NOTICE OF MEETING Vancouver School Board Secretary-Treasurer’s Office Facilities Planning Committee October 4, 2019 Allan Wong Oliver Hanson Carmen Cho Jennifer Reddy
Suzanne Hoffman, Superintendent of Schools J. David Green, Secretary-Treasurer
Notice of Meeting
A Meeting of the Facilities Planning Committee will be held in Room #180 of the Education Centre, 1580 West Broadway, Vancouver, British Columbia, on Wednesday, October 9, 2019 at 6:00 PM.
Trustees: Fraser Ballantyne Estrellita Gonzalez Lois Chan-Pedley Barb Parrott Janet Fraser
Student Trustee: Joshua Harris District Management Staff: Chris Allen Adrian Keough Carmen Batista Lisa Landry Aaron Davis Jody Langlois Pedro da Silva Patricia MacNeil John Dawson Jim Meschino Rosie Finch David Nelson Mette Hamaguchi Julie Pearce Joann Horsley-Holwill Lorelei Russell Magdalena Kassis Rob Schindel Michele Kelly Shehzad Somji Richard Zerbe
Reps: Terry Stanway, VSTA Alt: Joanne Sutherland, VESTA Jill Barclay, VESTA Angela Haveman, VASSA Harjinder Sandhu, VEPVPA Rosa Fazio, VEPVPA (Alt. 1) Carrie Sleep, VEPVPA (Alt. 2) Tim Chester, IUOE Tim De Vivo, IUOE Ajaz Hassan, PASA Priscilla Santos, CUPE 15 Amanda Hillis, DPAC Peter Couch or Sandra Bell, DPAC Stephen Kelly, Trades Raymond Szczecinski, Trades Brent Boyd, CUPE 407
Others: Secretary-Treasurer’s Office Ron Macdonald District Parents Jim de Hoop Communications Will Chan Bithia Chung Ed. Centre Engineers Lynda Bonvillain Rentals Kathie Currie, CUPE 15
VANCOUVER SCHOOL BOARD
COMMITTEE MEETING
FACILITIES PLANNING COMMITTEE Wednesday, October 9, 2019 at 6:00 pm Room 180, VSB Education Centre
AGENDA
The meeting is being held on the traditional unceded territory of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil- Waututh Coast Salish peoples. The meeting is being live-streamed and the audio and visual recording will also be available to the public for viewing after the meeting. The footage of the meeting may be viewed inside and outside of Canada.
Meeting Decorum: The Board has a strong commitment to ethical conduct. This includes the responsibility of committee members to conduct themselves with appropriate decorum and professionalism. As Chair of the Committee it is my responsibility to see that decorum is maintained. To do that I ask that: i. All members/delegates request to speak through the chair; ii. Civility towards others is maintained as stakeholder representatives and Trustees share perspectives and participate in debate; iii. Staff be able to submit objective reports without influence or pressure as their work is acknowledged and appreciated; iv. Committee members refrain from personal inflammatory/accusatory language/action; v. Committee Members, Trustees, representatives and /staff present themselves in a professional and courteous manner.
Please see reverse for the Purpose/Function and Power and Duties of this Committee.
1. Delegations Presenters 1.1 Track and Field Strategy Erin Embley, Planner II, Planning, Policy and Environment, Vancouver Park Board 1.2 Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure Shaun Kalley, Chair, Vancouver DPAC 1.3 Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure Kate Hood, QEA PAC Co-Chair Rebecca Pitfield, QEA PAC Co-Chair 1.4 Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure Nina Lakhani, JQ PAC co-Chairs Katy Howden, JQ PAC co-Chairs 1.5 Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure Kylie Taylor, President, Bayview Community Preschool Board
2. Information Items 2.1 Carleton Elementary Verbal Update J. Meschino, Director of Facilities 2.2 Vancouver Project Office Memorandum of L. Landry, Assistant Secretary Treasurer Understanding
3. Discussion Items 3.1 Long-Range Facilities Plan Update J. Dawson, Director Educational Planning an Student Information L. Landry, Assistant Secretary Treasurer
VANCOUVER SCHOOL BOARD
COMMITTEE MEETING
4. Items for Approval
4.1 Vancouver Park Board Track and Field Strategy J. Meschino, Director of Facilities 4.2 Consideration of Closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex D. Green, Secretary Treasurer S. Hoffman, Superintendent 5. Information Item Requests
Date and Time of Next Meeting Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 5:00 pm
Facilities Planning Committee
2.1 Purpose/Function:
2.1.1 To review and provide recommendations to the Board in regard to assigned facilities planning matters.
2.2 Powers and Duties:
2.2.1 School Closures:
2.2.1.1 Review the materials provided by senior staff to the Board regarding a possible school closure and provide a recommendation to the Board as to whether the committee supports the possible closure advancing to the school closure public consultation process phase.
2.2.2 Naming and Renaming Schools:
2.2.2.1 Within the constraints of Board direction provided at the outset of any potential school naming or renaming process provide recommendations to the Board.
2.2.3 Student Enrolment:
2.2.3.1 Annually review enrolment and enrolment trends and the potential impact on capital planning, student accommodation and catchment changes.
2.2.4 Capital Planning:
2.2.4.1 Annually review and make recommendations regarding the draft five year capital plan for submission to the BC Ministry of Education.
2.2.5 Long Range Facilities Plan:
2.2.5.1 Annually review and make recommendations regarding the draft long range facilities plan for submission to the BC Ministry of Education.
2.2.6 Facilities Planning Matters Referred to the Committee by the Board:
2.2.6.1 Review matters referred and make recommendations as requested. Facilities Planning Committee ITEM 1.1 OCTOBER 9, 2019
DELEGATION
Speaker: Erin Embley, Planner II, Planning, Policy and Environment, Vancouver Park Board
Re: Track and Field Strategy
• Overview of the Purpose of the Track and Field Strategy • Public Engagement highlights • Importance of Park Board/VSB relationship • Next steps for the three projects funded through the 2019-2022 Capital Plan
Supporting and Developing Athletics in Vancouver
Park Board Committee Meeting Monday, September 30, 2019
Killarney Park Background
Background ▪ 2016 Board Motion: Need for the Strategy “…investigate the opportunity to construct a new competitive track and Strategy Process field facility in Vancouver…” and “work with the sport community in Strategy Overview Vancouver, … for their consultation and input, and report back to the Engagement Results Board with recommendations at the earliest opportunity.” Implementation & Next Steps ▪ History of cooperative effort between the Park Board and the Vancouver School Board (VSB)
▪ The Strategy supports: • City of Vancouver Healthy City Strategy (2014) • Vancouver Sport Strategy (2008) • VanPlay (ongoing)
5 Strategy Purpose andBackground: Overview – ExistingExisting Facilities facilities
7 Need for the Strategy
Background Importance of Track and Field Need for the Strategy ▪ Engagement in sports for kids improves: Strategy Process • Capacity for learning Strategy Overview • Skills to cope with anxiety and withstand stress Engagement Results • Ability to work well with others Implementation & Next Steps • Self-confidence, self-esteem, and self-discipline ▪ Early and ongoing participation in physical activities create active adults who: • Are healthier • Have stronger social ties to their community • Have greater sense of well-being ▪ Track and field facilities are inclusive and low barrier 9 Strategy Process
Timeline
We’re here
13 Strategy Overview
Principles Background Need for the Strategy ▪ Provide Equitable Access Strategy Process Strategy Overview ▪ Strengthen Partnerships Engagement Results Implementation & Next Steps ▪ Support the Growth of Track & Field in Vancouver
▪ Complement Citywide Initiatives and Recreation Strategies
▪ Inspire All Athletes
▪ Celebrate the Past & Foster the Future
16 Strategy Overview – Recommendations
C B A
Amenities: All amenities of a Class ‘C’ All amenities of Class ‘B” facility, plus: & ‘C’ facilities, plus: ▪ ▪ ▪ Low impact surfacing 6-lane marked track 8-lane marked track ▪ ▪ ▪ Long jump pits Temp. seating space Spectator seating ▪ ▪ ▪ Wayfinding and signage Storage space Change rooms ▪ ▪ ▪ Site furnishings Washrooms Ancillary building space ▪ Lighting ▪ Full jumping and throwing ▪ Jumping and throwing event event space space 19 Recommended Categorization Strategy Overview – Strategic Themes of Existing Facilities
20 Engagement Results – Summary
Connected 1,586 940 >1,400 with 4000 interactions interactions interactions people
25 Engagement Results
Background ▪ Achilles International Track & Field Need for the Strategy Society Advisory Group Strategy Process ▪ Members Thunderbirds Track and Field Club Strategy Overview ▪ UBC Track and Field Alumni Association Engagement Results ▪ Vancouver School Board Implementation & Next Steps ▪ BC Wheelchair Sports Association ▪ BC Athletics ▪ Exceleration Triathlon and Multi-Sport Club ▪ Vancouver Olympic Club/New West Spartan Track and Field ▪ UBC Track and Field Club ▪ Mile2Marathon Running Club ▪ Vancouver Sport Network 26 Facilities Planning Committee ITEM 1.2 OCTOBER 9, 2019
DELEGATION
Speaker: Shaun Kalley, Chair, Vancouver DPAC
Re: Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure
• The rationale for considering closing QEA as presented in the staff report is ambiguous at best and opaque at worst. • The lack of debate at the last Board meeting did not provide confidence that trustees made the decision to proceed based on clear rationale, and not on the rationale in the staff report. • Between the ambiguity of the rationale and the lack of debate the Board has not made a prima facie case for considering closing QEA. • Information gathered since the last Board meeting obscures the rationale even further. • There may be valid reasons to consider closing QEA, but neither the staff report nor the debate at the Board meeting have established it. • Stakeholders and the general public require appropriate transparency when impactful decisions such as this are made.
