Facility Master Plan Board of Education Update April 26, 2016

Master Plan Guiding Principles Student-Centered Guiding Principles  Summit School District will create 21 st learning environments in alignment with the district strategic plan, VISION 2020, by enhancing and re-designing classrooms and school work spaces for: Blended learning options, Personalized learning environments to support student-centered education, Outdoor and experiential learning opportunities, Authentic, relevant, practical learning opportunities, including in the context of career & technical education real-world experiences, Unique programs: STEM, IB, Dual Language, Arts Integration, early childhood, etc. Physical and social-emotional health and well-being.  Schools and district facilities will be physically safe and secure.  Schools and district facilities will provide the infrastructure to ensure all students have access to global learning via current technology and internet connections.  Summit School District will provide accessible and inviting schools in each community to promote family engagement, cultural inclusion, and accommodate community organization collaboration, partnerships and use.

Master Plan Guiding Principles (cont’d) Management Guiding Principles  Summit School District will be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and continue to be fiscally responsible in maintaining schools and facilities.  Summit School District will prepare for anticipated future enrollment growth by maximizing school building capacities while maintaining appropriate class sizes.  Summit School District will carefully evaluate land assets for future student enrollment, district facility, and school building needs while working cooperatively with local entities to address community needs.  Summit School District will operate in an open and transparent manner as we continue to engage key stakeholders in master planning and facilities operations.

Facility Assessment and FCI Process:  Facility condition reviewed with SSD Facilities Manager and Staff  Condition of each facility was assessed independently  Educational suitability reviewed with: - School Principals, Technology, Security, Early Childhood Education, Transportation & Food Service  CDE building deficiency budgets updated  Facility Condition Index updated  SSD building deficiency and improvement budgets updated

Breckenridge ES FCI – Facility Condition Index All Schools Dillon Valley ESFrisco ESSilverthorne ESSummit Cove ESUpper Blue ESSummit Middle SchoolSummit High School

Building Utilization and Capacity Guidelines Capacity is based on how the school chooses to allocate use of space. As space is allocated for specials, intervention or other support functions, the number of classrooms available for capacity are reduced, but are considered as “potential” capacity. Assumption of average number of students per class : ES = 22 students per class MS = 25 students per class HS = 27 students per class

KINDERGARTEN K KINDERGARTEN K KINDERGARTEN FULL DAY CAPACITY 2 Classrooms x 22 Students/Classroom = 44 Student Capacity ARTMUSIC CLASSROOM CLASSROOM ELEMENTARY CAPACITY 2 Classrooms x 22 Students/Classroom = 44 Student Capacity Capacity Calculation Example: ART MUSIC CLASSROOM CLASSROOM MIDDLE / HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY 4 Classrooms x 25 Students/Teaching Station = 100 Students 100 Students x 75% Efficiency Factor = 75 Student Capacity (MS/HS facilities can typically be scheduled at about 75-80% efficiency)

K K Frisco ES Utilization and Capacity K-5 Capacity KKindergarten: 2 x 22 = 44 Classrooms: 10 x 22 = K-5 Capacity Oct. K-5 Enrollment: 239 PreK Capacity 1 x 15 = 15

Capacity Guidelines Summary All Schools School Name Oct 2015 K-12 Enrollment Gross Square Footage Current SF/ Student Capacity Guideline Capacity Remaining % of Capacity Guideline Breckenridge ES23535, % Dillon Valley ES40448, % Frisco ES23935, % Silverthorne ES31062, % Summit Cove ES27352, % Upper Blue ES27050, % Summit MS744180, % Summit HS832208, % District Total3,307673, (avg.)3, % ES Avg. 86% In aggregate, SSD K-5 facilities can support more students per grade than the secondary facilities: K-5 = 337 students 6-8 = 281 students 9-12 = 253 students

County Population and Enrollment Growth

Comparison of County and SSD History 11.4% 12.2% Summit School District 9.2% 6.1% Summit County Findings: Between , SSD grew slightly faster than the County. Over the past 5 years, SSD has grown twice as fast as the County.

LOCATIONDEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED # OF UNITSSCHEDULENOTES DillonDillon Gateway 29 2-BR & 14 3-BR In planning Mix of rental/condo, some Workforce Silverthorne Summit Sky Ranch (South Maryland Creek) lots sold, Complete % local, 40% vacation SilverthorneSmith Ranch180 In planning Workforce housing SilverthorneAngler Mountain 19 Mostly built-out Estimate 80% vacation Frisco Lake Hill350 Construction: 2018 Workforce housing TOTAL NORTH 832 (80.7%) BreckenridgeHuron Landing26 2-BRConstruction: 6/16-8/17Workforce housing BreckenridgeDenison Placer -Phase I65 2 & 3-BRConstruction: Start spring 18Workforce housing BreckenridgeDenison Placer - Phase II30 Studio & 1-BRConstruction: Start spring 17 BreckenridgeLincoln Park / Wellington78 2 & 3-BRConstruction: Late 16 – 19/20 TOTAL SOUTH 199 (19.3%) TOTAL 1,031 Approximately 80% of new planned housing is located in the North part of the County/District. Current Planned Housing Development in SSD Quantity and location of new housing:

Pure grade level progression, no growth: Grades Capacity Guideline , ,0201,0731,1001,1661,169 Pure grade level progression + 2% growth per year: Grades Capacity Guideline , ,0521,1041,1831,2501,3391,3701,397 Middle School and High School Growth Projections:

Projected Enrollment Growth & Capacity When will schools be at capacity? DVE: FRE: 2020 BRE: Primary: 2022 MS: 2017 HS: 2018 Secondary: 2018

Land Availability Study  SSD sites were reviewed for future expansion and development potential

Land Availability – Upper Blue Elementary

Land Availability – Summit High School

Land Availability  10-acre Summit Education Center site in Silverthorne

 8-acre parcel in Keystone area that is dedicated for use as an elementary school, but not yet owned by SSD Land Availability

Committee Preliminary Outcomes

1.There is a need to address High Priority facility issues at this time. Priority 1 and 2 should be considered. 2.There is an immediate need to increase space for student enrollment at SMS and SHS. 3. Learning environment renovations to support Vision 2020 could be considered. 4.A comprehensive plan at the elementary level should be developed to address specific needs in the North and South areas of the district. Programs, distribution of students and facility deficiencies should be considered. 5.Support development of workforce housing in the school district community.

School FacilityDeficienciesVision 2020GrowthOther ProjectsTotal BRE$5,682,188$992,984$0$1,962,125$8,637,297 DVE$3,410,000$1,191,609$0$2,798,125$7,399,734 FRE$3,826,625$1,191,609$0$4,191,763$9,209,998 SVE$2,000,625$435,359$0$2,385,625$4,821,609 SCE$1,612,188$993,609$0$1,010,625$3,616,422 UBE$2,505,938$832,349$0$1,925,000$5,263,287 SMS$2,791,250$2,361,391$8,678,935$8,767,083$22,598,658 SHS$5,465,625$3,098,781$15,317,426 (Gym Option 1) $8,061,694$31,943,526 School Facility Total$27,294,438$11,097,693$23,996,361$31,102,039$93,490,531 Other Facilities Central Admin. Bldg$1,175,625$0 $468,875$1,644,500 Facilities Bldg$543,125$0 $123,750$666,875 Transportation Bldg$866,250$0 $453,750$1,320,000 Other Facilities Total$2,585,000$0 $1,046,375$3,631,375 Total All Facilities$29,879,438$11,097,693$23,996,361$32,148,414$97,121,906 All SSD Possible Projects Preliminary Cost Estimate Summary

Thank You! Thoughts / Questions?