2010 10 -8_draft3_report
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

2010 10 -8_draft3_report

on

  • 213 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
213
Views on SlideShare
172
Embed Views
41

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

2 Embeds 41

http://www.weebly.com 26
http://buildingforboys.4daptive.com 15

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

2010 10 -8_draft3_report 2010 10 -8_draft3_report Document Transcript

  • Town School for Boys Facilities Master Plan October 2010!
  •  October 8, 2010  TOWN SCHOOL FOR BOYS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN  Overview  Town School for Boys is an independent K‐8 school for boys located at 2750 Jackson St. in San Francisco.  The school occupies a facility that has been assembled from four separate structures built at different times; the earliest structure dates from pre‐1958 with the latest addition being the gymnasium and cafeteria constructed in1971.    Over the past decade student enrollment has remained steady at approximately 400, while teacher population has increased significantly as a commitment to a richer classroom experience and enhanced program offerings.   The result is has been increased pressure on the existing facility to support the increase in people and programs to the point where the school has explored a number of options to provide needed space relief.    MKThink was commissioned in April 2010 to undertake a comprehensive study comprised of several independent tracks.  These tracks included a facility‐based needs assessment, a classroom utilization study, and an integrated planning and site acquisition strategy.  When woven together this work provides a framework for identifying and ultimately realizing the facility needs and physical environment solution options for Town School.  The primary goal of this work is to permit Town School to control their destiny on‐site at 2750 Jackson St. while also planning for opportunities beyond current footprint.  Underlying this study are numerous curricular and institutional goals.  These include:  • Developing a focus on project‐based learning  • Enabling a place for non‐traditional learners and personalities to thrive  • Enhancing the participation of families in the school  • Providing facilities that enable learning and encourage creative, critical thinking  • Incorporating green design principles with a focus on educational opportunities related to  building performance and systems ‐ using the building as a teaching tool.   The following reports were made available to MKThink and were reviewed in preparation of this work:  Jackson Street Facility Options Study, September 6, 2005.  Pfau Architecture MEP Systems Due Diligence Study, May 15, 2007.  Interface Engineering Structural Review Report, June 1, 2007.  Murphy Burr Curry, Structural Engineers Elevator System Assessment, June 30, 2006.  Edgett Williams Consulting Group Case Study for Town School Facilities Remodeling.  Date & author unknown Town School for Boys – Drawing Review (Code), May 7, 2007.  Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. Town School for Boys Building and Grounds Strategy and Plan – 3rd revision.  March 2008. 2750 Jackson Facility Opportunities Assessment (Preliminary).  December, 2009  Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  •  chapter 1.  Goals Setting and Need Analysis   School Leadership has established the following broad project goals:  Project Goals   • Control Destiny at 2750 Jackson  • Plan for Opportunities Beyond Current  • Understand & Apply User Needs & Patterns  • Maximize Facility Opportunities  • Integrate Into Unified Strategy    In May 2010 a series of workshops were conducted to elicit perspective and feedback from teachers and staff on the following topics:    • The Sciences  • Wellness, Food & Nutrition  • Environment as a Teaching Tool  • The Arts  From these sessions the following programmatic goals were established   Programmatic Goals (summary)   • Better Support Collaboration  • Think Communally About Space  • Consider Wellness & Human Performance  • Optimize Space  • Minimize Schedule Impediments  • Apply Technology As Staff Tool   Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • Programmatic Goals (expanded)  COLLABORATION   • TSB Teachers by nature want to collaborate – facility should foster grade or curriculum  collaboration.    • Support collaboration with space teachers ‘own’ outside of the classroom  • Adjacency is key to collaboration  ENCOURAGE COMMUNAL SPACE USAGE WHERE POSSIBLE  • Universal Classroom concept may be worth considering for certain upper school but…  • Roaming teacher model only works if everyone is roaming.  It doesn’t work if a teacher must  occupy another teacher’s space  • Prototype shared space scenarios before full roll‐out  WELLNESS / HUMAN PERFORMANCE  • Understand brain function needs and attention needs and support accordingly  • Provide social & emotional support, especially for the outlier kid  • Unstructured downtime and unstructured play are important  • Food & Nutrition awareness is important  SPACE OPTIMIZATION  • “Found” space is low hanging fruit  • Creating or acquiring new space will always be more expensive than other solutions  • Outside space can be better utilized to support programs, downtime, alternative learning  and unstructured play  • TSB facility can incorporate teaching moments  SCHEDULING ENHANCEMENTS  • Optimizing existing space to support expanded programs will rely on re‐thinking how  scheduling can free up space and utilize space effectively.  • Current schedule is a choice – it can be changed it if there is a will  • Consider alternative schedules: 6 day rotating / expanding double periods for certain classes  and grades  • Look at schedule blocks as a 4th dimension to space  TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENTS  • Technologies can expand learning beyond the classroom  • Effective scheduling tools can better allow traditional and non‐traditional learning spaces to  achieve greater utilization Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • chapter 2.  Inventory & Utilization Analytics  Comparing Multiple Facility Optimization Strategies  The analytics summarized here considered and compared 3 different strategic approaches to existing facility improvements as well as the possibility of off‐site acquisitions.  The strategies are as follows:      Strategy A ‐  Core Program Interior Improvements & Right‐Sizing   Strategy B – Modest Off‐Site Acquisition  Strategy C – Modest On‐Site Expansion  Strategy D – Major On‐Site Expansion   Summary Utilization Findings:  • Classroom Use Hours – vary widely room‐to‐room and day of week  • Daily Use Fluctuation – varies widely  • Occupant Density – varies widely  • Schedule Impact – scheduling can be a tool to make space usage more effective         Chapter 3 documents the planning options associated with each strategy.  Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • Town School for BoysAnalytics Summary The analytics used to compare various renovation to the Town School for Boys’ existing facility and  off‐site acquisition opportunities are based on two metrics: inventory and utilization. Inventory is  the set of available rooms that can host classes – either full rooms that can hold 22 students or  seminar rooms that can hold 11.  Utilization is the number of hours in the week that a particular room is used, or weekly room‐use  hours (WRH). The maximum theoretical WRH with an 8‐hour day is 40 – currently the most highly  utilized room at the Town School is the science room, with a WRH of 31. The school‐wide average  WRH is 17.5. The Town School’s capacity is measured in classroom‐equivalents (CREs), which is calculated by  multiplying the inventory of rooms by WRH and dividing by 17.5 the existing average utilization.  Each renovation strategy’s net effect on school capacity in the following slides is shown at existing  utilization rates (17.5 WRH), a 20% utilization enhancement (20WRH), and a 40%+ utilization  enhancement (25 WRH).Classroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week Increase Hours of Use/Week 20 Hrs 24 Classroom Equivalents 17.5 Hrs at existing Utilization 24 Classroom Increase Inventory Equivalents 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents (CRE) 1 10-5-2010
  • Existing Facility:Utilization Enhancements Total Classroom SF: 17,429 SF Change from Existing SF: ‐‐ Full Classrooms (1 CRE): 23 Seminar Rooms (.5 CRE): 5 Enrichment Rooms (1 CRE): 6 Applying modest utilization  enhancements through scheduling to the  Change in CRE @ existing  ‐‐ Town School’s existing facility could yield  utilization rates: 4.5 classroom equivalents (CREs) while a  more aggressive restructuring of the way  Change in CRE @ with 20%  +4.5 CRE classes are scheduled could yield as many  utilization improvement: as 10 CREs. Change in CRE @ with 40%  +10 CRE utilization improvement: Displaced Rooms and Uses: ‐‐Classroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs 34 Classroom equivalents +5.5 CRE 21 Hrs 28.5 Classroom equivalents +4.5 CRE 17.5 Hrs 24 Classroom equivalents 24 Classroom Equivalents 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents 2 10-5-2010
  • Strategy A:  Core Program Interior  Total Classroom SF: 17,984 SF Improvement & Change from Existing SF: +555 SF Right Sizing Full Classrooms (1 CRE): 23 Seminar Rooms (.5 CRE): 4 Enrichment Rooms (1 CRE): 6 Change in CRE @ existing  ‐.5 CRE Strategy A’s classroom and cafeteria  utilization rates: improvements create better quality  spaces, but don’t add to the school’s  Change in CRE @ with 20%  +4.5 CRE inventory of classrooms. Utilization  utilization improvement: enhancements through scheduling,  though, could more than offset the loss of  Change in CRE @ with 40%  +10 CRE one seminar room. utilization improvement: Displaced Rooms and Uses: Ceramics Room, Copy  Room, Computer  Repair, Science Office,  1 Adult ToiletClassroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs 33.5 Classroom equivalents +5.5 CRE 21 Hrs 28 Classroom equivalents +4.5 CRE 17.5 Hrs 23.5 Classroom equivalents 23.5 Classroom Equivalents 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents 3 10-5-2010
  • Strategy B: Sterne School Acquisition Total Classroom SF: 20,849 SF Change from Existing SF: +3,420 SF Full Classrooms (1 CRE): 24 Seminar Rooms (.5 CRE): 10 Enrichment Rooms (1 CRE): 6 Change in CRE @ existing  +3.5 CRE Acquisition of the Sterne School would  utilization rates: add 1 full classroom and 5 seminar rooms  to the Town School inventory. At existing  Change in CRE @ with 20%  +8.5 CRE utilization rates, this would add 3.5 CREs.  utilization improvement: Along with utilization enhancements to  the entire facility, the Town School could  Change in CRE @ with 40%  +15 CRE increase capacity by up to 15 CREs. utilization improvement: Displaced Rooms and Uses: Ceramics Room, Copy  Room, Computer  Repair, Science Office,  1 Adult ToiletClassroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs 39 Classroom equivalents +1 +5.5 CRE CRE 21 Hrs +.5 32.5 Classroom equivalents +4.5 CRE CRE 17.5 Hrs 27.5 Classroom equivalents 24 Classroom +3.5 Equivalents CRE 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents 4 10-5-2010
  • Strategy C: Modest On‐Site Expansion Total Classroom SF: 22,736 SF Change from Existing SF: +5,307 SF Full Classrooms (1 CRE): 27 Seminar Rooms (.5 CRE): 6 Enrichment Rooms (1 CRE): 6 Adding new classrooms through  excavation and construction adjacent to  Change in CRE @ existing  +4.5 CRE the northwestern stair tower could add up  utilization rates: to 4 new full classrooms and 1 new  seminar room to the Town School’s  Change in CRE @ with 20%  +10 CRE classroom inventory. At existing utilization  utilization improvement: rates, this would add 4.5 CREs. With  utilization enhancements to the entire  Change in CRE @ with 40%  +16.5 CRE facility, this project could result in a total  utilization improvement: increase of 16.5 CREs. Displaced Rooms and Uses: Library Reading Room,  PE OfficeClassroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs 40.5 Classroom equivalents +1 +5.5 CRE CRE 21 Hrs +1 34 Classroom equivalents +4.5 CRE CRE 17.5 Hrs 28.5 Classroom equivalents 24 Classroom +4.5 Equivalents CRE 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents 5 10-5-2010
  • Strategy D: Total Classroom SF: 25,220 SF Major On‐Site Rebuild Change from Existing SF: +7,791 SF Full Classrooms (1 CRE): 29 Seminar Rooms (.5 CRE): 5 (+1 conference  room) Enrichment Rooms (1 CRE): 6 A major on‐site rebuild of the Town  Change in CRE @ existing  +6.5 CRE School’s central core could add as many  utilization rates: as 6 new full classrooms as well as one  new conference room that could double  Change in CRE @ with 20%  +12.5 CRE as a seminar room. At existing utilization  utilization improvement: rates this would add 6.5 new CREs. Along  with utilization enhancements to the  Change in CRE @ with 40%  +19.5 CRE entire facility, this project could add as  utilization improvement: many as 19.5 CREs to the Town School’s  capacity. Displaced Rooms and Uses: Entry level office suite  (3 offices, reception,  copy room, nursing),  Library Reading Room,  Boiler Room, Faculty  Lounge, 5 Offices, PE  OfficeClassroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs 43.5 Classroom equivalents +1.5 +5.5 CRE CRE 21 Hrs +1.536.5 Classroom equivalents +4.5 CRE CRE 17.5 Hrs 30.5 Classroom equivalents 24 Classroom +6.5 Equivalents CRE 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents 6 10-5-2010
  • Utilization Findings & OpportunitiesWeekly Room‐Use Hours Average Utilization:  17.5 hrs 10 8-31-2010
  • Utilization Findings & OpportunitiesRoom #20Weekly Utilization 11 8-31-2010
