Planning & Design Meetings Tennis Courts Program Meeting Notes 4/22/2009 - MinutesOrientation of the Tennis Courts
Gunn High School
8 April 2009
Page 1
GUNN HIGH SCHOOL
Palo Alto Unified School District
PROGRAM MEETING NOTES
DATE: 22 April 2009
SUBJECT: Orientation of the Tennis Courts
ATTENDEES: Noreen Likins, Principal (partial)
Tom Jacoubowsky, AP
Chris Horpel, AD
Don Biggs, PE IS
Jim Gorman, Varsity Tennis Coach
Paul Stickney, PAUSD/OCMI
Erwin Lee, DLM
Facilities Planning Committee (no sign-in sheet distributed)
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss and determine the desired orientation of the
tennis courts.
1. A diagram was presented that showed the footprint of the proposed auxiliary
gymnasium superimposed on the existing tennis and basketball courts. The current
footprint of the auxiliary gymnasium incorporates current input from the initial program
meeting and is larger than that originally shown in the Master Plan. Therefore, it
illustrates that four (4) tennis courts will not fit between the auxiliary gymnasium and
the existing trees at the east. The existing trees will need to be trimmed and/or
removed for the courts to fit as shown in the proposed options. Confirmation of the
tree impact is pending the survey information.
2. Two options for the tennis court layouts were presented to the group. Option ‘A’
showed the tennis courts and the gymnasium in the general configuration as
approved in the Master Plan. Option ‘B’ showed the courts rotated with the long axis
aligned with true north. Both schemes are impacted by the existing trees at the east.
3. Erwin clarified that the tennis courts, regardless of the orientation and configuration, is
not specifically identified as a project in the approved Master Plan project list. That is,
the cost to construct the tennis courts will come out of the same allocation of funds
earmarked for the auxiliary gymnasium, gymnasium modernization and the lobby
addition to the existing gymnasium.
4. Questions were asked of the PE and athletic groups as to what works best for their
needs. Regardless of the cost, the general though of the group was that whatever is
constructed must satisfy the program needs. It was noted that eight (8) courts are
desired.
5. Option ‘B’ creates a lacrosse wall area that has portions of tennis courts behind it.
Orientation of the Tennis Courts
Gunn High School
8 April 2009
Page 2
6. Questions were asked about the cost between the options. Erwin indicated that he
did not have an absolute cost but indicated that a relative cost comparison would be
the amount of construction required beyond the existing fence line. Erwin further
indicated that the area beyond the fence in Option ‘B’ is roughly five times that of
Option ‘A.’ Option ‘B’, because it extends further into the existing field, would also
require retaining conditions around the existing oak trees.
7. During the discussion of the solar angles, it was noted that during certain times of the
year the auxiliary gymnasium will cast shadows onto the tennis courts. This did not
appear to be a concern.
8. After discussing the pros and cons for each option, it was decided by the group that
Option ‘A’, which leaves the tennis courts in the current orientation, was the preferred
option that should be pursued by the design team. The auxiliary gymnasium will be
developed with Option ‘A’.
Attachments: Existing Plan, Option ‘A’ and Option ‘B’
END
Prepared by Erwin Lee of Deems Lewis McKinley. Please advise in writing if you feel that any of the above
items are inaccurate.
Orientation of the Tennis Courts
Gunn High School
8 April 2009
Page 3
cc: Attendees, File