Page 1

MASTER PLAN FOR CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS AUGUST 1, 2012

Re:Vision

Page 1

ARCHITECTURE


i m a g e

BUILDINGS

i m a g e

NATURE

PEOPLE

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


MASTER PLAN FOR CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS AUGUST 1, 2012

Re:Vision

ARCHITECTURE

Jonathan Alderson Landscape Architects, Inc. Practical Energy Solutions Gardner/Fox Associates, Inc. Page 3


“…visioning is not a matter of moving forward – it’s knowing where you’re going and why you want to get there.” - Jennifer Karsten, Pendle Hill Executive Director

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


7 About Pendle Hill 9 Master Planning 11 Organizational Model

1

Pendle Hill 2012-2013

13 14 20 34

Campus Today Programs + People Facilities Grounds

2

Analysis

44 46 48 64 68

Campus Assets Facilities Conditions Deferred Maintenance Program Needs Grounds Assessment

3

Introduction

Proposal

Conclusion Page 5

76 Vision 84 Priority Initiatives 108 Long Term Opportunities 116 Phasing & Estimating

4

118 Final Thoughts 123 Credits 124 Appendix

5


1

INTRODUCTION

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


ABOUT PENDLE HILL

Pendle Hill was established in 1930 as a Quaker study center designed to prepare its adult students for service both in the Religious Society of Friends and in the world. The founders envisioned a new Quaker School of Social and Religious Education which would be “a vital center of spiritual culture” and “a place for training leaders.” [Rufus Jones, Preliminary Announcement, 1929] An ideal location for the new school was found in Wallingford, Pennsylvania, a dozen miles from Philadelphia, easy to reach by train and near Swarthmore College. Pendle Hill was meant to be different from existing Quaker schools or colleges, which were mainly academic. Its mission was both educational and religious: Pendle Hill was to be a school, rooted in Quaker community life, where students and staff would live according to Quaker principles and practices and where learning would be experiential as well as intellectual. No grades or academic credit would be given. It was to be an experiment in living and learning, grounded in work, worship and study. With the aim of preparing students to respond to injustice and violence in the world, education at Pendle Hill was seen as alternative and often counter-cultural. At the same time, Pendle Hill was to be a center for cultivation of inner spiritual life and discernment of vocation. Pendle Hill continues today to be a vibrant experiment in adult religious education. Pendle Hill’s program has been eloquently described as “the four basic social testimonies of Friends: equality of opportunity and respect for individuals, simplicity of the educational and material environment, harmony of inward and outward actions, community in daily life and in the seeking of the Spirit.” Despite many changes since 1930, Pendle Hill thrives as an “educational experiment, grounded in the spiritual and social principles of Friends - a community centered in the daily meeting for worship and sharing a common life of study, work, recreation, and mutual care and concern for one another.” (Text from Pendle Hill website, Spring 2012)

1 - INTRODUCTION

Page 7


Pendle Hill Touchstones Septermber 2011 In 2011 several Pendle Hill staff members, Board members, and friends of Pendle Hill collaborated in a process to select a Master Planning team. They sought a process that was robust, fair, thorough and spirit guided. In order to help prospective planners understand Pendle Hill, and the project they were being asked to undertake, the group created a set of touchstones early on. The work of creating them ended up providing a helpful grounding to their work together as a search committee. Seen to the right, they capture the bounds of the space in which the Planners were asked to create and envision campus over the coming years.

PENDLE HILL TOUCHSTONES SENSE OF PLACE - Pendle Hill offers people a sense of place with a unique campus that is attractive, simple, home-like, natural and clean. Spaces are accommodating and flexible, buildings are accessible to different levels of mobility and the entire campus is viewed as teaching space. Even as we gather in fellowship and create opportunities for learning, we provide an atmosphere of contemplation, and appreciate how silence can help us notice the power of Spirit to move among us. Attuned with (to) nature - Pendle Hill demonstrates integration of natural systems and human needs in order to model a sustainable balance. We increase self-reliance by resourcing basic needs like food, water, and energy from as close to home (and with as little waste) as possible. We exemplify patterns of efficiency and respect for our connection to the natural world. Exemplary and visionary - Pendle Hill holds the strong intention to be a pattern and example of living into “the triple bottom line”: people, place, and planet. We aim to go “beyond diversity” and to model a fully inclusive environment for transformative learning and growing, such that their experiences may enhance their ability to act as progressive change agents in the world. We are a very welcoming and hospitable environment where difference is honored and celebrated and “isms” are challenged. We respectfully steward and carry forward a strong set of traditions, while thoughtfully embracing new technologies and approaches when we are clear that they support and advance our mission. Economic practicality - Pendle Hill is thoughtful and frugal in its expenditures. Value and life-cycle costs will help in guiding wise choices. We seek simple solutions first. Quaker Aesthetics - Pendle Hill carries a tradition and appreciation of Quaker simplicity in its buildings and surroundings, incorporating an appreciation of both an historic look, and design that honors newer options for energy-efficiency. We value quiet and natural beauty. We are a place that is safe and allows for people to be at peace.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


A master plan can be defined as a general plan or program for achieving an objective; often to develop or improve (land, a community, a building complex, or the like) through a long-range plan that balances and harmonizes multiple elements. (Random House Dictionary, 2012) Often undertaken by campuses of various scales and complexities, master plans can be used as tools for financial and project planning. Effective master plans help to develop long term goals and concepts while allowing for flexibility of development over time.

MASTER PLANNING PROCESS This master plan is a study of Pendle Hill’s many organizational goals and assets and the development of a comprehensive scope of work that provides the foundation for phased improvements to buildings, grounds and systems. Our study is being done in conjunction with a time limited capital campaign - this means that a limited scope of campus improvement work will be attainable by those funds. That our recommendations exceed this timeline is OK as this study is also being implemented to help realize the long term vision for the campus. As a document, this master plan is intended to be a constant companion that is dog-eared, tea-stained, and highlighted. When working with such a rich variety of both physical and personnel assets a comprehensive and inclusive process is key to successful outcomes. As we research and test ideas a critical part of harnessing this richness is to generate feedback loops. This is when we re-present information we have learned or developed back to our working team (designers AND client). Thinking and evaluating in a parallel nature we focus on one analytical tract at a time. This allows us to generate and share a more encircling understanding of topics which we then synthesize in to solutions. This collaborative engagement leads to shared conclusions and shared directions forward.

CLIENT REVIEW

PROGRAMMING

OPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTS CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

ExISTING CONDITIONS ANALySIS

OPPORTUNITIES CONSTRAINTS

PHASING

1 - INTRODUCTION

Page 9

COST ESTIMATING


Facility Planning Guiding Statement 4/19/2011 (revised 8/23) These guiding principles were provided to the Design Team during the proposal phase of the project. They have been constantly referred back to throughout the master planning process.

MASTER PLAN GOALS 1. ASSETS a. MISSION & VISION b. FACILITIES: We are sited and housed in a place forever treasured for its beauty, continually evolving in its functionality, perpetually calling for loving maintenance/care. c. COMMUNITY: Whether an overnight sojourner, a day worker or visitor from off-campus, a workshop participant, a resident student or staff member, or conference attendee, there is a shared experience of having been part of an on-going community grounded in Spirit. 2. GOALS a. REDUCE OPERATING COSTS (cost per User goes down). i. Prevent New Costs: 1. Life Safety & Health 2. Loss Prevention ii. Reduce Existing Costs: 1. Reduce energy expenses 2. Improve staff functionality b. INCREASE CAPACITY AND APPEAL (income per User goes up). i. Shift capabilities toward target markets per current strategic planning, while improving resilience and flexibility for future change. ii. Create consistency between mission and appeal: achieve simplicity and economy in a way that becomes an appealing asset instead of a liability. iii. Facilities as teachers (the medium is the message): community, diversity, accessibility, way-finding, sustainability, awe and wonder, study and service, worship and work. c. PHASED APPROACH i. Sequence construction to minimize disruptions and hazards to on-going operations. Factor in related costs such as temporary barriers or off-site housing. ii. Prioritize construction in logical groups that can be implemented incrementally based on amount of funding available. d. BOTH-AND - Achieve transformation of existing facilities into 1. Restoration of what Pendle Hill always was. 2. Implementation of what Pendle Hill seeks to be, collaborative, wholistic, empowering.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


A key element to the planning process has been Pendle Hill’s work in 20092010 with Wellspring Consulting, a management consultant and planning firm based in Boston, MA. Working collaboratively and with input from the full Pendle Hill community, Wellspring presented recommendations that helped Pendle Hill’s staff and board to envision a multi-year financial model.

ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL Pendle Hill’s staff have collaboratively constructed a long-range organizational plan that incorporates improvements to the physical plant and ways to both deepen and renew the range of special programs and services offered here. This multi-year model includes increases to revenue from participant/rate increases in each of the primary program areas (resident program, short-courses, sojourners and conferences) as well as reduced operating expenses and loss prevention via capital improvements. Behind the Master Plan, then, is a vision for Pendle Hill’s mission-based work continuing and thriving coupled with a framework for meeting the objectives above.

1 - INTRODUCTION

Page 11


2

PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


CAMPUS TODAY

A Quaker center for study, retreat, and conference gathering, Pendle Hill seeks to transform lives and foster peace and justice in the world. Each year thousands of people from a diversity of backgrounds visit Pendle Hill to experience one or more of the programs and services offered, including workshops and courses, personal retreats, conference services, lectures and performances, and life changing long-term study opportunities. More are reached through Pendle Hill publications and internet resources. Most distinctively, Pendle Hill is a “place” where people find new and renewed inspiration, guidance, useful skills, and a sense of community to support their work in the world. Located on 23 ecologically diverse acres in suburban Wallingford, Pennsylvania, Pendle Hill’s verdant campus contains several small ecosystems, including forest, lawn, meadow, and wetland. This physical setting is key to Pendle Hill’s identity. An organic garden produces a wealth of fruits and vegetables, and a hoophouse provides greens for meals year round. Nineteen buildings, constructed in a variety of styles over a period of more than two hundred years, provide space for programs, offices, housing, and dining. Visitors can explore the grounds by walking the mile-long woodchip perimeter path. Pendle Hill’s distinctive sense of “place” is rooted in daily Quaker meeting for worship in the Barn and reflected in programs and amenities grounded in social concern. Quaker testimonies of simplicity and stewardship find expression in workshops and courses which promote sustainability. Pendle Hill’s meals reflect high standards for taste and health linked with a food philosophy of eating low on the food chain: organically growing many vegetables and fruits; buying locally and directly from the producer as much as possible; and preparing from scratch items such as bread, granola, and yogurt. Pendle Hill’s commitment to diversity and inclusion is reflected in program offerings, our workplace culture, and the range of groups and individuals served. Some who have not felt welcome elsewhere have found a “home” at Pendle Hill as staff strive to serve each person with “radical hospitality,” respect, and caring. Guests come from throughout the United States and around the world.

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 13


* - It should be noted that the language used in this document to desribe the “user groups” on campus is common to master planning studies and may not reflect the specific language that Pendle Hill may choose to describe its community members. The information in this section has been compiled from ongoing discussions with the Pendle Hill project advisors as well as an all day session in Autumn 2011 led by the Design Team which was focused on getting to know Pendle Hill. There was a charette style event with Pendle Hill’s full staff as well as smaller group interviews. Defining the campus user groups is key to understanding the complex organizational relationships which exist at Pendle Hill.

CAMPUS USER GROUPS* STAFF/FACULTY Pendle Hill staff/faculty is comprised of residents, commuters, volunteers and Friends in Residence. Many of the resident staff also have family living with them who may or may not be on staff. Historically, Pendle Hill has tried to house as much staff on campus as possible as compensation is adjusted for provided room and board. Commuter staff is compensated to reflect off campus market rate housing. Due to the deferred maintenance /IAQ shut downs in recent years Pendle Hill has been forced to move more staff off campus thus creating unnecessary cost exposure. Campus staff share in the work and rewards of the community. Staff (both resident and commuter) share a passion for the Pendle Hill mission, mutual concern and thoughtfulness as well as a support and knowledge network built on collective work and life experiences. The reliable daily rhythm of worship, work and hand crafted meals is central to the staff experience. The aging structures of the campus along with outdated technology and an adapted use of space have made departmental goals a challenge in recent years for the staff and faculty. STUDENTS Due to varying program types students can either be residents or commuters. Pendle Hill continues to welcome international students and others who arrive without personal vehicles. In many cases, resident students do not have cars and must rely on public transportation or walking when venturing off campus. The students of Pendle Hill both enrich and are enriched by the Pendle Hill community. They benefit from each other’s learning and bond with their peers as well as the faculty. This relationship has been described as “the staff providing the framework for the community, the students providing the depth”.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


GUESTS + VISITORS For the purpose of this master plan, “Guests” are defined as paying non-resident student visitors to campus while “Visitors” are defined as non-paying users of the campus. Guests include conference guests, sojourners, participants in the STEP program and volunteers who generously give their time and talents to Pendle Hill. Visitors include neighbors walking the perimeter trail or playing at the playground as well as Friends and the general public when they come to campus for special events. Guests and Visitors benefit from the community atmosphere and open door approach to campus. They are invited and made to feel welcome within this unique oasis in the Philadelphia metropolitan region. At the same time, this experience is sometimes diminished by difficult wayfinding and low ADA compliance. SUPPORT All visitors to campus who are not participating in programs or using the facilities are categorized as Support users. This group includes foodservice and hospitality vendors, contractors and other operations support visitors (UPS, FedEx, etc.). In general, this group is unaware of the unique environment of Pendle Hill; its pedestrian focus and peaceful facilities and grounds. Due to the current circulation network these commercial vehicles enter and leave quickly through the campus “front door” and can be a daily disturbance to an otherwise tranquil place.

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 15


The information in this section has been compiled from ongoing discussions with the Pendle Hill project advisors as well as an all day session in Autumn 2011 led by the Design Team which was focused on getting to know Pendle Hill. There was a charette style event with Pendle Hill’s full staff as well as smaller group interviews. Defining the campus user groups is key to understanding the complex organizational relationships which exist at Pendle Hill.

PROGRAMS + FUNCTIONS EDUCATION Courses at Pendle Hill create a space for spiritual deepening, intellectual stimulation, and the possibility of genuine personal transformation. Courses topics are varied and typically include: Quakerism, discernment, arts and spirituality, peace and social justice, organic gardening, the Bible, and healthful use of the body. Programs include: • Resident Program - Adult students both domestic and international of varying ages come to Pendle Hill to reside and study for 1-3 academic terms. • Short Term Education Program (STEP) - Weekend or multiday courses attended by short term overnight guests, resident program students and in some cases commuters. • Young Adult Leadership Development (YALD) - This program is offered in the Summer between Spring and Fall resident terms. Can be multi-week or one week intensive. There is a full staff supporting the educational programs and contributing to the intellectual and spiritual richness of campus: • Full-term teachers - Faculty are a combination of Pendle Hill residents and adjunct teachers(commuters) who are a daily presence in students’ lives. • Lecturers - Instructors, speakers and other guest faculty are an important part of Pendle Hill’s Education programs. They are both commuters and overnight guests on campus • Friends in Residence - Each year Pendle Hill hosts Friends in Residence who are present throughout the term and provide support and guidance founded on their long experience in the Religious Society of Friends. The company of these seasoned Friends adds a special dimension to the community’s understanding of what it means to be a Quaker. • Administrators - Administrative staff includes the Dean, a manager, permanent residential staff and adjunct positions.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