Facilities Planning Committee ITEM 1.3 OCTOBER 9, 2019
DELEGATION
Speaker: Kate Hood & Rebecca Pitfield - QEA PAC Co-Chair
Re: Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure
1. French Immersion and bilingualism 2. Queen Elizabeth Annex and it’s value to the VSB and public education 3. Questions pertaining to: alternate options for CSF site, why Queen Elizabeth Annex and the - loss of French Immersion
Facilities Planning Committee ITEM 1.4 OCTOBER 9, 2019
DELEGATION
Speaker: Nina Lakhani & Katy Howden - JQ PAC co-Chairs Re: Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure
The Computer Room
Both of these windows look out into the hallway
This is the front of the class, and is a shared wall with the girls’ bathroom. This is the most plausible place to install the sink, and would therefore likely turn into the cubby area as well. This is the side wall, and is a shared wall with the gym. This is where the students would most likely have to face, assuming the sink is installed in the wall shown in the previous slide. The “windows” are behind them. École Jules Quesnel
201910-09 VSB Facilities Planning Meeting
All the Kindergarten to Grade 2 students may only play in the orange area Facilities Planning Committee ITEM 1.5 OCTOBER 9, 2019
DELEGATION
Speaker: Kylie Taylor – Bayview Community Preschool Re: Queen Elizabeth Annex Closure
Brief Overview of Speaking Points
Overview Bayview Community Preschools programs and our positive contribution to our children, their families and the community
• Strong part of the Bayview school community and provides quality, affordable, accessible early childhood education for the last 40 years, with over 60 children enrolled in our programs. • Relocated to room 106 in Queen Elizabeth Annex (QEA) due to Bayview Community Elementary school’s two year seismic upgrade, for school years 2019/20 and 2020/21. • Preschool program at Queen Elizabeth Annex • Outdoor Nature Program at Jericho Park
Outline the negative impact of relocating the preschool for our children, their families and the community
• Relocating the preschool three years in a row is not in the best interest of children, their families, our teachers and our community. • If the Preschool is forced to relocated, it may not have the human resources and financial reserves, needed to gain a new development application, occupancy permit, license and keep the preschool running for a second year of initial low enrolments while trying to engage with a new community. • In order to remain viable, if relocated, the preschool may need to reduce/cut programs, making our highly skilled and dedicated teachers redundant.
Questions and Considerations:
What are the VSB’s plans for the preschool if QEA closes?
Will the preschool be able to remain onsite while the Francophone students use the school?
Where will we be relocated to, if the Preschool cannot remain on site?
Will the VSB support Bayview Community Preschool financially with the costs to gain new development permits, inspections, maintenance works as a result of these inspections and the cost’s to run the preschool at the initially low enrolments as a direct consequence of being relocated?
DATE: October 9, 2019 ITEM 2.2 TO: Facilities Planning Committee
FROM: J. David Green, Secretary-Treasurer L. Landry, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
RE: Vancouver Project Office Memorandum of Understanding
REFERENCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Provide effective leadership, governance and stewardship. Objectives: • Effectively utilize school district resources and facilities. • Support effective communication, engagement and community partnerships.
INTRODUCTION
This report is for information.
BACKGROUND
Two motions were passed at the May 27/29, 2019 Board meeting, regarding a request to amend the existing Vancouver Project Office Memorandum of Understanding signed with the Ministry of Education.
Specifically, the two motions were:
That the Board engage with the Ministry of Education in a renegotiation of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Seismic Mitigation Projects. As part of a renewed MOU the District would seek increased opportunities to engage the public in the process and to increase transparency; and
That the Board request of the Minister of Education to have a trustee serve as a non- voting member of the Vancouver Project Steering Committee.
DISCUSSION
On June 24, 2019, the Board chair wrote a letter to the Ministry of Education requesting amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
The Minister of Education responded by letter dated September 9, 2019 (Attachment A).
1 The Minister’s letter indicates the Ministry’s willingness to renegotiate the MOU, recognizing that some preliminary work has begun at the staff level. The letter recognized that involvement of local education partners and the public in school capital planning is an important part of successful planning, and should be encouraged. However, the letter indicated the Ministry would not be supportive of the District selecting or presenting a preferred option for a seismic project prior to government approval of a project.
The Minister’s letter indicates that Government has created steering committees to provide additional coordination and guidance for school capital projects. These are operational entities that do not include MLAs, Ministers or trustees, and as such, having a District trustee serve as a non-voting member would not be supported.
Amendments to the MOU would be reviewed and endorsed by the VPO Steering Committee. Both the Ministry and the District would have an opportunity to review any suggested amendments before an updated MOU is signed.
CONCLUSION
This report is provided for information.
APPENDICES:
• ATTACHMENT A: The Minister of Education responded by letter dated September 9, 2019
2
DATE: October 9, 2019 ITEM 3.1
TO: Facilities Planning Committee
FROM: John Dawson, Director of Educational Planning and Student Information L. Landry, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
RE: Long Range Facilities Plan Update
REFERENCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Provide effective leadership, governance and stewardship. Objectives: • Effectively utilize School District resources and facilities. • Implement the recommendations of the Long-Range Facilities Plan.
INTRODUCTION
This report is for information.
An update on work underway on recommendations adopted by the Board as part of the 2019 Long-Range Facilities Plan (LRFP) is provided.
In the executive summary of the 2019 LRFP, the 17 Board approved recommendations have been organized to reflect the structure of the LRFP and categorized as follows:
• Recommendations 1-12: Recommendations pertaining to the implementation of the 2019 LRFP. • Recommendations 13-17: Recommendations pertaining to future updates of the LRFP.
At the October 9, 2019 Facilities Planning Committee staff intend to provide progress updates on all the recommendations and will present detailed information on work undertaken on LRFP recommendations 7 and 13.
