DUFFERIN ELEMENTARY PLANNING STUDY SCHOOL DISTRICT 68 (NANAIMO-LADYSMITH) April 2006
Report Consultants Matrix Planning Associates Unit 2, 933 Meares Street Victoria, British Columbia Canada V8V 5B8 Telephone: 250-598-9912 Facsimile: 250-598-9939 Email: info@matrixplanning.bc.ca Website: matrixplanning.bc.ca Client School District 68 (-Ladysmith) Date Project 0549
CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Seismic Mitigation Feasibility Study 1 1.2 Project Objectives 1 1.3 The Study Area 1 1.4 Existing Capacity Utilization 2 1.5 Where Students LIve 3 1.6 Distances 4 2. ENROLMENT FORECASTS 2.1 Approach 5 2.2 Future Residential Development 5 2.3 Enrolment Forecasts 7 2.4 Future Capacity Utilization 11 3. IMPACT OF DUFFERIN CLOSURE 3.1 Options Considered 13 3.2 Option 1 Four Segments 13 3.3 Option 2 Three Parts, Minimal to Cilaire 17 3.4 Option 3 Limit French Immersion Intake 20 3.5 Option 4 Move French Immersion to Forest Park 21 3.6 Option 5 Mostly to Forest Park 23 3.7 Other Considerations of Closing Dufferin 26
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 SEISMIC MITIGATION FEASIBILITY STUDY We were retained by School District 68 (SD 68) to conduct a planning study for Dufferin Elementary School and adjacent schools. The purpose of the study was to determine the future role for Dufferin Elementary in light of the need to mitigate seismic shortcomings in the structure of the facility. This planning study addresses the first stage of the seismic mitigation study as outlined by the Ministry of Education. Specifically, we address Assumption 2 only that the school will continue to be required for instructional purposes. We do not conduct any other part of the seismic mitigation study. If our study concludes that Dufferin Elementary should be retained as a school, then the remainder of the feasibility study should be completed. This would involve addressing the remaining questions associated with the first stage, and all of the work outlined in the second stage of the seismic mitigation feasibility study. If our study concludes that the use of Dufferin as an elementary school should be discontinued, then it is no longer necessary to proceed with the remaining aspects of the seismic mitigation feasibility study. 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The specific objectives for the project were to: Develop ten-year enrolment projections for Dufferin Elementary School, other schools in the Woodlands Secondary catchment area and adjacent catchment areas. Define the number and size of elementary and secondary schools and their ability to accommodate projected enrolments. Optimization strategies for facilities utilization. Consider possible changes to current school boundaries and catchment areas. Identify facilities or sites surplus to the District s long-term needs. Consider potential joint development or shared use of facilities with local government, colleges, other agencies and the private sector. 1.3 THE STUDY AREA We defined the study area to include all elementary schools with catchment boundaries that are shared with Dufferin Elementary Quarterway, Brechin, Cilaire and Forest Park. As illustrated in Figure 1, we also included Departure Bay Elementary as part of the study area. Dufferin s boundaries with Forest Park, Quarterway and Brechin are quite permeable. A major highway defines Dufferin s boundary with Cilaire, although there is a pedestrian underpass between Cilaire and Dufferin schools. 1
Figure 1: Dufferin Study Area 1.4 EXISTING CAPACITY UTILIZATION The Ministry of Education calculates capacity utilization for schools using operational capacity and enrolment excluding kindergarten. Figure 2 outlines the utilization of the schools in the study area as of September 2005. Quarterway Elementary accommodates a French Immersion program that accounts for much of the enrolment 218 of the 329 students in Grades 1 to 7 are in French Immersion. Four of the six schools in the study area are operating under capacity. There are a combined total of 265 surplus spaces for Grades 1 to 7. Dufferin has the lowest utilization level with 135 surplus spaces. Calculation of capacity utilization for Dufferin does not subtract for the district program that is being accommodated in the school. The District Resource Centre (DRC) uses five classrooms at Dufferin. 2