DEVELOPMENT • Development & outreach - This group reaches out to, secures and processes donations to Pendle Hill. Their strongest asset is the ability to tell stories about Pendle Hill and show how it will remain impactful for future generations. • Marketing - This department focuses on bringing new people to campus, getting them involved and helping them to stay involved • Communications - Comprised of the website and publications staff. Close coordination with Marketing and the Bookstore • Bookstore - Currently open limited hours in the Barn. Sells Pendle Hill publications as well as a curated collection of books. OPERATIONS • Conference Sales - In charge of managing the booking and allocation of guests and groups on campus. Involved closely with Operations as well as marketing. • Event Planning - Coordinates large group functions. Involves various staff and includes but is not limited to catering, campus signage, furniture reconfiguration, AV set up, etc. Equal parts office work and field coordination. Works closely with sales, hospitality and foodservice. • Registration - Housed in the rear portion of the Barn this group is involved with check in and out as well as concierge services. • Hospitality - Concierge type services for guests for on and off campus needs including transportation. Guests receive access to 24 hour cell phone support staff. • Housekeeping - Typical guest hospitality services include cleaning, linen service, etc. Linen storage and laundry are located in basement of Main House. • Kitchen - Staff of 5 serves 800-1,500 meals per week and up to 135 in one sitting. Closed only 4-5 days annually. The goal of the kitchen staff is to work as much as possible in house and for outside items build relationships with local and regional food producers and farmers. Demand expected to double within financial plan projections. Serves Pendle Hill staff and residents as well as guests and special events. • Garden - Food production both outdoors and in green house as well as composting. Focus on permaculture and self reliance. Currently there are some educational programs focused on gardening/earth care, and this is expected to increase. 2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 17


• Program Support - Staff and interns provide necessary program support for hospitality and foodservice. This ranges from set up and breakdown of seating arrangements to AV provisions. ADMINISTRATION • Finance - Ensures the fiscal health and long-term sustainability of Pendle Hill by providing timely and accurate financial information, development and monitoring of budgets, managing assets and investments, providing adequate cash flow to meet operational and capital needs, and implementing financial controls to prevent fraud or mismanagement of organizational assets. • HR - Human Resources recruits and retains staff members who, through their various skills, talents, and abilities, serve the Pendle Hill community through work, worship, fellowship, and mutual support. • Accounting - Ensures accurate recording and reporting of financial information in line with generally accepted accounting principles, contemporary business practices, and non-profit standards. • IT - Responsible for providing quality hardware and software tools, internet and web-based services, back-up and disaster recovery services, and telecommunications. • Grounds - The grounds crew is responsible for maintaining the various exterior areas on site including, forest areas, landscaped areas, hardscape, Brinton House Pond, etc. • Facilities/ Maintenance - This group is responsible for building maintenance and repair as well as coordination with capitol project planning.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 19


Beginning in late Fall 2011 and continuing through the completion of the master plan, the design team has been studying Pendle Hill’s buildings. Information has been gathered in several different ways and presented in this and subsequent sections: • Documentation - Pendle Hill has provided various forms of building documentation including architectural drawings for most of the buildings on campus, maintenance notes, utility records, purchase history, etc • Site Observation - The design team has spent time walking through every building on campus - inside and outside. Visual observations were recorded in writing and by photograph. • Staff Interviews - Critical history and condition of buildings has been revealed though conversations with facilities staff and other building users. This real world information is an insight in to those things not readily apparent on paper or by visual inspection.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

CAMPUS FACILITIES Pendle Hill is a campus rich with history. Although the land was not acquired until 1930 there are a number of structures which date to as far back as the early 1800’s. Since 1930, Pendle Hill has purchased additional land and buildings, constructed new buildings and undergone major renovations. The resulting campus is a blend of architectural eras and styles. The following is a brief history of acquisitions and building projects: 1930 1936 1940 1940 1945 1958 1964 1965 1968 1968 1973 1982 1972-1974 1989 1990 1991 1995 2000 2003 2012

Campus Purchase (ncludes Main House and Barn) Barn renovation Upmeads Construction Main House - Dining Room Addition Wakefield Construction Matsudo Construction Firbank Purchase & Renovation Chace Construction Main House Storeroom Addition Crosslands Construction Cadbury Court Construction Maintenance Shop Construction Wakefield Renovation Main House Renovation PennDOT purchase of Matsudo and 1.9 acres of land Main House Tree Rooms Addition Brinton House Steere Wing addition Firbank Addition and Renovation Barn Geothermal Installation and Student Lounge addition Upmeads Addition Brinton House Conlon Room/Staff Apartment Addition Maintenance Shop Woodshop Addition Roadside Renovation

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


M I L L

R O A D

CAMPUS FACILITIES MAP

I

N

T

P L U S H

WF

E

R

S

T

A

T

E 4

MH B B

WM BH

7

6

UP

EH

CR BA

B

LB

SH

CC RS

CH

Barn Brinton House Cadbury Court Chace Crosslands

EH FB FA FH LB

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Edgehill Firbank Farm Buildings Flower House Little Barn

Page 21

FB

C

FH

BA BH CC CH CR

FA N

MB

MH MB RS SH UP

Main House Maintenance Building Roadside Spring House Upmeads

WF Wakefield WM Waysmeet

0 25'50' 100'

200'


FACILITIES CATALOG Narrative descriptions of facilities conditions have been included in this section. For additional information refer to the Deferred Maintenance Analysis on page 48.

BARN (Early 1900’s) Building Size: 6,900 sf; 2 stories + partial basement Primary Function: Main campus assembly and office spaces Exterior Envelope: Stone foundation, painted brick and cedar shingle siding, asphalt composite shingle roof The Barn is the “soul” of campus - where daily meeting is held in addition to group assemblies of all types. Nearly all of Pendle Hill’s administrative staff is housed here in addition to a campus bookstore and the hospitality services. The Barn is connected to Chace by a breezeway. Barn main meeting room

The barn is in average condition overall but does have some significant deferred maintenance issues. On the exterior the roof is most likely past it’s useful life and many of the existing windows are original single pane. Interior finishes throughout are below average. Other than aesthetics and quality of space this does not pose “problems” in most cases. However, the carpet on the second floor has several seams which are opening up - these are potential tripping hazards. Additionally, the floor assembly of the main meeting space, as conveyed to the design team, is highly problematic as the wood floor structure sits directly on soil. This is the likely cause of the recurring termite infestations as well as the musty odor in that part of the building. There are some significant mechanical issues that need to be addressedq relative to the geothermal system that was installed in the 1990’s.

CADBURY COURT Building Size: Primary Function: Exterior Envelope:

Barn bookstore

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

(1968) 4,200 sf total; (5) 1 bedrooms & (2) 2 bedrooms, 1 story each Staff residences Stucco walls, asphalt composite shingle roof

Cadbury court is a residential townhome style development in the center of campus. It has been plagued by water problems for decades and currently half of the units are not in use because of IAQ (indoor air quality) problems. The water problems are the result of surface drainage due to improper grading. The problem has compounded over time to become more than the sum of it’s parts.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Cadbury Court

Barn, view from Center Green

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 23


CHACE (1958) Building Size: Primary Function: Exterior Envelope:

Crosslands

6,300 sf; 2 stories Guest housing Brick and wood siding, asphalt composition roof

Chace is a dorm style guest residence building connected to the Barn via a breezeway. The building suffers from below average and dated interior finishes and a replacement mechanical system for the defunct geothermal system. The building also is vulnerable to minor IAQ challenges. While not significant enough to force a shutdown (testing shows acceptable conditions) this nevertheless is not a sustainable condition for the building in the medium term. As a result of these conditions the building has become an obstacle to Pendle Hill’s ability to attract audiences in the coming years (this is often referred to as “market competitiveness”). The exterior of the building is in decent condition although the envelope does show signs of aging such as masonry stress cracking and older windows. The exterior should most likely be upgraded in conjunction with future renovation work.