Recommendation 7: That the District undertake an Enrolment Data Validation process for all facility and education planning purposes. This process would consist of a validation study of short, medium, and long-range enrolment projections, as well as updating student yield metrics for areas of the District with significant development and redevelopment proposed or underway.
Recommendation 13: That the District investigate the implications of the new LRFP guidelines, arrange for community information sessions, and report to Committee and Board.
1
PROGRESS UPDATE: RECOMMENDATIONS 1-12
1. That the District establish guidelines on preferred student population size with the goal of determining appropriate ranges of school size to inform planning decisions.
During the 2019-2020 school year, staff will convene a stakeholder working group to develop draft guidelines for preferred student population size. The working group will be comprised of representatives from: • Vancouver Secondary Teachers’ Association • Vancouver Association of Secondary School Administrators • Vancouver Elementary Teachers’ Association • Vancouver Elementary Principals and Vice Principals Association • District Parents Advisory Council • Vancouver District Student Council
District staff are currently assembling background information and developing terms of reference to provide guidance to this working group. Working group meetings will be scheduled from November 2019 – February 2020. The findings of the working group, including any recommendations in regard to preferred student population size, will be reported at the May 6, 2020 Facilities Planning Committee.
2. That the District should continue the investigation of options to co-locate Alternate Programs in facilities which support comprehensive educational program delivery (gym space, applied design and technology labs, science labs, etc.) and the centralization of key services, resources and supports.
For the 2019-2020 school year, four Alternative programs (Spectrum, Total Education, Foundation, and West) have become part of Vancouver Alternate Secondary School (VASS). The inclusion of these four programs within VASS will enhance the provision of supports and services for students enrolled in these programs.
The District continues to look for opportunities to co-locate Alternative programs to support program delivery. This includes working toward the identification of a central site(s) where a number of programs supporting at-risk youth could be co-housed. This centralization and co-housing would provide increased access to supports, services and facilities for students and would support provision of a comprehensive educational program. More information on opportunities to co-locate programs will be brought to future Facilities and Planning Committee meetings as it becomes available.
3. That the District should continue to explore options that enable it to implement the Board approved recommendations of the French Program Review. That in exploring options to enable the Board to implement the approved recommendations of the French Program Review, consideration be given to including a geographical equity lens in how the District delivers French Immersion, identifying a minimum number of Kindergarten spaces to be maintained and possible ways to expand the program.
Section 2 of the 2019 Long Range Facilities Plan notes that one of the outcomes of the French Program review, conducted during the 2017-2018 school year, was the following motion approved by the Board in June 2018:
2
The VSB endeavor to enroll two Kindergarten French Immersion divisions in each of the Early French Immersion sites which could involve a combination of consolidating, relocating or adding programs.
The French Immersion program located at Henry Hudson has only had space to accommodate one Kindergarten intake in French Immersion for a number of years. At the April 29, 2019 Board meeting, the Board determined that French Immersion programming at Henry Hudson will be phased out beginning in 2020 to address the need to increase space for Hudson catchment students.
Section 10.13 of the LRFP (Reducing Surplus Capacity by Relocating District Choice Programs) notes that the French Immersion program located Queen Elizabeth Annex could potentially be relocated to another school with surplus capacity. The District is currently considering the closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex (QEA) effective July of 2020. Should QEA close, all the students attending QEA would be offered enrolment at Jules Quesnel Elementary.
4. That the District build on the initial work done on a Capital Asset Management Plan to develop a comprehensive strategic plan to guide the District in effectively managing the asset inventory in the future.
The Long-Range Facilities Plan identifies the potential for the Board to generate capital revenue to enhance seismic projects, through the careful management of real estate assets. The management of assets will balance the need to preserve capital assets, for long term needs, while generating capital funds to enhance ongoing seismic work (i.e. upgrading a seismic project to a full or partial replacement) and support educational programming infrastructure needs (e.g. enhanced fine arts and gym facilities).
The District has developed a draft Land & Assets Framework to begin to address the development of a strategic plan to guide the District’s management of land and capital assets and has issued a Request for Expressions of Interest and a short-list RFP to select qualified consultant(s) to assist with finalizing the draft Framework and the development of that plan The Land & Assets Framework will be presented at a future meeting of the Facilities Planning Committee for discussion and approval.
5. That the District updates the addition and expansion project requests in the 2020- 2021 Five-Year Capital Plan for Board of Education approval, including determining the need for elementary schools at Olympic Village, East Fraser Lands and WesBrook at UBC, secondary school space at King George Secondary and the need for additional capacity in the North Hamber study area.
The 2020-2021 Five-Year Capital Plan was adopted by the Board on June 24, 2019 and submitted to the Ministry of Education on June 30, 2019.
6. That the District continue to maximize opportunities for the provision of childcare space within VBE facilities, while recognizing that its primary obligation is to provide K-12, including Adult Education, educational programs.
Several Seismic Mitigation Program (SMP) projects have been designed to include purpose- built age 0-4 childcare space funded by the City of Vancouver. These projects include Lord 3
Nelson Elementary, Fleming Elementary, Tennyson Elementary, David Lloyd George Elementary, and Eric Hamber Secondary. The planned new school at Coal Harbour, currently in early design phase, will also include space for age 0-4 childcare.
The seismic upgrade of Weir Elementary is a partial replacement and includes a multi- purpose room that can be used for before and after school programs. The planned Coal Harbour school also contains a multi-purpose space that can be used for the same purpose. District staff are currently working with the Ministry of Children and Family Development to obtain funding to support the use of those spaces for OOSC programs.
District staff also support interested childcare providers in securing funding grants and in identifying appropriate space within school facilities for the provision of childcare. This work is ongoing.
7. That the District undertake an Enrolment Data Validation process for all facility and education planning purposes. This process would consist of a validation study of short, medium, and long-range enrolment projections as well as updating student yield metrics for areas of the District with significant development and redevelopment proposed or underway.
The 2019 LRFP contains several sections with information on District enrolment:
• Section 4.1: Historical Accuracy of Enrolment Forecasts provides information on medium term and short-term District enrolment forecasting. • Section 7: Areas of Enrolment Growth identifies six study areas experiencing enrolment growth. • Section 8: Areas with Low Capacity Utilization identifies seven study areas where elementary schools have experienced enrolment decline and three study areas where secondary schools have experienced enrolment decline.
District staff have completed a preliminary data validation study comparing 2011 enrolment forecasts to actual 2018 enrolment. The findings of this analysis will be shared at the meeting.
Recently District staff met with staff from the Ministry of Education Analytics and Governance division. Two of the topics of discussion were enrolment forecasting methodology and enrolment trends. Ministry analytic staff concurred with analysis by District staff regarding medium and long term enrolment forecasts, as well as enrolment trends including in migration of students, out migration of students, stable VSB market share, and cohort size trends.
The District is also undertaking a process to validate and refine student yield metrics used to forecast student enrolment due to development. This analysis will be particularly useful in forecasting the impact on enrolment in new greenfield developments such as the River District, Jericho Lands, and Squamish Nation land. Updates on work with respect to enrolment validation will be provided at future Facilities Planning Committee meetings.
8. That the District continue to collaborate with the City of Vancouver, University Endowment Lands and local First Nations on development and community plans, for example and including specifically the City-Wide Plan, Broadway Corridor, the 4
Squamish Nation’s housing development and the Oakridge and Wesbrook developments.
District staff work collaboratively with City staff to share information on upcoming development plans and projects. This collaboration is ongoing.
The District has reached out to the Squamish Nation to indicate our interest in working with them as they solidify plans for the development of lands in Kitsilano.
District and City staff have connected regarding how the District can take an active role in the upcoming CityWide Plan development process. More information will be available in the coming months regarding City plans for broad stakeholder input and engagement as part of the first phase of plan development.
