February 23, 2012
THOMAS EDISON HIGH SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY MODERNIZATION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN MEETING NO. 3
21067.20/075
ATTENDEES:
See attached sign in sheet.
Meeting Notes:
NEW BUSINESS:
3.1
Grimm + Parker provided a Powerpoint presentation which included a recap of the tour to
HD Woodson High School and Phelps ACE High School. Items noted from the Woodson tour
included the following: 1) The building seemed to inspire the teaching atmosphere; 2) The
building reinforced the STEM program; 3) The building was completely wireless. Items noted
from the Phelps tour included the following: 1) Good natural light was provided in lab
spaces; 2) Modern and portable display trainers were used; 3) Simulators were used for
heavy equipment.
3.2
A meeting date has been set up for input from the Edison students for February 24, 2012.
3.3
Ms. Szyfer advised that there will be a smaller health suite added to the program. The design
team will locate it proximate to the administration.
3.4
An updated Scheme 1 was presented. This scheme provided administration at the main
entrance of the building. The culinary arts classroom and restaurant is provided at the northwest
corner of the building. Cosmetology is provided at the west side of the building adjacent to the bus
loop. The construction trades area remains where it was shown previously, however the lab spaces
have been rearranged based on previous comments. The automotive areas are located to the
west side of the building. The remaining programs are provided on the second floor. Hospitality has
been relocated adjacent to the stair directly upstairs from Culinary Arts. The current arrangement
allows for some future lab space to be provided. It was recommended that the shell be built out for
these areas to be easily added in the future. The following comments and concerns were
expressed:
• Staff advised that the Culinary Arts restaurant needs to be accessed near admin,
and controlled by the main entrance. Café should be accessed from the interior of
the building.
• Staff noted that Cosmetology program should be accessed from the interior of the
building. Clients will check-in at the admin area prior to going to Cosmetology for
appointments. Mr. Hamlin will investigate if a public entrance off the bus loop will be
allowable.
• Staff advised that Plumbing needs yard area. Carpentry needs access to outside,
but not a yard.
• Staff advised that an adjacency between the foundations office and the
Construction Management classroom was desirable.
• Staff advised that the foundations department needed to be near an area where
CALVERTON / MCLEAN
11720 Beltsville Drive Suite 600 / Calverton MD 20705 / Tel 301.595.1000 / Fax 301.595.0089/ grimmandparker.com
Thomas Edison High School of Technology Modernization
Schematic Design Meeting No. 3
Page No. 2
•
•
•
•
•
cars were received. After some discussion, it was determined that a driveway may
be able to be provided near the foundations office. The design team will investigate
if existing curb cut on Dalewood can meet this requirement.
Staff expressed concern about sufficient storage for automotive program. If labs are
transparent then clutter and storage needs to be addressed.
The participants all agreed a space should be provided for all programs to display in
lobby.
Staff advised that a congregation space for the students was desirable, possibly the
café area.
Staff noted that currently the school receives building supply deliveries from a
tractor-trailer, preference was to have similar access to new building via a loading
dock.
It was noted that Masonry Lab needed exterior access but not a yard. This was
contrary to what was stated at previous meetings. This item will require clarification.
3.5
Scheme 1a was presented. This scheme is similar to Scheme 1, with the exception that the
automotive area is provided at a lower level, allowing vision glass from the corridor above down into
the space. The remainder of this scheme is similar to Scheme 1. After a good deal of discussion,
there was a consensus that this option was desirable and should be further developed. The
following pros and cons were noted:
Pros
• Takes advantage of grades resulting from existing building demo, will require less fill
than Scheme 1.