  • Utilization Findings & OpportunitiesUpper School Music RoomWeekly Utilization 12 8-31-2010
  • chapter 3. Planning Options  Comparing Multiple Facility Optimization Strategies  The planning options summarized here considered and compared 3 different strategic approaches to existing facility improvements as well as the possibility of off‐site acquisitions.  The strategies are as follows:      Strategy A ‐  Core Program Interior Improvements & Right‐Sizing   Strategy B – Modest Off‐Site Acquisition  Strategy C – Modest On‐Site Expansion  Strategy D – Major On‐Site Expansion    Strategy A 3D Overview Strategy B 3D Overview Potential Site Potential Space Acquisition Optimization Within Shell ROOF ROOF Potential Space Potential Exterior Space Optimization Within Shell Optimization Sports Field Potential Exterior Space Sports Field Optimization LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 Unexcavated Unexcavated LEVEL 2 LEVEL 2 Unexcavated Unexcavated . Other Residence . ST ST JACK TT JACK SON TT SON O O ST. SC ST. SC LEVEL 1 LEVEL 1 Sterne School        Strategy C 3D Overview Strategy D 3D Overview Potential Expansion Potential Expansion New Beyond Shell Beyond Shell Roof Potential Exterior Space ROOF ROOF Potential Space Expansion Beyond Shell Optimization Within Shell Potential Space Sports Field Potential Exterior Space Sports Field Optimization Within Shell Optimization LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 Unexcavated Unexcavated LEVEL 2 LEVEL 2 Unexcavated Unexcavated . . ST ST JACK SON TT JACK SON TT O O ST. SC ST. SC LEVEL 1 LEVEL 1        The following pages illustrate planning diagrams associated with the various strategies Chapter 2 documents the inventory and utilization analytics associated with each strategy. Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • Strategy ACore Program InteriorImprovement &Right SizingKeep Shell As-Is (no expansion)Optimize Exterior Opportunities 15 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A 3D Overview Potential Space Optimization Within Shell ROOF Potential Exterior Space Optimization Sports Field LEVEL 3 Unexcavated LEVEL 2 Unexcavated S T. JACK SON TT O ST. SC LEVEL 1 16 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 1 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 1 UNEXCAVATEDProjects Included in Scheme A:1 Improve ADA Access to theater and improve circulation efficiencies by removing ramps in cafeteria (ILLUSTRATED) 17 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 2 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 15 UNEXCAVATEDProjects Included in Scheme A:15 Convert Art/Science/Computer Lab Group into Enhanced Science Center (ILLUSTRATED) 18 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 3 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 20 Sports FieldProjects Included in Scheme A:20 Convert Classrooms 301-2 & staff restroom into Enhanced Arts Center (ILLUSTRATED) 19 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Roof Level Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 25 Sports Field Below 24Projects Included in Scheme A:24 Wind-sheltered Outdoor Learning Lab25 Possible outdoor “How Things Work” space 20 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 1 Detail Optimizing Cafeteria / ADA Theater Access FROM PFAU – LONG ARCHITECTURE 21 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 2 Detail Enlarge Science/Relocate Art and Computer Lab Programs KEYNOTES NEW 2225 SF FLEX WET / DRY F A SCIENCE LAB B NEW 707 SF FLEX TECHNOLOGY CLASSROOM C NEW 263 SF TEACHER PREP WORKROOM A D HALLWAY NOOK E STORAGE F LINE OF EXISTING WALLS D C F E FLEX B DISPLACED SPACE COPY / SUPPORT ART ROOM 1310SF ART STORAGE 161SF ART CERAMIC 172 SF 22 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Level 3 Detail Relocate Art Program to Former Classrooms 301/302 KEYNOTES NEW 928 SF ART ROOM A B NEW 458 SF ART SUPPORT & STORAGE A B DISPLACED SPACE CLASSROOM 301 496 SF CLASSROOM 302 610 SF STAFF TOILET 193 SF 23 8-31-2010
  • Strategy A Roof Level Detail Outdoor Learning Lab A KEYNOTES GLASS WINDSCREEN A B GARDEN PLANTERS C NEW WALKABLE ROOF SURFACE C B B B 24 8-31-2010
  • Strategy BModestOff-Site Acquisition1) Acquire Sterne School or2) Acquire Other Adjacent Property 26 8-31-2010
  • Strategy B 3D Overview Potential Site Acquisition ROOF Potential Space Optimization Within Shell Potential Exterior Space Sports Field Optimization LEVEL 3 Unexcavated LEVEL 2 Unexcavated Other Residence S T. JACK SON TT O ST. SC LEVEL 1 Sterne School 27 8-31-2010
  • Strategy B Sterne School CRE Analysis Strategy B: 10,623 Seat-Hours/Week 27.5 CRE @ 17.5 Room Use- Hours/Week +3.5 CRE 28 8-31-2010
  • Strategy CModest On-SiteExpansionReplace and Expand Central Core 30 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C 3D Overview Potential Expansion Beyond Shell Potential Exterior Space ROOF Expansion Beyond Shell Potential Space Sports Field Optimization Within Shell LEVEL 3 Unexcavated LEVEL 2 Unexcavated S T. JACK SON TT O ST. SC LEVEL 1 31 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C Level 1 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 30 UNEXCAVATEDProjects Included in Scheme C:30 New Classroom excavated below sports field (ILLUSTRATED) 32 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C Level 2 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 31 UNEXCAVATEDProjects Included in Scheme C:31 Re-build Stair Tower to capture additional space (ILLUSTRATED) 33 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C Level 3 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY Sports Field 32 39Projects Included in Scheme C:32 Re-Build Stair Tower to capture additional space; includes new enclosed space in location of existing climbing wall alcove (ILLUSTRATED)39 Roof/Field ADA Access – new exterior stair and elevator (ILLUSTRATED) 34 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C Roof Level Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY GYM ROOF Sports Field Below 33a, b 39 ROOFProjects Included in Scheme C:33a Re-build Stair Tower to capture additional flex roof space with windscreen – make area accessible and useable (ILLUSTRATED)33b Re-build Stair Tower to capture additional enclosed classroom space (ILLUSTRATED)39 Roof/Field ADA Access – new exterior stair and elevator (ILLUSTRATED) 35 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C (and Scheme D) Transverse Section 36 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C C Level 1 Detail A KEYNOTES NEW 1866 SF CLASSROOM A B ADA LIFT FOR CLASSROOM ACCESSIBILITY C NEW STAIR TO ATHLETIC FIELD SECTION D STEP-FREE ENTRY D B DISPLACED SPACE ELECTRICAL ROOM IMPACT AREA 2500 SF 37 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C C Level 2 Detail B KEYNOTES NEW 1145 SF CLASSROOM A D B OUTDOOR TERRACE A C NEW STAIR TO ATHLETIC FIELD D OPEN TO CLASSROOM BELOW SECTION E OPTIONAL ACCESS TO CLASSROOM E DISPLACED SPACE SMALL BREAK-OUT ADJACENT TO LIBRARY IMPACT AREA 2500 SF 38 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C F Level 3 Detail Stair Option 1 KEYNOTES A NEW SHOWER / LOCKERS / A EQUIPMENT ROOM B NEW PE STAFF ROOM C NEW 781 SF CLASSROOM D NEW STAIR TO FIELD / ROOF SECTION E NEW ADA LIFT TO FIELD B F NEW STAIR C DISPLACED SPACE D E HVAC 55 SF STORAGE 69 SF IMPACT AREA 3150 SF 39 8-31-2010
