Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Lewis Central Community SD
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Lewis Central Community SD

215

Published on

Faciltiy Master Plan/Long-Term Plan for school district in Council Bluffs, IA

Faciltiy Master Plan/Long-Term Plan for school district in Council Bluffs, IA

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
215
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Lewis Central Community School District Facility Master Plan Board of Education February 1, 2010 Strategic Resources West, Inc.
  • 2. Presentation Purpose
    • Provide overview of District’s economic & demographic environment
    • Show District’s historical and projected growth
    • Illustrate District’s ability to accommodate enrollment
    • Share insights regarding future needs
  • 3. Presentation Format
    • Economics
    • Demographics
    • Enrollment history and trends
    • Residential development
    • Enrollment history & insights
    • Enrollment forecasts
    • School capacities
    • Capacities vs. enrollment
    • Observations and recommendations
  • 4. Economic Characteristics
    • Local economy supported by greater Omaha-Council Bluffs area activity
    • Strong local business base for size of district (I-29 & I-80 corridors plus industrial influence)
    • Large amount of industrial land available; potential Google expansion
    • Power plant proximity a plus for large industrial or technology businesses
  • 5. Factors Influencing Economic Growth
    • Expanding commercial base – retail along major corridors
    • Transportation – close proximity to airport, rail and Interstates
    • Google – spin-off activity?
    • Manufacturing industry employment growth has been substantial
    • Education and health services growth also important
    • Infrastructure – City extending water & sanitary sewer into Pony Creek area
    • Competitive local labor force
  • 6. Summary: 2008 Pottawattamie County Employment by Industrial Classification 2008 Pottawattamie County Employing Sector Employment Distribution Private Sector: Retail & Wholesale Trade 7,767 20.0% Leisure & Hospitality 6,706 17.3% Educational & Health Services 4,979 12.8% Manufacturing 4,827 12.5% Professional & Business Services 2,448 6.3% Transportation & Utilities 1,945 5.0% Financial Activities & Real Estate 1,229 3.2% Balance of Total Private Employ. 3,677 9.5% Total Private Employ. 33,578 86.6% Public Sector: Local Government 4,325 11.2% State and Federal Government 865 2.2% Total Public 5,190 13.4% Grand Total 38,768 100.0%
  • 7. 1990 to 2000 Census, 2008 Population Estimate & Forecasts Source: Iowa Data Center. Census Population Projected Population Jurisdiction 1990 2000 2008 2010 2020 2030 Council Bluffs 54,315 58,359 59,536 NA NA NA Pottawattamie County 82,628 87,704 89,647 89,738 92,335 95,762 Lewis Central SD 10,307 12,440 13,497 NA NA NA
  • 8. School Age Population Distribution: 2000 Census Population Distribution by Age Group Age Ranges Pottawat. County Mills County Iowa Birth-4 6.9% 6.4% 6.6% 5-9 6.8% 6.4% 6.4% 10-14 6.6% 7.3% 6.5% 15-19 7.0% 7.2% 7.2% 20-24 5.7% 5.9% 7.1% 25-34 13.0% 11.4% 12.3% 35-44 13.1% 13.4% 13.1% 45-54 15.3% 16.6% 14.9% 55-59 6.4% 7.2% 6.4% 60-64 5.2% 6.0% 4.8% 65-74 6.9% 6.8% 7.0% 75-84 4.8% 3.8% 5.3% 85+ 2.0% 1.8% 2.4%
  • 9.  
  • 10. Historical Residential Development Single Family Multi- Mobile Proportion Year Detached Attached family Homes Total of Total Before 1970 1,548 118 29 33 1,728 29.9% 1970-79 816 74 16 68 974 16.9% 1980-89 280 12 25 45 362 6.3% 1990-99 473 50 6 28 557 9.7% 2000-09 846 14 413 6 1,279 22.2% None Given 40 6 211 615 872 15.1% Total 4,003 274 700 795 5,772 100.0%
  • 11. Student Generation Rates Applied Student Generation Rates by Unit Type Unit Type Primary Interm. Middle Senior High Total Mobile Home 0.110 0.175 0.165 0.125 0.575 Multifamily 0.080 0.115 0.070 0.065 0.330 Singe Family Attached 0.034 0.061 0.075 0.085 0.255 Single Family Detached 0.065 0.135 0.105 0.155 0.460            
