Montana State University Archives - School Construction News

Montana State Breaks Ground on Large Wellness Center

School News — Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:00:21 +0000

By SCN Staff

BOZEMAN, Mont.—Montana State University has broken ground on its new $78 million Student Wellness Center, designed by RDG Planning & Design in collaboration with Missoula-based MMW Architects. The venue replaces facilities that were damaged or destroyed following record snowfall in 2019, which resulted in a roof collapse of two gymnasia in the university’s fitness center.

Located on the south side of MSU’s campus in Bozeman, Montana, the new Student Wellness Center and its surrounding site create a best-of-class wellness center, encompassing allied departments from across the campus. The new building serves as a transformational space to support the mental and physical well-being of students and serves as the heart of student life on MSU’s south side.

“Crucial to student success, the wellness center will create a one-stop-shop for MSU students to find health, recreation, academic and athletic resources. This multi-functionality eliminates barriers to use, supports programming and promotes access for each student’s unique campus journey,” said RDG Architect Tom Ohle, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP.

Encompassing 150,000 square feet of new construction, the wellness center houses gymnasia and fitness spaces, outdoor programs, climbing and bouldering walls, a hybrid pool and remodeled group exercise, locker rooms and offices. University Health Partners, which provides medical, dental, counseling and health advancement services will be co-located in the facility, along with offices and labs for the Health and Human Development Department. The center is scheduled to be completed in 2023.

RDG Planning & Design is a multidisciplinary firm offering professional services in architecture, landscape architecture, interior design, lighting design, strategic planning, urban and comprehensive planning and design, graphic design, engineering and integrated and public art.

The post Montana State Breaks Ground on Large Wellness Center appeared first on School Construction News.

Deferred School Maintenance: Pay Now or Pay More Later

School News — Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:05:52 +0000

Deferred maintenance in K-12 schools has become a $271 billion problem, according to the 2016 State of our Schools: America’s K-12 Facilities report released by the Center for Green Schools at the U.S. Green Building Council, the 21st Century School Fund and the National Council on School Facilities. Adding lifecycle costs brings the estimate up to $542 billion. The report focuses on 20 years of school facility investments nationwide and the funding needed to make up for annual investment shortfalls in essential repairs and upgrades. Only three states’ average spending levels meet or exceed the standards for investment: Texas, Florida and Georgia.
New schools are exciting and beautiful, but the initial cost of construction accounts for only 10 percent of the facility’s lifetime cost. The remaining 90 percent must be funded so the building can serve students and educators as intended. Many districts struggle to fund ongoing facility maintenance. The State of our Schools report recommends adding at least $19 billion annually to the existing average of $42 billion appropriated to address deferred maintenance annually.
Most districts spend an average of 10 percent of their general operating funds for annual maintenance and operations each year. Most general operating funds are not budgeted to handle major repairs for components such as roofs and HVAC systems.
Typically, school buildings deteriorate at a rate of approximately 2 percent per year. If 2 percent of a facility’s total value is set aside each year, those funds can pay to replace facility components as they reach their end-of-life cycles. A building’s lifecycle might be 50 years, but individual components including roofs usually only last 20 years.
Inevitably, most school districts encounter monetary shortages at some point, and non-human assets usually bear the brunt of funding cuts. After all, roofs and boilers can’t petition their cases at board meetings when their budgetary needs aren’t met or make their voices heard during contract negotiations.
In the short term, moving a portion of maintenance funding to other operating funds may seem like an attractive option to get through hard times, but some districts make a habit of it. For example, some districts have moved upwards of 30 percent of their capital fund to operating funds, causing deferred maintenance needs to increase dramatically.
Many school systems dig out from large deferred-maintenance backlogs by combining one-time bond issues. Other districts implement permanent improvement levies where funds are used only for deferred maintenance and cannot be transferred to operating accounts. Permanent improvement levies enable districts to budget for big-ticket items when they are due for replacement, such as roofing and HVAC systems, and avoid compounded deferred maintenance costs. The biggest challenge is convincing taxpayers that a deferred cost is a compounded cost. If a district doesn’t set aside monies for roof repair and replacement beyond its useful life, the cost will compound due to water damage, mold permeation, etc.
Districts can save money if they include deferred maintenance costs in a facilities master plan. They decide what buildings should be kept “as is,” renovated, replaced, rebuilt or closed based on student demographic trends, total budget constraints, the district’s educational vision and the funds needed to support that vision.
When deferred maintenance issues are considered in isolation, the political will to address them wanes when compared to new construction and personnel investments. Packaging deferred maintenance within a broad facilities master plan provides an opportunity to closely link behind-the-scenes investments with high-profile matters of construction needs and educational vision. In the case of a broader capital campaign, districts have the opportunity make a compelling argument that funding for new construction must include funding to properly maintain facilities for the long haul.
Scott Leopold is a project director and GIS analyst for DeJONG-RICHTER. Since 2005 he has provided school districts with the technology tools they need for successful planning.

