The Superintendent of Schools recommended the School Board take action on a conceptual design this Summer. Here is is a recap of a time line and where things stand:
8/5: The County Board asked School Board to delay its scheduled 8/12 vote to approve Wakefield's conceptual design. The stated intent by Mr. Tejada, County Board chair, was to address several outstanding County issues, including a lack of "civic presence" in the exterior design and the location of the bus loop.
8/6-8/12: Rebuild Wakefield group meets with individual School Board members on the issue. We ask for vote in spite of Mr. Tejada's request. At a minimum we insist this not be an open-ended delay. If a work session is necessary, re-schedule the vote for Oct. The School Board ultimately agreed to a mid-Sept work session and rescheduled the action for Oct.
8/19: County Board holds it's own work session to prepare. For the last year, the project has been languishing without adequate "civic presence." The county's architectural consultant adds a new buzzword to the project. Richard Lewis recommended the County strive for "civic charisma" with the Wakefield design.
9/7: Community members, including some of us, met with County Board member, Chris Zimmerman, to discuss the County perspectives on the design delays. Mr. Zimmerman expressed that design should move forward in Oct. We are waiting to see the results and the tone of the 9/12 work session.
9/12: Joint work session between County and School Boards scheduled at Wakefield, 3:30 PM. We have several community members observing.
10/2: School Board is re-scheduled to vote on the conceptual design, assuming no further delays.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Why resolve design issues? Manage risk.
The School Board and County Board will meet Friday, 9/12, at Wakefield to discuss the stalemate over Conceptual Design.
A quick background: The School Board was set to take action on this design in early August, 2008. However, the County Board asked for a delay on the vote. The stated intent by Mr. Tejada, County Board chair, was to address several outstanding issues the County has, including the exterior design and the location of the bus loop. The School Board agreed to the delay and rescheduled the action for 10/2/08.
We met with Chris Zimmerman, County Board member, on 9/7/08. Mr. Zimmerman expressed that he felt confident that the Wakefield design issues could be worked out within the next 2 months, enabling the School Board to take action on the design as scheduled for 10/2. He also insisted we have "plenty of time" to complete the design phase since construction will not begin until 2014.
Differing Perspectives
Why do we remain concerned? The County and the Community have conflicting perspectives regarding the implications of this project timeline.
After much nonsense -- and we do mean nonsense -- the Superintendent found a design the two competing committees agreed on. Yet here we are, hoping to define the stumbling block all along -- the thus far intangible "Civic Charisma."
Effective organizations manage and minimize risk. Allowing any one project phase to span an indeterminate time horizon with vague or ill-defined requirements introduces greater risk including:
• Delays to the construction start date
• Increased cost
• Project derailment as competing budget priorities arise
• Lost time by staff and our elected officials on both Boards – time that should be spent, at this point, on other important school and community issues.
This is a long-term construction project. “Milestone” is not a buzzword; it is a risk-management tool. “Conceptual” design requires the same clear direction, goals and progress as any other phase. The work product is obviously not concrete, but the process should still be goal-oriented and well managed. To put it directly, the County Board must use this work session to take ownership of its broken process and enable the School Board to reach its 10/2 milestone to move this project to schematic design.
On September 12, the Community is looking for tangible results from this work session. The County Boards needs to express clear and achievable project requirements that will enable the architects to finalize a mutually agreeable conceptual design. If the County Board is unable to do so, it must recognize this and stop interfering with the independent School Board's project.
A quick background: The School Board was set to take action on this design in early August, 2008. However, the County Board asked for a delay on the vote. The stated intent by Mr. Tejada, County Board chair, was to address several outstanding issues the County has, including the exterior design and the location of the bus loop. The School Board agreed to the delay and rescheduled the action for 10/2/08.
We met with Chris Zimmerman, County Board member, on 9/7/08. Mr. Zimmerman expressed that he felt confident that the Wakefield design issues could be worked out within the next 2 months, enabling the School Board to take action on the design as scheduled for 10/2. He also insisted we have "plenty of time" to complete the design phase since construction will not begin until 2014.
Differing Perspectives
Why do we remain concerned? The County and the Community have conflicting perspectives regarding the implications of this project timeline.
This is where our perspectives diverge. What the County Board and its staff view as "plenty of time," we view as risk. After all, it's been 18 months of committee meetings and architectural reviews and we still have no conceptual design. The County-induced process has demonstrated a basic inability to resolve resolvable issues.
After much nonsense -- and we do mean nonsense -- the Superintendent found a design the two competing committees agreed on. Yet here we are, hoping to define the stumbling block all along -- the thus far intangible "Civic Charisma."
Effective organizations manage and minimize risk. Allowing any one project phase to span an indeterminate time horizon with vague or ill-defined requirements introduces greater risk including:
• Delays to the construction start date
• Increased cost
• Project derailment as competing budget priorities arise
• Lost time by staff and our elected officials on both Boards – time that should be spent, at this point, on other important school and community issues.
This is a long-term construction project. “Milestone” is not a buzzword; it is a risk-management tool. “Conceptual” design requires the same clear direction, goals and progress as any other phase. The work product is obviously not concrete, but the process should still be goal-oriented and well managed. To put it directly, the County Board must use this work session to take ownership of its broken process and enable the School Board to reach its 10/2 milestone to move this project to schematic design.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)