Loading...
Planning & Design Meetings 1/27/2011 - Minutes Palo Alto HS PAC SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 27 January 2011 P. 1 PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL Palo Alto Unified School District PERFORMING ARTS CENTER SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: 27 January 2011, 3:30 pm-5:00 pm SUBJECT: Performing Arts Center, Schematic Design Meeting ATTENDEES: Sign-in sheet (attached) The purpose of the meeting was to review the alternative, 400 seat Performing Arts Center (PAC) design revisions and determine what recommendation should be made to the Facilities Steering Committee at the 2 February 2011 meeting. The following are the highlights of the meeting: 1. Tom Hodges (TH) gave a brief summary of his meeting with the Superintendent and District Administrators regarding the PAC status. • There were four (4) PAC options discussed: (1) 600 seat as currently estimated, (2) 600 seat with 7,300 SF reduction, (3) 600 seat with area reductions and other cost reductions, and (4) Redesign as 400 seat. • TH explained that Option 4 was never tested as a design but generated only by square footage and an applied unit cost. Just before the holidays he asked DLM to look at what a 400 seat scheme would look like. The intent was to salvage as much of the current design and program as possible. The current 400 seat plan was reviewed with the user group in mid-January to determine if the plan satisfied the program requirements. The version currently being presented incorporates comments form that meeting. The current layout meets the program needs of the departments and users. • TH shared that the Superintendent and others have reservations about a major fund raising effort for the PAC project and how that effort will be received by the community. 2. Erwin Lee (EL) presented the revised floor plan. The major changes were the incorporation of a hallway between the Lobby and the back of house area and the addition of a row of seats. EL shared that the number of seats shown on the previous plan at 407 (excluding orchestra seating) would need to be increased to yield a final configuration of 400. The current plan shows 433 seats which provides the flexibility to settle in at approximately 400. When the orchestra pit is not used, the recovered area will accommodate an additional 32 seats. EL noted that when the proposed plan was reviewed with Jedd, theater consultant with The Shalleck Collaborative, he emphasized that the actual seat count will be reduced as Palo Alto HS PAC SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 27 January 2011 P. 2 sightlines are reviewed and checked. The users felt that the revised plan captured the important program elements and were pleased with the development and result. 3. Phil Winston (PW) offered that he felt it was their responsibility to provide a project within budget and that does not impact other projects that will follow on the Master Plan project list. He felt that the reduced seating scheme would satisfy that responsibility. 4. Stuart Berman (SB) reminded the subcommittee not to forget the “whole school needs.” He asked how or why did the need change from 600 seats to 400 seats? 5. Rachel Keller (RK) suggested that the “whole school need” was for a large gathering space but not necessarily in a theater format. This need can be satisfied elsewhere on the campus. She added that the 20-year Master Plan includes a new gymnasium which will have the seating capacity for this and much more. Jeff Willner (JW) added that the school does not current have a space now and will not until the new gymnasium is built. 6. RK asked if the bond language included a seat count? TH indicated that the bond was not specific but indicated 500 seats. However, TH noted that the CTE grant indicated 550 seats and did not know if it that would have an impact. He will review with Bob Golton and Ron Smith regarding this. 7. TH noted that the $22.4 million budget was taken to the BOE as the increased amount. 8. JW felt that the process to get to this point has been good and that he felt that the project has improved at every stage of development resulting in a facility that will serve their needs well. He further believed that the larger, 600 seat version would not serve the needs of the school any better than a 400 seat will. 9. Caroline Willis wondered what the community would think if we built a 600 seat facility and it was never filled. Would the community think that the District overbuilt? 10. Holly Ward (HW) said that we were told to build a “no apologies building” and added that we are still doing that with a different seating capacity. She is comfortable with the revised plan hearing from the users that it satisfies their programmatic needs. Michael Najar (MN) said the proposed plan satisfies their needs; it is a “no apologies building,” and that he will be a champion for the approach. 11. TH noted that the even if the FSC would support reshuffling the project list to fund the 600 seat theater, the superintendent indicated that he would not support allocating more the $23.5 million to the PAC project. The difference must be made up by a fund raising effort. Palo Alto HS PAC SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 27 January 2011 P. 3 12. RK suggests that we should refer to the need to accommodate a large amount of seating in terms of “assembly needs” in lieu of “entire” or “all school” in order to distinguish it from having to occur in the PAC. 13. The group unanimously agreed that the 400 seat count is the right number for the PAC and the current plan should be recommended to the FSC. 14. EL noted that if this is the direction to pursue, the proposed plan needs to be developed, flushed out, and a revised schematic design estimate needs to be prepared to confirm the cost. The building cost are still based on square footage albeit now in a configuration that confirms that the program can be accommodated in the footprint. TH added that if this is the direction, he would need to get a proposal for the changes from DLM. 14. Kathleen Wood (KW) shared that she talked to someone who has the Meyer Acoustic System installed in their facility and they had nothing but good things to say about it. KW has no reservations with the Meyer Acoustical System and is behind it 100%. 15. CW brought up her concern about the positioning of the PAC on the site, the rotated fly tower, and the curved façade. She wondered what it would really look like. • Next FSC meeting will be scheduled for 2 February 2011 at 3:30 PM. END Prepared by Erwin Lee 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 +0'-3"+0'+0"+0"+0"+0"3' R I G G I N G C L E A R Z O N E 2009 100011.30.2010PROPRIETARY DESIGN: THE DRAWING, DESIGN, AND INFORMATION CONTAINEDON THIS SHEET ARE THE PROPERTY OF DEEMS LEWIS McKINLEY, AREDEVELOPED FOR THE USE ON, AND IN CONNECTION WITH THIS SPECIFICPROJECT, AND ARE DISCLOSED IN THE CONFIDENCE AND SHALL NOT BE COPIED,REPRODUCED, PUBLISHED OR OTHERWISE USED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, INWHOLE OR IN PART TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO PRODUCE, CONSTRUCT, ORMANUFACTURE DRAWINGS, PRINTS APPARATUS, PARTS, OR ASSEMBLIESWITHOUT FULL KNOWLEDGE AND WRITTEN CONSENT CONSENT OF DEEMS LEWISMcKINLEY. THIS DRAWING IS PROTECTED BY COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT, ALLPATENTABLE MATERIAL CONTAINED HEREIN AND ORIGINATING WITH DEEMSLEWIS McKINLEY SHALL BE THE PROPERTY OF DEEMS LEWIS McKINLEY AND ANYUSE OF PATENTABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ROYALTY PAYMENTS TO'((06/(:,60F.,1/(<‹DLM D E E M S L E W I S M c K I N L E Y 7 7 V A N N E S S A V E N U E S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 0 2 4 1 5 . 2 5 5 . 1 8 1 1 F A X 2 5 5 . 0 2 4 8Key PlanApprovalsNew Performing Arts Center Palo Alto Unified School District - Palo Alto, CA Palo Alto High SchoolKey PlanFIRST FLOOR PLAN SCHEMATIC DESIGN A-1.2\\corbu\Projects\2009-1000 PaloUSD Paly HS Theater\06.00 Contract Documents\6.0 Schematic Design\Theater drawings\A1-2 reduced plan2-1.dwg, 2/3/2011 11:41:07 AM, 1:1, S Shimmin