Planning & Design Meetings Meeting #2 10/21/2009 - MinutesPalo Alto HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Palo Alto Unified School District 03 June 2009
P. 1
PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL
Palo Alto Unified School District
PERFORMING ARTS/THEATER SUBCOMMITEE MEETING #2
DATE: 21 October 2009, 3:15pm-5:00pm
SUBJECT: New Theater Conceptual Design
ATTENDEES: See attached sign-in sheet
The following are the highlights of the meeting:
1. Principal Jacquie McEvoy (JM) called the meeting to order.
2. Chris Ades (CA) handed out a “Preliminary Space Program Planner” and explained
that the planner is meant to outline various programmatic elements that the Drama
Department might have comparing them with the current Theater design. The
figures in “blue” represent the current design (used for grant funding purposes) and
the figures in black represent the targeted design.
3. Jedd De Lucia (JD) from the Shalleck Collaborative (Theater consultant) explained
that the planner is based on program information gathered from the Theater
subcommittee. The information was distilled and consolidated into an outline
program with categories and sizes. The intention is to help the committee prioritize
what they need in the building program. He explained that the net areas are much
less than the gross areas because of the “grossing factor”. Many spaces are not
included in the net areas such as hallways, and utility chase spaces. In general he
wanted the group to review the planner and provide feedback on: sizes,
adjacencies, and priorities.
4. JM said that the CTE grant was submitted and is “out there” or under consideration.
She noted that the committee should try to keep within the established budget. If
necessary they can venture beyond and seek large donors to help close the gap.
She added that she and Holly Ward (HW) would help coordinate the funding
outreach effort.
5. Erwin Lee (EL) re-capped progress made to date and presented several updated
plans of the Theater including a site plan that outlined three areas including space
for the new Theater, area within Building 100, and the space between the Theater
and Building 100. The available area for improvements is substantially less than the
total area given in the program planner. JD explained that many spaces can be
stacked vertically which helps fit the programmed spaces within a limited footprint.
EL reminded the group that the program planner represents a “wishlist” of spaces
that may or may not be appropriate for the Theater.
6. Michael Najar (MN) mentioned that he was surprised why the entire Building 100
was not included in the Theater scope, and that he thought it would be included. EL
noted that the photography, darkroom and food classrooms will be moved out.
Palo Alto HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Palo Alto Unified School District 03 June 2009
P. 2
7. Jeff Wilner (JW) mentioned that he was very happy with the newly modernized band
room in Building 100 currently located at the far end of Building 100. He noted it
was better to be closer to the Theater though not essential.
8. MN said that a main priority is acoustics and asked whether traffic noise might be
an issue. JD answered that only the train present a challenge but that with the right
treatment we can minimize problems. JW asked how the acoustics in the hall could
be designed given the various types of performances. JD answered that the hall
would be designed for music but provided with built-in features to adapt to film,
theater and other presentations that were less demanding. EL noted that there will
be an acoustical consultant to assist in the design.
9. The group began a discussion on various aspects of the Performing Arts program:
Stage
JW questioned whether or not 120 musicians could fit on stage at once. He
mentioned that it was possible at Gunn High School’s Spangenberg Theater
though it was still tight. Spangenberg has a 45-foot wide proscenium.
JD mentioned that a 45-foot wide proscenium is very wide. Later he noted that
it’s possible to reduce the width with moveable closure panels.
James Hilmer (JH) asked for a light lock and double doors behind the stage. JD
noted that behind the stage there would be an 8-foot deep light lock and that
this alcove was also used to store the orchestra shell. The shell was composed
of towers on rollers plus ceiling panels that hung down from the fly.
Green Room
MN mentioned that another area of concern is the Green Room which currently
shown seems small as he thought it might have to fit as many as 60 performers.
JD explained that a Green Room traditionally serves as a lounge but is often a
holding area that might also include a bank of make-up stations. He said that for
large groups there might be another space, such as a back-stage holding area.
EL noted that a room a bit larger than a typical classroom might be sufficient as
it’s designed to accommodate 49 students.
JD diagrammed a set of dressing rooms adjacent to a Green Room and
explained how this adjacency was important.
