Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Construction topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board reviews Hilltop primary-school design, site plan and budget estimate

5806435 · September 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Wyoming Board of Education reviewed schematic designs, site plans, branding and an initial cost estimate for the Hilltop primary school during its June regular meeting.

The Wyoming Board of Education reviewed schematic designs, site plans, branding and an initial cost estimate for the Hilltop primary school during its June regular meeting. Architects presented a two‑wing building with a transparent central ‘knuckle,’ an on‑site two‑lane drop‑off and an outdoor classroom and garden; district staff and the construction manager discussed schedule, contingency amounts and next steps for cost reconciliation.

The presentation matters because Hilltop is the first of three primary‑school projects in the district bond program and the design choices—site circulation, secure vestibule, playground consolidation and swing‑space plans—affect cost, construction sequencing and how students will be relocated during construction.

Board members and project staff described design goals that emerged from workshops with staff, students and neighbors: stronger indoor‑outdoor connections, abundant daylighting, visible community access and a distinct but related visual identity for each of the three primary schools. Kelly Kaufman, the branding consultant on the project team, described the district branding concept as a system that keeps each school visually related yet distinct; the Hilltop motif is “sun and hills.”

Architects showed a site plan that brings vehicle traffic into the site for a controlled two‑lane turnaround and drop‑off, places an outdoor classroom and gardens near the front of the building for after‑hours community access, and consolidates hard‑ and soft‑play spaces within a secure zone. The plans locate kindergarten on the ground floor with adjacent, dedicated ADA restrooms; a lobby with an elevator and a wrapped stair provides vertical circulation and a bridge from the building to the playground for fourth graders.

Project leader Lauren (project presenter) summarized engagement to date: three neighborhood workshops, 22 core team meetings that included district representatives Heather and Kara and intermittent participation by Jean, student sessions across grade levels, a staff input session and a preview to the planning commission. “Students kept saying they love the connection to the outdoors,” Lauren said; the design team said that feedback drove the emphasis on gardens, covered outdoor learning spaces and large windows.

On materials and interior graphics, the architect presented a color palette centered on a district blue with gold, mint and warm gray accents and showed early proposals for an entry canopy, a branded wall in the lobby and a “value spine” wrapping the elevator with the district’s vision language. Kelly Kaufman, the branding consultant, said the theme for the three schools is “roots arise,” with Hilltop expressed as “sun and hills.”

On schedule and cost, the team said schematic design is complete and was under cost review by the construction manager. The district’s overall bond program budget is $72,500,000; the project team reported a current Hilltop estimate in the low‑to‑high $28 million range (presented in the meeting as about $28.3 million) and said they expect a formal estimate from the construction manager in the coming weeks. The construction manager has an on‑contract contingency of $1,100,000; the owner’s construction contingency is $2,165,000 and a soft‑cost contingency of about $320,000 was reported—roughly $3.6 million of contingencies described to the board.

The team described the district’s approach to reconciling design with budget: receive the construction manager’s first estimate, adjust design elements (value‑engineer) in design development, then finalize a guaranteed maximum price after design development and bidding. The board was told abatement estimates for all three primary‑school sites had come in lower than expected and that swing‑space costs for use of Friendship United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church of Wyoming are included in the current plan.

Josh, the construction manager on the project team, reported ongoing swing‑space work: modular classroom units and ramps installed at Friend ship United Methodist Church, technology and internet hookups coordinated with Scott Powers, the district’s director of technology, and a security fence to enclose modular‑unit play areas. Staff said arrival and dismissal procedures are being reviewed to keep pick‑up and drop‑off on the church site to avoid unsafe street crossings. The project team said the modulars and swing‑space work aim to be complete before school starts and that final traffic striping and school‑zone signage are being coordinated with the city and state.

Board members asked specific, safety‑oriented questions: how the school will manage morning and afternoon sun (the design team said insulated double‑pane glazing with an embedded blind and low‑E coating), how bridge guardrails will meet code (code requires 42‑inch guardrails designed to discourage climbing), whether the gym is a full high‑school court (answer: no; it is primary‑school sized with retractable backstops and a stage wall that opens to the dining area) and whether existing carved limestone sign elements could be reused at the new entrance (the team said reuse is possible but will require a size and siting study).

The presentation closed with the project team noting further neighborhood workshops are scheduled and that the Hilltop schematic design and first round of cost estimates will return to the core team for reconciliation before the board sees recommended changes to bring the project to budget.

The board did not take formal action approving construction documents or authorizing construction at this meeting; this session was a design, budget and engagement update and the team characterized the next steps as cost reconciliation, design development and GMP preparation.