The post Deferred School Maintenance: Pay Now or Pay More Later appeared first on School Construction News.

The K-12 Capital Improvement Outlook

When the Great Recession hit in late 2007, nearly every sector and industry — including K-12 schools — felt the impact. Today, however, an increasing number of school districts nationwide are again seeking voter approval for improvement and construction bonds. As they consider the needs and priorities of their individual districts, superintendents, board members and other school leaders are working to balance competing factors such as deferred maintenance, renovation vs. replacement, cost of ownership, security and creating facilities capable of supporting 21st century learning.

School Construction News recently spoke with representatives from Heery International — an Atlanta-based professional services firm specializing in program management, architecture, engineering and construction management — about how school districts are bouncing back and reinvesting in critical infrastructure. David Waggoner, former Council of Educational Facility Planners International president chair and vice president and national K-12 market director, based in Heery’s Houston office, and Rob Chomiak, senior vice president and national director of program management in the Atlanta office, shared their thoughts on securing capital improvement funding and keeping schools in top working order in a post-recession world.

Q. How are renovation, expansion and capital improvement needs among K-12 schools changing?

Waggoner: Catching up on deferred maintenance is certainly a trend…because [it has] been neglected over the last eight years when the recession hit. During those years districts have spent money on some things, but not necessarily on the systems that need to be maintained.

Chomiak: I think the type of district — whether it’s urban or more suburban — also impacts programs and priorities. You see different issues with different sized districts.

A lot of districts are dealing with growth. You see a demographic change, especially in urban districts, where schools are not always in the locations that they need to be. Districts are trying to figure out how to either maintain schools that aren’t being fully utilized — or even close them, which is always a huge political issue — and how to get more schools in areas that are growing faster. Land and other things always become an issue when you try to do that.

Q. How might K-12 renovation or expansion projects affect school safety and security?

Waggoner: My philosophy about safety and security is that it needs to be well coordinated with other aspects of a school. It’s a mistake to simply say that the facility will address all the safety and security needs. It really needs to be holistic in terms of operations maintenance, training employees and technology. All of the aspects of a school system and operation need to be engaged in a safety program.

Chomiak: The things that have been happening around the country and around the world [in terms of school violence] have greatly impacted what school districts are looking for in terms of safety and security, to a much more heightened level. A lot more renovation projects that we’re seeing now are very specific to those changes.

From a technology standpoint, it’s almost been an improvement. For a while the big push was to add technology, which meant adding a lot of low-voltage cabling to classrooms, a lot of infrastructure. As technology has progressed, it’s actually eased off of that because of improvements in wireless capabilities of systems. You don’t necessarily have to run as much cable or have as much backbone in the school as you used to.

Q. Can renovation and improvement projects really deliver 21st century learning spaces, or does modern education more often require new facilities?

Waggoner: We want to try to house 21st century learning styles and approaches in existing facilities, but it can be a challenge depending on how the existing building is constructed. A lot of it has to be addressed on a case-by-case basis simply because a lot of the older school buildings are built as double-loaded corridors. They may have masonry load-bearing walls that you cannot knock down. So, it’s much more difficult to provide open environments, transparent classrooms and various flexible learning spaces. Certainly it’s easier in a new facility, but it can be done in an older facility if [districts are] willing to spend the bucks and be really creative.

Read more about the outlook for post-recession K-12 capital improvement projects in the July/August issue of School Construction News.

The post The K-12 Capital Improvement Outlook appeared first on School Construction News.