Figure 2: Enrolment and Utilization, September 2005 School Kindergarten Grades 1-7 Total Enrolment Nominal Capacity Operational Capacity Capacity Utilization Brechin 17 172 189 200 186 92% Cilaire 17 203 220 200 186 109% Departure Bay 12 202 214 275 256 79% Dufferin 19 144 163 300 279 52% Forest Park 29 219 248 325 302 73% Quarterway 52 329 381 350 325 101% Total 146 1,269 1,415 1,650 1,534 83% 1.5 WHERE STUDENTS LIVE Figure 3 illustrates where students who live in the Dufferin, Quarterway, Forest Park, Cilaire and Brechin catchment areas attended school as of September 2005. Conversely, it shows the origins of students who attend the same schools. We have differentiated the regular program from the French Immersion program for Quarterway Elementary, since so many French Immersion students come from outside the study area. Figure 4 shows the distribution of students attending five of the schools in the study area: The green dots indicate students attending Cilaire. The purple dots indicate students attending Forest Park. The yellow dots indicate students attending Quarterway. The red dots indicate students attending Brechin. The blue dots indicate students attending Dufferin. Figure 3: Where Students Attend School Where students attend school Catchment where students live Dufferin Quarterway (reg) Quarterway (FI) Forest Park Cilaire Brechin Other Total % to local school Dufferin 129 14 11 8 2 1 11 176 73% Quarterway 8 71 30 3 0 4 24 140 51% Forest Park 15 7 13 168 2 2 46 253 66% Cilaire 5 2 4 3 150 2 35 201 75% Brechin 29 4 4 5 7 108 25 182 59% Other 8 16 153 23 20 8 Total 194 114 215 210 181 125 % from local school 66% 62% 14% 80% 83% 86% 3
Figure 4: Where Students Live in Study Area 1.6 DISTANCES The walking distances from each of the four adjacent schools to Dufferin are: Forest Park 2.18 kilometres. Cilaire 1.29 kilometres. Quarterway 1.35 kilometres. Brechin 1.55 kilometres. These distances were measured based on going down main streets. The use of shortcuts may reduce actual distances slightly. 4
2. ENROLMENT FORECASTS 2.1 APPROACH Baragar Demographics provides enrolment forecasts for SD 68 using a software program called Demographic Dynamics. Baragar s projection is referred to as being without local knowledge since there is no input related to specific knowledge of individual schools or their communities. The underlying population data for the Demographic Dynamics enrolment forecasts come from a combination of data from the birth registry as well as the Family Allowance and Child Tax Benefit files. Net migration and births are factored into the forecast using historical averages. Our approach to estimating the enrolment for the schools in the Dufferin study area began with the base enrolment forecasts as provided to SD 68 by Baragar Demographics. We then added the estimated number of students from anticipated major housing developments in the study area. In those instances, we add the students from new housing to the Baragar base forecast with the net migration set to zero. This avoids double counting students from new housing. 2.2 FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Baragar s initial forecast incorporates many factors and is especially good at projecting each age cohort (including newly born) into the future. However, it does not take into account anticipated residential development except indirectly through the use of migration. The key is to determine to what degree future residential development will be significantly different in the next ten years compared to the last five years. We focus on the last five years because that is the timeframe for the migration levels established by Baragar in Demographic Dynamics. As illustrated in Figure 5, most of the houses in the Dufferin area were constructed in the period 1946 to 1980. There has been relatively little new housing constructed in the area since 1981. We consulted with the City of planning department who stated that there were relatively few major housing developments anticipated for the study area. In addition, much of the housing planned for the area will be to serve hospital staff, many of whom do not have school aged children this is particularly true for housing in the Dufferin