  • Strategy C Roof Level Detail Stair Option 1 KEYNOTES C NEW SEMI-ENCLOSED LEARNING B A LAB NEW GLASS WIND ENCLOSURE B C EXTENT OF ROOF SECTION D NEW STAIR TO FIELD / ROOF A E NEW ELEVATOR STOP AT ROOF C D E 40 8-31-2010
  • Strategy DMajor On-Site RebuildRemove, rebuild, and expand Central Zone of building(additional options include West Wing Replacement, North WingReplacement and Expanded Façade Zone) 42 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D 3D Overview Potential Expansion New Beyond Shell Roof ROOF Potential Space Optimization Within Shell Potential Exterior Space Sports Field Optimization LEVEL 3 Unexcavated LEVEL 2 Unexcavated S T. JACK SON TT O ST. SC LEVEL 1 43 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D Level 1 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION MR5 New GREENER Classroom & support IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY space MR1 UNEXCAVATED MR2 MR3 MR4 Full Replacement of west wing MR1 MR2 MR2 MR3 MR3 MR1 Full Tower Replacement. New Classroom / support. Program space MR5 Full North Wing Replacement – build out to property lines excavated below sports field and replaced stair tower (ILLUSTRATED) – impacts roof and shop area MR2 Expand / Rebuild portions of façade to capture additional space to property line MR3 Expand / Rebuild full façade to capture additional space to property line MR4 Full Replacement of west wing – requires removal and rebuild of roof-top athletic field 44 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D Level 2 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION MR5 GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY UNEXCAVATED MR1 MR2 MR3 MR4 Full Replacement of west wing MR1 MR2 MR2 MR3 MR3 MR1 Full Tower Replacement. New Classroom / support. Program space MR5 Full North Wing Replacement – build out to property lines excavated below sports field and replaced stair tower (ILLUSTRATED) – impacts roof and shop area MR2 Expand / Rebuild portions of façade to capture additional space to property line MR3 Expand / Rebuild full façade to capture additional space to property line MR4 Full Replacement of west wing – requires removal and rebuild of roof-top athletic field 45 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D Level 3 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION MR5 GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY MR1 MR2 MR3 Sports Field MR4 Full Replacement of west wing MR1 MR2 MR2 MR3 MR3 MR1 Full Tower Replacement. New Classroom / support. Program space MR5 Full North Wing Replacement – build out to property lines excavated below sports field and replaced stair tower (ILLUSTRATED) – impacts roof and shop area MR2 Expand / Rebuild portions of façade to capture additional space to property line MR3 Expand / Rebuild full façade to capture additional space to property line MR4 Full Replacement of west wing – requires removal and rebuild of roof-top athletic field 46 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D Roof Level Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION MR5 GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY MR1 MR2 GYM ROOF MR3 Sports Field Below ROOF MR2 MR3 MR1 Full Tower Replacement. New Classroom / support. Program space excavated below sports field and replaced stair tower (ILLUSTRATED) MR2 Expand / Rebuild portions of façade to capture additional space to property line MR3 Expand / Rebuild full façade to capture additional space to property line MR5 Full North Wing Replacement – build out to property lines – impacts roof and shop area 47 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 1 Level 1 Detail A KEYNOTES NEW 1723 SF CLASSROOM A B NEW ELEVATOR & STAIRS C NEW EXIT STAIR SECTION D NEW LOBBY / GALLERY E NEW BOYS RESTROOM F NEW ADULT RESTROOMS G NEW PRE-FUNCTION AREA F H E H STEP DOWN INTO THEATER G F I RECEPTION J HIGH CEILING (15’) ZONE C B DISPLACED SPACE ADMINISTRATION SUITE 1040 SF DEVELOPMENT OFFICE ACCESS D I J 48 8-31-2010
  • JStrategy D, Option 1 Level 2 Detail I KEYNOTES NEW 1237 SF CLASSROOM A D A B NEW ELEVATOR & STAIRS C NEW EXIT STAIR SECTION D OPEN TO CLASSROOM BELOW E NEW BOYS RESTROOM F NEW 1529 SF CLASSROOM I NEW OUTDOOR TERRACE E J STAIR TO ATHLETIC FIELD C B DISPLACED SPACE FACULTY LOUNGE 316 SF OFFICES (3) 556 SF TELEPHONE ROOM 18 SF LIBRARY STORAGE 184 SF F BOILER RM 260 SF ADULT TOILET 30 SF 49 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 1 G Level 3 Detail A KEYNOTES NEW SHOWER / LOCKERS / A EQUIPMENT ROOM B NEW PE STAFF ROOM C NEW EXIT STAIR SECTION D NEW ELEVATOR / STAIR PROVIDES ADA ACCESS TO FIELD / ROOF E EQUIPMENT STORAGE B F NEW 1529 SF CLASSROOM G NEW STAIR TO LOWER PATIO C D E DISPLACED SPACE OFFICES (2) 300 SF CLOSET 30 SF HVAC 55 SF F 50 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 1 Roof Level Detail Outdoor Learning Lab Option KEYNOTES NEW SEMI-ENCLOSED LEARNING A LAB B NEW STAIR TO ROOF A NEW ELEVATOR TO ROOF C SECTION NEW GLASS WIND ENCLOSURE D D B C 51 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 1 Roof Level Detail Enclosed Classroom Option B KEYNOTES NEW 999 SF CLASSROOM A NEW GLASS WIND ENCLOSURE B C NEW STAIR TO ROOF SECTION A D NEW ELEVATOR TO ROOF E NEW 978 SF CLASSROOM C D E 52 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 2 Level 1 Detail A KEYNOTES NEW 1913 SF CLASSROOM A WITH STORAGE B NEW ELEVATOR & STAIRS C NEW CODE COMPLIANT STAIR SECTION D NEW LOBBY / GALLERY E NEW EXPANDED BOYS RESTROOM F NEW ADULT RESTROOMS H G NEW PRE-FUNCTION AREA F G H STEP DOWN INTO THEATER I RECEPTION E J HIGH CEILING (15’) ZONE B DISPLACED SPACE ADMINISTRATION SUITE 1040 SF MAY IMPACT DEVELOPMENT OFFICE C I D J 53 8-31-2010
  • JStrategy D, Option 2 Level 2 Detail I KEYNOTES NEW 1630 SF CLASSROOM A D A B NEW ELEVATOR & STAIRS C NEW CODE COMPLIANT STAIR SECTION D OPEN TO CLASSROOM BELOW E NEW EXPANDED BOYS RESTROOM F NEW 1105 SF CLASSROOM I NEW OUTDOOR TERRACE J STAIR TO ATHLETIC FIELD E B DISPLACED SPACE FACULTY LOUNGE 316 SF OFFICES (3) 556 SF C TELEPHONE ROOM 18 SF LIBRARY STORAGE 184 SF BOILER RM 260 SF F ADULT TOILET 30 SF 54 8-31-2010
  • Strategy D, Option 2 G Level 3 Detail Without Hallway Access A KEYNOTES NEW SHOWER / LOCKERS / A EQUIPMENT ROOM B NEW PE STAFF ROOM C NEW 356 SF CONF. / SEMINAR ROOM SECTION D NEW ELEVATOR / STAIR PROVIDES ADA ACCESS TO FIELD / ROOF E EQUIPMENT STORAGE B F NEW 1082 SF CLASSROOM G NEW STAIR TO LOWER PATIO C E D DISPLACED SPACE OFFICES (2) 300 SF CLOSET 30 SF HVAC 55 SF F 55 8-31-2010
  • Supporting ProjectsA La Carte Improvements 57 8-31-2010
