Regardless of which side you were on regarding the recently passed controversial $93.4M bond referendum, for remodeling Westonka’s high school, the fact remains it passed.

So, what now? At the January 8 school board meeting a resident, former school board member and structural engineer, made a presentation to the board proposing an alternative plan to using the $93.4M for a high school remodel. The solution proposed would, he asserts, satisfy the goals articulated in the referendum of providing more room at the high school, while simultaneously addressing future facility needs at the middle school and forestalling the need for a future referendum:

The alternative plan suggests using a portion of the funds to build a new, larger middle school (already being discussed for yet another, future referendum) and moving 8th graders, currently attending the high school, to the new, larger middle school on property the school already owns. Removing 8th graders from the high school would provide the space needed for expansion needs there.

In addition to getting the needed space at the high school, and a new, larger middle school, the plan proposes keeping the referendum funds allocated to sports facility upgrades and safety measures intact.

Anticipating the school board’s possible concern about abandoning the previous, pre-referendum, proposal the plan points to language that would allow the switch to an alternative plan as long as it addresses “the acquisition and betterment of school sites and facilities.”

The question is: Is the Westonka School Board interested in a more efficient and cost-effective way of accomplishing the district’s long-term facility needs? Or will they forge ahead with a flawed plan, knowing they can always come back to the well and ask for more?

Please scroll down to read the complete proposal presented to the school board:

New Middle School Option for the Westonka School District

December 18, 2023

Dear Westonka School Facility Committee Members and Attendees,

I believe it is clear the School District should be looking at building a new middle
school to replace Grandview as opposed to putting five small very expensive additions
on the High School.

As a structural engineer with 50 years of experience, I can attest that adding 5 small
additions to MWHS may compromise the building’s integrity for several reasons. While
it is true the interior of the building has few interior bearing walls and would allow for
modifications, the exterior of the building consists of a brick and block masonry wall
that is full height from the foundation all the way up to the top of the parapet above
the roof. Any openings through those walls must be supported by large lintels with
vertical supports to maintain integrity for gravity and wind loads. The existing wall
footings under the exterior masonry walls are only sized for the loads present at the
time the facility was constructed and will certainly require underpinning footings or
adjacent new foundation pads to accept any new gravity loads from proposed building
additions. This gets very expensive, very quickly. Another concern is when you
introduce higher and lower elevations at the roof line as will be the case here, snow
buildup and its associated snow load support design along with roof water
management must be analyzed.

After studying the attached Review and Comment (R&C) document, it is my opinion
that Westonka Schools has been incredibly poorly served by Wold Architects. One
significant error on page 42 of the R&C is that Wold Architects’ School Capacity
Analysis indicates grades 9 through 12 (4 years) are housed at MWHS. MWHS houses
grades 8 through 12 (5 years) and has done so for decades. If the school district needs
space at MWHS for vocational, nursing and other offerings; I submit that it would be
wise for Westonka to consider moving 8th grade out of MWHS to free up plenty of
space. It would be equivalent to an addition of 25% of the total area being made to
the High School without any major construction required and the associated concerns
of disrupting the educational environment over a two year period of time.

If we think outside the box for a moment and take away the proposed costs associated
with the Grandview MS along with the additions and associated remodeling at the High
School, we will find it is less costly to replace the middle school at this time and forgo
the major work at the High School.

Here is the math: Funds earmarked for the High School’s additions / remodeling is $47.117 million, plus amounts scheduled for the Grandview School of $3.8 million for maintenance and $2.5 million for security upgrades equals $53.4 million. The cost to build a new middle
school is about $400 per square foot (per Finance & Commerce Oct.4, 2023 article plus
28% inflation over 4 years). If we wanted to put the 8th grade back into a new middle
school and have it accommodate grades 5 to 8 as is common practice, we would need
a total area of about 92,470 square feet (Grandview’s current area) x 1.33 = 123,000
square feet. Total approximate cost of new middle school will be $49.2 million which is
$4.2 million less than the current $53.4 million amount; therefore, a new middle
school should be the project taken as opposed to making numerous expensive
additions to the high school. In addition to the $4.2 million saving would be the value
of the 11.57 acre site on Dutch Lake that the Grandview School is located at. I would
suspect this property will be worth somewhere between $2 million and $3 million
bringing the total savings to around $7 million. This potential saving may be reduced if
a portion of the $47.117 million dollar amount scheduled for High School additions /
remodeling needs to remain for remodeling. It is clear the majority of this amount was
for the building additions; however, I don’t have estimate sheets from Wold or Kraus
Anderson to establish these numbers. I submitted a public data request for this
information months ago and never received the estimates from the school district.

Grandview Middle School was constructed in 1958 and will be 90 years old in 2048
when the last payments on the 2023 bond are made. If the school district builds a new
middle school at this time, we will have a fairly current 25 year old facility at the end of
the bond as opposed to having a 90 year old building ready to be demolished. I truly
believe that the district was incredibly poorly served by Wold Architects on their work
guiding us in this direction. The fact that Wold did not even know the High School was
housing grades 8 thru 12 as opposed to grades 9 thru 12 should raise significant red
flags regarding the reliability of their advice (see attached p.42 of Review & Comment).

According to the MN Department of Education’s “Guide for Planning School
Construction Projects in Minnesota”, we have adequate property to construct a new
middle school on our existing property on Sunnyfield Road. If the district feels more
property would be required, there is a 19.84 acre site that is immediately north of the
baseball field and bus garage on the north side of Sunnyfield Road that could be
acquired. This parcel was sold in June of 2023 for only $96,150 (see attached map).

The language defining the project on page 4, page 16, and page 20, in addition to the
actual bond question on page 135 of the Review & Comment document gives the
district latitude to change the direction of the project as long as it is for “the acquisition
and betterment of school sites and facilities”.

Thanks for your willingness to review this option for the community.

Please contact me if you have any questions at all.

Sincerely,
Thomas E. Notch, P.E.