At their annual retreat in the winter of the 2002-2003 school year, the School Board identified the need for a long range plan for the elementary school buildings in the school district. Many of the facilities were very old, built in the early 1900s. The buildings were not handicapped accessible and had poor heating and ventilation systems. The elementary school population had declined significantly since 1997 when the sixth grades were moved from the elementary schools to the middle school. For example Conant School in the South End of Concord had 500 students in 1997; today it has closer to 350 students. Four schools, Dewey, Rumford and Eastman had fewer than 175 students in attendance.

 

Reacting to the declining enrollments in one sector of the city, in the spring of the 2002-2003 school year the Concord Superintendent of Schools recommended that the students scheduled to attend Dewey School in the Fall of 2003 attend Kimball School instead. Kimball School had sufficient space and the Kimball administrator and many staff voiced their concerns about the increasing fragmentation of the program at Dewey School given that no one except 2 kindergarten teachers and 2 first grade teachers worked full time in the building. The principal reported that nearly 20 different individuals were in and out of the school each week. The Dewey School was temporarily closed for the 2003-2004 school year.

 

The community surrounding Dewey School was upset about this decision. They felt that a decision about the future of a school shouldnot be made until the School Board had a comprehensive plan for all the elementary schools. Members of the Dewey Kimball community offered to participate in the development of such plan.

 

The School Board and administration met with a variety of individuals during the 2002-2003 school year including the city’s master planning team, the Executive Director of the Superintendents’ Association and the consultant for educational facilities at the New Hampshire Department of Education. The Board sought guidance from each of these parties in the development of a master plan.

 

In the winter of the 2003-2004 school year, the School Board issued a Request for Proposals for a consultant who could assist the district with the task of developing a master plan for the elementary school facilities. The district had presentations by representatives of the three consulting firms who responded to the request. The district selected the architectural firm of Dore and Whittier to conduct a study of all the elementary facilities in the district and to work with a citizens’ advisory committee to determine the community values and priorities for the elementary facilities. The Board charged the consultant and advisory committee with developing recommendations to be made to the School Board’s Capital Facilities Committee. The Board was interested in alternatives that effectively and efficiently use the existing facilities, modify or renovate existing facilities or develop new facilities. The master facilities plan for the elementary schools would eventually be used to make decisions about renovations, additions, reconfigurations of existing facilities, attendance boundary lines, transportation policy, etc. for the next decade.

 

Enrollment is a key parameter that affects the number and size of elementary schools in Concord. The School Board’s study coincided with the city government’s review and revision of its master plan so the school district was able to take advantage of a major study of future growth and change in Concord by Planning Designs, Inc. from South Portland, Maine. 

 

The city study reported that Concord’s population growth had fluctuated from moderate to rapid in the past 50 years. From 1950 to 1980 the city expanded by fewer than 2,500 people. Between 1980 and 2000 the city’s population grew by more than 25% or 10,000 residents. This recent growth reflected the growth in Merrimack County and the state of New Hampshire.

 

Concord’s population growth has not been consistent across the city – the denser urban areas grew very little in the last two decades while outlying areas grew significantly. While the population has grown, the average household sizes have steadily decreased from 2.48 persons per household in 1980 to 2.29 persons per household in 2000. These decreasing household sizes follow national trends towards smaller households due to longer life expectancies, more single-parent and one-person households, younger couples postponing childbearing, and fewer children in each family than a decade ago.

 

Concord residents are growing older as the median age increased from 30.0 years in 1980 to 37.0 in 2000. The aging of the baby boom generation, coupled with lower birth rates among younger couples and increased life expectancies combine to increase median ages. As a result of the aging population, the number of fertile females (those between 18 and 44) is decreasing. In the last 15 years, the number of births to Concord residents has decreased from 550 and 600 per year to between 450 and 500 per year. The city’s consultant noted, “This could have an impact on the number of children enrolled in the school system…”

 

Planning Decisions, Inc. projects Concord’s household population will reach 43,107 by 2015 and Concord’s population is projected to reach 48,052 by 2030. This projection was based on trends in the city’s demographics and residential construction rate. The average household is projected to decrease to 2.27 persons by 2015 and to 2.23 persons by 2030.

