Cut away all the other stuff about sneaking in a recreation center, booting out shooters and gardeners and Scouts, and all the other possibilities that complicate the potential reuses of the Martin-Mitchell property debate and it all boils down to this: Should Naperville School District 203 remodel or rebuild Naperville Central High School?
Because most agree that Central's in bad shape and something's got to be done. School district officials are faced with the options of spending roughly $80 million to expand and renovate the existing Central building, or up to $140 million to start from scratch. Either way, voter approval of a referendum is needed.
Part of the decision must include not only what would be best for the district, but what would be best for the district and be approved by voters. According to the results of the district's scientifically accurate, statistically valid phone survey of 400 registered voters' attitudes toward these plans, 60 percent of those surveyed support the plan to renovate Central. Meanwhile, only 31 percent supported the idea of building a new Central.
The clock is ticking, as the school board will have to decide by Dec. 3 if it wants to get a referendum on February ballots. What should it do? Remodel, or rebuild?
Without taking anything else into consideration regarding the property and thinking only of the structure, I would say it about due for a rebuild. It will cost more to do it later and resetting the clock now while the costs are cheaper would be best for the taxpayers over the long run, IMO. Otherwise, they'll stick them with a renovation bill AND a rebuild bill down the line (a double-hit).
As a D204 resident I will not comment on the high school. But I do pay park district and city taxes and it is disappointing that we don't have any say in what happens to the park district areas as the only vote will be for the school. If D203 gets their pick of the M-M property at the expense of the Park District, why doesn't the Park District make it right by 204 residents by donating their 39 acres of the Macom site D204 is considering for their new HS?
As far as the shooting range goes, any plan that removes it is fantastic in my book. We can hear it inside our house and we live over a half mile away. I think it is a nuisance and I would guess that a good number of people that use it don't live close enough to be impacted by the noise.
I gotta believe that building has to be structurally sound enough and that remodelling is a better way to go. Other towns have school buildings that are much older and still functional.
I believe it would be a better move in the long run to rebuild. The existing facility is a patchwork of pieces that have been added on gradually over time, creating what amounts to a logistical mess. A totally new facility will benefit from a master plan with a clear vision of what the overall school should look like and how it needs to function. Since enrollment will not be increasing greatly in the future, the new facility will remain viable and properly sized and planned out for decades to come.
I also feel that the City as a whole would benefit from a newly conceived plan for the M-M property. And after watching many Little League baseball games at beautiful Knoch 8 Field and wondering how the batters keep from flinching every time a gun at the shooting range is fired, I won't miss the elimination or relocation of that facility. What percentage of the Naperville population does it really benefit anyway??
Will a new (very expensive) building really bring more value to the community? Will it raise test scores? My home value? Will it really produce a better product? Can it be done without raising taxes? Does it really make sense? Do we really need this? The answers to these questions are all NO. There is enough money wasted in the school district as it is. We don't need to help out some connected construction and development interests as well.
In the past few weeks I've heard about the aggressive tactics used by the Pro-New-School group to take Von Oven Scout Reservation by any means in order to have a college-campus grade spot for their new megaschool. I find it a travesty that it would even be considered removing the small section of land, supposedly protected by a trust, and used by many Naperville Scouts for this purpose.
OK, lets take a quick look and apply at least some minimal specifics:
Major renovations - $79 million
2nd major renovations plan - $84 million to $89 million (No explanation provided regarding the differences between the $79 mil and the $89 mil plans.)
Possible parking deck an additional $6 million
Minor renovation for $6 million to $30 million (What can you possibly get for a measly, puny $6 mil today? Oh yah, a parking deck.)
New building for $130 million to $140 million (New Oswego HS, $65 mil)
There’s a large amount of variance given the current options provided. Can’t wait to hear more and I'm sure we will.
I toured NCHS this week. I was appalled by the crowded rooms, jammed hallways, narrow staircases. This school was built for a small farming community in 1950, with no mandates to include all the disabled children and their aides;, space for computer labs, modern chemistry labs etc. No amount of patching and adding will make it a suitable structure for a city of 140,000 in the 21st century. The teachers there are amazing to produce such enviable results with such inappropriate facilities.
Responding to Jim's comment I know that because of new storm water detention regulations they have an additional 5-7 million in costs added to meet the new reg's that the first proposal did not include.
I think, but am not sure, that any parking deck would be dual purpose and shared with the settlement.
They will start offering more tours of Central once the board makes a decision on Dec 3rd. Take the tour and see for you own eyes. I went on one, even though my kids will go to North, and I was simply appalled. I do fear that the 80 million dollar renovation is throwing good money after bad. They are saving way more than I expected.
Jim's comment on the Oswego HS cost is interesting, and deserves more investigation.
Yes, these various school blogs have mentioned Oswego East's cost of $65 million a number of times, and also the new Plainfield HS was not too far from this price. No one seems to really address the issue after the questions are posed. Why so much less? We can find cheaper land, construction costs between these towns can't be so different. The new Oswego HS is beautiful, if Naperville needs a larger capacity HS in 203 and 204, does that mean over double the price!!??
