7/24/08:Planning

The purpose of this work session was to finalize the space requirements for the new school. To accomplish this, we used diagrams and spreadsheets to illustrate and discuss all programmatic building components.

At the June work session, the draft space program included all spaces requested during previous work sessions and focus group meetings, which totaled 100,000 gross square feet of building area. Ideas for reducing the building area were suggested by participants and have been incorporated into the space program presented at tonight’s work session.

With a targeted “budget” of 83,000 gross square feet, our task was to review, as a group, proposed strategies for reducing the building area by 17,000 sf.

agenda/notes

(notes from the session are included in red text.)

“LTM” = Leadership Team Member(s) and/or Worksession Participant(s)

“CTM” = Consultant Team Member(s)

6:00 – 6:30 Overview: Program of Spaces

A program of spaces with suggested area reductions incorporated was presented. Additional space can be added to the program, but only is an equal amount of space is eliminated elsewhere in the program.

6:30 – 8:00 Component Detail & Diagrams (click to view diagrams)

Activities:

Review suggested shared spaces

Review suggested space reductions

Discuss programmatic adjacencies to support the above

Team Pods

CTM: Science labs/learning studios share a wet lab between them, saving area. Besides this, there were minimal reductions in the core learning areas.

CTM: Lockers either as commons or around hallways. LTM: Teachers prefer Diagram A for lockers to be along the POD hallways.

“We would like to see separate bathrooms for girls and boys.” CTM: could make the entrances on opposite sides, take advantage of a shared plumbing wall.

CTM: Small Group now has a divider, rather than two rooms, option to create one larger room by pulling back the wall divider.

CTM: In the future, Social Studies could happen in the Applied Learning Lab since it’s a multifunctional space, but may currently be used as computer labs. In the future it might also be used for more hands-on projects.

CTM: Small teacher center included in the pod, so teachers don’t need to leave pod for small tasks. LTM: “I don’ like where the Teacher Center [in pod] is located, it isolates teachers from other grades. Prefer Teacher Center in teacher’s lounge so they can all collaborate. What about a Teacher Living Room?” CTM: There is a center for teachers, but just a very small space within each pod just to get things done quickly without needing to leave pod.

LTM: “If Teacher Center has glass walls, don’t teachers need to keep tidy?” “Don’t the teachers need privacy?” CTM: there could be half visibility, so when a teacher is standing up, they can see out, when seated at their desk there is either a wall or frosted glass for visual privacy.

LTM: “What is the purpose of the ‘Team Living Room’?” CTM: it is a contained, supervised, area within their pods where students can hang out.” LTM: “Our schedule doesn’t allow for that, they don’t have time, except before or after school.” CTM: Team Living Room space is not validated by time spent in it, but with the value students will have given it. Give voice to what students want: they might not be study buddies but they like to socialize. LTM: This area can encourage face-to-face interaction so kids aren’t just in front of computer screens all day. It supports community for the students.” CTM: students most wanted this as a space to call their own. It could be used as a ‘reward’ for students, for reading or even parent-teacher conferences.

LTM: “We want the [extra Exploratory] classroom AND the Living Room.”

LTM: “Could the ‘Living Room’ be attached to the Flex Studio for LA reading uses?”

Exploratory Programs

CTM: Supporting the performance commons is music/art (exploratory). General Music Room and Electronic Media Lab open up to each other.

CTM: Art displays open from behind the case in classrooms as requested.

CTM: We suggest that a General Learning Studio in Exploratory does not exist because the Applied Learning Lab can be used instead and save area.

CTM: Performance space doubles as Board Room as previously suggested.

LTM: Could have Drama classes in the Performance Commons. Choir can practice on stage – can add an acoustic wall to separate from the other part of the Perf. Commons. This should be verified with the music dept.

LTM: Drama wants to stay in the same area as Exploratory, “keep it all together.” “Supervision is an issue, 6^th grade having to travel down to Exploratory [can cause supervision problem].”

Library/Media/Reading Room

CTM: Two layouts are shown: one combines the Library & Reading Room, and the other shows them separated with some shared areas in between.

LTM: “Kids said they like small spaces, feel at home in them, but also like big open space- so how to keep reading room open and closed?” Agree that one large open room would be more flexible, but separation is still required between the 2 functions. Primarily acoustical, but also to minimize distractions. CTM: an operable wall divider such as Nanawall could be used to combine or separate Reading from Media. LTM: “We might like more wall space in the reading area, though, and divider would take that away.” and “We have to have a way to separate the two.”CTM: Need to reconfigure/expand the entrance to allow for 2 separate doors.

CTM: Toilets are included for staff only. LTM: Toilets in this area would be good, but not necessary if there are restrooms somewhere nearby.

CTM: Outdoor Reading area on upper level could be a green roof design.

CTM: Reading Alcoves are not defined yet, detail for later in planning/design, could be a combination of built-in and movable furniture. They are 120 square feet each, and open to a central space - more generous than the current school.

Physical Education

CTM: Suggest including the track as an “Bid-Alternate” and eliminating the area from the space program. We also suggest reducing the size of the gymnasium, which means that the cross courts will be short, non-regulation courts. The main court would still be regulation, with enough space for bleacher seating on one side.

