1 of 17

Early Childhood Care

and Education Center

Campus Town Hall

May 2, 2022

2 of 17

About this template

April 2022 Construction Costs Update

2

Capital Costs: $39M

Preliminary Facilities Design: $1.5M

Infrastructure: $3.5M

Construction, Phase 1: $34M (Apr22)

100 children served)
Includes construction cost escalation factor estimate (8-9% since Dec. 2021)

Funding available: $9.5M

CA Legislative Appropriation: $5M

Kennedy Wilson: $1.5M

Capital Project Reserve Earmark: $3M

Construction delta: $29.5M

3 of 17

Immediate Need

Site selection by President Yao

Campus input sought

4 of 17

About this template

Two Possible Sites

Big Rock Park

NE North Quad (Carden)

5 of 17

Context: Campus Vision Plan

5

Santa Barbara Ave

Camarillo St

Ventura St

BRP

Carden

North

Quad

Univ Dr

6 of 17

Context: Larger Campus Vision

6

7 of 17

8 of 17

Big Rock Park: Pros

Preferred by ECE faculty
Access for students with disabilities
Less noise for children with sensory challenges
Less auto and bus traffic on campus
Easy entry/exit
Self contained fenced school yard
Better visibility

8

DAVE AND TERRY

Preferred by ECE faculty: classroom configurations will better match program and research needs
Better able to ensuring access for students with disabilities - it can be more easily achieved in new
Less noise - general campus noise - people, vehicles, and adjacent buildings - all contribute to distraction _ also children can be noisy outdoors at play

BRP is better from that standpoint

Auto and Bus traffic: easy access for buses and parents, ease of partnership with local school districts and child development programs;
Entry/exit at the front of campus; can create new four-way stop intersection to ease vehicular access, limit traffic into the campus
Self-contained and fenced school: no access to other buildings or spaces for ease of creating child safety
Better visibility of main entrance will enhance fund-raising efforts - easier branding

9 of 17

Big Rock Park: Pros (continued)

Carden services can remain
Greater design flexibility
Greater opportunities for true outdoor nature interface
No impact on future buildings in master plan
Better facility layout as desired by consultant, architects, and ECE faculty
New structures and code compliance

9

10 of 17

Big Rock Park: Cons

Loss of an iconic open unfenced green space - play area
Univ Glen Phase 2 and parkland issue
Existing space limits to single phase of 100 children
Phase 2 challenges
Utilities relocation - cost
Closer to traffic
CA Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Site Authority (SA) Land - consider exchange process or SA engagement in project
Questions? Clarifications? Other pros and cons to consider?

DAVE AND TERRY

Parkland loss of a green space for the CSUCI community - Removes iconic open space - shared and valued by campus and UGlen communities that has play area potential
Univ Glen Phase 2 and parkland issue – additional parkland will need to be developed in CI Park
Existing space limits to single phase of 100 children
Phase 2 - If demand was there, phase 2 would require relocation of Rincon (alternative of split site might be worth conversation to avoid this where the 2nd phase would be in the Carden area as more preschool with primary admin functions in phase 1
Significant utilities relocation needed to make viable as there are several utilities running right where a building needs to be - cost
Closer to traffic - main street Camarillo is busy
CA Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) issues are significant because it is greenfield, next to a creek, and not on the master plan for a building project.
Site Authority (SA) Land - consider the process of exchange or SA engagement in the project
Questions? Clarifications? Other pros and cons to consider?

11 of 17

12 of 17

NE of North Quad: Pros

Inclusion with campus community
Easy access for ECS students and faculty
Not limited to single phase of 100
Site Authority (SA) Specific Reuse Plan
Less utilities issues; more reuse
Does not require building on current open space
Space available for parking

12

DAVE AND TERRY

Feeling of inclusion with campus community by locating it along the quad and just outside
Easy walking access for ECS students and faculty
Not limited to single phase of 100 (i.e., phase 2 would be partially shelled in Phase 1 and space for additional buildings; avoids moving a street)
No land issues or impact to Site Authority (SA) or the Specific Reuse Plan related to Parkland loss mentioned about BRP
Less utilities issues; more reuse of existing sewer and storm systems instead of relocating mains as in BRP
Does not require building on current open space; (i.e., resources reuse of existing structures, buildings in lieu of full greenfield although Carden also consumes some green space)
Space available for parking currently in place - although old and worn, the proposed parking is already a parking lot

13 of 17

NE of North Quad: Pros (continued)

CA Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Big Rock Park remains as open space
Location will provide access by school buses
Limited number of tree removals

13

14 of 17

NE of North Quad: Cons

Traffic challenges
Visual supervision of children by staff is more challenging
More difficult to secure
Carden concerns
The building entry/access hidden
Proposed plan will reduce parking in favor of playground space
More fencing for various ages

14

DAVE AND TERRY

Traffic challenges – internal congestion by bringing traffic deeper and into a tight courtyard area
Visual supervision of children by staff is more challenging - at least in the existing remodel, smaller windows, less access to play areas
More difficult to secure classrooms and play yard from unauthorized adults due to adjacencies with other buildings and outdoor spaces
Carden will need to close, or be relocated at significant cost, prior to start of remodeling (18-24 mo earlier, add’l 1.3M cost)
The building entry/access will not be as visible to the public, less attractive for fundraising opportunities
The proposed plan will reduce parking in favor of playground space - we explored flipped play and parking areas
In lieu of buildings forming the perimeter of play yards one play yard will need fencing for various age groups

15 of 17

NE of North Quad: Cons (continued)

Reuse of existing buildings
Reconstruction of adjacent buildings noise could disrupt ECE classrooms
Existing site terrain makes ADA compliance/accessibility more difficult
Noise interference greater
Close to campus; sensory issues
Remodel may limit future institutional/academic growth
Questions? Clarifications? Other pros and cons to consider?

15

16 of 17

Breakout Rooms: Pros/Cons Discussion

Discussion prompts:

Which site do you think is the better option? Why?
What other considerations might exist for selecting the final site that aren’t represented in the pro/con lists of this slide deck?

Directions

Choose one person to record for your group.
Add feedback from your group on each possible site.
Recorders: Click the "+" button to start a new thread. Give it a title in the Subject line and type your comment in the text area beneath it. Feel free to add comments to other groups' posts.

ECCEC Slides

ECCEC Padlet

17 of 17

NEXT STEP

Your Feedback Requested

Scan and register your individual feedback on site selection