Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
As a starting point for this update, in setting the budget for future school construction <br />it is important that the building cost per square foot reflect historical costs of <br />constructing new schools (both locally and statewide) as well as consider the current <br />construction market. A School Capital Review Team consisting of County ,staff a_nd _. <br />representatives from each school district, would meet annually, in November, to <br />review construction and land related costs for actual school projects that have <br />occurred within the past year. Based on actual expenditures related to school <br />construction, the Review Team would recommend updated school construction <br />standard costs, which include all of the project components, for the respective <br />School Boards to review and for the Board of County Commissioners to approve. In <br />addition to school construction costs, the Review Team would also review the ten- <br />year Capital Investment. Plan CIP rocess and pay-as-you-go funding. allocations <br />for the upcoming long-range capital plan. The Review Team would take the <br />Construction Price Index CPI and benchmarks set by national education facilities <br />planners into consideration in recommending updated construction standards. <br />Deleted: Budget Director <br />Deleted: Moving away from past <br />practices of establishing and <br />advertising a total project budget <br />before actual construction bidding <br />occurs, the County took a new <br />approach with Ghapel Hill Carrboro <br />City Schools Elementary #10. <br />Detetied: Elementary#10 and <br />Deleted: school __ <br />Deleted: school- <br />Deleted: Xx <br />With historical __practices, __construction___project__ bud~ets__ were: established__ and _•..---~~ <br />~- -- --------- u n <br />broadcast at the onset of project planning thereby pre-setting the budget fort e <br />market to react to with the ultimate result of the construction community matching or <br />exceeding the budget. However, .with ~uture__proj_ects, _ the _approach _would_v_ary__, <br />somewhat by not °pre-setting" the budget ahead of the bidding process. Amore '~•. <br />conservative approach would be for the School Capital Review Team to create a tool <br />that analyzes historical costs of like projects (elementary ,j_o_ elementary, _middle_ to ____.-• <br />middle, etc.) across all project components. Appendix 5~offers an_example_of the ;"`--- <br />template that would serve as an analytical. tool for developing construction project •'~•-- <br />+....,,.~+~ r,u;+o :+~. ~oa~i~r~ - `Arioendix 5 is bending tinalizat`ton ~by`'Couhiy' and~~School <br />Commissioners on:Ma~ch 13; 2007. This tool allows for a comparable cost analysis <br />without establishing any advantages or expectations to the marketplace. <br />The___following__section__defnes_ individual__construction__project__components,__ and__... <br />Appendix 6provides _ the_ information__ m__a chart format _ Staff _ plans to develop __--_ <br />construction project budgets and track actual expenditures in accordance with the <br />project components outlined in the chart. At the end of the project, staff will prepare <br />a final reconciliation and budget variance analysis for Commissioners and School <br />Boards to review. <br />a) Site Acquisition <br />Site acquisition costs include costs associated with acquiring a site. Examples of <br />these costs include the actual purchase price of the property along with costs of <br />-- Formatf:ed ----- <br />•- pelet~ed: ZZ <br />15 <br />