  • A La Carte Improvements Level 1 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION 4 GREENER 11 IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 2 3 UNEXCAVATED 6 17 5 9101 Improve ADA Access, Decrease circulation inefficiencies 4 Patio as teaching space – food, nutrition, science sustainability etc. Composting, rainwater harvesting, recycling etc.2 Cafeteria as “Lab”- teaching set-up, Improve overall 5 Lobby – can it be more effective? functionality, intimacy & utilization. Flexibility. Program 6 Hallway – verify egress path needed – possible space capture Support. Enhance Kitchen & Servery. Connection to Patio. 7 Break-out space or informal learning opportunity3 Auditorium: Increase Overall Utilization, Technology enhancements 9 10 11 Stairwell can be programmed as Informal learning opportunity 58 8-31-2010
  • A La Carte Improvements Level 2 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION 34 35 GREENER 11 IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 14 16 14 37 UNEXCAVATED8 16 18 17 10 98 Break-out space or informal learning opportunity 17 Faculty Lounge – enhanced collaboration tools9 10 11 Stairwell can be programmed as Informal learning 18 Minimize classroom real estate by minimizing space hogs if possible opportunity14 Library functions well now - Consider scheduling tools to 34 New exterior deck with exit breezeway below support additional unstructured / downtime activities 35 New enclosed seminar room16 Enable hallways to better support collaboration, break-out 37 New excavated classroom with light from side yard space, down time, informal learning etc. 59 8-31-2010
  • A La Carte Improvements Level 3 Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION 36 GREENER 11 IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 19 22 38 16 21.2 21.1 9 99 11 Stairwell can be programmed as Informal learning opportunity 21.1 Consolidate 4 rooms into 1 large room16 Enable hallways to better support collaboration, break-out 21.2 Consolidate 4 rooms into 2 rooms space, down time, informal learning etc. 22 Climbing wall alcove can be programmed to support down/time19 Gym modifications: Possible support for other down/time non-sport activities. non-sport activities. Provide for room darkening, 36 New enclosed seminar room or roof deck technology enhancements, presentation capabilities etc. 38 New infill classroom at climbing wall area 60 8-31-2010
  • A La Carte Improvements Roof Level Overview INCREASED SPACE BETTER SPACE / PROGRAMS BETTER UTILIZATION GREENER IMPROVED IMAGE / IDENTITY 26 23 GYM ROOF Playfield Below 23 27 27 27 29 9 ROOF 28 28 28 26 Explore possibility of utilizing this rooftop for program (s)9 Utilize wall surface for learning opportunities / teaching moments 27 Demonstration Solar Panel & Dashboard, Rainwater23 Wind Sheltered Roof Garden / Unstructured Play collection etc. 28 Possible Phenomena based learning areas (light, sound, weather etc.) or “downtime” alcoves 29 Opportunity to reveal building systems (elevator) / extend elevator to roof for ADA access 61 8-31-2010
  • 5. Summary• Additional classroom capacity exists within the existing footprint• Small scheduling changes can have a big impact• Integrating use changes and physical changes yield the highest impact 62 8-31-2010
  • Strategy Comparison 40 Hrs 43 RE E E CR CR te : 4 0 R E D: 5 C .5 .5 C 9C . 33 gy 3 A: te : ra y B gy gy g te te ra ra ra St St St StClassroom Utilization: Room-Use Hours/Week 25 Hrs +5.5 CRE 21 Hrs +4.5 CRE 17.5 Hrs 24 Classroom Equivalents 0 Hrs 0 10 20 30 40 Inventory: Classroom Equivalents (CRE) 63 8-31-2010
  • Facilities Strategy Matrix All Opportunity Areas Projects Included < $2M each $2 - $5M $5 - $10M $10-20M in Strategy:Strategy A:Core Program InteriorImprovements & Right Sizing 1 15 20 XKeep Shell As-Is (no expansion)Optimize Exterior OpportunitiesStrategy B:Modest Off-Site Expansion1) Acquire Sterne School or OS. 1 2 3 4 X2) Acquire Other ResidenceStrategy C: X 30 31 32 33 39Modest On-Site Expansion8K SF IMPACT AREA – NET GAIN: 3245 SFReplace and Expand Central CoreStrategy D: MR. 1 XMajor On-Site Rebuild 2 3 4 520K SF IMPACT AREA – NET GAIN:5500-7500 SFRemove, rebuild, & expand CentralEntry & Stair Tower ZoneA La Carte Improvements 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 X 28 29 34 35 36 37 38 14 8-31-2010
  • Facilities Strategy Matrix Comprehensive Project List Strategy A Strategy B Strategy C Strategy D A La Carte 65 8-31-2010
  • Appendix 1    Goal Setting & Needs Analysis   Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • May 28, 2010  TOWN SCHOOL FOR BOYS  FACULTY & STAFF WORKSHOPS  Initial Findings / Emerging Themes:  a rough summary of some key discussion points in the faculty & staff workshops  RAW SPACE   • Creating or acquiring new space will always be more expensive than other solutions  • “Found” space is low hanging fruit  • Outside space can be better utilized to support programs, downtime, alternative  learning and unstructured play  • Building can become a Teacher   COLLABORATION   • Teachers want to collaborate – think beyond the Faculty Lounge – teacher  “pods” by grade or curriculum could provide space they ‘own’ outside of the  classroom  • Adjacency is key to collaboration  THINKING COMMUNALLY ABOUT SPACE   • Universal Classroom concept may be worth considering for certain grades if  issues can be addressed  • Roaming teacher model works if everyone is roaming.  It doesn’t work if a teacher is  ‘occupying’ another teacher’s space  • Would have to re‐think how classrooms deal with long‐term student projects, set‐up / tear‐ down.  • Prototyping change should be considered  WELLNESS / HUMAN PERFORMANCE  • Understanding brain function & attention needs is important  • Providing social & emotional support, especially for the outlier kid is important  • Unstructured downtime and unstructured play are important  • Food & Nutrition is important  Town School for Boys – Summer 2011 Modernization Project  Page 1 of 14
  •  SCHEDULE  • Optimizing existing space to support expanded programs will rely on re‐thinking how  scheduling can free up space and utilize space effectively.  • Current schedule is a choice – we can change it if there is a will  • Consider 6 day rotating schedule  • Consider expanding double periods for certain classes and grades  • Look at schedule blocks as a 4th dimension to space  • Data driven scheduling analysis is worth looking into  TECHNOLOGY  • Technologies can expand learning beyond the classroom  • Effective scheduling tools – “air traffic control system” can allow Opportunity  Spaces to achieve greater utilization  • Get everyone iPads…  Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 2 of 14
  • Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 3 of 14
