SVHS Master Plan gets first look

Neighbors upset with proposed 2,500-seat stadium|

The draft Facilities Master Plan for Sonoma Valley High School received its initial reading at Tuesday night’s school board meeting, and it will be back on the agenda for the board’s approval at a special meeting on June 23.

Steve Kwok, the district architect with Quattrocchi Kwok Architects in Santa Rosa, told the board that the proposal could cost an estimated $112.7 million in today’s dollars.

“But it’s still a work in progress,” he said. “It’s a living document. It’ll go on for a long time.”

Kwok called the proposal a roadmap for the district’s future.

“We wanted to provide a campus that will serve the students,” he said.

The report was broken up into four categories – Mandatory Improvements, Green Technology, Necessary Improvements and Desired Improvements.

Mandatory Improvements are items that are required to bring the campus into conformance with regulatory codes and to resolve other safety issues.

Green Technology can be funded with Measure H money and is intended to reduce campus consumption of natural resources while improving the learning environment for the students.

Necessary Improvements are items required to preserve the campus and provide necessary classroom and technology upgrades.

Desired Improvements are items that are required to accommodate educational program changes and provide building additions – or as Kwok put it, “these are the big-ticket items.” And he said the items on this list are constrained by financial considerations.

He told the board that the costs are merely “rough estimates. These are ball-park figures based on typical costs today.”

Of the $112.7 million, about $85 million is for construction costs while an additional $27.7 million is for soft costs such as design, surveys, fees and unforeseen conditions.

Kwok did tell the board that none of the buildings on the campus are structurally distressed.

Boardmember Gary DeSmet said the Desired Improvements are “not for today.” And he ?pointed out that because it’s a school and therefore a necessary facility in the event of an earthquake or disaster, that costs are at least 25 percent higher than they might be.

Among the bigger ticket items on the various lists are Creekside modernization ($1.1 million), Pavilion modernization ($1.2 million), roof replacements ($2.7 million), new quad ($2.5 million), K Building modernization ($3.5 million), new track and field ($2.9 million), new stadium ($2.5 million), Science wing modernization ($3.1 million), new pool ($4.7 million), modernization of other buildings ($6.5 million), new athletic training center ($7 million), new Student Services building ($8.2 million), new Performing Arts facility ($9.1 million) and a new classroom building ($11 million).

While the board didn’t have a lot to say about the draft report, a group of neighbors from around the school were there and one member got up and read a letter into the record protesting the proposed 2,500-seat stadium.

The group’s spokesman said the neighbors are opposed to the stadium and said that the 2,500-seat facility would have a negative impact on their neighborhood. And he called on the board to concentrate on structures and hardware to provide marketable skills for students instead of building a “large stadium.”

In a PowerPoint presentation, Kwok, the district’s architect, summarized the report saying, “The Sonoma Valley High School Facilities Master Plan undertakes to identify those improvements required to perform safe, secure and well-maintained campuses appropriate to the needs of 21-century education.”

“The scope of this Master Plan,” he continued, “extends well beyond the scope of the Measure H bond passed in 2010. Many of the improvements described in the Master Plans are not fundable through Measure H. Improvements will be made at the discretion of the board as funding becomes available.”

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.