9. That the District continues to work with the City of Vancouver to construct Coal Harbour Elementary and develop a catchment and enrolment plan for the school.
Work is underway with the City of Vancouver. The school will be part of a City of Vancouver development that will include a childcare facility and residential housing. Architects have been selected and are working on design concepts.
10. That the District should develop an Administrative Procedure setting out guiding principles and detailed procedures for governance and stakeholder consultation for SMP projects, including engagement with Indigenous communities as a key part of the District’s commitment to reconciliation.
Over the past several months District staff have collaborated with the DPAC Executive to develop a draft Administrative Procedure (AP) to guide public and stakeholder engagement. This draft AP was reviewed by the Administrative Procedures Working Group (APWG) on September 25, 2019. Input received from the APWG will be incorporated and the final draft will be reviewed by the Superintendent prior to adoption. The roadmap for seismic mitigation work, which includes public and stakeholder engagement information and timelines, will be included as an Appendix to this AP. The ‘Road to Seismic Mitigation’ graphic was developed in collaboration with Ministry of Education staff and adheres to the MOA between the Board and the Ministry in regard to seismic mitigation work conducted by the Vancouver Project Office. The graphic can be found at: Capital Projects- Road to Seismic Mitigation
District staff will report out on the finalized AP for District Engagement at a future Policy and Governance Committee meeting.
11. That the District should conduct a detailed analysis on the impact of reducing school capacity through the SMP (‘right sizing’) in relation to the goals and priorities of the Long-Range Facilities Plan.
No update, work not yet underway.
12. That the District decide, in conjunction with the advancement and development of the Carleton Seismic Project Definition Report, if a seismically upgraded Sir Guy Carleton Elementary should be used as temporary accommodation for the SMP or as an 5
enrolling school.
The Project Definition Report for the seismic upgrade project has been completed and work is underway to finalize the Funding Approval Summary Report which will then be brought to the Vancouver Project Office Steering Committee for review and decision.
PROGRESS UPDATE: RECOMMENDATIONS 13-17
13. That the District investigate the implications of the new LRFP guidelines, arrange for community information sessions, and report to Committee and Board.
In April 2019 the Ministry of Education announced revisions to Appendix C: Long Range Facilities Plan Guidelines. These guidelines are one of 7 appendices which provide detailed instructions for Five-Year Capital Plan submissions.
At the April 17, 2019 Facilities Planning Committee staff presented an assessment of the implications of the revised LRFP Guidelines. Staff will be presenting this information as part of the Facilities Planning Committee meeting on October 9, 2019.
Community information on the revised LRFP guidelines will be included in the community engagement process (recommendation 14) to inform development of LRFP updates.
14. That the District will undertake a year-long envisioning/consultation process with communities and neighbourhoods to envision and identify opportunities for enhanced and renewed teaching and learning environments to inform the 2020 Long Range Facilities Plan, and that as an early part of this process request a meeting with the Education Minister.
A Request for Proposals (RFP) from qualified consultants to develop and lead an envisioning and consultation process was posted to BC Bid on September 18, 2019. The RFP closes on October 18, 2019.
The envisioning process, at the direction of the Board, will include gathering input and ideas to inform and guide the use of District facilities to support student success and identify opportunities for collaboration with community partners (i.e. childcare, youth programming, recreation, arts, etc.).
The Board Chair has written to the Minister of Education requesting a meeting as an early part of this envisioning process. (Appendix A)
15. That a working group comprised of stakeholders, community education partners and the VSB be formed to develop an action plan, and that the ultimate goal be Ministry capital plan funding guidelines that include:
a. Community and neighbourhood needs b. Student safety c. Special spaces in schools such as auditorium and gyms d. Innovative programs/learning spaces e. Predictions of school population growth 6
And the Minister of Education be invited to take part in periodic discussions with the working group.
No update at this time. Staff are seeking Board direction as to which trustee(s) will be facilitating this working group.
16. That the Board direct staff to develop a way to assess capacity utilization of VBE school facilities, with the intent to inform the 2020 LFRP that includes consideration of special needs, indigenous and vulnerable students and reflects the value we place on holistic education including physical education, music and arts programs. The intent of the work is to inform the 2020 Long Range Facilities Plan.
Staff have begun work on updating current facilities space use data to inform development of a District measure of capacity utilization. As information gathered through the year-long envisioning (recommendation 14) is likely to impact the assessment of capacity utilization, it is anticipated this recommendation will not be complete until that process has concluded.
17. That the Board of Education requests a report outlining the financial costs and the risk to human lives in the event of a seismic event as a result of operating the District with current surplus capacity.
District staff do not have the training or background necessary to conduct such an assessment. Further Board direction is required on the engagement of an outside expert to compete this report.
NEXT STEPS
As progress is made on the various LRFP recommendations, staff will provide updates to future meetings of the Facilities Planning Committee.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Letter to Minister Fleming from the Board Chair.
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
1. 2020-2021 Five Year Capital Plan Submission 2. Appendix C: Long Range Facilities Plan Guidelines 3. Facilities Planning Committee Agenda - April 17, 2019
7
APPENDIX 1
October 3, 2019
Honourable Rob Fleming Minister of Education PO Box 9045, Stn Prov Govt Victoria, BC V8W 9E2 VIA EMAIL: [email protected]
Dear Minister Fleming,
On June 24, 2019 the Board of Education for the Vancouver School District adopted an updated 2019 Long Range Facilities Plan. One of the recommendations approved in this plan is for the District to undertake an envisioning and consultation process with communities and neighbourhoods to identify opportunities for enhanced teaching and learning environments to support student success. Information gathered through this envisioning process will be used to inform future updates to the District’s Long Range Facilities Plan.
As an early part of this envisioning process, the Board would like an opportunity to meet with you. The Board would appreciate your feedback and insight on the opportunities for enhanced teaching and learning environments within our District.
I am writing to request an opportunity for the Board to meet with you to have a conversation as part of our envisioning process for use of school facilities to enhance student success. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Janet Fraser Board Chair cc: VBE Trustees Suzanne Hoffman, Superintendent J. David Green, Secretary-Treasurer
Board of Education Trustees: Janet Fraser – Board Chair Allan Wong – Vice-Chair Fraser Ballantyne Lois Chan-Pedley Carmen Cho Estrellita Gonzalez Oliver Hanson Barb Parrott Jennifer Reddy
Date: October 9, 2019 ITEM 4.1 To: Planning and Facilities Committee
From: Jim Meschino, Director of Facilities
RE: Vancouver Park Board Track and Field Strategy
REFERENCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 1: Engage our learners through innovative teaching and learning practices. Objectives: • Enhance support for students with specific needs.
Goal 3: Create a culture of care and shared social responsibility. Objectives: • Encourage and enhance practices that support cultural, emotional, physical and mental well-being. • Support collaborative relationships with community partners that enhance student learning and well-being.
Goal 4 :Provide effective leadership, governance and stewardship. Objectives: • Effectively utilize school district resources and facilities.
INTRODUCTION
This report contains recommendations.
BACKGROUND
At the September 11, 2019, Facilities Planning Committee, staff presented a report titled “Vancouver Park Board Track and Field Strategy”.
The report identified that since June 2018, the Vancouver Park Board (VPB), along with representation from the Vancouver School Board (VSB), conducted several community consultations regarding the Park Board Track and Field Strategy.
The report also noted that the VPB has allocated funds in their current capital plan to develop a Track and Field Strategy, which would determine the location and components of a new
1 competitive track and field training facility, guidance for upgrading other facilities and addressing aging surfaces at older tracks. The Capital Plan indicates that $11.3M is available to deliver the Strategy as well as the new facilities and upgrades. Track venues are typically either located on City owned park properties or on VSB owned school sites.