  •  5/12/2010 FACULTY & STAFF WORKSHOPS  ‐ notes from sessions Forum 1:  The Sciences  What are the experiential opportunities that you would like to see enhanced?  • Connect threads of all sciences through lens of outdoors  • Outside Access – outdoor classroom  • Exploration opportunities – nature / biology based, weather, phenomena  • Messy area  • Garden  What about physical environment needs?  • Co‐location would be good – now math and science are brought to lower school  classrooms  • Need teacher & student workspace  • Ongoing project exploration has set‐up, tear down, project display space needs  • Set up / tear down eats into critical teaching time  • Create spaces that enable exploration – perhaps a woodshop‐like space, a tinkering lab  – these would require supervision  • Cafeteria is not ideal for space teaching – not intimate, poor acoustics (noisy), not  intimate for small groups, scheduling conflicts etc.  Would a better scheduling tool help take advantage of available spaces in the school?  • Yes – it would need to be easy to use and widely accessible  Is there an opportunity to enhance inquiry between classes?  What locations if any?  • 4th & up would be best  • Playfield   • Cafeteria too scheduled, not friendly  What opportunities do you see to enhance collaboration?  Where might this happen?  • Interaction happens in the hallways – spontaneous encounters – both teachers and  students  • Adjacency is key to teacher collaboration – Grade to grade, adjacent grades (ie: 2 & 3),  teacher to teacher by curriculum.  • Dedicated Upper School, Lower School collaborative teachers environment would be  good if possible  What interdisciplinary teacher interaction would you like to see if any?  • Science & Math  ‐ tried it with mixed success, Math Science Olympiad was successful  • Science & Humanities, Science & Art have interesting connections Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 4 of 14
  • What specific needs do the sciences need as it relates to physical space?  • Sinks, storage, clean‐up space, a dishwasher would be nice, technology enhancements  (smart boards etc.)  What about alternative learning space opportunities?  • Hallways are there but can be disruptive – ok for break out or brief one‐on‐one  • Library – small breakout room is great, but needs scheduling tool “Air Traffic Control” –  something like this could be used to make other spaces more useful too  • Building as a Teacher – Cal Academy experience, exposed building pluming, systems,  solar dashboard, scavenger hunt  • Roof & Patio – climatic issues   • Corner of the sports field  Centralized v. Decentralized Space: If you had to choose between the classroom as a larger fixed  teaching space, and the classroom as a smaller home‐base with access to a series of satellite  spaces which would you prefer?  • Depends on the age group – for lower school, probably the larger classroom.  For older  age groups the satellite idea is interesting.  Time v. Space: If you had to choose between more space in the classroom, and more time in a  classroom which would you prefer?  • Split vote – seemed to be a correlation again between offering more time (double  periods) to teach upper school classes, while for lower school might not benefit from  additional time.   Forum 2:  Wellness, Food & Nutrition     What are some key food / nutrition program elements currently in place?  • Food / nutrition programs does come to classrooms  • Portable cooking / learning demonstrations  • Patio supports outdoor planting & herb garden  • Composting / worm bins  • Roof top garden envisioned next  What are some of the key food / nutrition learning connections that important?  • Science, Math, History, Phys. Ed.  What are key elements of wellness at TSB?  • Physical activity is critical  • Social & Emotional Needs must be met.   Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 5 of 14
  • What is being done to enhance social & emotional support?    • Teaching Life Skills  • Providing unstructured down time   • Small group break‐outs  • Mentoring / buddy system   What specific space needs or opportunities would you suggest to improve food / nutrition /  wellness offerings?  • Morning gym is open to boys above 2nd grade.  Would be good if gym could offer /  provide more than basketball for those who prefer different activity or less active  experience  • More space for unstructured down time – small space in library is good, but often not  available – maybe bean bag chairs in hallway nooks  • More space for unstructured play  • Small group break‐outs, meeting space  • Space to support parent / family meetings – current space limitations / configuration  may inhibit expanded family activities  • The roof is a good opportunity – “the cage” area needs a new surface to make it usable  and some wind protection  • Lower school cooking classes  • Cafeteria as a Teaching Lab – would need a technology set up, maybe live feed to other  programs (edible school yard) – a center for Eco‐Literacy – include families  • Flexible dividers in Cafeteria might make this space more usable / friendly  How does schedule play a role?  Any suggestions for schedule improvements?  • Lunch before recess will be enacted to create a more responsive classroom   • More time for eating – could be created by having more efficient dining / serving flow  • Would it be possible to work a second snack into the schedule?  Basket to room or a  separate area for students to pick up snack – staffing & operational issues would need  to be dealt with. Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 6 of 14
  • Forum 3:  Environment as a Teaching Tool      This session was conducted as a walking tour through the building looking at opportunities to  support learning at TSB.  Diagrams with notes follow:    Town School for Boys – Summer 2011 Modernization Project  Page 7 of 14
  •  Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 8 of 14
  •  Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 9 of 14
  • Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 10 of 14