JH thought the space between the Theater and Building 100 could be valuable
as a holding area for performers during performance and function as an art
gallery and circulation space during regular hours.
Fly Loft
NJ said that the sub-committee had decided to pursue a stage with a full fly-loft.
Rachel Kellerman (RK) noted that they consider a fly-loft a critical component of
the drama teaching facility.
Aimee Lopez (AL) noted that the committee ought to present this decision to the
Facilities Steering Committee (FSC) next week.
JD mentioned that the committee should not feel lost if the fly-loft became too
expensive or was not allowed by the community due to added building height,
because a tension grid was still a workable alternative.
Orchestra Pit
MN noted that an orchestra pit would only be used once a year for musicals and
it was not yet a tradition at Paly.
Palo Alto HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
Palo Alto Unified School District 03 June 2009
P. 3
JD said an orchestra pit is costly. He described alternative ways of
accommodating a band and orchestra such as side stages. JD added that the
faculty needs to consider not only how often they produce musicals, but also
what types. Many musicals are written for small bands or bands that appear on
stage. The cost for an orchestra pit may be used to fund other aspects of the
program. The faculty should consider what the trade-offs are.
Kathleen Woods was in favor of an orchestra pit as she thought it provided
flexibility with performances, especially musicals, and good for special effects.
It’s noted that Saratoga High School has an orchestra pit which is covered with
portable solid panels when not in use, expanding the stage.
Balcony
JD recommended a balcony as a means of creating a more intimate seating
arrangement and showed plans and perspective of a theater as an example. He
also pointed out that a full elevator would be required for a balcony with
accessible seating provided at one location.
CA noted that a balcony can free up space at the ground floor for other rooms.
MN asked how much height a balcony adds to the building and JD answered
that it adds at most another 10-feet. EL added that for comparison purposes the
Haymarket Theater is about 44-feet high at the eave and 50-feet at the peak.
MN questioned the expense of a balcony and JD agreed but added that a
balcony has value because it provides a lot of flexibility and added building area.
It’s noted that JM had issues with how well a balcony can be supervised.
Drama Classroom and Black Box Theater
MN thought a chamber ensemble room was more valuable and could double as
a drama classroom or even a black box theater.
JD said that a drama classroom is a support space with a lower ceiling and not
as developed as a black box. A black box theater is much larger and has
support spaces of its own. If a second smaller theater is what’s required rather
than a drama classroom we will need to revisit that in the program.
Caroline Willis (CW) thought the black box theater might go in Building 100 and
include a lobby. Whether it can accommodate a high ceiling is a question.
Other spaces
Storerooms are very important including; fabric and scenery storerooms. These
rooms should be of regular shape.
CW noted that it was important to maintain a corridor between the Theater and
Building 100 for ease of circulation to and from the parking area.
10. Next Steps:
AL noted that the next FSC meeting is on October 26th. The next Theater
subcommittee meeting is yet to be determined.
JD informed the subcommittee that the next step will be for them to review the
“space planner” and confirm that adequate square feet has been identified. This
then need to be conformed to the allowable footprint and project budget.
