1. Capital Improvement Program FY12/13-FY21/22
August 11, 2011

2. CIP Request: 3 Options LRPAC CIP 101 Recap Tonight’s Presentation
We are here tonight to give a presentation on the school’s Capital Improvement Program.
I’m going to start with an overview of the CIP Process,
do a quick recap of the Long Range Planning Advisory Committee’s report,
and then present three options that staff has developed.
(transition…)
So what is the Capital Improvement Program?

3. What is the Capital Improvement Program?
The Capital Improvement Plan and the Capital Needs Assessment – collectively referred to as the Capital Improvement Program– represent a statement of the County of Albemarle’s policy regarding long-range physical development for the next five-year and ten-year periods respectively.
Years 1-5: The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
The initial five-year period of the program forecasts spending all anticipated capital projects and is considered to be the link between the County’s Comprehensive Plan and fiscal planning process.
The Capital Budget, the first year of the plan, is formally adopted and therefore authorized for expenditure by the Board of Supervisors. 
Projects in subsequent years (Years 2-5) are for planning purposes only and do not receive spending authority until they become part of the Capital Budget.
Years 6-10: The Capital Needs Assessment (CNA) 
This assessment plan is updated every other year and helps form the basis of the five-year Capital Improvement Plan as projects are brought forward.
Projects included in the assessment period are not balanced to revenues but are viewed as potential projects in a planning stage.
The Capital Improvement Program is the County’s tool for the planning of long-range physical development.
It is divided into 2 five year periods: the Capital Improvement Plan & the Capital Needs Assessment
The CIP is the first 5 years.
Only year one receives spending authority.
The CNA is years 6-10.
Projects are not balanced to revenues in this assessment period.

4. The CIP Planning Cycle The CIP process is a two year planning cycle:
YEAR 1 involves the development of the long-range ten-year capital needs, including the five year Capital Improvement Plan and the Capital Needs Assessment.
YEAR 2 involves only streamlined review of urgent or emergency project needs and update cost estimates for projects in the five-year window.
New project requests are NOT accepted unless they meet the definition of a critical need.
WE ARE IN YEAR ONE OF THIS PLANNING CYCLE
The CIP Planning Cycle is a two year process.
Year One includes the development of the 10 year plan.
Year Two is only a amendment year. This means that only urgent or emergency projects can be added to the five year window.
We are in YEAR ONE of this cycle, which is critical to know when deciding on which projects to submit.
If we don’t include a project this year, they typically not be added for another two years.

5. The CIP Review Process OMB & OFD TRC OSC BOS JAN/FEB Executive Office
AUG/SEPT
Project Justifications & Cost Data were due by Aug. 5th
School Division submits adjustments by August 26th
OFD & OMB review occurs to verify the accuracy, adequacy, and completeness of project descriptions, project cost, and funding requests.
OCT/NOV
The Technical Review Committee (TRC) meets to prioritize 5 year CIP projects based on ranking and available revenues
The Oversight Committee (OSC) meets to review the TRC’s recommendation and adjust as necessary.
DEC
Joint Meeting of Board of Supervisors (BOS) and School Board to Review Capital Program Recommendations occurs & the Final Recommended CIP Document is prepared.
JAN/FEB
Planning Commission Presentation for Comment occurs.
County Executive Review/Approve Recommended Capital Program & submit final document to BOS
MAR
BOS Work Session –Capital Program Budget
Public Hearing on the FY12/13 Proposed Operating & Capital Budgets
APR
BOS Adopts FY 12/13 Budget & Amended FY CIP
OMB & OFD
TRC
OSC
Executive Office
BOS
Here is the timeline of the review process:
As an ‘owner’ or submitting entity we are at the beginning of this process. The School Division along with other entities , such as Park and Recreation , the Police Department, etc. submit project requests.
Staff had to put in a preliminary request by August 5th, but we can make adjustments up until August 26th.
In September, the County’s Office of Facilities Development reviews all the requests for accuracy & completion.
In October, the Technical Review Committee meets to prioritize all the projects. I myself sit on this committee along with Jackson Zimmerman & county representatives.
In the past the committee has been charged with balancing the requests with the anticipated revenue. This year, though, the committee will recommend 2 or 3 plans based on potential revenue scenarios.
After the TRC, the projects go before the Oversight Committee. This Committee has representatives from both the BOS & the School Board, as well as a representative at large.
The County Executive submits a recommendation to the BOS in February. The BOS holds work sessions & public hearings in March before approving a budget in April.

