Planning & Design Meetings Meeting #3 12/1/2008 - Minutes
GUNN HS MP MEETING No.3
Palo Alto Unified School District
01 December 2008 | Page 1
GUNN HIGH SCHOOL MASTER PLAN
Palo Alto Unified School District
MASTER PLANNING MEETING NO. 3
DATE: 01 December 2008, 12:30-1:30 pm
SUBJECT: Master Planning Meeting with Gunn HS Facilities Steering Committee
ATTENDEES: See attached sign-in sheet
The following are highlights of the meeting:
1. The architect, Erwin Lee, began the meeting by reviewing what was discussed at the
previous meeting that was held on November 19, 2008. This includes the following:
· Displacement of classrooms
· Consolidation of buildings
· The possibility that the courtyard should be enlarged
· The possibility of clustering the RC, special ed. and music classrooms
· Adding to the existing cafeteria to enable service from both sides
The following are the comments and discussion items from the facilities steering committee
based on the review of the last meeting:
· There is a general consensus that the special ed. and music classrooms should not be in
the same cluster, due to noise isolation concerns. Erwin Lee stated that there are many
technical ways to break up sound in the same building, and said that department
adjacencies in the new master plan must be decided on before getting into the details of a
proposed new building.
2. The question of what would be gained by a larger courtyard came up. Erwin Lee explained
that a larger courtyard would be more efficient for supervision, would better organize the
campus edges to assist in way finding, create edges around the courtyard where kids can
gather in smaller groups, and create medium spaces within by utilizing landscaping or seat
walls. In addition, a larger courtyard would be a focal element of the campus that acts as
one large space for accommodating the student body for public events.
There were many comments from the facilities steering committee as to the advantages and
disadvantages of an enlarged courtyard area. The following is a summary of what the
committee felt were the advantages of having an enlarged courtyard:
1) It would help elevate traffic congestion at highly travelled times of the day.
2) Creating a central space would be a great way to bring students together and out of
the interstitial spaces that are often occupied by smaller groups.
The following is a summary of what the committee felt were the disadvantages of having an
enlarged courtyard:
1) Little spaces in between buildings allow certain groups of students to separate
themselves from other groups that they might not want to mix with. Having a larger
courtyard might take away some of those comfort “niches”.
2) The opportunity of having centralized services, such as a copy room for staff, will be
lost if the courtyard gets expanded without adding a building in that location.
GUNN HS MP MEETING No.3
Palo Alto Unified School District
01 December 2008 | Page 2
3) There is a concern that the funding to finish the enhancement of the courtyard would
run out, resulting in a basic, paved space without the anticipated design elements.
Erwin Lee suggested that the funding would have to be planned in such a way that
there is enough of it to meet current needs. He presented the option of adding a
second phase to a later bond to finish the intended design if need be.
The general consensus from the committee is to go forward with the design of an enlarged
courtyard space.
3. Principal Noreen Likins stated that the RC building is definitely going to be demolished,
and that an agreement of what to do with the available space is necessary in moving
forward with the master planning. The following general options for what to do with this
space were presented:
· Construct a new, 2-story building in the same footprint as the existing RC building.
· Construct a smaller building in the same general area as the existing RC building.
· Construct a new building that replaces the functions of the existing RC building in
a different location.
There was no general consensus from the committee on this matter. Erwin Lee will present
various layout schemes in the upcoming meeting that will reopen this discussion.
4. There were no objections by the committee concerning the location of the new gym.
5. It was stated that tradeoffs will have to be made, due to the finite budget and underlying
priorities. The main priority is to meet the space requirements for the growing student body.
The following is a list of the design goals that were discussed:
· Departments are to be located within the same area and buildings of their offices.
· Louder, busier activities are to be programmed around the courtyard.
· Indoor student activity space (currently in the RC building) must be preserved, not
eliminated from the program. It was suggested that there is an opportunity for this
space in an expanded lobby of the Spangenberg Theater, and by opening up the
existing L-31 building to the courtyard.
· Maximize the expansion of existing buildings around the perimeter of the campus in
order to minimize the size of a new building footprint on the campus interior.
· New science rooms should be adjoined because classes share a majority of the
same resources throughout the Science Department.
· With the new building code in effect, it would not be cost effective to add a second
story to existing single-story buildings. It is agreed that this option be ruled out.
· Two additional classrooms will be added to the Language building without the need
for a new building in that location.
· If there is a new three-story building built, the top (third floor) will be used only for
offices and staff purposes, not for classrooms.
The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, December 15th from 1pm-2:30pm
END
Prepared by Dean Schmitz of Deems Lewis McKinley. Please advise if you feel that any of the
above items are inaccurate or need further clarification or detail.
CC: Attendees
File