catchment area. Figure 6 summarizes the municipal planner s best estimate of the six major housing developments over the next decade. Figure 6 only identifies major developments. It does not include those residential developments that we consider a part of the same pattern of development seen in these areas over the past several years. We modified the yield rates (number of school age children per residential unit) from the rates used by Baragar based on the actual yield rates in specific neighbourhoods as well as similar research in other BC school districts. In general, our yield rates are higher than the default yield rates used by Baragar for ground oriented developments, but lower for single-family housing. 5
Figure 5: Housing Construction Periods in the Dufferin Catchment Figure 6: Major Residential Developments in Study Area Elementary Catchment Residential Development Type of Development Yield Factor Departure Bay Miller Farm Multi-family and single family 0.35 Stephenson Point Single family 0.45 Century Holdings Multi-family and single family 0.35 Departure Bay/Rock City Rock City Multi-family 0.30 Quarterway Pryde Townhomes Multi-family and single family 0.35 Dufferin Dufferin Crescent Multi-family/townhouse 0.30 The municipal planners estimated that there would be a total of 690 units built over the next ten years in these six developments. We adjusted these estimates to reflect a more conservative view of future market conditions to yield the estimates shown in Figure 7. It is our experience that such conservative approaches yield results that are more accurate to the realities of development than initial optimistic projections. 6
Figure 7: Estimates of Residential Units to 2015 Residential Development single detached 2006-2010 2011-2015 ground oriented total units single detached ground oriented total units 10 year total Miller Farm 0 0 0 70 70 140 140 Stephenson Point 40 40 30 30 70 Century Holdings 20 20 40 20 20 40 80 Rock City 40 40 40 40 80 Pryde Townhomes 40 40 80 10 10 20 100 Dufferin Crescent 30 30 50 50 80 Total Units 100 130 230 130 190 320 550 Annual Units 20 26 46 26 38 64 55 2.3 ENROLMENT FORECASTS Figures 8 to 13 present enrolment forecasts for the six elementary schools in the study area. The following provides further explanation and background for the labels on the enrolment forecast charts: Baragar The lines with square markers are the base enrolment forecasts from Baragar Demographics. Matrix The lines with circle markers are the forecasts with students from major housing developments added to the base Baragar forecasts schools that do not have this estimate have no major housing developments nearby. Capacity The straight thick line is the operational capacity of the school this provides a visual indicator of utilization for each school. Excluding Kindergarten Enrolments and capacities exclude kindergarten we exclude kindergarten because the Ministry of Education classifies the capacities of elementary schools based on the space available for students excluding kindergarten 7
Figure 8: Enrolment Forecast, Brechin Elementary Figure 9: Enrolment Forecast, Cilaire Elementary 8
Figure 10: Enrolment Forecast, Forest Park Elementary In addition to the regular enrolment shown in Figure 10, Forest Park accommodates a distance learning program for students in Kindergarten to Grade 7. The program occupies three classrooms and serves 75-100 students. If utilization in this school is increased, alternative space for this program may need to be found. Figure 11: Enrolment Forecasts, Quarterway Elementary 9
Figure 12: Enrolment Forecasts, Departure Bay Elementary Figure 13: Enrolment Forecasts, Dufferin Elementary Figure 14 summarizes the enrolment forecasts for the six elementary schools in the study area. The line with diamonds is the sum of the highest enrolment forecasts. This selects the base Baragar forecast for Quarterway Elementary where the base forecast is higher than the forecast where students from new housing developments were added to the base forecast. In this way, we have been cautious in assessing the capability of the schools in the study area to accommodate future 10