 

Planning Decisions, Inc. reported that Concord residents between 5 and 17 years of age grew by 26% between 1980 and 2000, the majority of this increase in the 1990s. At the same time, however, the population of fertile females has been decreasing.

The increase in the total enrollment in the school district between 1994-95 and 2003-04 hides the more subtle changes in the grade-group data. An increase in grades 9 – 12 was offset by a decrease in grades K – 5. This suggests that, as these younger class sizes move through the school district, class sizes in the upper grades will eventually decrease.

 

 

 

 

Concord's school enrollments are projected to decrease steadily between 2004 and 2014. Enrollments in the Concord School Department reached their all-time high around 5,500 students in ‘98-‘99. The population has since declined to 5,191 today. School enrollments are projected to continue decreasing through 2014 when they reach 4,625 students.

 

Two major trends explain these decreasing enrollments. First, there are fewer women of child-bearing age in the city's population. The last of the Baby Boom generation (those born between 1945 and 1965) are now reaching 40 years of age. As these Boomers leave their prime child-bearing years behind, not as many parents are replacing them. This pool of parents in their prime child-bearing years has been steadily decreasing steadily for a decade.

 

The second trend suppressing enrollments is the decrease in the Concord School District Projection, K-12, average size of families. This decrease is the result of several factors, including parents waiting longer to have children and having fewer children once they do decide to start a family.

 

The result of these two trends has been a marked decrease in the number of births to Concord residents. In the last ten years, the number of births to Concord residents has decreased from between 550 and 600 per year to between 450 and 500 per year. Declines are projected in all grade categories, but declines in the high school population are projected to be the most dramatic. Between 03-04 and 13-14, high school enrollments are projected to decrease from 1,675 to 1,371 students.

 

1965………………….. 2,907 students

1975……………………2,352 students

1985……………………2,292 students

1995……………………3,035 students

2000……………………2,498 students (6^th grade students move to Rundlett)

2005……………………2,210 studnets (800 fewer students: 400 to Rundlett, loss of 400)

 

 

Beaver Meadow … 657 students                                   407                                                  

Broken Ground …. 427 students                                   377

Conant …………… 578 students                                   363

Dame……………... 583 students                                   247

Dewey……………. 178 students                                   -

Eastman………….. 241 students                                   115

Kimball ………….. 347 students                                   303

Rumford …………   367 students                                138

Walker …………..   453 students                                 159

 

 

As size of school declines, so does the program. Schools less than 400-500 do not have a full time faculty nor can they have a complete program.

 

School populations can decline too much – and lead to more limited opportunities for students, teachers and parents. Ten years ago Walker School had 453 students….with full time art, music, physical education teacher; a full time nurse and guidance counselor. Today Walker School has 165 students, shares a nurse and guidance counselor with Rumford School. “Specials” teachers are assigned to teach classes at more than one school; during           the week they travel from school to school.

 

 

 

 

 

·        Other specialists – psychologists, counselors, OT and PT teachers – also travel from school to school each week, working two children in this school, five children in that school. They come and go with little time for consultation with the child’s classroom teacher, little time to plan lessons and services together.

 

·        In the past one of our principals traveled across the city each day as she administers to two different schools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shrinking schools have fewer options for placement in classes for both students and teachers.

    

·        A shrinking school may have only one or two classes at a grade level. This limits the flexibility of placing students with certain teachers or not with particular children.

 

One or two classes at a grade level means very limited opportunities for teachers to collaborate with other teachers at the same grade level. 

 

·        New teachers who are the only teacher of their grade in the school have no one to go to for help with curriculum, materials, advice about handling certain challenges.