Through the Track and Field Strategy the VPB has developed a plan to: 1) Fund improvements to Vancouver Technical Secondary to include the construction of a new 8-lane rubberized track and other track and field amenities to support training and competition in Vancouver. 2) To upgrade the rubberized track and provide additional field facilities at Kerrisdale Park/Point Grey Secondary school 3) Upgrades to Templeton Park track located adjacent to Templeton Secondary school.
There is a synergy in improving tracks on VSB land in that they can be used by the school during the day and by the Community when not required by the school. The projects at Vancouver Technical Secondary School and Point Grey Secondary/Kerrisdale Park are subject to Vancouver School Board approval and a shared use agreement as they are located on VSB land. The third project, Templeton Park track improvements is located on COV land.
On September 30, 2019, at a regular meeting of the Vancouver Park Board, VPB staff presented a report titled “Track and Field Strategy” dated September 20, 2019. Attached to the Park Board report as appendices was a copy of the Proposed Track and Field Strategy including a summary of the engagement process. Below is a link to the Report, including Appendix A. https://parkboardmeetings.vancouver.ca/2019/20190930/REPORT- TrackAndFieldStrategy-20190930.pdf
Four recommendations made in the report were unanimously approved by the Park Board on September 30, 2019 and are as follows:
A. THAT the Vancouver Park Board approved the “Vancouver Track and Field Strategy as outlined in this report and attached as Appendix A, to guide the planning, programming operations and maintenance of track and field facilities in Vancouver.
B. THAT the Board approve Vancouver Technical Secondary School as the site for building a new Category A track and field facility, as described in Appendix A, subject to Vancouver Board of Education approval, and a shared use agreement.
C. THAT the Board approve the prioritization of upgrades to the track and field facility at Kerrisdale Park and Point Grey Secondary School, to bring it in line with a category B facility as described in Appendix A, subject to Vancouver Board of Education approval, and a shared use agreement.
D. THAT the Board approve the prioritization of upgrades to the track and field facility at Templeton Park to bring it in line with a category C facility as described in Appendix A, adjacent to the Templeton Secondary School and Templeton Pool.
2 Track and Field Category Descriptions:
C B A Category Recreation Recreation and Training Recreation, Training and Competition
Use
Facilities supporting leisure In addition to category C In addition to category B and C activity for running, facilities, category B facilities, category A facilities
walking, fitness, cross- facilities provide for formal are larger, can accommodate training, school fitness athletic and para-athletic more users and support classes and informal training and small event competitions and hosting
Facility athletic/para-athletic hosting and facilities are larger events. training. Facilities are reservable. generally non-reservable.
Includes a track of 6-lanes Includes a minimum six- Includes an 8-lane rubberized, or less with a low impact lane rubberized, lit track lit track, space for spectator surface where possible. and as many core amenities seating, and all core amenities Other amenities may (long jump and high jump (e.g. equipment storage space,
include fitness equipment, areas) and desired timing, announcement and benches, and a water amenities (e.g. change communication systems) and fountain. rooms, communications as many desired amenities systems) as possible. The (e.g. serviced for broadcast ‘B’ facilities will align with Amenities capabilities) as possible. The the IAAF (International ‘A’ facilities will align with the Association of Athletics IAAF Category III facility. Federations) Category V facility. Proposed category ‘C’ Proposed category ‘B’ sites Proposed Category ‘A’ sites sites are: Templeton Park, are: Kerrisdale Park/Point are: Vancouver Technical
Memorial South Park, Grey Secondary, Killarney Secondary, Sir Winston Balaclava Park, Britannia Secondary, Strathcona Park Churchill Secondary. Secondary, Empire Fields and Eric Hamber Park, Charles Tupper Secondary.
Locations Secondary, Camosun Park and Brockton Oval in Stanley Park.
The report identified the following actions (subject to Vancouver Board of Education approval, and a shared use agreement for recommendations B and C noted above).
3 Vancouver Technical Secondary School – build a category A facility, project phases to include:
1. Develop a shared use agreement with the VBE 2. Work with the VSB and engage with the public, user groups and stakeholders to inform conceptual facility plan. Include detailed site layout and amenities, a new field house, site assessments (e.g. environmental and arborist, engineering, etc.) and on and off-site considerations such as parking/transportation, services, and cost estimates. 3. Develop operating and maintenance programs and seek funding for these through annual operating budget processes. 4. Bring forward conceptual plan and cost estimate for Board decision. 5. Develop detailed design and refined cost estimates and tender construction works. 6. Bring forward contract award recommendations for Board/Council decisions. 7. Undertake site development.
Kerrisdale Park/Point Grey Secondary School –upgrade to a category B facility, project phases include:
1. Develop a shared use agreement with the VSB. 2. Work with the VSB and engage with users and stakeholders to confirm site upgrades (e.g. new track surface, additional jumping and throwing facilities and site amenities) complete necessary site assessments and detailed cost estimates for procurement. 3. Bring forward contract award recommendations for Board decision. 4. Undertake site development.
DISCUSSION
Feedback from the Community Consultation is summarized below:
Feedback Strategy Response Expand opportunities for people of all Implementation plan proposes balanced abilities. improvements to track facilities of each category A, B and C
Improve the geographic distribution of Implementation plan balances geography, facilities. while aligning with other projects.
The most desired upgrade across all facility Surfacing improvements considered and levels, is surface improvements, specifically recommended at many sites, and further more “rubberized” surfaces. recommend low impact looping trails be incorporated for new parks and for other park renewals.
The principle “Strengthen Partnerships” Strategy includes recommendations to received the highest level of support. The formalize the partnership between Park Vancouver School Board was cited as a key Board and the VSB category A and B partner. facilities with added clarity for staffing, maintenance and time allocations.
4 There are approximately 68 public elementary schools participating in elementary school zone track meets with events hosted a Kerrisdale Park/ Point Grey Secondary, Sir Winston Churchill Secondary, Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver Technical Secondary and Swangard Stadium (Burnaby)
There are approximately 19 public secondary schools, with a total of over 2030 student athletes participating in track League and Championships in 2018. Most host their Zone Meet events at Kerrisdale Park/ Point Grey Secondary School.
Vancouver Technical Secondary
Key finding from the open houses includes:
• There was... interest in upgrading the Van Tech facility so that it could host District meets.
• Currently there are 3 available track sites in the North East Quadrant. All these tracks are in poor condition and require surface upgrades. With a new A class facility at Vancouver Technical Secondary, there will be less need for the District to rent Track and Field Facilities at UBC or Swanguard Stadium in Burnaby. • Very few schools can provide training or coaching in events like hammer throw or steeplechase in the City of Vancouver (need to go Burnaby, Richmond or UBC). These would be available at Vancouver Technical as an A class facility. • The highest concentration of quality coaching or community track clubs is on the west side. Improvement to facilities on the eastside may draw some of these clubs to the east and increase opportunities for the students in the area to have access to higher levels of coaching. • With improved facilities and better equipment, more teachers would use the track, jumping and throwing areas for Physical Education classes or extracurricular meets/training.
Point Grey Secondary
Key finding from the open houses includes:
• A short-term need is resurfacing of the Point Grey track, as it sees a very high level of use by teams and clubs form across the city as well as casual users.
• With the construction of the new Eric Hamber Secondary School on the site of the Hamber Secondary School Track, District Elementary schools will no longer have use of the Hamber track for track meets until such a time that a new track is constructed. This will put additional scheduling pressure on the Point Grey Secondary Track which is in poor condition. • Point Grey track is currently the only site that the VBE has in its inventory for high school competition events. • Improvements to the Point Grey Secondary track would directly benefit the District for K to 12 Track and Field events.
5 Support the Growth of Track & Field in Vancouver and Increased Physical Activity Unlike most sports, track and field offers a very low barrier cost to entry. A student with a pair of runners can train year-round, in almost any type of weather either independently or with a group. The proposed improved facilities would be a catalyst for increasing participation from elementary and secondary school students in track and field.
