HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-09-CMBPC-rpt.pdf Contract No. 13-06: FINAL REPORT (For Review & Comment)
Isaac Harris Cary Memorial Building Renovation
1605 Massachusetts Avenue
Lexington, Massachusetts
•
•
P AA
ll
.1111IS +ffi ,-4SV M ?.yo- btu+ nc W Y '-etew'V t v;
.s -+�`.aa o.r+ .ter. � � 4... r ��` 5g
tr-
1111114
o- 411P4-44111
3f 3
44.1
I/lA�iiip i N
- 1 I ;/i' t
Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
PO Box 750089
Arlington MA 02474
9January 2013
CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING RENOVATION
Review Copy of Final Report/9 January 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
1 Cary Memorial Building
1 Committee Charge
1 Committee Members & Participants
2 Schedule
2 RENOVATION STUDY PROCESS
2 Evaluate Recommendations of Prior Study
3 Further Review of Selected Project Components
3 Reviewed Current& Future Uses of the Building
4 Prepared Acoustical Model of Battin Hall
4 Prepared Programmatic Requirements for Audiovisual Improvements
4 Modifications of Proposed Plans
5 Prepared Animations& Illustrations of Battin Hall
6 Proposed Plans, Outline Specifications & Project Budget
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDICES
A. Drawings—Existing&Proposed
B: Scope Prioritization Survey
C. Consultant Documentation
D: Recommended Improvements
E: Preliminary Budget Estimate
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Ad hoc Cary Memorial Building Program Committee (AhCMBPC), established by the Board of
Selectmen in May 2012, was charged with reviewing the June 2011 CMB Evaluation Report to
determine appropriate improvements for public benefit and to make recommendations to the
Board of Selectmen. The Committee selected a Designer and commenced work in July 2012,
meeting on a monthly basis through January 2013. The Committee recommends an integrated
approach to improvements that will address upgrades to life safety (including accessibility),
building systems and facility usability. The project cost of this integrated approach, assuming
timely continuation of the outlined process, is approximately$8.5 million.
INTRODUCTION
Cary Memorial Building
The Isaac Harris Cary Memorial Building was constructed in 1927-1928 as a memorial gift from his
daughters, Eliza Cary Farnham and Susanna E. Cary The intended use of the facility, as outlined in
the daughters' wills, was to promote the Town's educational and community life. The building has
served the citizens of Lexington continuously since its dedication, hosting events such as public
meetings, exhibits, performances and numerous other activities that meet the original intentions of
the memorial gift. The history of the building has been documented in various sources and was
summarized in the prior study s report.
Committee Charge
An evaluation of the Cary Memorial Building was performed in 2010-2011 to assess its current
conditions and recommend appropriate improvements for its continued service to the Town. A
report by Mills Whitaker Architects, the selected Designer that worked on the building evaluation,
was published in June 2011. The report described the building's interior and exterior conditions
and recommended work that included upgrading aging systems, making code improvements and
enhancing the functionality of the facility. The study was well received and this subsequent study
was commissioned by the Board of Selectmen in order to review the public merits of the proposed
work scope. Adopted on May 21, 2012, the Ad hoc Cary Memorial Building Program Committee's
charge was as follows:
"To evaluate the recommendations of the Cary Memorial Building Evaluation,
completed lune 1,2011, and make recommendation to the Board of Selectmen
on the appropriate scope of work.
The scope of the Committees work included reviewing the prior study report, seeking public input
into the recommended prioritized scope, enhancing the schematic design and updating the costs.