 

 

During the spring of 2004, the architectural firm of Dore and Whittier conducted a study that included a thorough architectural and engineering review and assessment of all nine buildings and sites, a review of enrollment projections as well as the development of an educational program and a series of alternatives for the long range educational plan for the district.  

 

During the architectural study of buildings a general review of current building codes was performed, however, structural calculations were not performed to determine capacities of structural conditions or evaluate if they meet current code requirements.

 

The architectural team also reviewed prior studies of district schools including the , following:

 

 

The architectural team visited the nine elementary school buildings and saw aging and outdated schools, inaccessible, did not meet current codes or standards, without HVAC, inefficient, in need major repairs such as up to date electrical systems.

 

(Timeline)

            Oldest is Dewey, originally constructed 1890; additions, modifications 1956-58

            Next is Rumford 1902, addition in 1952

            Kimball, 1906 (originally high school)

            Walker 1910

 

            In 1902, there were 31 schools in Concord and Penacook

 

            Dame 1923, additions 1941, 1960-65

            Conant 1929, changes 1948, 1961, 1967, 1985, 1998

            Eastman 1935, addition 1958

                       

            Broken Ground 1973, addition 1988

            Beaver Meadow, 1987, addition …

 

 

A child with physical disabilities cannot go to his neighborhood school with his brothers and sisters or next door neighbors if he lives in the neighborhood of Kimball School, Walker School, Rumford School, Eastman School or Dewey School.

 

The district pays $.95 per square foot for steam heat at Concord High School and $3.06 for steam heat at Kimball School and the administrative building.

 

The district pays $.58 per square foot for oil heat at Beaver Meadow School and $ 1.79 per square foot for oil heat at Eastman School.

 

 

Students at Broken Ground School have a full sized gymnasium for physical education classes, whole school meetings, performances and community activities such as East Side basketball leagues

Dame School has no gymnasium. The students at Dame School must leave class, put on their coats, leave school, load the bus and travel to Broken Ground School for what should be a 45 minute physical education class.

 

Conant School has a recently renovated library in the center of their school. The library at Rumford School is in a former classroom in the basement of the building.  

 

Students at Beaver Meadow school has rooms dedicated for Art and Music and have bathrooms in their classrooms and plenty of room to store their projects. The art teacher at Rumford School must set tables and assemble materials in the multipurpose room for each class and Rumford students travel down one or two flights of stairs to the two sets of bathrooms in the basement of the school

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

During this same period of time, the Community Advisory Committee was formed. A list of members is included as Appendix A.

 

The Advisory Committee met for a period of months to discuss the future of the elementary schools in Concord. Frank Locher, a consultant brought in by the Dore and Whittier team, worked with the advisory committee to plan two community meetings to assess the community’s values and priorities for its elementary schools. The advisory committee’s tasks included providing the consultant with general information and perceptions of Concord and its schools; providing the consultant with information about how the current facilities have worked and were working in the school district; assisting the consultant with plans for two public meetings between March 2004 and June 2004; synthesizing what was voiced at the public meetings; hearing the consultant’s potential alternatives for the elementary facilities; identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the different alternatives and making a report to the Capital Facilities Committee of the School Board.

 

In addition to the two public hearings the Advisory Committee conducted an online survey for the public to weigh in on their goals and priorities for the elementary schools in Concord.

 

The Community Advisory Committee reported to the Capital Facilities Committee in July 2004. Their report included a number of alternatives for renovating, replacing or closing the elementary schools in Concord.

 

In the fall of 2004, the Capital Facilities Committee reviewed the findings for each of the elementary schools and met with the principal of each of the elementary schools to hear about the strengths and needs of each facility. During the 2004-2005 school year the Superintendent and Director of Facilities met with parents at each of the elementary schools to explain the results of the architectural study and advisory committee’s alternatives and gather community feedback on the various alternative plans. The School Board Joint City Council School Board Committee received periodic updates from city planners on the potential growth in the city.

