05180 Why is a new bldg. better than an old bldg. for teaching?

05160 Why don’t we build or renovate without using the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC)?

OFCC will co-fund the project at a 30% rate whether we renovate or rebuild; however, if we renovate, they will only co-fund up to the cost of replacement.

If renovation costs exceed replacement costs OFCC will not co-fund the overage.

If we chose to engage in a project on our own, we will be governed by the debt limitation.

Our debt limitation (between $60M–$65M) would not allow us to build more than the high school until a funding source to repay the debt is secured.

05140 Shouldn’t a Master Facilities Plan include drawings of what a new building/site would look like?

The term Master Facilities Plan is defined by the OFCC as the number
and configuration (grade span) of the buildings intended for renovation
or construction and the buildings that are planned for demolition. The
Master Facilities Plan does not include design and architecture work.

Design and architecture work come as a result of a full year of interviewing stakeholders.

Stakeholder interviews drive the look and determine the necessary elements inside the building.
That said, we could pay between $50 and $75K to have “conceptual” designs made.

The inherent problem is, they are conceptual and the actual design may not be as advertised based on the stakeholder conversations held in the design phase.

05150 Why can’t all of the facilities be on the same site?

 For years, our student/athletes have competed at various locations
across the city including the Natatorium, the YMCA, Water Works,
Harrington Field, Kelsey Creek, CFHS, and Leybourne. A larger site may
actually allow for more concentration than we currently have, but may
not large enough for all of our programs.

o We should maintain a separate soccer and football facility simply due to scheduling the number of teams we have for each (five (5) football teams and seven (7) soccer teams).

o The auditorium and gym spaces are in high demand in the city; thus, we expect them to be used regularly.

05120 Shouldn’t we sell buildings and sites and not engage in demo costs?

It is currently our intent to maintain our properties; however, we do not want to create another Sill Middle School situation.

Through the current plan, razing the buildings is co-funded. That said, this position could change.

05110 Shouldn’t we have four (4) K-5 elementary buildings?

o Our current K-5 enrollment is 2,224. If they were divided amongst four (4) buildings suggests 556 students in each building. Which fits with building-size research.

That said, there are two other considerations:

 Segment 1 would need to be expanded to include 6th grade
student. The current enrollment is 388 students; given the
allocation of approximately 155 ft2
/student, we would need an
additional 60,140ft2
. The cost per square foot is approximately
$240/ft2 which would shift approximately of $14.4M from
Segment 2 to Segment 1.

 Further, we wish to expand our early childhood education
program to include all PreK students. For that to happen, we
would need to incorporate them into the K-5 buildings or set
aside a building for that purpose.

05100 What happens to the 6th grade students?

There are a couple options that would be discussed during Segment 1 of
the current plan which would not be complete until 2021-2022 school year
at the earliest.

The options are as follows:
 Utilize the front (newer) section of the current CFHS and Roberts MS to house students in grades 4-6; or students in grades 5-6.

 House all students in grade 5-6 at Roberts or the current CFHS
o The intention in either case is to never have a singular grade of students
in a building by themselves
o If there is another option presented it will be considered so long as a
singular grade is not housed in a building by themselves.

05090 Why do we want a HS/MS Campus?

Please understand that campus environments have been utilized all over the state for a very long time.

Perhaps not so much in Cuyahoga Falls or the immediate area, but the reality is many, many districts incorporate a campus model for several reasons.

One of the reasons is to provide  educational opportunities for kids.

Currently, we have three buildings on different sites with staff who are attempting to collaborate in an effort to provide opportunities for kids at their cognitive level.

In the past,  students in a particular grade were predominately prescribed the same measures in terms of educational delivery; for example, the vast majority of 8th grade students took 8th grade math.

Today, for example, 8th grade students take everything from 8th grade math to geometry and do
so in mass. Additionally, having 7-12 staff on the same campus allows for
great flexibility.

o The notion that 12th grade students regularly harass or otherwise corrupt
7th grade students simply hasn't come to fruition in more than 20 years
of administration mostly spent in campus settings.
In fact, it is generally the opposite; older students tend to serve as role models, especially if the
culture of the campus is designed to enhance the philosophy...very much the same as our 5th grade crossing guards take great care and concern for the Kindergarten students.

05080 Why not build a new high school on the current site?

There has been consternation regarding this issue, allow us to suggest some logistical problems with building a new high school on the current site.

First and foremost, the current site consists of only 9.9 acres (versus 35 acres associated with the Bolich/Newberry site). Constructing a new structure of 200-300K square feet on this property while the current one exists would be tricky if not impossible unless it was built vertically with a limited footprint.

If that was the choice, we would have to accommodate parking and would indeed displace our football (five teams across 7 thru varsity) and tennis programs.
It would be difficult to accommodate football at Leybourne Field in addition to the seven (7)
junior high and high school soccer teams who use that facility.

Additionally the seating capacity is prohibitive.
There is also no real solution for the parking dilemma.

It has also been suggested that we should move the students from the current building to other facilities; the reality is, there are no other facilities to accommodate 1600 students and provide the programming in which the students are engaged (auto tech, wood shop, advanced manufacturing, cosmetology, chemistry, radio, music, drama, etc.).

With regard to the "white elephants," allow us to suggest that the demand for our auditorium is such that we would be able to attract more community use in addition to school use, especially if we incorporated a smaller (800 seats) fixed seating performance center into the campus construction.

Additionally, gym space is at a premium in our community; there is much more demand than we currently have capacity.

There is no intent to bus kids during the school day to use these facilities as instructional spaces during the school day.

05070 Why use the Bolich/Newberry Site?

While the Bolich/Newberry site is not the most centrally located site, it is the largest site (35+ acres) which means it is the site that can accommodate facilities, parking and traffic.

The current CFHS site is only 9.9 acres.

05060 Will busing costs increase?

Yes. We are planning for increased operational cost with the addition of 0.5 mills which will generate approximately $365K annually based on current assessed valuation in the district.

This amount would be cover busing and much more in terms of operational costs.

05050 Neighborhood Schools ?

The CFCSD is comprised of approximately 10 square miles which is much smaller than many communities. In fact, the population density of CFCSD is larger than 19 of the 20 similar districts (as defined by ODE) in Ohio;
as we engage the community to select the sites for Segment 2 (three - PK-3 Facilities and two – 4-6 Facilities),
the goal will be to use current sites spread throughout the community.

Unfortunately, students do not walk to school as they did when the current buildings were built. Parents predominately drive their children to school which cause traffic jams at arrival and dismissal.

The new facilities might be slightly farther apart; however busing and site design will allow for better traffic flow and increased safety.

05040 Should we use land/buildings we already own?

There are no plans to purchase additional land or to engage in eminent
domain with the city.

05030 Can we shorten interest lifespan of the bond to 13 years?

We can investigate the ramifications thereof; however, like a car or house loan, that would cause annual repayment to increase.

If annual repayment increases, the amount collected would also increase;
thus, the millage rate request would increase.

05020 Can we limit total amount (all segments) to $50M?

Of the seven (7) plans that were reviewed, the least expensive using the 2015 cost set is estimated at $147M;
The current plan is estimated at $162M.

Both estimates are co-funded amounts before any Locally Funded Initiatives (LFIs) are added.

The estimated cost of building a new high school and nothing else is $54M; thus, staying inside a budget amount of $50M would severely reduce the scope of the project to renovations alone.

05010 How many 'Master Plan Options' were reviewed?

At least seven (7) Master Facility Plan Options were presented at the onset of the 'Building Our Future Together' meetings.

There have been other options reviewed since 2001 when CFCSD first became engaged with OFSC.