Committee Members & Participants
The Committee was established with five members representing the following groups:
Center Committee Member. Fred Johnson, Chair
• Cary Lecture Series Member Nancy Shepard,Vice Chair
• Historical Commission Member. Wendell C. Kalsow
• School Committee Member Bonnie E. Brodner
• Selectmen: Hank Manz
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 1
In addition to the five members,the following liaisons and staff members also participated:
Capital Expenditure Committee: William Hurley
Permanent Building Committee: Gary Lerner
Appropriations Committee: Richard L. Neumeier
• Communications Advisory Committee: Linda Roemer
Director of Public Facilities: Patrick Goddard
• Town Manager's Office: Michelle Stevens
Mills Whitaker Architects LLC was selected as the Designer for the renovation study through the
M.G.L. Chapter 7 process and assembled the following team:
Mills Whitaker Architects LLC. Donald W Mills, RA, LEED AP
Structures North Consulting Engineers: John Wathne, PE(Structural)
Forte Engineering: Steve Forte, PE(Mechanical)
The Green Engineer: Chris Schaffner PE, LEED AP (Energy Advisor)
Johnson Engineering&Design: Eric Johnson, PE (Electrical)
Available Light: Derek Barnwell, Lighting Designer
Acentech: Ben Markam, Project Manager(Acoustics &AV)
B. N. Productions: Anna Barbieri,Theatrical Systems Consultant
Born Illustration: Michael Born (Renderings &Animations)
Daedalus Projects: Delwyn Williamson, Cost Estimating Consultant
Schedule
The Committee assembled for their first meeting on July 18, 2012, and then met at least monthly
up through January 7 2013, for a total of eight meetings. The Committee's meetings were public
and interested parties from the Town, such as Town Meeting Members and others, frequently
attended and participated in the discussions. In addition to the regular monthly meetings of the
full Committee, other meetings were held with the Architect and Consultants to develop program
criteria and prepare pertinent information. These other meetings included a programming review
and facility tour with interested parties, to prepare a range of potential audiovisual improvement
recommendations. Also, review of an 'auralization' of Battin Hall, a computer simulation of
acoustical improvements,was held at Acentech's offices in Cambridge for all who could attend. In
early December 2012, the Committee Chair presented renovation recommendations in a report to
the Community Preservation Committee. Upon completion of the Renovation Study, a public
presentation was made to the Board of Selectmen on January 14, 2013.
RENOVATION STUDY PROCESS
Evaluate Recommendations of Prior Study
The Renovation Study commenced with a review and evaluation of the prior Cary Memorial
Building Evaluation Study. The work scope and recommended improvements from the June 2011
study were reviewed in detail by the Committee, initially as a group and subsequently by each
member and liaison on an individual basis, culminating in a survey ranking each item on a scale of 1
(no benefit)to 10(substantial benefit)to prioritize the public benefit of each work scope item. The
survey indicated that, with few exceptions, the prior study recommended work that was beneficial
to the public in terms of the type and scope of improvements. The improvements, a total of 102
items, received an average ranking of 7.1 by the group. Only 3 of the 102 items ranked below a 5.0
while a strong majority(61) ranked higher than 7.5. The survey helped clarify the value of the prior
study and establish the basis upon which to further define the schematic scope of improvements.
A summary of the survey analysis and prioritization rankings is included in Appendix B of this report.
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 2
The Committee's detailed review of the prior study's recommendations resulted in the exclusion of
six items from the scope of work (see Appendix B) and helped to establish a more simplified
approach to defining the categories of improvements that are needed. In the prior study, the
recommendations were organized, in response to a review of existing conditions, into the following
categories of work:
• Accessibility Improvements
• Auditorium &Support Spaces
• Miscellaneous Improvements
• Exterior Structural Repairs
• Interior Structural Repairs
• Structural Modifications
• Mechanical—Fire Protection System Improvements
• Mechanical—Plumbing System Improvements
• Mechanical—HVAC System Improvements
• Electrical Improvements
• Acoustical Improvements
• Repairs and Improvements to Stage Rigging
While this detailed approach was useful for the Building Evaluation study process, the schematic
work scope for the Renovation Study was organized into three integrated categories:
• Life Safety Improvements: code issues,accessibility, etc.
• Building System Improvements: upgrading of aging systems
• Facility Usability Improvements: enhancements to support use
These three categories are integrated and rely on each other in terms of creating the maximum
public benefit of renovation improvements. A summary of the recommendations in each category,
along with an outline specification of the improvements,is included in Appendix D of this report.