 

The Capital Facilities Committee also met with various groups from the city, including representatives of 20/20 to discuss ways in which the two groups could work together.

 

In the fall of 2005 the Capital Facilities Committee developed a set of major principles and priorities for the elementary schools. These included:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The first meeting of Task Force II was spent in a vigorous discussion of the composition of the Task Force and the purpose of the Task Force. The group agreed that it would conduct the feasibility study by looking at two specific sites, Kimball and Conant, and consider and compare the costs of renovating or building new schools on these sites to house both 300 and 500 students.

 

Members of Task Force II have listened, discussed, debated and weighed in on a number of issues related to the proposed elementary facilities master plan. Following is a summary of their perspectives on a variety of important issues.

 

In an earlier study in 2004, the Dore and Whittier architects evaluated each of the sites of the current elementary school and each of the elementary school buildings for the potential to renovate and build new. At that time there was some evidence that building new schools was going to be as or more cost effective than trying to renovate the existing 100 year old schools.

 

This Fall, 2008 Harriman Associates architects and engineers evaluated the sites and buildings and reported to the Task Force that they felt the two schools were good candidates for renovation and has developed preliminary sketches of a facility to house 500 students on the Kimball site. Kimball itself would be renovated; an addition would be added with many of the core facilities such as a library and gymnasium.

 

In this plan, Kimball would be a downtown elementary school – a goal of the many who have participated in this process. Kimball is a historic building as it was originally the high school building in the early 1900s. Kimball is in a walkable area.

 

Dan Cecil of Harriman Associates called Kimball a potential educational “gem.” The arrangement of classrooms around a common area is a very modern plan that provides space for individual as well as small group and large group work.

 

Renovating and adding to Kimball would make Kimball handicapped-accessible and improve energy efficiency – a significant financial consideration. . The project at Kimball would increase the equity of opportunity among the elementary schools.

 

Renovating and adding to Kimball is likely to cost $20million plus. Kimball School is in a congested site and the Task Force members worried about traffic and parking issues. Members suggested looking at the design if it is for 350 children..

 

A project at Kimball would require the Central Office organization to be relocated perhaps to Dewey.

 

There is limited lot area at the Kimball site, even with the purchases of adjacent properties. The early designs for Kimball appeared very large with inefficient spaces. There is limited playground space as well.

 

The Kimball facility will have limited ability to go beyond 500 students in the future. If Walker School is closed, the district has not increased capacity within the school district.

 

2. Do we renovate or replace the Morrill Building as part of Kimball project?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If Rumford School is closed, there is no increase in student capacity for the school district. Because of the concerns about future enrollments, the district should consider moth balling the Rumford for a period of time in case it is needed in the future.

 

 

 

 

Building green schools will have higher up front costs. It may be difficult to do in a renovation project compared to building new. We should make a serious effort at Conant and Kimball to design energy efficient buildings, balanced with an eye toward budget. A future school upgrade at one of the other campuses will afford a “ground up” opportunity for a LEED/CHIPS certification. It should be easier to design a green building from the ground up

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Task Force members recommended that the Board evaluate the costs and needs of all the schools rather than just a couple. Taking action on only a limited number of schools does not take into consideration the costs, needs, flexibility and potential problems on the whole system.  

 

Some Task Force members recommended that the Board develop cost estimates for bringing all the buildings up to ADA and modern energy standards and for addressing other identified needs such as gymnasiums. Then we can directly compare the costs of renovating all schools vs. costs of closing and renovating and building new..

 

In addition, some Task Force members urged the Board to evaluate population projections, which predict growth in elementary school aged children to exceed what existed in 1995. Consider closing smaller schools temporarily, giving the district more time to complete the necessary ADA, energy and other improvements to those buildings so that they are ready when needed again in ten to fifteen years.