END
Prepared by Christopher Ades 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
Palo Alto HSertaehTrennalP margorP ecapSOctober 21, 2009STNEMMOC/.TF .QS SSORG.TF .QS TENECAPSA451,81008,11ERTAEHT052,5SEITINEMA NORTAP8,077A.1Lobby - Orchestra Level3,0005555X5sf/person tight but workable for 600; Table seating +/-180A.2Lobby - Balcony Level900A.3051snoissecnoC/stekciTA.4ni thguorb sriahc/selbat ;snoissecnoC001egarotS esuoH fo tnorFA.5Women’s Restrooms400for 300; provide 2 x code = 5; 38 sf/fixtureA.6Men’s Restrooms200for 300; provide 2 x code = 3; 38 sf/fixtureA.7005egarotS & nehctiK gniretaC055,6MUIROTIDUA10,077A.8Seating area - Orchestra Level4,02010 sf/person, 2/3 of audience600A.9Seating area - Balcony Level1,98010 sf/person, 1/3 of audienceA.10Sound & Light Locks45075 sf each, others in gross6A.11001xiM esuoH nIBOTHER FACILITIES13 12020 185BOTHER FACILITIES13,12020,185STAGE & TECHNICAL AREAS 7,42011,415B.1muinecsorp elbatsujda w'54 ;ssorg ni revossorc '6 ;egats ’09 x ’53051,3egatSB.2'55 x '4022noprA egatseroFB.3004tiP artsehcrOManual platforms or lift as budget allows; basementB.4Upstage Support Area450shell/riser storage, large music ensemble overflowB.5)sdnats sriahc ,onaip( stnemurtsni egral002egarotS tnemurtsnIB6Bkt StB.6Backstage Storage200B.7tnemesaB004mooR parTB.857mooR remmiDB.957mooR reifilpmAB.10002mooR lortnoCB.11051moor topswolloFB.12051 smoortseR egatskcaBCh i RB.13Changing Restrooms 150B.14002mooR gnignahC syoBB.15003mooR gnignahC slriGB.16gniteem ,gnitiaw rotca ;pu-ekam009mooR neerGB.17002aerA gnidaoLPage 1 of 32,340X190X170X260X260X 5,260X410X100X2,240X280X200X200X200X260X150X 120180XX180X450X200XTotal 3,220Total 5,770Total 4,660LEGEND: (TEXT IN BLUE REPRESENTS CURRENT THEATER CONCEPT DESIGN)X - In TheaterO - Planned in 100 Building PRELIMINARY
Palo Alto HSertaehTrennalP margorP ecapSOctober 21, 2009STNEMMOC/.TF .QS SSORG.TF .QS TENECAPS007,5SNOITCNUF CSIM8,769B.17"xob kcalb"/stneve gib rof wolfrevo remrofrep/mrssalc amarD002,1moorssalC amarDB.18003aera troppus moorssalC amarDB.19selbat krow ;stneduts 03009moorssalC ngiseD and computer stations, scene & lightingB.20009pohS porP/enecSB.21057egarotS enecSB.22004egarotS porPB.23003pohS emutsoCB.24005egarotS emutsoCB.25ecaps troppus dna eciffO051eciffo rotceriD ertaehTB.261eciffo rotceriD lacinhceT50Office and support space5pp pB.27051aerA kroW yticilbuPB.28Admin. Offices0AREA TOTALS029,42,erA TEN laatoTTotal GROSS Area, Sq. Ft.38,338Total GROSS Area, Sq. Ft.38,338778,23.tF .qS .tF .qS ,tnirptooF detamitsEPage 2 of 3Total 900OOXXOOO9003006504003005003,950Total NET Area, Building 100 Total NET Area, Theater 14,5003,100Total NET Area Total GROSS Area, Building 100 Total GROSS Area, Theater Total GROSS Area 17,60016,4003,40019,800LEGEND: (TEXT IN BLUE REPRESENTS CURRENT THEATER CONCEPT DESIGN)X - In TheaterO - Planned in 100 Building PRELIMINARY
Palo Alto HSertaehTrennalP margorP ecapSOctober 21, 2009STNEMMOC/.TF .QS SSORG.TF .QS TENECAPS"Low" "High"Total GROSS Area, Sq. Ft.38,338 $/sf ROUGH Opinion$400 $475Bld C i C$8$8 62009 Bldg Construction Cost$15,335,385$18,210,769 ,gnivap ,epacsdnal ,krowhtrae ,seitilitu deriuqer lla sedulcni ecnawollA :krowetiSretaining walls, hardscape, site furnishings; Architect to verify$500,000 $1,000,000 2009 Total Construction Cost$15,835,385 $19,210,769Escalation per year5% 5%Escalation number of years11 2010 Total Construction CostCompounded$16,627,154 $20,171,308psnI & gnitseT :sedulcnIreilpitluM tsoC tfoSections, Construction Management, Building Agency Fees, Legal, Advertising, Fixtures, Furniture and Loose Equipment and 5% Contingency. Does not include design fees already contracted.20% 20%Soft Costs Total$3,325,431 $4,034,262"Low" "High"2010 Total Project Cost$19,952,585 $24,205,569Page 3 of 3THEATER (only)Current MP Budget = $ 11,763,000(Construction Cost)PRELIMINARY