Further Review of Selected Proiect Components
The Renovation Study work by the Committee included a detailed look at several project
components in order to prepare appropriate recommendations to the Board of Selectmen. These
various project components included the following items:
• Reviewed Current& Future Uses of the Building: The Committee reviewed the current use
policies of the Hall and Meeting Rooms, recognizing that the policy statement should be
reviewed and updated while continuing to honor the terms of the memorial gift. Updating
the policy statement was considered to be outside the scope of the current charge, but
since it has not been done since 2004,the Committee recommends this be done very soon.
The Committee also reviewed use options in discussion with Peter Lally, Manager of a
similar facility in Lowell (Memorial Auditorium) that hosts a variety of programs that are
targeted to enrich community life. While the facilities differ in some regards, the
renovations planned for the Cary Memorial Building will make improvements that will
better serve a variety of events such as lectures, musical performances and other activities
that occur in Town. The meeting with Peter Lally helped the Committee to confirm the
scope and need of the planned improvements.
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 3
Prepared Acoustical Model of Battin Hall: The auditorium space of the Cary Memorial
Building is very well suited to orchestral music and similar events but is poor when speech
intelligibility is required. In order to evaluate proposed improvements to the Hall, a 3-D
computer simulation of the space was prepared to model existing conditions and evaluate
the improvements. The computer model, called an 'auralization, allowed the Committee
to hear the effect of changes to the HVAC system (system upgrades to reduce room noise),
replacement of the sound system (to improve speech clarity) and other improvements.
The model was also used to evaluate the effect of two items that were initially considered
to be optional but, as a result of the auralization, were determined to be very favorable for
making significant improvements. One of these was replacement of the air-cooled chiller
and relocation away from the auditorium windows. The other was the provision of variable
acoustic treatment to reduce reverberation for speech-only events (concealed retractable
absorptive panels). These two items were initially considered as 'alternates' in the budget
until the auralization demonstrated their significant benefits to acoustical performance.
The chiller replacement has the added benefit of replacing a 12-year old chiller with an
assumed life of 20 years,with more efficient equipment that will reduce operating costs.
The auralization was demonstrated in a 'listening studio' at the offices of Acentech. This
setting allowed an effective simulation of the 3-D computer model of Battin Hall. The
presentation was attended by a majority of the Committee members along with other
interested parties. Acentech offered to provide a selection of the audio files to the Town
for use in setting up a website for reaching a broader audience with this information, but
due to current staffing issues in the Town's IT department,this was not implemented.
Prepared Programmatic Requirements for Audiovisual Improvements: A meeting with
interested Committee members and other parties was held to review issues related to
existing conditions and possible improvements to the audiovisual systems for the building
including within Battin Hall,the Lobby, Green Room and the meeting rooms. The results of
this discussion are included in a programming report prepared by Acentech in Appendix C
of this report. The report included descriptions and budgets for each AV issue that was
discussed with the group during the programming meeting held on site.
Subsequent to issuance of the overall report and its respective budgets, the Committee
met to review each program component and its related costs, agreeing to include only
those program elements that they believed will provide the most public benefit, resulting
in acceptance of approximately half of the full scope of improvements(see Appendix C).
Modifications of Proposed Plans: The Renovation Study process led to a few changes to the
proposed floor plans as noted below These changes are illustrated in the drawings that
are included in this report in Appendix A.
Wheelchair Access to Stage & Green Room —The former study plans provided an access
door at the former orchestra pit stairway that would lead to the concealed wheelchair lift
serving the Stage and Green Room areas. This access door location required that the
permanent thrust stage be no wider than the existing temporary thrust stage. The updated
proposal widens the thrust stage to abut the angled wing wall and relocates the wheelchair
access door into a reconfigured version of the adjacent stairway.