enrolment. Future enrolment at these six schools is more likely to be less than greater than the highest forecast shown in Figure 14. Overall, we estimate that attendance at the six schools in the study area will decline to 2012 and then increase slightly. Figure 14: Enrolment Forecasts, Total of Study Area Schools 2.4 FUTURE CAPACITY UTILIZATION Figure 15 shows the capacity utilization calculations for each elementary school in the study area (excluding Departure Bay) as well as the overall utilization for the five schools combined. Only two schools (Cilaire and Quarterway) are at or above capacity, while the remaining schools are all operating below the Ministry of Education s threshold of 95%. Overall utilization for the five schools is expected to decline over the next decade. Figure 16 shows the number of surplus spaces in each school as well as for the five schools combined. From 2009 onward there are over 250 surplus spaces in the five schools. Dufferin alone has over 150 surplus spaces for most of the next ten years. The Revised Total in both Figures 15 and 16 shows the utilization and number of surplus spaces if Dufferin was closed. The revised total in Figure 15 indicates that the overall capacity utilization would be just over 100% for most of the next ten years. The revised total in Figure 16 shows that eliminating Dufferin s operational capacity of 279 spaces would eliminate the surplus when excluding Departure Bay from the analysis. 11
Figure 15: Capacity Utilization Figure 16: Surplus Spaces 12
3. IMPACT OF DUFFERIN CLOSURE 3.1 OPTIONS CONSIDERED As outlined in Section 2.4, if Dufferin was closed, the remaining schools in the study area have sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated enrolment for all the schools. The issue now becomes how to implement the closure. We explored the following five options for re-distributing the Dufferin students: 1. Dividing Dufferin catchment into four (Cilaire, Brechin, Quarterway and Forest Park). 2. Dividing Dufferin catchment into three (Brechin, Quarterway and Forest Park). 3. Restricting intake into French Immersion to allow more Dufferin students to go to Quarterway. 4. Moving French Immersion from Quarterway to Forest Park and send most students to Quarterway. 5. Dividing Dufferin catchment into three (Forest Park, Brechin and Cilaire). The options presented focus on the four schools immediately adjacent to Dufferin. We explored the potential for Departure Bay Elementary to play a role in the reconfiguration resulting from Dufferin s closure but found that there was limited opportunity: The boundary between Cilaire and Departure Bay is approximately half way between the two schools and practically could not be shifted much closer to Cilaire. Moving the French Immersion program from Quarterway to Departure Bay would not be well received because Departure Bay is not as convenient for many of the students as the other alternative, Forest Park. 3.2 OPTION 1 FOUR SEGMENTS Figure 17 illustrates how the Dufferin catchment could be divided into four segments with the students from each of these segments going to one of four adjacent schools. Figure 18 indicates how many Dufferin students are likely to attend Forest Park, Cilaire, Brechin and Quarterway based on the division of the existing Dufferin catchment area shown in Figure 17. Using this analysis, for example, we would expect 30% of future Dufferin enrolment to attend Quarterway. The data in Figures 17 and 18 is based on GeoSchool using 2005 as the base year. 13
Figure 17: Division of Dufferin Catchment into Four Segments Figure 18: Destination of Dufferin Students for Option 1 Source catchment Possible destination school Based on Option 1 Out of catchment Combined total % in study area Dufferin Cilaire 16 1 17 13% Brechin 49 5 54 41% Quarterway 27 12 39 30% Forest Park 9 13 22 17% Other 12 12 Total 101 43 144 132 Figures 19 to 22 show the impact of adding the Dufferin students to each of the four schools presented in order of the relative number of Dufferin students forecast to attend each school. Figure 23 summarizes the impact on the four schools combined. Our conclusion is that the division of the Dufferin catchment as outlined in Option 1 would result in the following: Brechin would be over capacity by about one class. Quarterway would be over capacity by one or two classes. Forest Park would remain underutilized. Cilaire would be over capacity by just over one class. Overall the four schools would be one or two classrooms over capacity for most of the next ten years. 14