CROSSLANDS (1965) Building Size: 2,100 sf; 2 stories + basement + attic Primary Function: Staff residence Exterior Envelope: Stone walls, vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof This building is currently home to the Grounds Manager and his family. They have been living there for over 20 years. This building is in average condition inside and out. Minor repairs and interior improvements will keep this building going. Exterior repairs consistent with the Deferred Maintenance guidelines are recommended.

EDGEHILL (1936) Building Size: 2,100 sf; 3 stories + basement Primary Function: Staff residence Exterior Envelope: Stone walls, vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof

Edgehill

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

This building is home to the executive director and family. It is among the buildings in the best condition of the campus residential buildings as it has been maintained well over the years. There are minor, non-critical deferred maintenance items on the interior. Exterior issues are typical of this campus building type. The major issue is basement flooding due to an improperly graded exterior patio.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Chace, view from walking trail

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 25


FIRBANK (Early 1800’s) Building Size: 14,3000 sf; 3 stories + full basement Primary Function: Student Residence and academic building Exterior Envelope: Insulated stucco facade (EIFS), asphalt composite shingle roof Firbank is the main academic building on campus. It contains the library, art/ceramic studio as well as student and staff residences and guest rooms. One of the biggest challenges for Firbank is the mix of various programmatic functions under the same roof.

Firbank

As the most recent major construction project on campus Firbank is in better condition than many of the campus buildings. However, it still has its share of interior items (stair treads, carpet, peeling paint, etc) which have slipped in recent years. On the exterior the main concerns are maintaining the stucco (EIFS) facades, scraping and repainting peeling paint and addressing the exterior doors which are rusting at the bases.

FLOWER HOUSE Building Size: Primary Function: Exterior Envelope:

Flower House

300 sf; 1 story Formerly used as a hermitage Wood siding and asphalt shingle roof

In the past Flower house has been used as a hermitage, however, it has been shut down in recent years due to IAQ issues. This building faces major challenges to being brought back online as a marketable hermitage space and the cost to do so will most likely not be worth the financial return. It’s most practical use moving forward is storage.

LITTLE BARN (1936) Building Size: 1,200 sf; 2 stories Primary Function: Formerly a staff residence Exterior Envelope: Painted wood siding and asphalt composite shingle roof

Roadside

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Little Barn has been used in the past as a staff residence building and meeting space. In recent years it has been shut down for IAQ issues. Spatially it is a fine building and should be brought back on line. Interior finishes are in above average condition but the exterior needs work - primarily relative to the roof and siding. Mechanically, the furnace location in the shed space is most likely causing some of the IAQ problems. This should be addressed as its relocation (or shed improvement) will lead to a more efficient operation.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Firbank, view of library from field

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 27


MAIN HOUSE (1922) Building Size: 9,000 sf; 2 stories + full basement + attic Primary Function: Foodservice and guest housing Exterior Envelope: Stone walls and vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof

Maintenance Building

Staff shared with the design team that while the Barn is felt to be the “soul” of campus, Main House is felt as the social “heart”. Three daily meals are prepared by the kitchen staff here and served to residents, students and guests in the dining area. Upstairs are guest and staff residences. Also in this building are a reading room and meeting space. Main House is an iconic building on campus but it has become an amalgamation of different functions under the same roof. Due to the age of the building and the years of program use adaptation, overall condition has slipped inside and out to well below average. This building is beloved but a programmatic and maintenance problem for Pendle Hill that will need to be addressed systematically over time. Much of the deferred maintenance analysis was written around the condition of Main House so the recommendations in that section should be seen as directly applicable. However, given the extensive backlog of deferred maintenance a full renovation (when appropriate) may be most cost effective.

MAINTENANCE BUILDING (1968) Building Size: 3,400 sf; 2 stories Primary Function: Maintenance functions Exterior Envelope: Stucco and wood siding, asphalt composite shingle roof Main House, front view The maintenance building lower level is dedicated to storage of maintenance equipment. The upper level is composed of an extensive wood shop and offices. In general this building is in above average condition for the campus. Main concerns relate to exterior grading at the driveway which leads to occasional flooding on the lower level.

ROADSIDE (1807) Building Size: 2,200 sf; 2 stories + basement Primary Function: Residential Exterior Envelope: Stone, stucco and vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof Roadside

Roadside has traditionally been a residential property that Pendle Hill has rented. It has recently been renovated in preparation for a new tenant and is in above average condition.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Main House, rear view

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 29


UPMEADS (1936) Building Size: 2,190 sf; 3 stories + basement Primary Function: Residential/Meeting space Exterior Envelope: Stone, stucco and vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof The public half of Upmeads contains a medium size library and meeting room, a refreshment kitchen and a bathroom. This area is in good condition. The private half of the structure is residential and until recently has been occupied by a family. This area is in moderate condition. Upmeads sits on a prime location near the entrance to campus. and will be discussed in subsequent chapters. Deferred maintenance is typical to slightly below average for the residential buildings. Given the prominance of the building and its role as a welcome center in the campus “vision” (page 76) a comprehensive renovation may be worthwhile.

WAKEFIELD (1940) Building Size: 1,400 sf; 2 stories Primary Function: Residential Exterior Envelope: Stucco, asphalt composite shingle roof

Upmeads (library in foreground)

Wakefield is a multi unit property for staff housing. Due to IAQ issues the lower level is shut down. The top floor has been adapted as a second unit to keep some usage of the structure despite the lower level issues. This building is on a difficult site which is heavily shaded and near the Blue Route. It also suffers from site drainage issues.

WAYSMEET (1936) Building Size: 3,300 sf; 3 stories + basement Primary Function: Guest residences Exterior Envelope: Stone, stucco, painted wood and vinyl siding, asphalt shingle roof Waysmeet is a residential building which is being used a guest residence building. Most of the rooms have multiple beds. The occupancy of this building is very dense and should be analyzed for code compliance. Condition is below average and there are some potential code issues which are currently being dealt with by Pendle Hill’s operations staff. Wakefield

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Waysmeet front entrance

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 31


BRINTON HOUSE Building Size: Primary Function: Exterior Envelope:

(1922) 9,500 sf, 2 stories + basement (Brinton), 2 stories (Steere Wing) Conference and guest residences Stone walls, vinyl siding, asphalt composite shingle roof

Brinton House (and the Steere Wing and Conlon additions) is the main conference facility on campus. The buildings include a large conference/event room, reception and dining spaces in addition to guest rooms. There is also a large one bedroom apartment on the lower level. This building is one of the prime revenue generators for Pendle Hill. As the building has undergone two major additions in the past 25 years it is in better shape than most on campus. However, with the exception of the Conlon room, interior spaces would benefit from modernization and finish upgrades. As Brinton House is so significant to Pendle Hill’s current and future fiscal stability it needs to bring its interior environment up to market standards to remain competitive. The exterior is suffering from the typical campus deferred maintenance. Roofing and painted wood surfaces are of prime concern. Additionally, the pole lights in the parking lot are in pretty bad shape and should be considered for replacement. Conlon Room interior

SPRING HOUSE Building Size: Primary Function: Exterior Envelope:

350 sf, 1 story Hermitage Brick and painted wood siding, asphalt composite shingle roof

This structure used to be used as a hermitage on the Brinton House campus. In recent years it has been shut down due to safety issues. The building’s structure is severely compromised and at this point is unsafe for occupancy. Similar to Flower House, the cost for repair of this structure most likely will not be cost effective. Reconstruction will be a better financial investment. Key to the success of this though is dealing with the surrounding vegetation and grading which have been the drivers of its current state.