  •  5/26/2010 FACULTY & STAFF WORKSHOPS Forum 4:  The Arts   What opportunities do you see to enhance collaboration?  Where might this happen?  • Faculty lounge is currently key to staff interaction  • Faculty need balance of public and private space  Do you see opportunities to share space & collaborate?  Where might this happen?  • Sharing classroom has proven difficult (Art) and disruptive.  Storage, material  management, set‐up, tear‐down & transition time is problematic.  • Sharing auditorium space concurrently (Drama / Theater) doesn’t work  ‐ too disruptive  • Computer Lab – currently shares ‐ provides swing space for small classroom break‐outs.    Could you envision “nook” somewhere in the facility where art could be explored informally,  perhaps a downtime activity?  • Not in the Art Room per se – would need supervision & would be messy.  Could there be a better merging of Theater set‐building activities with other disciplines?  • Yes, a stronger link with Art and English programs would be a positive.  What about alternative learning space opportunities?  • What if the theater seats were replaced with carpeted benches that could support more  flexible teaching arrangements or other types of use?  • Indoor / outdoor areas for tinkering & project based learning (industrial arts, science at  recess) would need staff supervision  • Informal “noodling “  How does space play a role?  Any suggestions for space improvements?  • A deck off the art / science rooms   • Break‐out space – think about where someone could go to play the piano or draw.  • The gym is used for all‐hands meetings but it isn’t ideal.  Better A/V, acoustics, lighting,  room‐darkening capabilities are needed.  • The Roof  • ‘Roaming” space opportunities on site (roof, patio) or off‐site (Alta Vista Park) – would  need to be set up to accommodate  How does technology play a role?  Any suggestions for technology improvements?  • Informal noodling – technology can help make this happen.  • Can be a way to share unique student talents through visual displays etc. beyond the  ‘talent show’ Town School for Boys – Summer 2011 Modernization Project  Page 11 of 14
  • • Can help with room scheduling – What if teachers & kids all had iPhones or iPads with a  scheduling app?   • iPads could replace 80lbs of books the kids have to carry and store  • Technology has promise for extending limited classroom space and program offerings –  live feed, in‐reach, out‐reach, distance learning etc.  • Technology pods are a compelling idea, but being ‘wired’ limits their flexibility  • Laptop lab works, but currently requires considerable set‐up / trouble shooting time.   Currently software licensure means laptops don’t have key software programs loaded.   Fixed set up does have benefits in terms of loaded software, no wireless network issues,  maintenance etc.    How does scheduling play a role?  Any suggestions for scheduling improvements?  • Double period – Art starts at grade 3, for other classes it starts at grade 7 – maybe there  are opportunities to expand this if overall scheduling can accommodate  • Art & Music collaborate on some projects – would like to do more but scheduling is an  issue.    • A 6 day rotating schedule may be worth considering.  More double periods could be  offered.  • What if TSB tried to regularize field trips and other out‐of‐school days by grade to  specific (repeating) days, permitting those classrooms to be available for other uses  during that time.  Is there a place for the Universal Classroom at TSB where teachers don’t own their classrooms  but have dedicated collaborative work areas that they do own?    • Roaming teacher model works if everyone is roaming.  It doesn’t work if a teacher is  ‘occupying’ another teacher’s space  • Better for upper grades – for lower grades it’s difficult to move kids around building  efficiently.  Group management inefficiencies   • Would have to re‐think how classrooms deal with long‐term student projects, set‐up /  tear‐down.  • It’s would require a culture shift   How would you suggest we begin to think more communally regarding space?    • Have to make it easier to be fluid in the space we’re in.  • “The way I see it, it’s less expensive to make a mental shift than expand the facility”  • Prototype change rather than changing for change’s sake  • Never lose sight that facilities need to promote excellent teaching  • Minimize set‐up / break down time Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 12 of 14
  • • Look at schedule blocks as a 4th dimension to space  • Data driven scheduling analysis is worth looking into   Forum 5:  Integration & Prioritization   Scheduling  • Need to know where space is available.  Lower school v. upper school schedules.  • Need to look at schedule by 15 min. increments  • Difficult to anticipate disruptions to calendar (assembly, class trips, productions etc.)  • Lower school teachers have ability to manipulate classroom time   • Spanish:  Would love longer periods – set up / take down takes time  • Double periods might provide flexibility to get more done in the classroom – particularly  at grades 7&8  • Current schedule is a choice – we can change it if there is a will  • Change the way we think about things  • Consider a 6 day schedule  Technology  • iPad as platform idea (Econ, Hist.)  • Interactive boards – could be transmitted to grade book  Operations  • Central supply for basic consumables – paper, supplies etc. rather than duplicative  storage in classrooms.  Should ease administrative time to re‐supply (did exist)  Universal Classroom  • Need to understand the issues from user’s perspective – teacher’s need to haul around  materials, need space to talk to students  • Would have to re‐think how classrooms deal with long‐term student projects, set‐up /  tear‐down. – better for upper school grades  • Storage is challenging  • Time between transitions can cut into productive teaching time.  Prep is essential and  takes time  • Creating a collaborative group office for teachers would have advantages, and would be  a good place to talk with parents / students.  • Is a teacher’s desk needed?  Not if teacher’s office has desk they own and if classroom  has set up for teacher to prepare materials, laptop presentations  • Set up a balance Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 13 of 14
  • Space  • More space in Classroom or Better Common Spaces? Lower School response:   Classroom.  Upper School response:  More comfortable with the idea of universality  • Spanish:  12 in class makes a huge difference  • Lower school classroom divided into ‘zones’  • More / new space will always be more expensive than other solutions          Town School for Boys –  Faculty Workshops  Page 14 of 14
  • Appendix 2    Inventory and Utilization Analytics    Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • Appendix: Weekly Room-Use Hours To identify opportunities to improve the capacity of the Town School through scheduling and spatial  enhancements, MKThink assessed rooms at both the entire‐school scale and at the individual room scale.  