Page 20 - School Planning & Management, July/August 2017

FACILITIES USING ACTIVE PLANNING TO EVALUATE SPACE AND LEVERAGE RESOURCES
Active planning. This rendering of a classroom in the High School at Boggy Creek, part of the School District of Osceola County in Kissimmee, Fla., depicts an example of active planning, a process that encompasses both facility and space planning. One of the main goals is to provide flexible space that allows educators the ability to adapt in the future to needs that they can’t even project today.
program dictate the number and size of classrooms, which helps dictate the spaces within the school,” notes Waggoner. “We start with the educational program, the instructors and the grade configuration.”
Drerup agrees. “In order to plan for space you have to know how you’re going
to deliver education because project-based delivery is different from lecture-based edu- cation, and schools need a variety of spaces to support a variety of delivery methods.
“You have to think about how you’re delivering education now — is it because of the confines of the space or is it how you wish to deliver education,” Drerup continues. “Then you have to explore how you want to deliver education in the future. How are you supporting all of the different learning styles?” This is one of the items discussed during the educa- tional visioning and transformation process — arguably the most crucial step in OFCC’s five-step process.
2. Utilizing a public engagement process. “A community-based public engagement process is helpful and does a number of things, such as resulting in a better end product and serving as a communication tool,” says Waggoner. “This open engage- ment should include administrators and classroom teachers. It should also include technology, maintenance and operations, food service, transportation and security, as all of these departments have a vested interest in how a school is planned and
a macro level view of the entire district. The process should also include expanded stakeholders such as parents, neighbors and business partners.”
The engagement process should be based around the district’s vision, so everyone knows and understands why you’re doing what you’re doing. For example, we know that natural daylighting is important to stu- dent learning, and administrators may be in favor of lots of windows on a new construc- tion project. However, the person who’s in charge of maintaining energy costs may not know that natural daylighting is important
An Active Planning Process
The State of Ohio’s Facilities Construc- tion Commission (OFCC), which, among other things, is responsible for guiding capital projects for the state’s comprehen- sive public K-12 school construction and renovation program, offers a five-step active planning process. It includes the following:
1. a 10-year enrollment projection;
2. a facility condition assessment;
3. an enhanced environmental assessment,
in which experts look for such hazards as mercury (in original gym floors), asbestos and lead;
4. a master plan: “We develop several mas- ter plan options that show each build- ing, the grade configuration, the number of students housed with a defined scope and budget,” Melanie Drerup, LEED-AP, CPM, ALEP, A4LE Fellow, OFCC’s chief of planning specifies; and
5. a three-day engagement process, “which we call educational visioning and trans- formation,” says Drerup.
The fifth step looks at the ways the
building and its interior spaces can be shaped to effectively reflect the district’s educational plan and goals. It’s important to note that OFCC considers this part of the process so important that districts in the planning process are often invited to a
one-day overview session that makes them aware of the importance of this step.
Ideally, facility planning is done continually, especially with larger school systems. “Planning covers a lot of ground, not just the condition of exterior walls and windows,” explains Torbert. “It includes technology and a plan for keeping that technology up to date. Are mechanical systems working correctly and efficiently?”
Realistically, there simply isn’t money available for continual planning in many school districts, and so it doesn’t get done. That said, there are two situations in which every district administrator should consider planning, regardless of a tight budget. “The first is if they’re seeing a population shift,” says Clay Clayton, AIA, ALEP, LEED-AP BD+C, program manager and executive associate for Heery, indicating that it’s important to locate schools near the students to save transporta- tion time and costs, as well as other expenses. “The second is if they’re trying to change how they’re delivering their curriculum.”
What Works Best?
When it comes to comprehensive active planning, there are two things that the experts note work best to ensure a success- ful outcome.
1. Defining the education program. “We believe that the needs of the educational
20 SCHOOL PLANNING & MANAGEMENT / JULY/AUGUST 2017
WEBSPM.COM
RENDERING © SCHENKELSHULTZ ARCHITECTURE