Funding for Track and Field improvements The Vancouver Park Board has identified the following estimates to complete work at Vancouver Technical Secondary School, Kerrisdale Park, Point Grey Secondary schools and Templeton Park (adjacent to Templeton Secondary School):
Vancouver Technical $6 to 7M Point Grey Secondary $3 to 4M Templeton Park $1 to 2M Total Expenditure $10 to 13M
All cost for upgrades for track and field facilities, whether located on park sites or VSB sites, would be paid for by the VPB.
RECOMMENDATION(S)
A. THAT the Board approve Vancouver Park Board funded improvements to Vancouver Technical Secondary School as the site for building a new Category A track and field facility, as described in Appendix A, subject to a shared use agreement with the Vancouver Park Board.
B. THAT the Board approve the Vancouver Park Board funded prioritization of upgrades to the track and field facility at Kerrisdale Park and Point Grey Secondary School, to bring it in line with a category B facility as described in Appendix A, subject to a shared use agreement with the Vancouver Park Board.
APPENDICES: (Available to the public in the electronic agenda posted on the District Website)
• Appendix A: September 20, 2019 Track and Field Strategy Report
6 Implementation & Next Steps
Background Facility Improvements Need for the Strategy Priorities Strategy Process Strategy Overview Engagement Results Implementation & Next Steps
Templeton Park upgrade to a category C facility Kerrisdale Park/Point Grey Secondary School upgrade to a category B facility Vancouver Technical Secondary School build a category A facility
33 Implementation – Templeton Proposed Recreation Facility
Templeton Park - Proposed Improvements
34 Implementation – Point Grey Proposed Training FacilityKerrisdale Park/ Point Grey Secondary - Proposed Improvements Implementation & Next Steps – Proposed Competition Facility
Vancouver Technical Secondary
36 Date: October 9, 2019 ITEM 4.2 To: Facilities Planning Committee From: Suzanne Hoffman, Superintendent J. David Green, Secretary-Treasurer Re: Consideration of Closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex
REFERENCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Provide effective leadership, governance and stewardship Objectives: • Effectively utilize school district resources and facilities • Implement the recommendations of the Long Range Facilities Plan
INTRODUCTION:
The Board of Education is undertaking the consideration of a school closure for Queen Elizabeth Annex (QEA) pursuant to Board Policy 14 – School Closure. Board Policy 14 provides that the Board will consider information presented by Senior Management on a potential school closure and either conclude that no action or further study is required or forward the information to the Facilities Planning Committee.
At the September 23, 2019 Public Meeting of the Board of Education, the Board passed a motion that it intends to consider the closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex. The motion is as follows:
That the Board of Education consider the closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex school effective July 1, 2020 by referring the report to the Facilities Planning Committee.
The report mentioned in the motion is the report presented at the Public Meeting and contained Senior Management’s assessment of the factors listed in Section 1 of Policy 14, in making the closure consideration motion. The report is attached as Appendix A to this report and the referral to the Facilities Planning Committee is in accordance with Section 2.2 of Policy 14.
With respect to the referral of the report to the Facilities Planning Committee, Section 3 of Policy 14 says that the Facilities Planning Committee shall review the materials and provide its recommendations to the Board. It is inherent that the “materials” to be reviewed by the Committee should also include the questions that were submitted at the September 23, 2019 Board meeting and others submitted in writing to the Board. The following sections of this report are intended to expand on the factors Senior Management assessed in bringing forward the recommendation and to provide answers to questions raised.
1 BACKGROUND:
General Background
The process for the closure of a school is governed by a Ministry of Education policy titled “School Building Closure and Disposal Policy” (Appendix B) which in turn is guided by two Ministerial Orders: the School Opening and Closure Order (Appendix C) and the Disposal of Land or Improvement Order. This latter Order would only be relevant in the event the District had a closed school that it wanted to dispose of and is therefore not attached to this report. The School Opening and Closure Order defines the permanent closing of a school as “…closing, for a period exceeding 12 months, of a school building used for purposes of providing an educational program to students.” The Order goes on to require a Board to develop and implement a policy that includes a public consultation process with respect to a permanent closure and make that policy available to the public. Finally, the Ministerial Order also requires a Board to apply that policy when considering a permanent school closure. The District adopted Policy 14 - School Closure in September 2018 as part of new Board Policy Handbook.
Rationale for the Closure Consideration
In order to understand why the recommendation to ‘consider the closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex (QEA)’ was brought forward to the Board of Education, it is important to know the following historical context of a September 2016 BC Supreme Court Ruling.
In September 2016 the BC Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Francophone plaintiffs on most points of an action brought by them against the Ministry of Education and the Province of British Columbia on the basis that the government:
“…failed to provide British Columbia’s Francophone linguistic minority the resources and facilities that are mandated by Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 23 of the Charter ensures that the Francophone minority has “the right to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in that language in that province” and “where the number of those students so warrants, the right to have them receive that instruction in minority language educational facilities provided out of public funds”.
One of the plaintiffs in the case was the Conseil Scolaire Francophone de la Columbie-Britannique (CSF), known as the Board of Education of School District No. 93. The nature of the Supreme Court's ruling was that in some communities, the school facilities currently available to the CSF were not sufficient. The Court ordered that the Province was required to assist the CSF in acquiring school sites and pay for leases in certain areas of British Columbia, including west of Main Street in Vancouver.
Following the decision of the BC Supreme Court, the Ministry of Education approached the Vancouver School District to explore the possibility of utilizing a VBE facility to meet the needs of the CSF for a school on the west side of Vancouver. In December of 2017, the Ministry engaged Partnerships BC to conduct an assessment of possible VBE sites. This assessment indicated QEA as the preferred option for the CSF due to QEA’s location, low utilization, and high seismic rating.
With the identification of QEA as a possible school site for the CSF, discussions could be initiated on an acquisition process by the CSF, if QEA was closed. In accordance with Board Policy 20
2 the District is committed to not selling school lands. As such, a potential acquisition of the QEA site by the CSF would have to take the form of long-term lease so that the VSB retains ownership of the property. For the District to consider a long-term lease of the QEA property to the CSF it would first need to close the school, in accordance with Board Policy 14 – School Closure.
The proceeds from a long-term lease would be capital funds. In the case of potential proceeds from a long-term lease for the QEA site, the capital funds would be accounted for as Local Capital, meaning the District would have the flexibility to spend the funds on capital projects of its choosing. The District has determined that the Ministry of Education did not contribute any funding for the acquisition of the QEA site or the construction of the school.
Having the ability to spend local capital funds on capital projects of its choosing aligns with the Capital Asset Management Planning philosophy outlined in Section 3.7 of the District’s Long Range Facilities Plan and in particular Section 3.7.3 where it is stated “Funds generated through long-term lease and/or sale of land parcels would be available to the Board to fund the ‘premium’ required to convert a seismic upgrade project to a new, replacement school. Additionally, the Board would also be able to consider the enhancement of major capital projects through the investment of local capital funds to achieve specific, local priorities.”
The philosophy of generating capital funds to enhance seismic and other capital projects is central to the Board of Education’s adopted motion in the Long Range Facilities Plan to include a Capital Asset Management Plan element. Of the 17 recommendations approved by the Board to be included in the Long Range Facilities Plan, Recommendation #4 states:
That the District build on the initial work done on a Capital Asset Management Plan to develop a comprehensive strategic plan to guide the District in effectively managing the asset inventory in the future.
ANALYSIS:
The following information expands on the factors assessed by Senior Management in bringing forward the closure consideration recommendation to the September 23, 2019 public Board Meeting by providing more information and analysis.
