Loading...
Planning & Design Meetings Landscape Meeting 2/14/2012 - MinutesLandscape Committee Meeting Palo Alto High School 14 February 2012 Page 1 PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL Palo Alto Unified School District LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: 14 February 2012, 3:30 pm - 5:00 pm SUBJECT: Palo Alto High School Performing Arts Center ATTENDEES: Sign-in sheet (attached) The following are the highlights of the meeting: Introductions: 1. Aimee Lopez (AL) welcomed the committee and initiated the meeting. Performing Arts Center (Information): 2. Erwin Lee (EL) discussed the boundaries of project scope: • Area of project scope includes Performing Arts Center (PAC) and area immediately adjacent to PAC. • Area of project scope also includes new plaza to south of building, drive way, small parking lot to west of building and emergency vehicle access to north and east of building. • Area of project scope aligns roughly with north façade of Haymarket Theater though transition between new concrete paving at plaza and existing asphalt paving along side of Haymarket Theater will require that a temporary paving connection be provided to create a transition to the existing grade. Tom Hodges (TH) clarified that transition solution will need to work for years even though it is temporary. It will eventually be replaced during campus-wide site improvements. 3. EL reviewed the tree survey with the committee: • EL reviewed which trees are to remain, which trees are to be transplanted (marked with a “T”), which trees are to be removed (marked with an “X”) and which trees are in questionable health (marked with a star) due to existing conditions or the impacts of construction activities. • Committee reviewed and discussed locations of existing trees. • TH requested that proposed locations for trees to be transplanted to be reviewed by the committee. Chuck McDonnell (MC) informed the committee that Debbie Ellis (DE) is currently working on a tree survey for trees near El Camino and the tennis courts, and will identify which are not in good condition. This will allow space for transplanted alumni-trees. The committee requested for the trees to be transplanted during winter break. • AL explained that not all trees indicated to be transplanted are alumni trees. Some are very small trees. The committee may consider planting new trees. • EL and Brad Gunkel (BG) asked about starred (debatable) trees, in particular those in the parking lot area. DE responded that conditions vary. These are generally trees with questionable health, some of which are also at least Landscape Committee Meeting Palo Alto High School 14 February 2012 Page 2 marginally impacted by construction. DE noted that tree 612 has poor structure (some damage due to pruning) and that tree 611 has compromised structure but not as bad as 612. DH pointed out that it was her goal to document which trees are in good health and which trees are in questionable health. This does not mean that the Committee may not want to save/protect some trees that are in questionable health. It was suggested that the trees 611 and 612 be re-evaluated a year from now. • Committee asked that DLM coordinate utilities so as to avoid impact on existing trees. BG stated that utility routing is still being worked out but that it is being coordinated around landscaping and trees. Committee asked if they can get a copy of the utility plan once it is worked out and BG said that he would do so. 4. EL reviewed the areas where landscaping will occur: • Areas for landscape opportunities include parking lot island and surrounding landscape area, plaza planter at existing trees, landscape area immediately to the west of the PAC (adjacent to the patio), small area to north of PAC, a portion of the area to the north of the new emergency vehicle access road (for tie-in to existing landscaping) and small planter to east of PAC adjacent to Green Room. • Mary Gordon (MG) requested information on overall parking and street frontage area (including areas outside of the PAC scope) to coordinate project and larger site landscaping for the sake of continuity. EL said that he will re-issue that plan which already exists. • BG clarified that Schematic Design deadline is at the end of March and requested that Landscape Committee attempt to provide their recommendations according to a timeline that will accommodate the schedule that the School District has set for the design team. • Erwin pointed out that trees originally shown along the side of Building 100 would need to be in raised planters due to the density of existing underground utilities in this area. 5. Seating opportunities were discussed by the committee: • Numerous members of committee commented on need for outside seating (in particular shaded seating). • BG mentioned that raised planters along Building 100 (as necessary to accommodate underground utilities) could provide opportunity for some integral seating. • Seating around planter in plaza (at existing trees) was discussed and TH reminded group that it was decided that there would not be integral seating in this area due to Committee’s prior concerns about footings interfering with existing tree roots. Committee members asked if benches could be installed in this area. EL and BG commented that this is a possibility provided tree roots can be avoided. • BG pointed out that seating around planter in plaza would need to accommodate bike parking. Committee asked if bike rack could be moved. TH pointed out that bikes could be moved to west side of Haymarket Theater at current lawn area immediately adjacent to plaza. Committee agreed that the revised location would be preferable. Landscape Committee Meeting Palo Alto High School 14 February 2012 Page 3 Media Arts and Classroom Building (Information): 6. Potential conflict between footing over-pour and planter area was discussed: • EL explained footing size, building line and planter area. He explained that paving to foundation distance should be 1’-6” resulting in a 1’-6” planter. • MG explained that Tim McBrian (TM) had said that there was only 8”. Committee was concerned that footing may have been over-dug. • EL explained that, if footing is over-poured, planter could be extended some if necessary but the plant-able area would be farther from the building. Some of the over-pour could be jack-hammered out if necessary. • EL stated that he would check out the situation during his construction meeting on Wednesday (2/15/12) and report back regarding the actual condition as well as the options available. Action Items (Action): 7. DLM to provide plans of area of immediate scope as well as surrounding area to Landscape Committee. 8. DLM to provide building elevations to Landscape Committee. 9. DE to provide tree survey of surrounding area. 10. DLM to forward utility plan to Landscape Committee once it is worked out. 11. EL to investigate potential footing conflict with planter at Media Arts building and report on situation and options to Landscape Committee. END Prepared by Brad Gunkel of Deems Lewis McKinley. Please advise in writing if you feel that any of the above items are inaccurate. cc: Attendees, File