Figure 19: Option 1 Impact on Brechin Figure 20: Option 1 Impact on Quarterway 15
Figure 21: Option 1 Impact on Forest Park Figure 22: Option 1 Impact on Cilaire 16
Figure 23: Option 1 Impact on Combination of Four Schools 3.3 OPTION 2 THREE PARTS, MINIMAL TO CILAIRE Since we are concerned about children crossing the highway to attend Cilaire, we divided the Dufferin catchment into primarily segments only Forest Park, Quarterway and Brechin. We have only a few children living nearest the underpass going to Cilaire. The division is illustrated in Figure 24. Figure 25 indicates how many Dufferin students are likely to attend Forest Park, Brechin, Quarterway and Cilaire based on the division of the existing Dufferin catchment area shown in Figure 24. Using this analysis, for example, we would expect 44% of future Dufferin enrolment to attend Brechin. The data in Figure 25 is based on a forecast in GeoSchool using 2005 as the base year. 17
Figure 24: Division of Dufferin Catchment into Essentially Three Segments Figure 25: Destination of Dufferin Students for Option 2 Source catchment Possible destination school Based on Option 2 Out of catchment Combined total % in study area Dufferin Cilaire 2 1 3 2% Brechin 53 5 58 44% Quarterway 27 12 39 30% Forest Park 19 13 32 24% Other 12 12 Total 101 43 144 132 Figures 26 to 28 show the impact of adding the Dufferin students to Brechin, Forest Park and Cilaire. The impact on Quarterway is the same as for Option 1 (reference Figure 20). The impact on the four schools combined would be the same as with Option 1 (reference Figure 23). Our conclusion is that the division of the Dufferin catchment as outlined in Option 2 would result in the following: Brechin would be over capacity by one or two classes. Quarterway would be over capacity by one or two classes. Forest Park would remain underutilized. Cilaire would be over capacity by about one class. 18
Overall the four schools would be one or two classrooms over capacity for most of the next ten years. Figure 26: Option 2 Impact on Brechin Figure 27: Option 2 Impact on Forest Park 19
Figure 28: Option 2 Impact on Cilaire 3.4 OPTION 3 LIMIT FRENCH IMMERSION INTAKE The key problem with both Options 1 and 2 is that shifting extra students from the Dufferin catchment to Quarterway brings Quarterway over capacity (reference Figure 20). One way to create more room in Quarterway for the influx of Dufferin students would be to restrict access to the French Immersion program. We explored the impact of restricting intake into the French Immersion program at kindergarten to a maximum of 32 students. We assumed a very modest attrition of one student per year so that by Grade 7 there would be only 25 students enrolled in French Immersion. Figure 30 presents the results for Quarterway. Figure 30 shows the forecast enrolment for Quarterway based on the division of the Dufferin catchment from Option 2 and restricting French Immersion intake. There continues to be excess enrolment at Quarterway until about 2009 where the enrolment is just slightly above capacity. 20
Figure 29: Option 3 Impact on Quarterway 3.5 OPTION 4 MOVE FRENCH IMMERSION TO FOREST PARK Option 4 begins with the division of the Dufferin catchment as outlined in Option 2, but moves the French Immersion program from the overcrowded Quarterway to the underutilized Forest Park. We recognize that moving the French Immersion program will encounter some resistance, but the choice of Forest Park may be more accessible (and, therefore, more acceptable) than Departure Bay. There would be no change from Option 2 for Brechin (Figure 26 shows it would be over capacity by one or two classes) and Cilaire (Figure 29 shows would be over capacity by about one class). However, the impact on Quarterway and Forest Park would change as illustrated in Figures 31 and 32. 21
Figure 30: Impact of Option 4 on Quarterway Figure 31: Impact of Option 4 on Forest Park Our conclusion was that moving the French Immersion program would exacerbate the situation in that Forest Park would become over capacity and Quarterway would become very underutilized. 22