• Improves visual sightlines into Automotive Labs from Main Floor corridors
• Lowered vehicle storage area less visible from Wheaton HS/Randolph Rd
• Provides more flexibility in size/configuration of future labs on 2nd floor
Cons
• Results in larger building due to additional circulation space @ lower level
• Automotive program isolated from rest of main floor programs
• Loading area for main floor may overlap driveway into Auto Labs below
3.6
The following comments were taken from stakeholder responses to questions provided on
note cards:
1. What do you feel are the most critical adjacencies in the building?
• Foundations Office / Construction & Auto
• Network Ops / Architecture / Graphic Design
• Restaurant Mgmt / Community
• Construction Mgmt Classroom / Foundations Office
• Foundations Office / Parking
• Medical / Bathrooms / Locker Rooms
• Interior Design / Architecture / Construction Trades
• Main Office / Guidance / Health
• Hospitality / near Stairs / Café
• Restaurant / Hospitality
• All auto programs grouped
• All construction programs grouped
2. What ways can the building showcase the unique programs of the school?
• Allow people to see student at work
• Use student-designed/student-created products for daily, functional use
• Showcase Medical Careers
• All rooms – Glass fronts with showcase area
Thomas Edison High School of Technology Modernization
Schematic Design Meeting No. 3
Page No. 3
•
•
Have lots of visual into labs so community & students can see what Edison does!
Video screens
3. What ways can public spaces enhance the experience of the new Edison HS?
• Atrium feel like Phelps HS
• Small snack area w/ machines and seating
• Display student projects
• Public needs to see what programs and products Edison produces
• Gathering spaces for students
NEXT MEETING:
1.
The next schematic design meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, March 8, 2012, at 6:30
p.m. at Thomas Edison School of Technology.
THESE NOTES ARE THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE MEETING AND REPRESENT THE UNDERSTANDING OF
THE WRITER OF ITEMS DISCUSSED AND DECISIONS MADE DURING THIS MEETING. WE SHALL ASSUME
OUR UNDERSTANDING TO BE CORRECT UNLESS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CONTRARY IS BROUGHT TO OUR
ATTENTION WITHIN SEVEN DAYS.
Author: Don Porter
DRP/drp
J:\proj\2012\21202.20\Docs\04-Meeting Minutes\2012-0223 SD Meeting 3\EHS 022312-sd03.doc
Thomas Edison High School of Technology
Modernization
Project Name:
Date: February 23, 2012
Mr./Ms
./Mrs./ Name
Dr. First
Last
Representing
1 Mr.
Steve
Boden
Foundations
2 Dr.
Lynn
Brown
Thomas Edison School of Technology
3 Ms.
Karen
Burlingame
Grimm and Parker Architects
4 Mr.
Dennis F.
Cross
MCPS Division of Construction
5 Mrs. Denise
Fennell
6 Mr.
Carlos
Hamlin
Thomas Edison School of Technology
Principal -Thomas Edison School of
Technology
7 Ms.
Melanie
Hennigan
Grimm and Parker Architects
8 Mr.
John
Hydro
Community Member
Johnson
Thomas Edison School of Technology
9 Mrs. Amy
10 Ms.
Jesse
McGee
11 Ms.
Judith
McMillan
Thomas Edison School of Technology
Montgomery County Department of
Health and Human Services
12 Mr.
Stan
Metta
Thomas Edison School of Technology
13 Mr.
Steve
Parker
Grimm and Parker Architects
14 Mr.
John
Petro
Thomas Edison School of Technology
15 Mr.
Don
Porter
Grimm and Parker Architects
16 Mr.
Jason
Potyk
Thomas Edison School of Technology
17 Mr.
Scott
Price
Thomas Edison School of Technology
18 Mr.
Antonio
Rebelo
Grimm and Parker Architects
19 Mr.
Nick
Saylor
Grimm and Parker Architects
20 Mr.
Leo
Schwartz
CTF / ATF / ITF
21 Ms.
Jillian
Storms
Maryland State Department of Education
22 Ms.
Debbie
Szyfer
MCPS Long-Range Planning
23 Mr.
Kieran
Wilmes
Grimm and Parker Architects