The chart below shows the weekly room‐use hours (WRH) of each classroom at the Town School. The school‐ wide average WRH is 17.5.Weekly Room‐Use Hours 1 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Weekly Room-Use HoursWeekly Room‐Use HoursWeekly Room‐Use Hours Rooms in Lowest Quartile of Utilization Rooms in Mid‐Low Quartile of Utilization Rooms in Mid‐High Quartile of Utilization Rooms in Highest Quartile of Utilization 2 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Weekly Room-Use Hours Third FloorOverlaid on the school’s floor plan, color‐coded utilization patterns reveal areas to target for utilization improvement. Second Floor Ground Floor Rooms in Lowest Quartile of Utilization  Rooms in Mid‐Low Quartile of Utilization Rooms in Highest Quartile of Utilization Rooms in Mid‐High Quartile of Utilization 3 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Room UtilizationRoom‐scale assessments of utilization were generated by calculating the hourly use for each room in the school. Examined on a room‐by‐room basis or aggregated by room type and/or grade level, this fine‐grained assessment methodology revealed times of day when rooms of different kinds were available and how compatible uses might be consolidated into fewer spaces.The overall room utilization graphic below shows how lunch impacts the utilization of classrooms every day and the impact on Monday of the school’s assembly. The utilization drop at the end of the day is a function of classes terminating before the end of the hour and does not represent an opportunity for a utilization enhancement. Overall Room Utilization 4 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Room Utilization Average Upper School Room Utilization Aggregated Upper School Utilization patterns  show significant daily variation in the mornings  and more standard utilization patterns in the  afternoon. The Town School’s science lab is the most highly  utilized room in the building, and its utilization  curves show the room being almost fully utilized  every day. By comparison, room 20, which is used for 16  hours a week (just below the average Town  School room’s WRH) shows extended periods of  disuse in the middle of the day four days a  week. Science Lab Utilization Room 20 Utilization 5 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Room Utilization Average Lower School Room Utilization Aggregated Lower School Utilization patterns  show fairly standard utilization patterns  throughout the week. Typical of lower school classrooms, room 23 is  used 18 hours/week, approximately the average  WRH for Town School rooms. Its utilization  patterns show high utilization in the morning  and afternoon with a daily drop during lunch. Room 23 Utilization 6 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: Room UtilizationEnrichment and specialty rooms at Town School have great variation in their utilization patterns. While the science lab is Town School’s most highly utilized room, other enrichment rooms like the music rooms are among the least utilized. Examples below illustrate the variability. Average Enrichment/Specialty Room Utilization Gym Utilization Upper School Music Room Utilization Cafeteria Utilization 7 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: OccupancyThe area per student at the Town School is reflective of the campus’ dense urban site. Classrooms in the western wing of the second floor are among the most crowded, in the school, as are rooms 301 and 302 on the third floor. 8 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: SchedulingMKThink assessed the Town School’s schedule on an annual and daily basis. On the annual level, MKThink found that while only 12 our of 171 school days had irregular schedules, 21 out of 37 weeks had irregular schedules. Thus, assuming that a regularly scheduled week is the norm is incorrect. Moreover, these irregular weeks did not evenly affect all classes: classes on Monday, Tuesday, and especially Friday are disproportionately disrupted. 9 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: SchedulingOn a daily level, MKThink evaluated the impact of set‐up and break‐down times on teaching time. Assuming 5‐minute set‐up and break‐down times for each class, more than 25% of the day is spent in set‐up/break‐down. Assuming 10‐minutes of set‐up/break‐down time, nearly 50% of the day is spent in set‐up/break‐down.MKThink also evaluated the impact of switching the upper school to a double period or hybrid schedule – the impacts on teaching times are below. 10 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: FacultyMKThink assessed weekly teaching hours for each teaching in the same way that weekly room‐use hours were calculated. The results are below. 11 10-5-2010
  • Appendix: FacultyAn alternate version of weekly teaching hours, each color represents a different classroom that a teacher teaches in. 12 10-5-2010
  • Appendix 3    Facility Planning  Town School for Boys – Facility Master Plan  
  • Construction Sequence: Level 1 Plan 1971 1965 Pre‐1958 1958Legend: Date of Construction Pre-1958 1958 1965 1971
  • Construction Sequence: Level 2 Plan 1965 1971 Pre‐1958 1958Legend: Date of Construction Pre-1958 1958 1965 1971
  • Construction Sequence: Level 3 Plan 1971Legend: Date of Construction Pre-1958 1958 1965 1971
  • SF Zoning Map: Use Districts 1 9-10-2010
  • SF Zoning Map: Height & Bulk Districts 2 9-10-2010
  • 2750 Jackson Street3 9-10-2010
  • 2750 Jackson Street4 9-10-2010
  • SF Zoning: Height & Bulk DistrictsTable 124 – Basic Floor Area RatioRH-2 1.8:1Sec. 125 – Floor Area PremiumsCorner Lot – Increase Lot size by 25% for FAR calculationCorner Lots and Lots at Alley Intersections. On acorner lot as defined by this Code, or on a lot at theintersection of a street and an alley of at least 25 feetin width, the required rear yard may be substitutedwith an open area equal to 25 percent of the lot areawhich is located at the same levels as the requiredrear yard in an interior corner of the lot, an openarea between two or more buildings on the lot, or aninner court, as defined by this Code, provided thatthe Zoning Administrator determines that all of thecriteria described below in this Paragraph are met.(A)Each horizontal dimension of the open area shall bea minimum of 15 feet.(B)The open area shall be wholly or partially contiguousto the existing midblock open space formed by therear yards of adjacent properties.(C)The open area will provide for the access to light andair to and views from adjacent properties.(D)The proposed new or expanding structure willprovide for access to light and air from any existingor new residential uses on the subject property. 5 9-10-2010
  • SF Zoning: Section 134 Rear Yard RequirementsCorner Lots and Lots at Alley Intersections. On acorner lot as defined by this Code, or on a lot at theintersection of a street and an alley of at least 25 feetin width, the required rear yard may be substitutedwith an open area equal to 25 percent of the lot areawhich is located at the same levels as the requiredrear yard in an interior corner of the lot, an openarea between two or more buildings on the lot, or aninner court, as defined by this Code, provided thatthe Zoning Administrator determines that all of thecriteria described below in this Paragraph are met.(A)Each horizontal dimension of the open area shall bea minimum of 15 feet.(B)The open area shall be wholly or partially contiguousto the existing midblock open space formed by therear yards of adjacent properties.(C)The open area will provide for the access to light andair to and views from adjacent properties.(D)The proposed new or expanding structure willprovide for access to light and air from any existingor new residential uses on the subject property. 6 9-10-2010