6. The LRPAC Final Report Recap
10 Schools were projected to be over capacity within 10 years.
The LRPAC recommended a redistricting committee should be convened to better utilize existing seats.
Next school year, the division will have 2,083 seats of excess capacity, but by year 5 that number is reduced to 740 (558 of which are at the middle school level.)
Based on this information, the LRPAC presented a 10 year CIP Recommendation. The five year CIP totaled $85,655,000.
So going back to the beginning of that process….where we are today.
We need to determine what our CIP request will be.
The LRPAC came to the previous board meeting & gave you a presentation on a needs-based analysis of the school division’s long term facility needs.
(Review bullet points on the slide)

7. The LRPAC Final Report Recap
Ranking
Project
Type 1
Maintenance Replacement Program
Continuation 2
State Technology Grant 3
Administrative Technology 4
Instructional Technology 5
Wide Area Network Upgrade (WAN) 6
Local Area Network Upgrade (LAN) 7
School Bus Replacement Program
New 8
Storage Facility Lease 9
Red Hill Elementary Addition/Renovation
Reinstated/Revised 10
Meriwether Lewis Elementary Addition 11
Monticello High School Addition 12
Western Albemarle HS Addition 13
Crozet Elementary Expansion Phase I 14
Henley Auxiliary PE/Meeting Space 15
Crozet Elementary Expansion Phase II 16
Henley Addition 17
Elementary School Addition 18 19
Murray Elementary School Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
Reinstated
School Board’s Response
Agreed that a redistricting committee was needed
Agreed that Projects 1-8 should be approved and incorporated into the CIP
Requested a committee to be convened in the Fall to evaluate building capacities, creative/out of box ideas, etc.
Years 1-5
Here again, is the project list that the committee recommended.
As a board, you have agreed to convene a redistricting committee.
You also agreed that projects 1-8 on this list be incorporated into the CIP request.
These projects all the multi-year projects…. Maintenance, Technology, Storage lease etc. The only new addition this year is the School Bus Replacement Program.
Lastly, you requested that a committee be convened in the Fall to evaluate building capacity and creative/out of the box ideas.
Years 6-10

8. LRPAC Recommendation
 Project 1
FY 12/13 2
FY 13/14 3
FY 14/15 4
FY 15/16 5
FY 16/17
Total
FY 12-17 6
FY 17/18 7
FY 18/19 8
FY 19/20 9
FY 20/21 10
FY 21/22
FY 17-22
1-8
Multiple Continuation Projects
8,368
9,322
8,733
8,514
9,154
44,092
10,668
11,017
9,656
10,261
10,035
51,636
Red Hill Renovation (Increase capacity to 216)
397
4,715
5,112
Meriwether Lewis Addition (Increase Capacity to 492)
418
5,274
5,692 11
Monticello HS Expansion (Increase Capacity to 1512)
478
7,174
7,652 12
Western Albemarle Addition (Increase Capacity to 1264)
1,521
13,759
15,280 13
Crozet ES Expansion Phase I (Increase Capacity to 480)
447
5,496
5,944 14
Henley PE/Meeting Space
103
1,215
1,318 15
Crozet ES Expansion Phase II (Increase Capacity to 600)
293
3,658 16
Henley Addition (Increase Capacity to 1075)
274
3,447 17
Elementary School Addition
506
6,199
6,705 18 19
Murray ES Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
821
1,051
1,872
$9,184
$19,891
$19,090
$27,770
$9,721
$85,655
$17,773
$12,535
$29,074
$11,312
$10,035
$80,729
So here is what the LRPAC plan looks like with dollar figures & years.
As an example…
[use laser pointer to illustrate]
Red Hill’s Renovation design is proposed in year 1 7 construction in year 2 for a total of about $5.7 million.
We have grouped projects 1-8 together, because again the board agreed that these would all be included.
1 Figures include a 4.5% PM Fee + 3.5% inflation rate/year