LTM: “How big is the current gym?” LTM (another): Believe it’s about 5,000sf. CTM: If this is right, the proposed gym would be approximately 3,000sf larger than the current gym. But for an accurate comparison, the existing gym size should be verified.

LTM: “Isn’t gym most used after hours? Isn’t it where we shouldn’t be making cuts?” “Community uses it too.” CTM: The proposed gym will still be able to host a variety of activities and uses.

CTM: Per a suggestion at the last work session, we combined the coach and PE offices and saved a bit of square-footage.

LTM: “Is there a way to position locker room to keep sliding mat from being used to cover the doors? Perhaps move them behind the bleachers?“ CTM: the locker rooms behind the bleachers may be a supervision issue. If the court-to-wall distance is 10’ minimum, the wall mat requirement is not as stringent. We will be sure to maintain the 10’ clearance in the gym/court design.

LTM: “How do you enter the Weight Room?” CTM: It could be beside or above the locker rooms and staff offices. Glass walls in Weight Room to look onto the gym.

LTM: “We requested that the bleachers would have access from the top instead of from the gym floor, is this possible? CTM: The area required to have a “sunken” gym floor is excessive. We suggest gym floor access to the bleachers, but will leave enough space in front of the bleachers to minimize spectator interference with the court.

Dining/Food Services

CTM: Commons haven’t been changed since the last meeting. Still as shared performance/ cafeteria spaces. LTM: This area looks good.

Administration & Student Services

CTM: The diagram shows how one can enter at the Welcome Center then decide to go either to district or school offices from there. The shared “lobby” is economical use of area.

LTM: “Where is the receptionist?” CTM: There will be a reception counter, and the receptionist is behind in the Open Office.

CTM: The Dean and Principal offices are equal to each other in size, interchangeable. All other offices are the same size, so the office assignments can change as needed.

LTM: Soc. Worker and Psych. need access to Testing Room. LTM: “Soc and Psych are in on different days so they currently share an office. “

LTM: “Tech has to be in both district and school.” LTM: “Need Speech therapist office. No need for ESL office.” LTM: “There is no ‘Activities Coordinator’ office.” LTM: “Maybe an extra office for special needs?”

LTM: “Child Development Center space for anyone inside district to be included in the school, learn life skills, and is intended for persons with very special needs. It would need an inside and outside entrance. Also a multi-age area.” CTM: CDC closer to pods to keep the special needs students feeling included? LTM: “No, they need more room and security.” LTM: “If CDC is just a space, could it be used as a flex space too? For Drama or whatever?”

LTM: “SRC needs to be accessible from academic area. [Kind of a time out room] where Teacher s work with students one-on-one from 5 to 45 minutes to get a student back on task.”

CTM: do parents or volunteers or visitors need an area? LTM: “No, open spaces in admin would be fine for them.”

District Office

CTM: District office is smaller since the Board Room shares the Little Theater.

LTM: “Payroll needs an office with a door, not an open area.”

LTM: “Many files need to be stored on site, we need a larger storage space”.

LTM: “District Office staff should meet separately to clarify our space needs and adjacencies”.

General Comments

LTM: “Are we asking for too much or is this school just too small?” CTM: Both. We are asking for more space than will be in use at one time. We’re trying to make efficient use of the space. Start with a wish list and then narrow it down.

LTM: “You can always manipulate schedule to accommodate students.”

LTM: “Students don’t just spend all day with their one grade anymore. They mix it up and move around.”

CTM: “There is room for growth in new school, since the new building is for 450”

LTM: “What if we bid and get less than we hoped?” CTM: Some additions easily bid, other’s can’t (i.e. can’t bid ten extra sf for each room, but we can manipulate the scope and/or finishes, so we can meet the budget, either reduced or added.

8:00 – 9:00 Overall Building Planning Diagrams (click to view diagrams)

Planning Diagrams A - E were presented and discussed:

Diagram A:

CTM: Suggest share Applied Learning and/or Choral Room for use of Exploratory or Health classroom. LTM: “Problem with the flex space that can’t be used when 7^th grade uses it.” CTM: That’s the give and take – creative scheduling could figure these things out. LTM: “It’s all going to work but it amounts to scheduling.”

LTM: possibly combine Choral with General Music Room.

LTM: “Can music classes be done in practice rooms?” CTM: Music Lessons can make use of he practice rooms, and sectionals/ensembles could use the large practice room.

Diagram B:

Little theatre close to district offices to keep shared ‘Board Room’ closer. Plan A is better for the flex space distance from Exploratory.

Diagram C:

Angled component increases perimeter sunlight, and this configuration emphasizes the ‘Wow’ space as you enter the building. Also district office closest to shared ‘Board Room’ in this plan.

Diagram D:

Student pods closer relationship to the teacher offices. Dining commons become big foyer, with kitchen across the hall from it.

LTM: Don’t like kitchen opening to circulation/community commons.

Diagram E:

Just a little different but less natural light in teacher areas next to lockers.

LTM: “Keep Exploratory closer to the rest of the programs.”

9:00 – 9:05 Next Steps

Diagrams will be revised and posted to the project web site. The building design process will begin to take over from this planning process, and the next meeting will discuss site parameters and building layouts.

Planning Worksession #5:

July 24, 2008