Page 14 - Priorities #26 2004-April

Better, Not Bigger
The Performing Arts Center is designed for the classes and activities already taking place on the campus. “We don’t plan
to increase any of the programs, we just need to support them with better quality, more suitable facilities,” said Tim Molak, Headmaster. Nevertheless, parking that was added for multiple needs will benefit guests to the PAC.
The campus master plan replaces the current 51-space lot with 73 designated spaces near the PAC. For the relatively few occasions every year when this won’t do, cars can park, as they do now, in student spaces up the hill, along the campus roadways, and around the track. WPS will continue its longstanding practice of using traffic patrol volunteers to help with parking and flow, he added.
The building now has changed substantially from Tom’s first plan, but that’s fine with him.
“(WPS Trustee) Al Ebneter gave the PAC its first big start by taking the basic concepts and budget, anddrawingupourfirstsetofblueprints. His background and knowledge of the building industry were invaluable,” Tom said.
For many people on and off the committee, Al Ebneter’s blueprints were the first assurance that this project could work—a beautiful, functional, design that fit the space and budget could be achieved.
The campus community started thinking about other possibilities: students got excited about good acoustics and a workspace that would attract more performing arts students. One student asked if the building could include the overhead translators one sees at the San Francisco Opera House, so students could do operas. Another hoped for facilities where students could create and record their own music. A middle school student said wistfully that with a good auditorium perhaps “we could have small symphonic orchestras play at assemblies—we’ve never had that.”
Adults mentioned things like Portola Valley town meetings, the Community Forum lecture series, sports banquets, and graduations.
The committee looked at practical issues and made changes, among them:
• A more spacious lobby that encourages efficient
audience movement into and out of the auditorium. A second-level lobby provides more convenient access to upper auditorium seating as well as additional art space.
• A modified orchestra pit that does not require major excavation.
• Improved bathrooms.
• An upper-level technical support area that flanks
the stage and allows for more creative theatrical
and concert staging.
• A smaller kitchen, suitable for catered events.
The architects reoriented the building for better access and to avoid cutting into the hill. They created a student walkway right through the heart of the performing arts classroom area, and, not incidentally, figured out a way to save that handsome old tree.
The driving forces in the evolving design have been mainly practical considerations, such as orienting the shopandbackstageentrancenexttoasmallparking area for easy pick-up and delivery. Other design factors include budgetary constraints, the need to conform to town building codes, and the desire to impact neighbors in only a positive way.
Most issues have been easily resolved through discussion and consensus, Tom said. The most recent committee members, the architects, proved to be good listeners, offering sound suggestions and listening carefully to reactions, he said.
“The current plan is visually appealing, with lots of possibilities for attractive exterior design. I like the way the breezeway leads students on their way to the gym right past all the arts classrooms—it helps the students to see the performing arts as integral to their education. It’s a big improvement over the isolated location of the Assembly Hall and music room. And in terms of getting students excited about performances and concerts - students can’t miss the action when they walk right through the PAC.” Tom explained.
The building now has changed substantially from Tom’s first plan, but that’s fine with him.
“The committee has made good decisions, and the architects have brought some truly exciting designs. I’m thrilled with this building and I think everyone will be impressed with its look, its feel, and its contributions to the life of the school!”
The bones of the building—the fundamentals—
could still be changed if budgetary or town review constraints require it. If those aspects go well, and once they are completed, Tom thinks only minor tweaking will be needed to complete the design. Finishing touches such as seats, stage lighting, acoustics and a sound system are still ahead. Choices of interior and exterior color, wall and floor surfaces, furniture choices, landscape design – all these have yet to be decided.
Most buildings like the PAC are funded in two
14