District 41 aims for long-term plan

What does a school of the future look like, and how does that relate to the buildings that exist today?

That's what Glen Ellyn Elementary District 41 officials want to find out through a long-range facility master plan that will carry the district at least 15 years into the future.

The last time the district conducted such a study, in 2004, it resulted in an ambitious construction proposal and a tax hike request to add space to Hadley Junior High School. Voters soundly rejected the notion.

That idea, though, was based primarily in space, or a lack thereof, and how to add more to the district.

This new study, Superintendent Ann Riebock said, and the others the district conducted in the last year, are aimed at looking at what the district needs educationally, first, then on a space basis, second.

"This is not just about housing children," she said. "It's about creating the learning environment for children into the future."

School board members are scheduled to vote on the $79,830 contract with FGM Architects at the Sept. 15 board meeting.

District 41 earlier this year conducted a space study at each of the schools that determined how the buildings are being used, and what needs to change so space is maximized. It also completed a security audit of all buildings and a stormwater study. The long-range facility master plan is the final piece in the puzzle, pulling everything else together.

As part of the study, teams at each school will be assembled to look at the building and talk about both existing and future ideal programs. Once their work is done, it will move on to an overall district steering committee.

Riebock said they're looking for people with a variety of expertise: engineers, architects, construction specialist, etc. If approved by the board next month, the architects would start in September with a goal of having the entire study completed and submitted back to the board in March 2009.

She said this review process is different from the one completed four years ago. The 2004 study was "more administrative and staff driven. This one is a more community-driven process," Riebock said.

Another difference, she added, is that this master plan isn't looking for a "specific solution." For example, it's not looking to remove all portables from the district. Instead, Riebock said, it's aiming for short-term, midrange, and long-term solutions that pair educational demands with physical building space.