Program Offerings
As stated, QEA is the Annex to L’École Jules Quesnel (LJQ). Both schools offer a French Immersion educational program. The QEA program is from Kindergarten to Grade 3 and the LJQ program is from Kindergarten to Grade 7. Every year, most of the QEA Grade 3 students transition to LJQ for Grade 4 to continue in the French Immersion program. In addition, by ensuring that all students currently enrolled at QEA will have the option of attending LJQ, the District is continuing to follow the practice of providing continuity of FI programming – K-7.
Space Available in Nearby Schools
In the report presented at the September 23, 2019 Board Meeting, management stated that the students currently enrolled at QEA could be accommodated at LJQ. The enrolment at LJQ declined due to the implementation of restored class size language in 2017 to the current level of 378 students, which is projected to continue at a similar level, as illustrated in the following chart:
3 Figure 1: Enrolment History and Forecast
Jules Quesnel Enrolment History and Forecast 500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Enrolment 436 417 432 403 380 378 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 380 Operating Capacity 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410 410
The September 2019 headcount of students at QEA is 68 for a combined total of 446. Projecting the QEA and LJQ students currently enrolled to September 2020 the total headcount would be 434 students. “Currently enrolled” means the Kindergarten and Grades 1 and 2 students enrolled at QEA in September 2019 and the Kindergarten to Grade 6 students at LJQ in September 2019 and the addition of 40 Kindergarten students at LJQ in September 2020, as illustrated below:
Figure 2: September 2020 Combined Enrolment
LJQ 2019 Enrolment 378 Grade 7's Graduating (52) QEA 2019 Enrolment 68 2020 Kindergarten Classes 40 434
Staff have determined that LJQ can be organized into nineteen classroom divisions to accommodate all the projected students.
4 The following facility diagram for LJQ shows the school has 19 classrooms. Two of these are Kindergarten rooms on the ground floor and one is the Computer Room. The school currently has 16 classroom divisions, leaving three rooms available for use. These three rooms would be able to accommodate the higher enrollment if the currently enrolled QEA students moved there in 2020.
Figure 3: Floor Plan L’École Jules Quesnel
The space analysis above proposes that there would be two Kindergarten classes at LJQ in September 2020 based on the classroom space available in the building, if the student populations were consolidated. Bringing all FI students currently at QEA and LJQ together in one location aligns with the Board approved motion from June 2018 which states:
That the VSB will endeavor to enroll two Kindergarten French Immersion divisions in each of the Early French Immersion sites which could involve a combination of consolidating, relocating or adding programs.
The Board is committed to the intent of the motion above. Staff will continue to investigate the potential to enroll three K cohorts each year at LJQ in the future by looking at the possibility of an addition to the school. There are twenty-one Kindergarten divisions in the District in September 2019 and while there would likely be a reduction of one in 2020 if QEA closes, the District has identified opportunities to increase that number back to twenty-one or more in future years. There will be no reduction from the baseline number of 19 K cohorts established in 2017-18.
5 Distance Between Schools
LJQ and QEA are both located on Crown Street and the distance between the two schools is 1.2 km. Students enrolled at QEA transition to LJQ for Grade 4. The following scatter gram from September 2019 indicates that while a number of students live near QEA and presumably walk to school, many others live further away and are likely driven, take public transit or cycle.
Figure 4: Current Student Distribution
If QEA did close and the students moved to LJQ, the District would ensure that safe walking routes would be identified for those students who now live near the school. For those that are driven, take public transit or cycle, there would not be a significant impact in getting to LJQ in terms of commuting times given the proximity of the schools to each other.
There is a school traffic working group with representatives from VSB, the City of Vancouver (COV) Engineering Department, the COV Park Board and the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) that reviews any concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety for students enroute to school. The group meets monthly and any concerns can be added to the agenda. Any school walking programs are implemented at the school level. About 40% of District elementary schools have these in place. LJQ has a school patrol program overseen by a school staff member. Patrollers are trained by the VPD.
Current and Projected Enrolment
As stated in the report, because French Immersion is a District program, forecast enrolment for a consolidated program at LJQ would be stable. The following chart illustrates this:
6 Figure 5: Projected Enrolment
JQ Consolidated Program 2K Cohorts 500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Enrolment 433 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435
Age and Condition of Building
Seismic
In the September 23, 2019 report presented at the Board meeting it was stated QEA was built in 1964 and has a H3 seismic rating. In the District’s Long Range Facilities Plan the extent of damage in a seismic event for a building with a H3 rating is described as “Isolated failure to building elements such as walls are expected; building likely not reparable after event”. The H3 rating also indicates that both structural and non-structural seismic upgrades are required.
As referenced in Section 9 of the Long Range Facilities Plan, seismic ratings have been developed by a technical team led by the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC), working with staff at the University of British Columbia. From 2005, after the first phase of the Seismic Mitigation Program (SMP) was announced, to 2012, that work refined the research on how to determine seismic ratings of school buildings. This work resulted in new technical guidelines and assessment methodology that refined the list of high priority schools to be addressed under the SMP which was released in May 2012. The Ministry of Education provided these updated assessments to Districts at that time and have updated them since. The Ministry has produced a report that details the seismic ratings of components of school buildings. For many schools it is not the entire building that is seismically at risk and the report indicates the sections that are, as say Block 6 or the gymnasium. In the latest version of this report, QEA’s H3 rating is described as affecting all the classrooms in the building and that a structural upgrade is required. The Vancouver section of this Provincial report is attached as Appendix D. The following diagram shows the location of the five classrooms and one Kindergarten Room in the building:
7 Figure 6: Floor Plan Queen Elizabeth Annex
There are no current plans to include QEA as a seismic request in the District’s Five-Year Capital Plan. LJQ underwent a seismic upgrade in 2011 and is seismically safe. It has been a priority of the Board and the Ministry of Education to provide seismically safe schools as quickly as possible and moving QEA students to LJQ aligns with that priority.
Facility Condition
The September report also referred to QEA having a Facilities Condition Index (FCI) of 0.66. In the District’s Long Range Facilities Plan, an FCI rating of 0.66 is described as very poor, meaning the building does not meet present requirements and that immediate attention is required to most significant building systems as they are at end of life and replacement parts may not be available. As such, these building systems are at risk of failure.
FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance dollars to replacement dollars for a building’s systems and provides a straightforward comparison of an organization’s key estate assets. Attached to this report as Appendix E is an Asset Detail Report for QEA, produced in 2016, that provides extensive information on the school and the systems in it. The report indicates the FCI as being 0.67, with deferred maintenance costs of $2,190,504 compared to a replacement value for the systems of $3,265,118. The deferred maintenance costs are itemized in the report and many of them are described as “Beyond Useful Life”. These items are often described as “Renewal” with “Action Date” by September 30, 2019. The following table lists some of the major deferred maintenance costs associated with the building:
8 Figure 7: Example of Deferred Maintenance Costs
Gas-Fired Boiler $ 92,793 Central Air Handling Unit 305,847 Perimeter Heat System 163,076 HVAC Renewal 80,865 Roof Membrane 231,255 Swinging Doors 150,868 $ 1,024,704
The Asset Detail Report also has a second section that relates to the site itself with an FCI rating of 0.50, with deferred maintenance costs of $170,290 compared to a replacement value of $338,106. All the deferred maintenance costs listed for the site are described as “Beyond Useful Life”, requiring “Renewal” with an “Action Date” of September 30, 2019.
Potential Re-Uses of the School Site
As outlined in the report that was presented at the September 23, 2019 Board Meeting and above in the rationale section, there is an expressed need for the Province to find school facilities for the CSF which could open the possibility on the part of the CSF to enter into a long-term lease agreement with the Vancouver Board of Education for the QEA site. Revenue from a long-term lease would generate capital funds for the District which could be used to supplement other capital and seismic projects. Should the decision be made to close QEA, the Board could make the decision to enter discussions with CSF regarding the long-term lease of the QEA site. The CSF is a Public School Board and a new site would provide increased access to French language instruction within Vancouver.
