Dozens of community stakeholders gathered in the commons area at Bayfield Intermediate School on October 29 to hold their third and final meeting with consultants from a pair of architectural firms hired to assist the school district in identifying current and future construction needs.
The group, which had already committed six hours of work to identifying problem areas in the district and potential solutions, was asked to undertake the most challenging part of their task — prioritizing which projects should be tackled first in light of cost projections and urgency of need.
“Tonight, we need to have your input on prioritization, both with time and cost on your mind,” said Kari-elin Mock of Cuningham, one of the architectural firms hired by the district.
Prior to last week’s meeting, the group had not been given cost projections for the various projects that had been identified in the previous two meetings, but Tim Smith from FCI Constructors had generated some estimates for the final meeting and was present to provide context for those figures as well. Smith had supervised much of the construction of Bayfield Intermediate School for FCI in 2017, and reported that the building cost approximately $300 per square foot to build at that time.
“Traditionally we see a 3 to 5 percent increase every year since I have been with FCI, but during the pandemic, construction costs went up 30-40 percent,” he told the group, indicating that costs are driven by subcontractor pricing, material pricing and the availability of labor. “Costs have gone up 50% from where they were when we did this building.”
Prior to tackling the prioritization of proposed construction projects, the participants in the workshop were also reminded that there was a limit to the amount of funding the district would be able to access to undertake large-scale projects.
“Our current bonding capacity is about $17 million,” Assistant Superintendent Bill Hesford said. The district also intends to apply for a BEST (Building Excellent Schools Today) grant that could cover as much as 35 percent of construction costs, which means that approximately $25 million may be available for infrastructure improvements in the short term.
A condition assessment that was performed on schools in the district has revealed a little more than $5 million in maintenance needs that consultants suggested were high-priority items, including HVAC systems and other significant repair projects. That left the group with approximately $20 million to use in the short term for more than an estimated $60 million in potential infrastructure improvements that were nominated for inclusion in the master facility plan.
“We had to have a long-range plan, and at the end of the day we’re going to come out of this with what has to happen over the next ten years,” Superintendent Leon Hanhardt stated.
“We are curious to get your feedback about what comes first and what is later,” Mock said.
A series of possible improvement projects at Bayfield Middle School accounted for more than half of the total project costs presented to the group. A renovation of the building’s east side that includes the construction of a new main entry, a classroom addition and a new parking lot has an estimated cost of $17.4 million, and a renovation of the remainder of the building that includes the construction of a new commons area has an approximate price tag of $12.2 million.
The group had also expressed a wish for a renovation of the current BMS athletic facilities, complete with the construction of additional space for fitness, training and practice activities, and that project would have an estimated cost of $9.8 million. The attendees were also provided with estimates for the construction of a new Auxiliary Gym ($2.5 million) and construction of a new football field and track, which was estimated to cost between $2.5 and $4.2 million depending on the materials used for the track and field.
The workshop team had acknowledged in the first two meetings that Bayfield Middle School’s condition made it a top priority for future construction, and the building presented a number of challenges that likely requires a comprehensive renovation and possibly an addition, and they maintained their commitment to that belief in the final meeting by making the $17.4 and $12.2 million renovation projects the top two priorities.
It was pointed out that the total for those two projects exceeded the allowed budget by 50 percent, and attendees requested that the consultants attempt to scale both down to fit the budget.
It was largely agreed that the other Bayfield Middle School improvements could be put off until later in the 10-year cycle, but there were many in the group who hoped that a way could be found to include the district’s third identified priority — the construction of a new Career and Technical Education wing at Bayfield High School — as part of the first phase of the district’s master facility plan.
The proposal for a CTE addition at BHS included a 7,500-square-foot addition that extends off the east end of the building’s classroom wing and would be connected to the existing wood shop by a construction yard. The addition would contain a welding shop, a STEM/Metal Fab lab and shared classroom spaces in between the two labs. Construction would include a new entry and a new sidewalk to the bus loop and probably restrooms as well.
In addition to allowing the district to stop bussing students to Ignacio for welding instruction, the new CTE wing would free up additional classroom space in the high school to accommodate future growth.
“We would move our current STEM program and ag program out of the building, so we would be opening up at least those two classrooms and we would have a talk about the Health Sciences classes as well,” Hanhardt said.
Some participants still questioned whether or not the addition would be big enough to meet the district’s needs, but when presented with the reality associated with the costs of the various projects — and reminded of the limited resources available — the group quickly agreed that a scaled-down version of the addition would be preferable to making no improvements to the district’s current CTE spaces at all.
“Is it ever big enough is always going to be the question, and the answer is probably no,” Hanhardt acknowledged. “But for the size of our school district the answer is probably yes.”
A number of projects identified at other schools in the district were also placed further down the priority list — including an outdoor activity space at BIS and some playground and restroom improvements at Bayfield Primary School — but because the cost associated with them was relatively low there is a possibility that some of them may be undertaken sooner if funds are available. A final priority that was identified was for a $6.3 million facility to be constructed at BIS for use by the Boys & Girls Club, but that entity would be responsible for generating much of the money needed to undertake such a project.
The projects that did not make it to the top of the priority list could be undertaken when the district’s bonding capacity increases again in 2032 when current bonds are paid off. The district may also be able to set aside small amounts of revenue from the general fund in future years, or generate revenue from the sale of property that could potentially cover some construction costs.
“We put some really hard and fast constraints on you for the purpose of tonight’s activity, but there are some other mechanisms for us to possibly fund some these improvements in the future,” Hesford said.
A number of suggestions were made to consultants about ways to potentially lower the cost of the top three priorities, and in a meeting with district officials the day after the workshop it was agreed that the architects would consider the creation of scaled-down versions of those three proposals to see how much could be accomplished with the district’s anticipated budget.
“We know we have to do something at BMS, and we know student demand is for CTE, so those are the important things,” Hanhardt said. “We already have approval to move forward with our intent to apply for a BEST grant, and we have strong direction towards going for a bond in 2025, so our intent is to come back and report all of the work we’ve done here to the entire community in the coming month.”
He expressed gratitude to the staff members and citizens who had dedicated more than nine hours over two months to the process of identifying and prioritizing construction projects to meet the long-term needs of the district. He acknowledged the amount of sacrifice and level of dedication it took to attend all three meetings.
“Thank you so much for committing to this process. We appreciate the partnership and appreciate the input. The feedback has been phenomenal and I can’t believe the group is still this big,” Hanhardt concluded.