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 4
Civil Room Accessibility Deferred — The former study proposed to provide an accessible
path to the Civil Room by reconfiguring the front row of balcony seats and aisle stairs. This
work would require replacement of the front row of central balcony chairs with removable
chairs and alteration of the aisle stairways. Since the Civil Room is one of three similarly
sized rooms (Ellen Stone, Legion, Civil), it was the Committee s belief that a convertible
solution for providing access to this one room was more expensive and disruptive than the
benefit gained by the disabled. So, a variance from the Massachusetts Architectural Access
Board (MAAB) regulations should be sought during subsequent design, requesting the Civil
Room to remain as-is. Since the Town would not schedule the room for public meetings,
there is a very high probability that the MAAB would grant such a variance,as this has been
their practice for similar historic buildings with particularly challenging configurations.
Confirmed Adequacy of Existing Roof Truss Structure — The prior study noted that the
original steel roof trusses appeared to be undersized and recommended that the structural
capacity be evaluated. The current study included an evaluation of the trusses and it was
determined that they are adequately sized and no reinforcement work is required. This
part of the current study did not result in any changes to the floor plans or work scope.
Relocated and Replaced Chiller for Cooling & Acoustical Needs — The prior study, which
noted that noise generated by the air-cooled chiller adjacent to the Hall is significant,
proposed to add sound attenuation to the chiller and sound isolating storm windows in
that area of the building. As a result of the auralization study and chiller noise evaluation,
it was determined that replacement and relocation of the chiller would significantly reduce
the sound impact on the Hall without requiring sound isolating storm windows. It was also
noted that the existing chiller was sized for simultaneous occupancy of the Town Offices
Building and Cary Memorial Building during its temporary use as the Library while the 2000
renovation and expansion of the Cary Memorial Library was underway. Since the adjacent
buildings are not used at full occupancy simultaneously under normal circumstances, the
200-ton chiller serving the former simultaneous use could be reduced to a 120-ton chiller
for energy savings and relocated away from the windows for acoustical benefit. Refer to
Appendix C for noise information and estimated operating cost savings of this modification.
• Prepared Animations & Illustrations of Battin Hall: The most noticeable alteration to the
Cary Memorial Building will be replacement of the temporary thrust stage with a proposed
permanent thrust stage. Since this modification will affect multiple uses of Battin Hall, a
series of animations were prepared to visually represent the effect of this change for three
very different uses: public meetings, exhibits and performances. Each use has differing
needs and the intent of the animations was to show how the presence of a permanent
thrust stage will serve to enhance these uses while also improving the general appearance
of the stage area. Note that the following specific uses were selected:
Town Meeting: the permanent thrust stage provides a larger, safer and better
integrated presentation platform area for the activities related to public meetings.
Quilt Show the stage area can be equipped with removable guardrail system that,
together with improved on-stage lighting,expands available floor area for exhibits.
Lexington Symphony the permanent thrust stage is visually compatible with the
building's historical character and is a broader area to enhance performance use.
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 5
Proposed Plans. Outline Specifications&Project Budget
Updated floor plans for the proposed renovations are included in Appendix A of this report. The
drawings illustrate existing conditions, proposed selective demolition and updated floor plans and
site plan layouts. Proposed changes to the existing floor plans are intended to retain the historic
character of the building. The changes were thoroughly explained and documented in the prior
study and will not be reiterated at length in this report. In summary,the following is proposed:
Improve acoustics,audiovisual systems,thrust stage and lighting in Battin Hall;
Renovate Green Room below the stage to restore its historic use with upgrades;
Provide handicap access to Stage,Green Room, Bird Room and Battin Hall seating areas;
Improve usability,configuration,acoustics and audiovisual systems in Estabrook Hall;
Improve audiovisual systems in the Lobby, Ellen Stone, Legion Room and Bird Room;
Improve and expand public toilet rooms in the Basement Level for better functionality;
• Remove electrical switchgear from the Stage and provide the equipment in utility areas;
Replace steam boilers with high efficiency hydronic boilers; replace air-cooled chiller:
Provide reconstructed entrance ramp,drop off area &accessible parking spaces;
Provide related life safety, HVAC and building system improvements as noted herein.
_ To complement the drawings, outline specifications were prepared to summarize proposed
changes relative to the three categories of work: life safety, building systems and facility usability
improvements. These specifications and summary descriptions are included in Appendix D.