Other Matters
CSF Needs
The CSF currently operates three school buildings in Vancouver. Two are in the Heather Lands - an elementary school (L’école Rose-des-vents) and an adjoining secondary school (L’école Secondaire Jules-Verne). The third one is L’école Anne Hebert on the east side of Main Street which also has 10 portables on site to accommodate students and requires seismic upgrading. Both L’école Rose-des-vents and L’ecole Anne Hebert were purchased by the CSF from the Vancouver School Board (VSB). The CSF also leases three annexes from the VSB – Laurier, Maquinna and Henderson.
In speaking with CSF Senior Staff, their west side catchment extends from Main Street to UBC and includes the Downtown core. They have a need to divide that catchment into two smaller catchments to provide more ease of access and increase the quality of their educational programming by building a stronger sense of community. They have confirmed they would still need the Heather Lands site in addition to QEA, if they had a long-term lease for QEA.
Enrollment in the CSF program at the joint L’école Rose-des-vents and L’école Secondaire Jules- Verne site is increasing and the capacity of the schools is constrained by the site. Hence the identification of a potential site for the CSF was considered in the COV’s Heather Lands Policy Statement. In that statement at page 39 it is stated “At the outset of planning, the Heather Lands was identified as a potential location for a new CSF elementary school. A high-level feasibility
9 study has determined that a one-acre parcel at the south-west corner of the site could accommodate the new school.”
If the District did enter a long-term lease with the CSF effective for 2020, they may no longer need the Laurier Annex facility. This determination would need to be made by the CSF Board following the VSB’s decision regarding QEA. The lease the District has with the CSF expires at the end of 2022 and there are provisions in the lease for early termination. If that were to happen there would be a loss of short-term lease revenue for the VSB.
Waitlists
There has been some discussion of waitlists for Kindergarten in the Early French Immersion Program on the west side of Vancouver, particularly in relation to QEA and LJQ. The following table illustrates the history of waitlists for the west side French Immersion schools for the last six years: Figure 8: History of West Side Waitlists
1st Choice 1st Choice 1st Choice 1st Choice 1st Choice 1st Choice 1st Choice School Waitlist Waitlist Waitlist Waitlist Waitlist Waitlist Waitlist Spring 2014 Spring 2015 Spring 2016 Spring 2017 Spring 2018 Spring 2019 Sept 2019
Jules Quesnel/Queen 11 34 16 19 15 1 0 Elizabeth Annex L'Ecole Bilingue 62 55 84 125 133 88 87 Tennyson 11 5 33 59 19 45 28 Hudson 34 42 34 40 42 24 14 Kerrisdale 2 0 4 0 13 5 1 Quilchena 16 12 0 9 1 0 0 Trafalgar 15 0 0 13 8 1 0 EFI Totals 151 148 171 265 231 164 130
The following heat map illustrates that there are minimum waitlists in the southwest sector of the District and high demand for the Program in the rest of Vancouver.
Figure 9: Heat Map of September 2019 Kindergarten Waitlists
10
Questions Submitted at the September 23, 2019 Public Board Meeting
At the Public Meeting of the Board of Education on September 23, 2019, ten questions related to the QEA closure consideration were submitted. The Board Chair read all the questions and stated that answers would be provided to the Facilities Planning Committee. These answers are included in this report as Appendix F.
Questions Submitted by the QEA PAC in a September 22, 2019 Email
The QEA PAC submitted an email on Sunday September 22, 2019 addressed to the trustees, the LJQ PAC, DPAC and the Secretary Treasurer and Superintendent. That email contained commentary and six questions. The commentary and the answers to the six questions are provided in Appendix G.
Meetings with Staffs of QEA and LJQ
Subsequent to the September 23, 2019 Board Meeting, District staff met with the staffs of both QEA and LJQ to receive their initial comments and to take their questions in relation to the Board of Education referring the closure consideration to the Facilities Planning Committee. While some of the questions asked were able to be answered at the time, many were not. Of those that were not able to be answered in the individual meetings, the answers now appear in this report. Attached to this report, as Appendix H for the QEA staff meeting and Appendix I for the LJQ staff meeting are tables which provide short answers to the questions.
Meetings with the PAC Executives of QEA and LJQ
Subsequent to the September 23, 2019 Board Meeting, District staff met with the PAC Executives of both QEA and LJQ to receive their initial comments and to take their questions in relation to the Board of Education referring the closure consideration to the Facilities Planning Committee. While some of the questions asked were able to be answered at the time, many were not. Of those that were not able to be answered in the individual meetings, the answers now appear in this report. Attached to this report, as Appendix J for the QEA PAC meeting and Appendix K for the LJQ PAC meeting are tables which provide short answers to the questions.
Next Steps
Board Policy 14 (sections 2–12) outlines the process to be followed should Senior Management recommend consideration of a school for closure.
Now that the Board has forwarded the recommendation to the Facilities Planning Committee, that Committee would meet to review materials and information provided by District staff in order to make a recommendation to the Board.
The Board would then review the recommendation from the Facilities Planning Committee and either: • Conclude that no further action or study is required • Initiate a public consultation process by passing a motion at a public meeting of the Board If the Board passes a motion to initiate a public consultation process, Board Policy 14 stipulates that a period of a least sixty (60) days will be allocated to allow for this consultation to occur. The proposed consultation period as indicated in Appendix L would be 78 days, ending on January 15, 2020.
11 As part of the consultation the Board will make available, in writing, the rationale for the proposed closure including information about several factors as outlined in section 7 of Policy 14. Factors include, but are not limited to, the following information: • number of students affected; • enrolment trends; • availability and proximity of space; • financial considerations; • facility age and condition; • programming; and, • impacts on surrounding schools and community.
TIMELINE OF KEY DATES (Proposed – See Appendix L)
After the September 23, 2019 Board Meeting
October 9th: Closure Consideration report presented to Facilities Planning Committee. • Facilities Planning Committee to review material presented and provide a recommendation to the Board.
October 28th: Recommendation of Facilities Planning Committee to be considered at public Board Meeting. • Board to either conclude that no further action is required or initiate a public consultation process.
Should the Board determine at the October 28, 2019 Public Board meeting to initiate a public consultation process, Policy 14 stipulates that this consultation will: • Be a minimum of sixty (60) days • Include at least one public consultation meeting • Include at least 14 days' notice in advance of meetings
October 29, 2019 - January 15, 2020: Proposed Public Consultation Period (78 days)
January 27, 2020: Board to receive consultation findings and consider closure of QEA. Consultation findings would include all feedback received from meetings with school communities, correspondence received, information presented by delegations at Facilities Planning Committee meetings, feedback received at scheduled public meetings and all other relevant material
July 1, 2020: Proposed effective date of closure
12 RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
The Facilities Planning Committee report on consideration of the closure of QEA be referred back to the Board of Education meeting on October 28, 2019 to determine that either: • no further action or study is required or, • to initiate a public consultation process on the proposed closure.
APPENDICES: (Available to the public in the electronic agenda posted on the District Website)
• Appendix A: September 23, 2019 Report to the Board • Appendix B: BC Ministry of Education School Building Closure and Disposal Policy • Appendix C: BC Ministry of Education School Opening and Closure Order • Appendix D: Vancouver Seismic Condition Report • Appendix E: Asset Detail Report for QEA • Appendix F: Questions Submitted at the September 23, 2019 Public Board Meeting • Appendix G: Questions Submitted by the QEA PAC in a September 22, 2019 Email • Appendix H: Questions and comments from Meeting with QEA Staff • Appendix I: Questions and comments from Meeting with LJQ Staff • Appendix J: Questions and Comments from the QEA PAC Executive • Appendix K: Questions and Comments from the LJQ PAC Executive • Appendix L: Timeline of QEA Proposed Closure Process
13
Consideration of Closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex Facilities Planning Committee October 9, 2019