  • 12. Assessed Valuation Assessed Change From Prior Year Year Valuation Asses. Val. Percent 2000 $ 472,467,141 NA NA 2001 535,356,871 $ 62,889,730 13.3% 2002 561,371,578 26,014,707 4.9% 2003 559,110,370 (2,261,208) -0.4% 2004 575,340,092 16,229,722 2.9% 2005 641,095,128 65,755,036 11.4% 2006 682,284,384 41,189,256 6.4% 2007 780,169,896 97,885,512 14.3% 2008 858,652,158 78,482,262 10.1% 2009 927,444,122 68,791,964 8.0%
  • 13. Resident Enrollment by School Level: 1999 - 2009 Resident Enrollment by School Level Elemen. Inter. Middle Sr. High Total Year (PK - 1) (2 - 5) (6 - 8) (9 - 12) (PK - 12) 1999 364 721 591 826 2,502 2000 336 726 599 731 2,392 2001 358 704 599 767 2,428 2002 347 725 612 809 2,493 2003 344 666 579 766 2,355 2004 419 670 591 778 2,458 2005 425 712 595 784 2,516 2006 398 726 574 763 2,461 2007 462 740 562 771 2,535 2008 467 740 559 798 2,564 2009 498 797 569 753 2,617
  • 14.  
  • 15.  
  • 16.  
  • 17.  
  • 18.  
  • 19.  
  • 20. Enrollment Forecasts
    • Three Methods:
    • District-wide Scenarios
    • By School
    • Development-Based
  • 21. Enrollment Forecast Assumptions
    • Births – stable to slow increase
    • Out of district enrollment: 2 scenarios
      • Constant
      • Slow growth
    • Program changes not significant
    • Non-public schools influence steady
  • 22. ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS SUMMARY BY SCENARIO — 2010 to 2015 SCENARIO LOW -- 10 Year Cohort/5 Year Percent Chg. Middle -- 5 Year Modified Cohort HIGH -- 3 Year Percent Change Prim. Inter. Midd. Sr. High Prim. Inter. Midd. Sr. High Prim. Inter. Midd. Sr. High YEAR PK - 1 (2 - 5) (6 - 8) (9-12) Total PK - 1 (2 - 5) (6 - 8) (9 - 12) Total PK - 1 (2 - 5) (6 - 8) (9 - 12) Total 2009 Actual 498 797 569 753 2,617 PROJECTED:     2010 526 800 608 738 2,673 528 811 601 749 2,690 536 812 602 758 2,708 2011 543 826 624 722 2,715 544 849 614 735 2,742 551 858 615 753 2,777 2012 509 881 638 741 2,769 552 892 627 735 2,806 576 909 627 758 2,869 2013 517 873 670 771 2,832 560 911 649 762 2,882 601 940 652 788 2,980 2014 526 883 694 803 2,905 568 941 668 789 2,967 626 994 677 814 3,111 2015 534 875 739 818 2,965 576 957 708 800 3,041 653 1,038 728 825 3,244                                
  • 23. Table II-3. PREFERRED SCENARIO: PROJECTIONS 2010-2015 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Kreft Primary (PK-1) Titan Hill Intermediate (2-5) Total Year Pre- Kinder- Total Interm. (Fall) School garten 1st (PK-1) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (2-5) Projected Resident Enrollment 2010 111 187 206 505 194 209 184 199 787 2011 119 190 190 500 208 196 212 186 803 2012 119 195 193 507 192 211 199 214 816 2013 119 200 198 517 195 195 213 201 804 2014 119 205 203 527 200 198 197 215 810 2015 119 210 208 538 205 203 200 199 807 Projected With Out of District Enrollment -- Constant at 2009 Level 2010 111 229 241 582 243 248 242 243 977 2011 119 232 225 577 257 235 270 230 993 2012 119 237 228 584 241 250 257 258 1,006 2013 119 242 233 594 244 234 271 245 994 2014 119 247 238 604 249 237 255 259 1,000 2015 119 252 243 615 254 242 258 243 997 Projected With Out of District Enrollment -- Slow Growth Scenario 2010 111 232 252 595 231 260 226 257 973 2011 119 237 239 595 256 235 265 227 983 2012 119 245 244 608 243 260 240 266 1,009 2013 119 252 251 623 248 246 265 241 1,000 2014 119 260 259 638 256 252 251 267 1,025 2015 119 268 267 654 263 259 257 253 1,032                    
  • 24. Table II-4. PREFERRED SCENARIO: PROJECTIONS 2010-2015 SECONDARY SCHOOLS Total MIDDLE SCHOOL (6-8) SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL (9-12) District Year Total Total Enrollment (Fall) 6th 7th 8th (6-8) 9th 10th 11th 12th (9-12) (K-12) Projected Resident Enrollment 2010 211 193 197 601 182 184 188 201 754 2,647 2011 199 214 193 606 198 180 184 190 752 2,660 2012 186 202 214 601 194 196 181 186 756 2,680 2013 214 188 201 604 214 193 196 182 786 2,710 2014 201 217 188 606 202 213 193 198 806 2,749 2015 215 203 217 635 189 201 213 195 797 2,777 Projected With Out of District Enrollment -- Constant at 2009 Level 2010 253 234 232 719 228 225 223 234 909 3,187 2011 241 255 228 724 244 221 219 223 907 3,200 2012 228 243 249 719 240 237 216 219 911 3,220 2013 256 229 236 722 260 234 231 215 941 3,250 2014 243 258 223 724 248 254 228 231 961 3,289 2015 257 244 252 753 235 242 248 228 952 3,317 Projected With Out of District Enrollment -- Slow Growth Scenario 2010 258 237 240 736 221 232 231 233 917 3,221 2011 260 263 239 762 245 222 234 229 931 3,271 2012 231 264 265 760 245 246 224 233 948 3,324 2013 270 235 266 771 270 246 248 223 987 3,381 2014 244 274 237 756 272 271 248 247 1,037 3,456 2015 270 249 276 795 242 273 273 246 1,034 3,515                      