Spring House

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Brinton House (original building) and Conlon Room addition

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 33


Beginning in late Fall 2011 and continuing through the completion of the master plan, the design team has been studying Pendle Hill’s grounds. Information has been gathered in several different ways and presented in this and subsequent sections: • Documentation - Pendle Hill has provided a few valuable forms of site documentation, most notably a tree map indicating individual species. • Site Observation - The design team has spent time walking the campus grounds during the fall, winter and spring. Visual observations including seasonal changes were recorded in writing and by photograph. • Staff Interviews - Critical history and condition of the campus grounds have been revealed though conversations with grounds maintenance staff and other campus users. This real world information is an insight in to those things not readily apparent on paper or by visual inspection.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

CAMPUS GROUNDS The campus grounds are integral in supporting Pendle Hill’s mission. Throughout campus there are beautiful and interesting trees, sunny open spaces for groups to gather and private shady spots for contemplation. These spaces are varied and adaptable to many uses; they create a guest’s first impression to campus and become central to a their continued experience. The campus grounds face many challenges, however. As an arboretum the site has the characteristics of a fragmented woodland: intense competition from invasive plants, buildings and paved areas that need to be kept clean and safe from dropping branches. The distributed layout of buildings makes site organization difficult, as outdoor spaces are located on all sides of buildings, creating no obvious “back” of buildings for private areas or service zones. Circulation and wayfinding also suffer due to a lack of clear distinction between public versus private, hierarchies of paths or key gateways. In addressing these challenges the campus grounds can become an even greater asset for Pendle Hill as a place of reflection, education, and connection with community and nature.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


M I L L

R O A D

CAMPUS GROUNDS MAP

I

MD

T

PG

PO

P L U S H

N

CL

E

R

S

BW

MHL

T

A

T

E 4

7

6

B B

PBH

UG

BHW

WC

BHV

OG

CG

B

PB MG

CC

LB

PF FY

BHV BHW BW CC CG CL

Brinton House Valley/Pond Brinton House Woods Berm Woods Cadbury Court Center Green/Mound Center Lawn

FF FY LB MD MG MHL

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Firbank Field Firbank yard Labyrinth Meadow Memorial Garden Main House Lawn

Page 35

MY OG PB PBH PF PG

FF

VG

C

N

0 25'50' 100'

MY

Maintenance yard Owen’s Garden Parking - Barn Parking - Brinton House Parking - Firbank Playground

PO UG VG WC

Parking - Overflow Upmeads Garden Vegetable Garden Waysmeet Court

200'


GROUNDS CATALOG BARN PARKING LOT The Barn Parking Lot is an asphalt lot serving 30 cars. It is situated between Barn and Chace and mainly serves short term visitors.

Berm Woods

BERM WOODS The Berm was created as a sound buffer along the Eastern edge of the property. This area has grown into a dense wood of evergreen and deciduous trees. BRINTON HOUSE PARKING LOT This is an asphalt lot with spaces for 20 cars sitting just North of Brinton House. BRINTON HOUSE VALLEY & POND The Pond and the open valley upstream create a clearing in Brinton House Woods. This pond was been created within the valley by an earthen dam along the eastern property line, fed by a spring to the West.

Brinton House Woods

BRINTON HOUSE WOODS The Brinton House Woods encompasses all of the property surrounding Brinton House and the Pond, on the Northern Half of Campus. The terrain is more severe than the Southern Half of the property, and the woodlands are less fragmented by buildings, creating a space that feels more secluded and wild. CADBURY COURT Cadbury Court is a lawn area enclosed by Cadbury and Firbank with a few small but mature trees, and a bamboo fence to the West.

Cadbury Court

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Brinton House Valley and Pond

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 37


CENTER GREEN Is a large open spaced situated in the center of campus. The space is mostly lawn, partially shaded by mature trees. Two major landmarks sit within the Green: a stand of mature dawn redwoods and the “Mound”. Various paths and roadways run through the space, connecting Main House, the Barn, and Firbank/Cadbury. CENTER LAWN Center Lawn is an open lawn space to the North of Center Green. It is currently used for additional parking for large events. Center Lawn

FIRBANK FIELD Firbank Field is a sloping, open lawn space situated between Firbank, Owen’s Garden and the Vegetable Garden. The area is currently used as a play space for activities like Frisbee and other lawn games. A flagstone terrace connected to Firbank overlooks this space to the west. FIRBANK YARD Firbank yard is a small, flat lawn space to the West of the Firbank Parking area. The area is mostly lawn, has a clothesline and a few mature trees.

Firbank Yard

FIRBANK PARKING LOT Is a small asphalt lot for 12 cars, adjacent to Firbank and mainly serving students. LABYRINTH The Labyrinth is situated in a relatively flat open space enclosed by trees of various sizes. A neighboring residential property is open to the West, and it is enclosed to the other sides by dense vegetation.. The labyrinth feature is mowed into cool season lawn grasses.

Labyrinth

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Center Green

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 39


MEADOW The Meadow sits adjacent to Plush Mill Road, just east of the main entrance and North of the Front Parking Lot. It is composed of a variety of native wildflowers and warm and cool season grasses, contained by a split rail fence and partially enclosed by trees on all sides.

The Meadow

MAIN HOUSE LAWN The Main House Lawn is connected to the east side of Main House. It is primarily used as an outdoor dining space due to its proximity to the dining room and the shade cast from the surrounding canopy trees. Sound from the Blue Route is noticeable in this part of campus. MAINTENANCE YARD The Maintenance yard includes parking, storage, and work space for various service operations. Many materials are stockpiled in this location for future projects.

Owen’s Garden

OVERFLOW PARKING The Front Parking area is a gravel parking lot serving 17 cars, primarily functioning as an overflow. Located within yards of the front entrance and across from Upmeads, it is lined with mature deciduous trees to the South and a variety of Spruce trees and the Meadow to the North. OWENS GARDEN Owens garden is a small enclosed space with a pavilion, pond, and various plantings. PLAYGROUND The playground is well used by children on site and sometimes shared with the Community Arts Center to the North. Its enclosed with a steel fence, and in a well shaded area.

Playground

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Main House Lawn

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 41


ROADSIDE COURT Roadside court is a small wooded courtyard, with pathways leading to Roadside and FS, and bench in the center looking out toward the Labyrinth space. UPMEADS GARDEN This space is shaded flagstone seating area on the back side of Upmeads.

Walking trail

WAYSMEET COURT Waysmeet Court a small, partially wooded courtyard with pathways leading to Waysmeet, Edgehill, and Little Barn. VEGETABLE GARDEN The vegetable garden is one half acre, the majority of which is cultivated soil. A hoophouse and a small shed, and coldframes are sited here. Various materials such as firewood and compost are stored here as well. Mature canopy trees surround the garden to the South and East, and Firbank Field sits to the West.

Beech tree

THE WALKING TRAIL The walking trail is a one mile path leading around the perimeter of Pendle Hill, and is well used both by guests and nearby residents. It is connected to a number of adjacent properties and the Leiper Smedley trail. Most of the path is paved with wood chip, in some areas it coincides with asphalt paths or driveways.