9. Alternative #1 Keep only Multi-Year Projects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 12/13 2
FY 13/14 3
FY 14/15 4
FY 15/16 5
FY 16/17
Total
FY 12-17 6
FY 17/18 7
FY 18/19 8
FY 19/20 9
FY 20/21 10
FY 21/22
FY 17-22
1-8
Multiple Continuation Projects
8,368
9,322
8,733
8,514
9,154
44,092
10,668
11,017
9,656
10,261
10,035
51,636
Red Hill Renovation (Increase capacity to 216)
467
 5,512
 5,979
Meriwether Lewis Addition (Increase Capacity to 492)
491
6,136 
 6,627 11
Monticello HS Expansion (Increase Capacity to 1512)
540
 8,113
 8,653 12
Western Albemarle Addition (Increase Capacity to 1264)
1,228
 13,170
 14,398 13
Crozet ES Expansion Phase I (Increase Capacity to 480)
 491
 6,019
 6,510 14
Henley PE/Meeting Space
117
 1,374
 1,491 15
Crozet ES Expansion Phase II (Increase Capacity to 600)
320 
 3,997
4,317 16
Henley Addition (Increase Capacity to 1075)
282
 3,535
3,817 17
Elementary School Addition
506
6,199
6,705 18 19
Murray ES Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
821
1,051
1,872
14,284
56,394
29,394
15,309
125,416
So here is the first alternative…
The only thing that remains in the 5 year plan is the 8 Multi-Year Projects.
This dramatically reduces the 5 year request, and gives time for further evaluation of other projects.
A quick formatting note…the light orange represents where the design was in the LRPAC report & the dark orange is construction.
1 Figures include a 4.5% PM Fee + 3.5% inflation rate/year

10. Alternative #1 Keep only Multi-Year Projects 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 12/13 2
FY 13/14 3
FY 14/15 4
FY 15/16 5
FY 16/17
Total
FY 12-17 6
FY 17/18 7
FY 18/19 8
FY 19/20 9
FY 20/21 10
FY 21/22
FY 17-22
1-8
Multiple Continuation Projects
8,368
9,322
8,733
8,514
9,154
44,092
10,668
11,017
9,656
10,261
10,035
51,636
Red Hill Renovation (Increase capacity to 216)
467
 5,512
 5,979
Meriwether Lewis Addition (Increase Capacity to 492)
491
6,136 
 6,627 11
Monticello HS Expansion (Increase Capacity to 1512)
540
 8,113
 8,653 12
Western Albemarle Addition (Increase Capacity to 1264)
1,228
 13,170
 14,398 13
Crozet ES Expansion Phase I (Increase Capacity to 480)
 491
 6,019
 6,510 14
Henley PE/Meeting Space
117
 1,374
 1,491 15
Crozet ES Expansion Phase II (Increase Capacity to 600)
320 
 3,997
4,317 16
Henley Addition (Increase Capacity to 1075)
282
 3,535
3,817 17
Elementary School Addition
506
6,199
6,705 18 19
Murray ES Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
821
1,051
1,872
14,284
56,394
29,394
15,309
125,416
Ranking
Project
Type
5 Year Request 1
Maintenance Replacement Program
Continuation
$25,069, 000 2
State Technology Grant
$4,107,000 3
Administrative Technology
$1,204,000 4
Instructional Technology
$3,083,000 5
Wide Area Network Upgrade (WAN)
$437,000 6
Local Area Network Upgrade (LAN)
$1,266,000 7
School Bus Replacement Program
New
$8,143,000 8
Storage Facility Lease
$784,000
Again, the 8 projects are as displayed…..
1 Figures include a 4.5% PM Fee + 3.5% inflation rate/year