In addition to the categories of work, several 'alternates' were described in order to review the
cost of certain work items and review those with the Committee. The alternates were related to
accessibility for the Civil Room, replacement of the chiller variable acoustics in the Hall, providing a
dance surface for the stage and a range of audiovisual improvements for the facility Upon review
by the Committee, the replacement chiller variable acoustics (retractable sound attenuation for
speech only events) and some of the AV improvements were accepted. The accepted alternates
have been incorporated into the project and are no longer considered to be alternates for the
purposes of the project recommendations.
A project budget was established through a process of reviewing the outline plans and specs with a
professional cost estimator followed by more extensive review and discussion with the Committee.
The cost estimates are included in Appendix E of this report. A summary of the budget relative to
each work category is as follows:
$1,536,683 Life Safety Improvements (18.0%)
$3,969,763 Building System Improvements (46.5%)
53.030,680 Facility Usability Improvements (35.5%1
$8,537,126 Preliminary Project Budget(100%)
The project costs include the cost of construction, soft costs and contingencies. The values include
escalation based upon implementation of the following schedule:
May 2013—March 2014 Design Development&Construction Documents;
$548,836: Estimated Cost of A/E Services through CDs
May 2014—January 2016: Competitive Bidding and Construction Period;
$7,988,290: Estimated Construction &A/E Bid/CA Costs;
Additional escalation needed if schedule is extended
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
The focus of the Ad hoc Cary Memorial Building Program Committee (AhCMBPC), as charged by the
Board of Selectmen, was to evaluate the recommendations of the CMB Evaluation study and make
recommendations on the appropriate scope of work. The Committee recommends an integrated
project of approximately$8.5 million be implemented in order to make appropriate improvements
to life safety (18.0%), building systems (46.5%) and facility usability (35.5%) of the Cary Memorial
Building. The project components outlined in this report will provide substantial public benefit to
the Town by maintaining and improving the integrity of this important historical resource.
The Cary Memorial Building is largely unchanged from its original design, and the proposed
improvements will serve to complement the building's character and enhance its use while
improving life safety and handicap accessibility. The scope of recommendations is in alignment
with the responsibility of the Town to maintain the building as was noted by Mr Robert P Clapp,
Chairman of the Isaac Harris Cary Educational Fund,during his remarks at the 1928 Dedication:
The result of our work is now before you. We have tried to produce a building that will be of
constant service to the community. How far we have succeeded in our efforts is for you
and our fellow townsmen to judge. I ask you to keep in mind always the memorial
character of the gift and the limitations which the donors have placed upon its use.
Remember also that the 'continued use' of the building for the authorized purposes was an
object of solicitude on their part. This means maintenance and thoughtful care, not only
this year and next year,but through all succeeding years.
The Renovation Study has outlined the recommended work scope that, if implemented, will
proceed in two subsequent steps as was described in the designer selection process for this study
The next step will involve design development, construction documentation and a construction
cost estimate based on the completed drawings. Pending approval, the remaining step will be to
select a contractor through competitive public bidding and then construct the renovation project.
The intent of the anticipated project will be to provide appropriate improvements that enhance the
intended public use of the building in keeping with the wills of Isaac Harris Cary's two daughters.
APPENDICES
A. Drawings—Existing& Proposed
B: Scope Prioritization Survey
C: Consultant Documentation
D: Recommended Improvements
E: Preliminary Budget Estimate
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Study Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page 7
r 0
0 rD
K S. p
Po) a
• ti
1 i
c----
•
c -
It
S 122 ,/ I /
---r -•!-
-!• .- 1/4,.„, ----k..,
=m
_____
c
+ . I
PROVIDE
c
CHILLER —1.' ythcilT
,
h
,
92. ! ,/ _—______,1
I ' _.