For further discussion on this issue on more you may want to check out Naperville Neighbors. A new community discussion forum.
http://s3.invisionfree.com/NapervilleNeighbors/
OEHS was built in the middle of nowhere and land is significantly cheaper in Kane/Kendall county. They have alot of options because they are not as land locked as Naperville is. The City of Naperville has continued to annex land from surrounding areas and allowed builders to put up massive subdivions, and only held them (somewhat) responsible for building elementary schools to compensate for the growth. If proper planning was done, both 203 and 204 wouldn't be in the mess they are now. 204 with nowhere to put a new high school that may or may not be needed (and a lengthly legal battle over what could be the WORST location ever), and 203 with NCHS that maintenance has CLEARLY been neglected for years to allow it to be as run down as it is, forcing a debate to tear it down. Yes, the new OEHS interior is beautiful. But the outside looks like a prison (the kids refer to it as Oswego East Federal Prison), and the roof leaks every time it rains, forcing maintenance to have buckets all over the building to catch the water so the kids don't slip and fall. (I'm not kidding about this - I've seen it with my own eyes!) Naperville will get hosed by contractors because it's Naperville, period. Even home renovation contractors charge different prices for work in Naperville vs surrounding suburbs. You tell someone you like in Naperville, and the price goes up before they even come out to your house. It shouldn't be that way, but unfortunately, it's seems to be the reality.
Oh my goodness, and the Waubonsee campuses ARE attractive? Perhaps it would help if we remember that these are public high schools, not 30 to 40 thousand dollar-a-year priviate universities. Concentrating on a sound education in a simple, attractive, safe and secure environment should be key, amenities that can't be paid for easily should be re-evaluated, as all of us in our daily lives and businesses must do. I have 3 hard working children currently attending private universities, with my help (and another coming up) and therefore, although I do live in Naperville, and do quite well, taxes and government spending does effect me, as it does everyone. I work hard in my everyday life and business life to spend within my means, I'm sure most 203 and 204 SB members do as well. The same philosophy with our tax dollars would be appreciated.
OEHS is not ugly, personal style preference is different with everyone. Teenagers think whatever HS they attend is ugly, inside and out, at different given times!
How come District 203 test scores have been consistently high for 35 years? How in the world has the District been achieving ACT scores of > 24 with such decrepit facilities? Oh, the hardships that the Naperville elites must endure! Rebuilding Central will do NOTHING to improve the District's long history of academic achievement. The supporters of this massive waste of taxpayer money simply can't sleep at night knowing District 203 does not have its own version of Neuqua. How do those 200-300 year old Ivy League colleges manage?!
Gee Mike, how do those 200-300 year old Ive League Universities manage? They build new structures and renovate their old ones. Here's just a few examples from Harvard University.
1. New Bauer Laboratory officially dedicated: The Bauer Laboratory, designed by Ellenzweig Associates, is a 60,000-square-foot, state-of-the-art laboratory facility, interactive spaces of which include the Bioinformatics Lobby, a cyber café, and a video-conferencing seminar room.
2. The $8.3 million renovation, which involved gutting the building except for bearing walls and structural members, is the second phase of a multiyear effort to provide improved office and program space for Harvard's humanities departments. The first part, completed last year, involved renovating the Harvard Union, Burr Hall and Warren House to create the Barker Center, which houses 12 humanities groups.
3.Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) and the Harvard Law School (HLS) will collaborate to renovate Hemenway Gymnasium in a project slated to run from late May to September of this year. The two schools will split the cost of the top-to-bottom interior rehabilitation of the 28,000-square-foot recreational fitness facility, which will be closed during construction.
4. HMS breaks ground for research building;The $250 million project will consist of two main parts. The first is a low-rise component reaching four stories and fronting on Avenue Louis Pasteur. The second is a 10-story high-rise tower directly beside the Harvard Institutes of Medicine. The tower portion will be connected to the Harvard Institutes of Medicine on each floor by pedestrian walkways.
5. Amid pounding jackhammers and screaming saws, earplugged researchers are still quietly using Harvard's Countway Library of Medicine.The Countway's $26 million renovation got under way in March 1998, but library staffers have another objective besides facilitating the work of contractors sprucing up and updating the place.
Let me repeat my prior comment. They will be offering tours of Central again soon. Take the tour, make up you own mind after you see it.
I agree with Thom.
We moved back here two years ago after nine years in Houston. Houston is the cheapest major city in the US for housing. We knew it would be a shock to see what the same dollars would buy. After three months of research (we did not have kids when we lived in Dupage County before), we were convinced we only wanted to be in 203. Our Realtor worked mightily to convince us of how much more house we would get in 204. We stayed firm, and moved from a 7 year old 3800 s.f. home on an acre, on a lake, to a 35 year old home with 2400 s.f. on a 1/4 acre. We paid 10% more for this house than we got for the Houston house. We sunk $40K more into it in the first year to make it livable-new kitchen, wiring, and windows. Why were we willing to do this? BECAUSE WE WANTED TO BE IN 203! We are most certainly not alone in this desire. The reality is, people pay MORE to live in 203. Period. Although we have been happy with the education our kids have gotten, the Central building appalls us. We feel sure that price edge that 203 houses enjoy will erode if something is not done about Central's building. The principal, Jim Caudill, is as devoted to the students at Central as you could possibly hope for. He is NOT in this to "keep up with the Jones". Meet him and tour the school before you make up your mind.
Nice story Nancy. I’m not sure if I should feel sorry for you now living in that small 2400 sq ft house on a paltry quarter acre or happy that you were able to move into SD 203. You demanded residency in SD 203 but are appalled with the condition of Central? Does the condition illustrate to you good stewardship of the school by its’ administration? You've only been back in the area for two years, any idea about the extended history of this SD?
I don't know Mr. Caudill and I'm sure he is a wonderful person but I am concerned that Central has seemingly without notice become an “appalling” death trap. And, how does one arrive at an $84 million repair?
By the way, just as the teachers note the wages of those in other SD's, I guarantee you that Mr. Caudill is very aware of what is occurring around him. His primary goal may not be in "keeping up" but to continue to be SD that YOU WANT he must know about the others don't you think.