  • 25. Estimated Students From Potential Development Potential Potential Students by Zoning Housing Type Housing Units Primary Interm. Middle Sr. High Total Mobile Home 851 94 149 140 106 489 Multifamily 1,611 129 185 113 105 532 Singe Family Attached 274 9 17 21 23 70 Single Family Detached 11,584 753 1,564 1,216 1,796 5,329 Total 14,320 985 1,915 1,490 2,030 6,419
  • 26. Capacity Analysis
    • Three capacity models
    • Program-based method
    • Methodology issues:
    • 1. Room size
    • 2. Room type
    • 3. Efficiency ratios
    • 4. Optimum/maximum
    • 5. Program quality
  • 27. Capacities by School Level Student Capacity Estimate Capacity Method Kreft Primary* Titan Hill Intermediate Middle School Senior High Castaldi (Average) 534 832 742 1,073 University of Wisconsin 673 970 834 1,166 Oklahoma Dept. of Education 669 910 762 1,087 Staffing Ratios (optimum) 493 888 643 1,022 Staffing Ratios (maximum) 573 999 823 1,207 SRW Suggested Capacity 530 950 750 1,070 *: Capacity includes Preschool.
  • 28. Capacity per Grade and School: Facility Planning Implications School Level Student Capacity No. of Grades Served Seating Capacity* per Grade Schools to Fill Elementary (PK - 1) 530 3 177 NA Intermediate (2 - 5) 950 4 238 1.34 Middle (6 - 8) 750 3 250 1.05 Senior High (9 - 12) 1,070 4 268 1.07 *: Rounded.
  • 29. Interim Facility Needs (to 2015) SRW Current and Projected Net Capacity Suggested RESIDENT Enrollment Available (Short) . School Capacity Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2015 Fall 2009 Fall 2015 Primary 530 498 505 538 32 (8) Intermediate 950 797 787 807 153 143 Middle 750 569 601 635 181 115 Senior High 1,070 753 754 797 317 273 SRW Current and Projected Net Capacity Suggested TOTAL Enrollment* Available (Short) School Capacity Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2015 Fall 2009 Fall 2015 Primary 530 575 595 654 (45) (124) Intermediate 950 987 973 1,032 (37) (82) Middle 750 687 736 795 63 (45) Senior High 1,070 908 917 1,034 162 36 *: Slow growth open enrollment applied.
  • 30. Long-Term Facility Needs At 75% of Allowed Zoning: Total Number Total of Schools Student Enrollment Needed at School Type Capacity Potential* Build Out Primary 530 1,237 2.3 Intermediate 950 2,233 2.4 Middle 750 1,687 2.2 Senior High 1,070 2,275 2.1 Total   7,432  
  • 31. Summary / Observations
    • Residential development has been reasonably steady and concentrated in the north and east portions of the district;
    • Modest enrollment growth is anticipated in the near future;
    • Facility capacity is compromised or nearly so at both elementary schools;
    • Middle and high school capacity are adequate for the near term;
  • 32. Summary / Observations – cont’d
    • Considerable housing and enrollment potential exist in the long-term;
    • Capacity imbalances between school levels may create capacity discrepancies;
    • Long-term facility needs for RESIDENT students will be at least double the existing capacities.
  • 33. Conclusions & Recommendations
    • Adequate time is believed available to prepare for growth and do necessary planning;
    • A comprehensive plan to accommodate enrollment is believed essential – should complement strategic plan;
    • An educational specification is recommended for all school levels to determine how the District will best serve future enrollment;
    • The Ed Spec should consider desired grade configurations and school capacities;
  • 34. Conclusions & Recommendations
    • Work closely with the City and County to plan future school sites, especially regarding safe access and site configuration;
    • Establish policies and criteria regarding site size, configuration, and general development expectations (share with City & County);
    • Emphasize net usable acreage; and
    • Planning for transitional uses or phasing is believed very prudent.

×