___I
a
-, 1 i , 1
; .__ 0
i ! 1 J r• ------- 1 i I
ali 1 1 I
. I
ill E I. jrri(.1 1 i - II
1 11 r
, I I
on i 1
, c4_, i j 1 1
1 i ,
1 I
--I
i _ PROVIDE
_ ---
1
Fl
TRANSFORMER jp.,_ I
-.-. .-.. II L it , ::• 1 I
1
• ,_-
:,
— I I i : .--_-1__ _ c 6. -r_.-
N
z
,I , i
-0
i
z, q
! PROVIDE L
ir, :=I-
P .„ ...
I ENTRY - m:s,
ii 1=1 1 RAMP-1o , LTATI I .„ ILL
cm
___,,...... ,
IT
1 PROVIDE1 I I- ' L.B.7.7s---'-'2. ..
o
' - BIKE
.
' . 1
RACKS--> f
POLICE I
z
TOWN 1 1
STATION
I , OFFICES 11111 ------...,..„ , ,G___, 1 DROP OFF AREA
i , BUILDING ,
.., ---
2/Z
- HC
4
/.,/
---
''' -,- +/ Ce
,f r (k\\ 1 1 it rS-EXISTING FLAGPOLE
\
I
RELOCATE PAIR K \
OF MAILBOXES '1/4-EXISTING TREE(TYR) \ C.'2%1
NORTH
D't
‘ l_ppii
i 1/41/4-
I
_________
F.;
— ENTRY —
100'
R
0' 25' 50'
Exrr —<_—_—------ MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE
a
-a ci
1 a
›F
ea 0 .
PROVIDE FACILITY PROVIDE GREEN ROOM
STORAGE AREAS _ W/RELATED FACILITIES
.'111,' fiv
PROVIDE
REPLACEMENT .tlign ' - - WI a
i-ii
CHILLER ' ' 4 1±;(4J:
___ . . 1\ PROVIDELIFT
L i
— ,
, I UP TO HALL&
[ 000 - , MAIN STAGE
( AA,, -- I
--- RECONFIGURE
—nr Ii [ f,
I,,. , __ STAIRWAY
PROVIDE -r-lt,1 0 s. ,1,1
HYDRONIC i
fur RECORDS
BOILERS
ID .n. .
x 9 • - \ .i.t
FACILITY 1=i4r- PROVIDE
WORKSHOP ' H'iN M li
1 T RAMP TO
•ILII —,65-- I
-,-- STAGE -1 STAGE
— J3ais
RECORDS
it fi
N 1 ESTABROOK I I
1 HALL
_
PROVIDE
, ii-LEN ifi:
PROVIDE STORAGE
.
TRANSFOR1 ER— " - - HI - & REVISE
• i I: ENTRANCE i • I I ,,--7
,..
ri --
__ 11 na$ ROBBINS
PROVIDE A 1 I: —I '
i ;tr.' , i ROOM , ELEV
? :4-
1
SWITCHGEAR — r , k_,L L 1 -- 1_, Lti
-1 u J: - 1-- -14-_- •
1- - - ,-- _, i
unil F41 . 4
, o)Q ,e ‘i cri 4
L N, 1 ) LOWER LOBBY
Ill
; --LI
Olokti.IrA! ' i
— 1 'll
) (-7 I
cil L IF 7779- --,- ,, ,
PROVIDE 1 i : if 1 -- 1 I VAULT ...-- ..-.'- 1
—, ', i E1_ / ......„ n , V -
t
MEN'S ROOM ' ,lif,
._ c:_; • . _ .3- 7 I; _ '''I' —
LIN
Fr -1'' 'II NORTH
= '01440Forororor RECORDS k , cr 4' 816'
PROVIDE EXPANDED EXPAND VAULT INTO
WOMEN'S TOILET ROOM RECORDS STORAGE
BASEMENT LEVEL PROPOSED
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page A-6
PROVIDE LIFT FROM
HALL TO STAGE&
GREEN ROOM
u1
"
