Our students deserve better

The current AIA SC newsletter has a reprint of an interesting point/ counterpoint between Don Bowen (R-Anderson) and current AIA SC president Steve Coe (AIA, LEED AP) concerning the use of "stock plans" for schools statewide. This is certainly not a new debate for South Carolina, or any other state, but the current economic situation seems to have allowed this issue to creep back in the news. My membership in the AIA and job at an architectural firm that designs schools obviously biases me a little, but I think that the initial letter from Representative Bowen has some pretty scary notions for everyone. His letter hits the usual "we could save money" highlights without really offering any compelling new thoughts; stating that (3) school pans for each school level across the state would suffice, we could save large sums of money, etc. Mr. Coe's response addresses all of these issues and offers additional items for consideration that clearly illustrate why a majority of States have opted not to use or have abandoned stock plans.

One very alarming idea in Bowen's letter is his idea to have a competition between students to design the stock school plans. As Mr. Coe says, "Do we really want unlicensed designers, who have limited knowledge of building and life-safety codes, designing facilities for our children to spend most of their time in?" I find the concept of casually exploiting "free" student labor to be most unsettling. Statements such as these illustrate the knowledge gap between those actually involved in the design and construction of schools and those looking in from the outside.

I also find the obvious disregard for local school districts to be a scary concept. While Bowen maintains that districts would "have input," he feels that mandating plans for every district "...would save millions of dollars statewide and not compromise the integrity of the local districts." Rep. Bowen does cleverly word the funding/ budget cuts he's proposing with phrases like, " [redirecting] this revenue stream toward economic development and business growth within our state." But, that redirection would come from cutting budgets for design fees and eliminating positions at school districts involved in facility planning and procurement. One major complaint I've heard by community members (and volunteers on this project) is that school districts often make decisions autonomously, without consulting the schools or communities they are going to affect. Rep. Bowen is suggesting we should move the decision making process even further away from those affected. Why don't we invest resources in designing appropriate schools for each community? If districts would work with local community groups and implement shared use facilities the costs of construction could be offset. Local businesses, such as a coffee shop or book store, could potentially benefit from being located near a school. Some entrpreneurs might even see a market and develop a new business to serve the school and community. Buildings are very complex and costs can never truly be represented by a ledger on a spreadsheet, especially school buildings. Designing a school that is appropraite for each community makes more financial sense than wasting money on pouring slabs and running utilities for additions to schools that may never be needed.

Hopefully the Summit at the AIA SARC will offer an opportunity for a broader discussion on these and other topics.

Bowen's letter is here: http://www.independentmail.com/news/2009/aug/02/guest-columnist-new-plan-how-we-build-schools/

Coe's response is here: http://aiasc.affiniscape.com/associations/7611/files/Students%20Deserve%20Better.pdf

any other thoughts?