Walking trail

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Garden

2 - PENDLE HILL 2012-2013

Page 43


3

ANALYSIS

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


UNDERSTANDING CAMPUS ASSETS

When studying and analyzing what exists at Pendle Hill it’s critical to recognize the inherent liability and potential of individual assets as opposed to their recognized or assessed financial value. This will help to drive future decision making in the most constructive direction. These campus assets can be broken in to three major categories - buildings, grounds and people. Each of these groupings has unique needs that have arisen around their own evolution and adaptations. Each also has a unique set of variables which effect their performance. Buildings house functions and, in the case of education and guest services, are tools for financial generation. But in order to perform properly they require maintenance and repair. They also bring richness to campus and the activities that occur there. In the end a successful building must be more than purely functional or aesthetically pleasing - it needs to be financially viable and not an undue burden. Campus grounds are similar in that they can be functional but in less defined and programmatic ways. They also require maintenance and upkeep, but this is harder to quantify in a net return/loss kind of way. Where buildings are rigid and functional, grounds can be thought of as organic and atmospheric. As such their cost to maintain must be balanced with their ability to contribute quality to the campus environment. The most difficult asset to assess though is people and programs. What Pendle Hill does is perhaps of greater value than all other assets combined. But in order to keep this “mini ecosystem� performing at the highest level possible (thereby generating financial, social and intellectual capital) the facilities and grounds must be mechanisms for and not obstacles to this vision.

3 - ANALYSIS

Page 45


Facility condition assessment (FCA) is an industry term that describes the process of a qualified group of trained industry professionals performing an analysis of the condition of a group of facilities that may vary in terms of age, design, construction methods, and materials. A typical metric that can be generated by the FCA is the Facility Condition Index (FCI). This is used in facilities management to provide a benchmark to compare the relative condition of a group of facilities. The FCI is primarily used to support asset management initiatives. Mathematically, FCI is equal to the maintenance/repair costs of the facility divided by the replacement cost of the facility. The closer this number gets to 1 the less value there is to repair, the closer the value to 0 the better the value of repair. Specific FCI calculations are not in the scope of this master plan. However, a more qualitative representation of this is shown in the diagram to the right.

FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENTS As Pendle Hill’s buildings have been acquired, constructed, renovated and adapted to over the last 80 years, the sheer size of the campus and building area has sometimes outgrown the maintenance capabilities of the staff and budget. As a result most of the buildings on campus are behind on deferred maintenance. The design team has performed qualitative facilities condition assessments to help guide future building deferred maintenance and renovation initiatives. Before delving in to deferred maintenance though it is important to understand how this assessment should guide future work. The following principals should be adopted as guides for facility improvements: • Buildings in good condition (requiring only minor improvements) need to be maintained at their current high level so as to avoid slipping in to poorer states. • Buildings requiring significant to moderate improvements should be approached with systematic initiatives. For example, consider window replacement or roof replacement for a number of buildings one at a time rather than focusing on multiple aspects of one building. This will ensure consistency of materials, detailing and contractors as well as bring up the quality of this group of buildings as a whole. • Buildings which require major improvements need to be assessed for cost benefit or repair versus replacement (tear down). If they are determined to be worth keeping they need to first and foremost be stabilized and then approached with comprehensive plans to bring them back to good working condition. These facilities should not receive one-off repairs as these minor benefits will be swallowed up by larger building deficiencies.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


CAMPUS FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT MAP

B B

B

B

C

Offline Major Improvements Needed Significant Improvements Needed Moderate Improvements Needed Minor Improvements Needed

3 - ANALySIS

Page 47

N

0 25'50' 100'

200'


Deferred maintenance is defined as the upkeep of buildings and equipment postponed from an entity’s normal operating budget cycle due to a lack of funds. Under funding of routine maintenance can cause neglect allowing minor repair work to evolve into more serious conditions. The problem is further compounded by choices made during austere financial times when routine maintenance is often deferred in order to meet more pressing fiscal requirements. The failure to take care of major repairs and/or restore facilities or building components that have reached the end of their useful lives can result in a deferred maintenance backlog. (definition from University of Illinois Deferred Maintenance brochure)

BUILDING DEFERRED MAINTENANCE On any campus, the moment construction finishes (and sometimes even earlier) building maintenance begins. This is a never ending process of tending to lots of small items and the occasional large issue. The most effective way to deal with building maintenance is to address issues before they become problems. If they go on too long they become disruptive and costly. As is often the case with many established campuses with historic buildings, Pendle Hill’s building maintenance has become difficult to keep up with. In some cases, small problems have aggregated to serious issues and in some cases these issues have caused irreparable damage to buildings. Moving forward it is critical to develop a balanced deferred maintenance action plan. There needs to be a dual focus on maintaining those facilities which are in better condition while repairing and catching up to those which have fallen behind. Attached to this document as Appendix K is a sample list of common deferred maintenance unit costs which may help Pendle Hill gain an understanding of some of the cost exposure of deferred maintenance items. In order to fully understand the cost of repair it is recommended that a full deferred maintenance action plan be generated by a team of architects and construction managers. ROOFS + ATTICS Nearly all of the roofs currently in place on campus are asphalt shingles. Asphalt shingle roofs are a cost effective installation but have relatively limited lifespans which can be as little as 20 years in certain environments and orientations. Records indicate that the vast majority of buildings on campus have not had roof replacements in over 20 years. Visual observation suggests that many of the roofs are deteriorating. It is recommended to develop a roof replacement plan which can be folded in to facilities maintenance annual budgets and/or capital campaigns.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


When replacing roofs consider alternatives to asphalt shingles which will be more durable over time, require less maintenance, have longer lifespans and be more environmentally responsible. Some alternatives include standing seam metal and synthetic slate shingles. The added benefit to roofs like this is that they add significant aesthetic character to the buildings and campus. When installing new roofs the existing roofs should be completely removed and all underlayments and flashing repaired or replaced as necessary.

Roof shingles delaminating

When undertaking a re-roofing project, attic insulation and ventilation should also be addressed. Attic insulation should vary based on usage. If the attic is unusable the ceiling framing cavities above the top floor should be insulated with an open cell spray foam (preferred) or blown in cellulose. If the attic is usable consider installing the spray foam in the roof framing bays. In conjunction with insulation, adequate attic ventilation is important to prolonging the life of the roofing, indoor air quality and thermal comfort. An inadequately vented or unvented attic is a reservoir of heat and moisture which can harbor mold and create uncomfortable top floors in warm weather. Exhaust ventilation must be balanced with fresh air intake so soffit and eave vents are necessary. When considering roofing vents there are a wide variety of options available from fully passive to fully powered. A hybrid approach is solar powered roof vents, which use energy collected from a small photovoltaic(PV) array to power the vent fan.

Downspout missing drain boot

In conjunction with re-roofing or repairs the roof drainage on each associated building should be resized and replaced as required. Gutter protection should be installed as gutter cleaning is a significant cost and burden to the facilities and maintenance staff. Ensure that all downspouts are terminated in stormwater collection/harvesting systems or direct water away from the base of the buildings.

Old single pane window with peeling paint

3 - ANALySIS

WINDOWS + EXTERIOR DOORS Windows and exterior doors are essential to the quality of light and space inside buildings as well as being compositional elements which help to define campus aesthetic themes. At the same time, they are also sources of heat loss and gain, water infiltration and air infiltration. With much of the building area on campus not having been renovated or built in the past few decades there are many old windows Page 49


on campus which are in need of replacement. Window replacement is not inexpensive when done right, but the alternative - heating and cooling costs, thermal discomfort, water damage - is costly as well.

Basement windows, visible edge gaps

Of particular concern on Pendle Hill’s campus are basement windows. There are many basement windows which are not air and water tight, have broken panes of glass and window wells which do not drain. These windows should be targeted early on for replacement as not only are they undermining the seasonal energy performance of the buildings but they are allowing water in to the basements which is causing a whole other set of problems. As a general goal, all single pane windows should be replaced by thermally broken, insulated glass windows. To maintain the historic character of campus, in select appropriate locations these windows should be replaced with historically accurate designs. There are many different window types, materials and manufacturers in today’s replacement window market so it is suggested that competitive bids be solicited for the first project undertaken with the goal of developing a campus standard.