ill, RECONFIGURE
I !ill, STAIRWAY
PROVIDE •
5
CHILLER I yg� "' __
BELOW -l
tt 1 /~ II PROVIDE
t t I 1 'BATTIN1 ` 1 0,, PERMANENT
PROVIDE 1 HALL TST
ACCESSIBLE P tL / i I 1 STAAGE
SE
DRINKING I 1 I 1 II
FOUNTAIN cul �N
Itl ¢ i ; 1 1 A " i I
I1
PROVIDE
RAILS FOR
PROVIDE ,fit } EX. IN SIDE
RAMPS
TRANSFORMER
I. ILS \i CORRIDORS
BELOW _
.; 1I 1, �" - .71-7-1°
L� If ELEV
1 J a FLTd) 12' 1..
6. t� ��
fI i_1�,J�1_Ll 1y1�_I Ll, 2 i
-- _ , _ ' ,kJ Lld l LL2 U i-. l l..is - �
kry
. . ' � ,.{ I \ / 1 i q ,- . . f- , - 1•:
'11 1 A ENTRANCE s1 It 1 ! '
HALL
p p u:
,
RAMP lA � n. Q. �Ilp r
PROVIDE _ ! y� /\
�____ Lel_ _ NORTH
'" _ --� o' a a' 1s�
1; I=
- I =t—_.�
PROVIDE 1 '--1 --1-
BIKE RACK--------' RE-SET BRICK WALKWAY --�
PROVIDE DROP-OFF AREA& \ r--________
rj ( ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES
FIRST FLOOR PLAN-PROPOSED
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page A-9
S I FLY
0001 ) GALLERY RECONFIGURE
000 Ii STAIRWAY
PROVIDE - �I 1
CHILLER allow O
BELOW mp � �nap b, �, ,� !�eeey
ti
�_.
CONCEALED - - I RI -,-4:-.1
CEILING-MTD. ' P` BATTIN HALL • ' ,F
RETRACTABLE ' E �H3 3 BALCONY LEVEL r •���,_ r t'
SOUND ATTEN.
PANEL(1 of 6) ;1 = NOTE: - E k; .
j j q ADD RAILINGS AT reE,,-' `gib .1
BALCONIES FOR l _J
I kf ALL SEATING i ji .
S
PROVIDE4 !F.VIWHEELCHAIRSEATS1 hSRPER SEATS 1� .i(�
1It
� �It 1 d
41
....,.-. -I- MEM., 1-r n ,i .= ELEV
__ - 21”1121110-.-... - - - 1- _
-_ __ Z
t- - ' II . - - "- ..one
I n E CONTROL '�- -may-���-
._M-..„ BOOM e._!a_ _
I�
6aiV -: .-' 1-m— ( o I
CIVIL LEGION
ROOM o ( Il 1 9 ROOM 1
. , .PS + BIRD
ROOM ..011lli ' .
it ier IN APM
NORTH
0' 4' 8' 16'
PROVIDE LIFT UP 1-T-L-I
TO BIRD ROOM (
SECOND FLOOR PLAN PROPOSED j
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page A-12
--- ------- ---
r r____,_
I GRIDIRON
9 ..---i ; Eel
! H
il
I 1 U
PROVIDE ATTIC a• f / (--1
67,1„
' €t'
VENTILATION L ' i \� I
FAN IN SOUND- LL
ISOLATED ROOM L.:.
—' PROVIDE ALL
DUCTWORK
•
Il
L._ 1 _ r
1 I
ATTIC
1 I LEVEL I
HH
---' -- ELEV
t1
I , „___
;fINN !U __l
!1 1 \ r
__,,t •_
1
r t `C
{{i
i0 ti S--- 7-'1 Ir
l 1
SLATE 0 U 1 ------ FT SLATE
1 SW Ic 1 1 1 1 1 !� ! j ! S.E. =
FLAT II ! i i ! 4�1 i I� FLAT
1 ROOF-� �I 1 II I _ROOF
I-
------- NORTH
PROVIDE AIR HANDLER IN 0' a' 8' 16'
SOUND-ISOLATED ROOM t____
ATTIC PLAN PROPOSED
Cary Memorial Building Renovation Mills Whitaker Architects LLC
Lexington,Massachusetts Page A-15