11. Alternative #2 Move Red Hill out of 5 year plan
Move WAHS & CRO out 3 years
Alternative #2
 Project 1
FY 12/13 2
FY 13/14 3
FY 14/15 4
FY 15/16 5
FY 16/17
Total
FY 12-17 6
FY 17/18 7
FY 18/19 8
FY 19/20 9
FY 20/21 10
FY 21/22
FY 17-22
1-8
Multiple Continuation Projects
8,368
9,322
8,733
8,514
9,154
44,092
10,668
11,017
9,656
10,261
10,035
51,636
Red Hill Renovation (Increase capacity to 216)
467
 5,512
 5,979
Meriwether Lewis Addition (Increase Capacity to 492)
418
5,274
5,692 11
Monticello HS Expansion (Increase Capacity to 1512)
478
7,174
7,652 12
Western Albemarle Addition (Increase Capacity to 1264)
1,228
13,170 
 14,398 13
Crozet ES Expansion Phase I (Increase Capacity to 480)
 491
 6,019
 6,510 14
Henley PE/Meeting Space
103
1,215
1,318 15
Crozet ES Expansion Phase II (Increase Capacity to 600)
302
 3,951
4,253 16
Henley Addition (Increase Capacity to 1075)
282
 3,535
3,817 17
Elementary School Addition
506
6,199
6,705 18 19
Murray ES Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
821
1,051
1,872
8,786
15,177
17,122
58,753
13,438
44,722
29,074
11,312
108,581
This is Alternative #2… Again, the Multi-year Projects are included & grouped together.
Then below that, things are rearranged.
First, Red Hill is pushed out to Year 6. It is acknowledging there is certainly a need, but is a statement that perhaps the emphasis should be on seats.
The MWL & MHS additions are kept as originally proposed. These are additions, that according to capacity calculations, are needed first.
The Western & Crozet Additions are pushed out 3 years and out of the 5 year request. The logic behind this is…
The Western schools certainly need seats, but they not necessarily be needed as early as the projections indicate. This will allow time to determine if the projections are realized.
The Henley PE space is included as originally proposed.
1 Figures include a 4.5% PM Fee + 3.5% inflation rate/year

12. Alternative #3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Used Modified Capacity Formulas:
Use 1:22 Ratio for High Schools & Middle School and Move all HS & MS Additions out to year 6
Remove 15% capacity reduction & Move MWL out 2 years
Alternative #3
 Project 1
FY 12/13 2
FY 13/14 3
FY 14/15 4
FY 15/16 5
FY 16/17
Total
FY 12-17 6
FY 17/18 7
FY 18/19 8
FY 19/20 9
FY 20/21 10
FY 21/22
FY 17-22
1-8
Multiple Continuation Projects
8,368
9,322
8,733
8,514
9,154
44,092
10,668
11,017
9,656
10,261
10,035
51,636
Red Hill Renovation (Increase capacity to 216)
397
4,715
5,112
Meriwether Lewis Addition (Increase Capacity to 492)
 447
 5,603
6,050 11
Monticello HS Expansion (Increase Capacity to 1512)
540
 8,113
8,653 12
Western Albemarle Addition (Increase Capacity to 1264)
1,228
13,170 
 14,398 13
Crozet ES Expansion Phase I (Increase Capacity to 480)
447
5,496
5,943 14
Henley PE/Meeting Space
103
1,215
1,318 15
Crozet ES Expansion Phase II (Increase Capacity to 600)
302
 3,951
4,253 16
Henley Addition (Increase Capacity to 1075)
282
 3,535
3,817 17
Elementary School Addition
506
6,199
6,705 18 19
Murray ES Addition 20
Support Services & School Technology Facilities
821
1,051
1,872
8,765
14,140
10,842
19,613
62,504
13,020
41,304
29,074
11,312
104,745
This is the final alternative, again projects 1-8 are grouped together.
The changes here have to with the capacity formulas. The committee in the fall will evaluate building capacity, so we realize it’s the cart before the horse, but I think its worth looking at.
If the ratio for High School & Middle School classrooms is changed from 1:20 to 1:22, the high school additions are delayed to year 6.
Per policy , Meriwether Lewis’s capacity is reduced by 15% because its classrooms are smaller than state standards.
Looking at it in more detail…. Only ½ the rooms are small.
4 - first grade/kindergarten rooms are 88% of state standards
8 - 4th/5th grade rooms are 94% of state standards.
If we remove this 15% reduction the addition is not needed to Year 4. This also gives time for a committee to evaluate the addition. Perhaps its not classrooms, perhaps its different learning spaces that better support the reduced classrooms size. Just a thought…
Red Hill, Crozet, & Henley all remain in place.
1 Figures include a 4.5% PM Fee + 3.5% inflation rate/year