Rusting door base

With the exception of problem or emergent situations one-off replacements should be avoided as there are economies of scale to be gained from whole building replacements. Since windows have a significant impact on a building’s energy use their replacement should be considered in conjunction with other elements such as insulation, roofing, etc to improve mechanical system performance and reduce operating costs. Exterior doors are also a problem in many locations on campus as they can also be sources of heat loss, thermal discomfort and air and water infiltration when not installed properly. It is essential that all exterior doors be properly weatherstripped and that their thresholds be sloped away from building interiors. Where possible, vestibules should be used for added energy savings and thermal comfort.

Air gaps between doors

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Exterior door replacement should be pursued in a similar manner to window replacement as noted above with the added considerations of accessibility, life-safety code compliance and security. Again a campus standard (or multiple standards Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


for different architectural styles) is recommended for aesthetic coherence as well as hardware consistency. FOUNDATION/BASEMENT WALLS The two main deferred maintenance issues relative to basement walls are moisture and heat loss.

Deteriorating basement walls

Unparged foundation walls

Steel column base rusting away due to repeated flooding

3 - ANALySIS

Nearly all of the buildings on campus have unfinished and unconditioned basements. Below grade spaces benefit from the insulation of earth and the consistent temperature below the ground plane. Any tempering of the air in these spaces is due to residual heat from mechanical systems, lighting or adjacent (above) conditioned space. As noted in the window recommendations inadequate basement windows can be significant sources of heat loss. Even though the heat is for the most part residual this still has a measurable impact on the building heating loads. Conditioning basement space is difficult and is accompanied by a unique set of thermal issues. For this reason and the spatial conditions of basements on campus doing so is not recommended. Moisture in basements is a problem throughout campus which should be addressed. There are three pathways for moisture to get in to basements - windows, walls and floors. Refer to the window notes section for information on dealing with moisture infiltration through windows. Relative to walls the best method for preventing moisture infiltration is keeping water away from the walls in the first place. For existing construction the best way to do this is with proper grading sloping away from the foundation wall as well as by directing water from downspouts away from the building. There will always be hydrostatic pressure on the foundation walls and with the stone walls which are common on campus this pressure can drive water through the mortar joints. Without major excavation and exterior installation of waterproof coatings, drainage board and below grade drainage pipe the best measure for reducing this kind of infiltration is parging of stone basement walls with cementitious material and finishing with a waterproofing masonry paint. An additional measure which can be employed for problem areas is the installation of below slab “french� drains tied to a sump pump which can evacuate accumulated water. This is quite costly though and should only be pursued if all other measures fail. A similar kind of hydrostatic pressure Page 51


as well as the evaporative paths of water can also drive moisture up through a concrete basement floor slab. Again, coatings can be installed to help prevent some of this moisture. Another consideration is that in many cases older basement slabs can be as thin as just an inch or two - this can lead to cracks and fractures which can allow moisture in. A topping slab can help to seal these cracks and add mass which will help reduce the amount of vertically rising moisture.

Step flashing at roof/wall joint

Masonry stress crack at Chace

Perimeter window joints are prone to water an air infiltrations

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

EXTERIOR WALLS There are two primary concerns relative to exterior wall deferred maintenance; air and water infiltration and exterior finish maintenance. Insulation is a key component of successful wall assemblies although not so much a deferred maintenance topic. This will be addressed in later sections. Water infiltration though exterior walls can cause multitudes of damage ranging from mold growth and damaging of interior finishes to significant structural system or wall damage from moisture decay or masonry spalling. The primary pathway for water to penetrate an exterior wall is the intersection of any two materials. This can be around penetrations (e.g. windows, doors, vents, hose bibs, electrical outlets, etc.) or at the joint between materials (e.g. stone to stone, stone to brick, stone to siding, siding to roof eave, etc.). Detailed visual surveys should be performed by maintenance staff to identify and seal all such gaps on exterior walls. All materials have unique thermal expansion and contraction characteristics that must be accounted for when sealing these kinds of joints. That is, dissimilar materials will have differential movement in the varying thermal conditions our region experiences through different seasons. For this reason joints need to be filled with elastomeric waterproof material such as silicone caulk. Adhesion to different materials must also be considered as not all sealants adhere to different material types. Mortar joints in stone and brick masonry walls also need to be monitored closely as water can travel through mortar. Over time the material in these joints can deteriorate and/or crack allowing water to more easily penetrate the wall. In these cases, old mortar will need to be removed a depth suitable for installation of a new mortar joint - this is referred to commonly as repointing. Particular attention needs to be paid to masonry chimneys as they are quite prone to mortar deterioration. Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


As with masonry, the deterioration of other exterior finishes also can provide means for water to penetrate walls. For this reason it is very important to stay on top of maintenance of these finishes. There are only a handful of finishes on Pendle Hills campus in addition to the aforementioned stone and brick masonry:

Peeling paint exposes wood to moisture

• Painted Wood - Used for siding and wood trim in various locations ranging from decorative trim to siding. Paint has been observed on many buildings to be peeling. As the paint peels away it exposes wood to water which can lead to rot which in turn can allow water in to the interior of buildings. Peeling wood needs to be scraped, the wood primed and then repainted with an exterior grade paint. It should be noted that given the age of many buildings on campus it is highly likely that lead based paint may be present (lead paint was banned by the EPA in 1977). A certified abatement professional should be consulted before the removal of any peeling pant by Pendle Hill maintenance staff. Any wood product should be held off the ground surface as not only will this invite moisture to degrade the wood but can lead to termite damage (see subsequent sections). • Vinyl Siding - There are a number of buildings which have vinyl siding installed. Vinyl siding is a very durable material but it does require maintenance. If moisture is able to get behind the siding it can accelerate rot, promote mold and mildew, and invite insect infestations. To avoid hidden decay, sealant joints between the siding and adjacent trim (vinyl or otherwise) needs to be monitored and replaced when necessary (refer to masonry comments above). Along these lines any punctures or tears in siding need to be addressed immediately. It’s recommended to keep an attic stock of siding on campus for such repairs. To keep vinyl siding looking fresh pressure wash annually or as needed to remove any mildew on the surface.

Stained vinyl siding

Stucco walls showing signs of efflorescence and cracking

3 - ANALySIS

• Stucco - Stucco is a durable and protective material but requires maintenance to remain aesthetically pleasing and technically sound. Stucco is a masonry material and as such is susceptible to similar kinds of degradation as mortar - it can crack, spall, effloresce, etc. To maintain stucco focus should be placed first on filling in damaged areas with a patching compound. Once repairs have been made any Page 53


cracks need to be filled. Hairline cracks can be filled when surfaces are repainted but larger cracks ay require a paintable silicone sealant. As stucco is a masonry material it can hold moisture, which can lead to discoloration and transfer to substrates or interior materials. To prevent this, roof drainage systems should be held off the face of wall and stucco at the base of buildings should not come in to contact with the ground plane.