3.6 OPTION 5 MOSTLY TO FOREST PARK Figure 32 illustrates a division of the Dufferin catchment where most of the students go to Forest Park and none go to Quarterway. Figure 33 indicates how many Dufferin students are likely to attend Forest Park, Cilaire and Brechin based on the division of the existing Dufferin catchment area shown in Figure 32. The data in Figure 32 is based on actual 2005 enrolment as incorporated into GeoSchool 2005. Figure 32 also indicates the possible shift of the boundary between Departure Bay and Cilaire. Using GeoSchool 2005, we estimated that this enlargement of the underutilized Departure Bay Elementary would shift 19 students from Cilaire. This is reflected in Figure 36. Figure 32: Division of Dufferin Catchment Emphasizing Forest Park Figure 33: Destination of Dufferin Students for Option 5 Source catchment Possible destination school Based on Option 5 Out of catchment Combined total % in study area Dufferin Cilaire 9 1 10 8% Brechin 15 5 20 15% Quarterway 0 12 12 9% Forest Park 77 13 90 68% Other 12 12 Total 101 43 144 132 Figures 34 to 37 show the impact of adding the Dufferin students to each of the four schools presented in order of the relative number of Dufferin students 23
forecast to attend each school. Our conclusion is that the division of the Dufferin catchment as outlined in Option 5 would result in the following: Forest Park be over capacity to about 2010 and then operate just below capacity. Brechin would operate at or near capacity over the whole period. Cilaire would be at capacity until 2012 and then increase to about one class over capacity this incorporates the impact of shifting some students to Departure Bay Elementary. Quarterway would be over capacity by less than a class over the planning period. Figure 34: Option 5 Impact on Forest Park 24
Figure 35: Option 5 Impact on Brechin Figure 36: Option 5 Impact on Cilaire 25
Figure 37: Option 5 Impact on Quarterway 3.7 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS OF CLOSING DUFFERIN All of the students in all of the options considered would be well within SD 68 s four-kilometre walk limit. Nevertheless, more analysis needs to be done related to the safety of routes from specific neighbourhoods to new schools. Figure 38 presents six indicators for most SD 68 elementary catchment areas. It shows that the Dufferin catchment has: Below average household income. Below average dwelling values. More than average proportion of rental dwellings. Higher than average transience as indicated by the proportion of people who have moved in the last five years. Has a lower than average proportion of adults with post secondary education. Has a lower than average net migration levels. All these factors should be taken into account when considering the closure of Dufferin Elementary School. 26
Figure 38: Comparison of Catchment Areas Elementary School Average Income Dwelling Value Rental Dwellings Moved in Five Years Post Secondary Net Migration District Average 49,200 152,816 28% 46% 46% 0.54% Dufferin Crescent 34,482 116,765 51% 58% 31% -3.94% Brechin 39,432 121,870 52% 57% 54% -1.43% Cilaire 47,285 147,200 36% 43% 51% 1.32% Forest Park 42,487 126,825 37% 45% 47% 1.20% Quarterway 33,670 106,777 55% 54% 45% -0.24% Departure Bay 66,178 198,699 19% 41% 63% 1.91% Chase River 38,124 102,013 12% 35% 43% 1.71% Cinnabar 53,718 126,989 9% 37% 57% 5.73% Coal Tyee 49,111 127,550 23% 43% 45% 2.32% Davis Road 55,500 167,381 15% 43% 53% 6.18% Fairview 35,769 134,321 53% 58% 45% -2.08% Frank Ney 70,174 208,671 11% 51% 61% 3.32% Gabriola 43,412 189,818 15% 40% 58% -1.83% Georgia Avenue 38,736 111,387 40% 54% 41% -1.47% Ladysmith 49,211 136,644 26% 46% 41% 1.46% McGirr 65,802 197,008 21% 46% 56% 3.00% Mount Benson 45,879 140,063 32% 51% 40% -0.61% Mountain View 53,279 158,553 18% 40% 53% 2.26% North Oyster 47,572 178,095 13% 35% 53% -0.75% Park Avenue 39,053 114,048 33% 53% 39% -0.41% Pleasant Valley 44,474 125,260 14% 52% 44% 3.33% Randerson Ridge 58,991 152,599 17% 51% 49% 2.78% Rock City 51,047 164,890 46% 50% 47% -0.08% Rutherford 67,677 178,331 9% 42% 56% 4.67% Seaview 63,826 228,130 17% 30% 55% 2.19% South Wellington 48,071 159,774 25% 40% 38% -1.80% Uplands Park 58,791 150,827 20% 51% 55% 0.92% Woodbank/Cedar 57,776 180,652 14% 41% 51% 0.58% 27