EIFS with weather stains

Potentially hazardous pipe insulation

Peeling interior paint possibly containing lead

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

• Exterior Insulated Facade System (EIFS) - EIFS is a stucco like facade system which is installed over rigid insulation. When installed correctly the system should require relatively little maintenance as the stucco is usually integrally colored and formulated with an acrylic binder which prevents much of the cracking common in traditional stucco applications.. Because the stucco finish is not installed to a rigid substrate like traditional stucco is it can be susceptible to impact damage. If this damage punctures the surface it can lead to water infiltration and must be addressed immediately. General periodic maintenance should include thorough checking of the flashing and sealing to ensure that the building envelope remains watertight. Damaged or missing flashing should be repaired or replaced immediately; likewise, cracked or deteriorated sealants should immediately be repaired, or removed and replaced. INTERIOR FINISHES The importance of interior finishes is often diminished or ignored in the context of many common envelope and systems related deferred maintenance items. However, there are serious interior deferred maintenance items on campus which relate to health, safety and the fiscal solvency of Pendle Hill. The two primary health issues impacted by interior finish deferred maintenance are hazardous materials and indoor air quality. During the building visual observations there were several instances of potentially hazardous materials in living areas. The identification and cataloguing of hazardous materials is outside of the scope of this master plan, however, it is strongly recommended that certified hazardous material abatement specialists inspect all buildings prior to renovation work. This topic is included under deferred maintenance as many of the materials in question (lead based paint, asbestos, etc) have been identified as hazardous for many decades. Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Relative to indoor air quality, the primary issue is material and finshes which could be harboring microorganisms or mold growth. Prime offenders of this would be carpet and basements. Carpet which has been in place for many years can contain a number of different toxins which can cause health problems as well as be a fertile breeding ground for mold. In particular there are a whole family of toxic flame retardants which were common in commercial and residential carpet up until the mid 2000’s. It is recommended that a carpet replacement program be started for all carpets that have been in place for greater than 10 years. Similarly, the many wet basements on campus are fertile ground for mold growth. As most of the mechanical equipment on campus is located in basements this air is being circulated throughout the buildings. It is recommended that in addition to waterproofing initiatives mentioned in other sections that all masonry or painted surfaces in basements be recoated with a low VOC stain blocking paint to contain any and all contaminants.

Opened carpet seams

Peeling paint in prominent areas

As interior finishes degrade over time safety becomes an issue. This is best understood by looking at the various surfaces within a room. Starting with flooring, when carpet or resilient floor begins to delaminate from the subfloor it can present tripping hazards. This was noticed in multiple buildings with older flooring and in particular at intersections and transitions between flooring types. A floor of significant concern is the Barn meeting room. Refer to the Pest control section for information. With walls the main concern relative to safety is tied to peeling paint - when lead paint peels it can contaminate the air. This is particularly of concern with children as the toxin levels in the air effect their development more so than with adults. This can also be an issue with lead paint on doors and door frames as the repeated rubbing of the paint when doors are opened and shut can cause paint dust. Refer to comments on hazardous material abatement for more information.

Delaminating ceiling tiles in public areas are safety hazards

3 - ANALySIS

With ceilings the obvious concern is finishes falling on building occupants. Peeling paint is one offender of this but the bigger problem is delaminating ceiling tiles (observed primarily in Main House). These should be removed immediately and replaced with a new ceiling finish. Page 55


As so many interior finishes on campus have been neglected for so long they have created a general quality of indoor space which may impede Pendle Hill’s competitiveness in the conference sales market. At this point in time nearly all public spaces on campus need “refreshing” and “modernization” This will be addressed in later sections of this report.

Brinton House ceiling

Barn meeting room floor

Tub faucet requiring use of shutoff valves to operate

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

PEST CONTROL Termites have been a mild but problem on Pendle Hill’s campus in the past. The surest path to preventing termite infestations is to make sure that any wood products, stucco and/or EIFS do not come in contact with the ground plane. This is especially critical at planted areas and should be aimed for at hardscape as well. The other location where this is a recurring and serious problem is the floor of the main meeting room at the barn. This wood floor is installed on top of large wood framing members (referred to by the maintenance staff as “railroad ties”). These members rest on gravel below which is soil. This is a very easy path for termite entry to the building and explains the many incidents of termite damage to this floor over the years. This assembly (open soil below the floor) also helps to explain some of the indoor air quality problems and musty smells in the building. To prevent future damage and expanded infestation in the building this entire floor assembly needs to be removed and reconstructed. When building above grade, all wood members need to be a minimum of 18” above soil with no direct pathways for termites. Additionally, a vapor barrier should be installed over the soil to address the air quality issues. Alternatively a concrete slab with vapor barrier below could be poured and a new floor installed on top. WATER USAGE AND PLUMBING As Pendle Hill performs work on their buildings, plumbing fixture replacement should be pursued alongside deferred maintenance items. Although not technically deferred maintenance, many of the plumbing fixtures on campus are very old and use much more water than current fixtures on the market. Replacing fixtures with more water efficient versions is not a huge expense when installed by staff. Doing so will reduce operating costs as well as help minimize Pendle Hill’s exposure to increasing domestic water supply costs and property damage which would be incurred by fixture failures. Additionally, water saving fixtures that use hot water don’t just save water, they save a Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Old toilets use several times more water then new ones

tremendous amount of energy needed to make that hot water. As a general rule of thumb: • Toilets with flush volumes greater than 1.6 liters per flush should be replaced as soon as feasible. Consider dual flush or high efficiency toilets. • Lavatory faucets greater than 2.0 gallons per minute (GPM) should be replaced with faucets less than 1.0 GPM. • Showerheads greater than 2.0 GPM should be replaced with showerheads less than 1.5 GPM. • Kitchen pre-rinse spray valves greater than 2.0 GPM should be replaced with fixtures less than 1.5 GPM. Although not as easily quantified as the items above, if and when kitchen related equipment is replaced water efficiency should be a factor in product selections. STAFF, STUDENT AND GUEST ENGAGEMENT Referring back to the master plan goals (page 10) part of Pendle Hill’s intention is to engage all campus users in their community. A great way to do this is through shared, communal work efforts. Being involved in maintenance and/or upkeep creates an intimate relationship between user and building/grounds. By sharing this experience with others not only will the collective user/facility relationship be improved but so to will the greater sense of and investment in the community be heightened. While much of the deferred maintenance noted in this section requires a reasonable degree of specialization there are many items which can be done with minimal training. Pendle Hill should consider seasonal “work days” or other scheduled times when everybody (including guests) will drop what they’re doing, roll up their sleeves, get dirty and see the progress that they can achieve with a little collective elbow grease!

Working together in the garden

3 - ANALySIS

Page 57


Energy use is critical to the thermal comfort of buildings as well as the cost effectiveness of their operation. Pendle Hill’s campus can be divided in to three kinds of buildings: • Public buildings (Barn, Firbank, Brinton House, etc) • Residential Buildings (Edgehill, Crosslands, etc) • Out buildings (Spring House, Hoop House, etc) This energy study focuses primarily on the Public buildings as they are composed of more complex mechanical and electrical systems and also represent the majority of energy use on campus. The residential buildings and out buildings are simpler and represent smaller energy demands.

ENERGY USE AND REDUCTION Pendle Hill consumes electricity, natural gas, and fuel oil in its various energy-using systems. Given the current records of utility usage it is difficult to tell exactly how much is spent annually and how the various energy sources are distributed throughout the campus. Utility tracking software, such as ENERGY STAR’s Portfolio Manager, should be used to organize utility records for each building. Tracking utility usage is a critical part of maintaining long-term energy efficiency. By developing a baseline of electricity, natural gas, and fuel oil consumption, Pendle Hill can easily evaluate the effects of energy conservation measures, monitor fluctuations in utility rates, and compare the campus’s energy performance to other facilities in the region and around the country. Tracking fuel oil consumption is particularly important, as the cost of fuel oil is relatively volatile and is predicted to rise in the coming years. Pendle Hill should strive to discontinue the consumption of fuel oil in favor of natural gas, geothermal heat pumps, or other alternatives. Utility tracking through Portfolio Manager can help identify the largest users of fuel oil and prioritize renovations. Refer to the chart in the sidebar to the left for the estimated overall consumption of electricity, natural gas, and fuel oil at Pendle Hill for the 12-month period ending February 2012.

2011 Utility consumption: Units Rate Cost Electricity 547,755 kWh $0.09 $49k Nat. Gas 11,277 ccf $1.34 $15k Fuel Oil 4,988 gal $3.40 $17k TOTAL $81,374.85

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Short-Term and Deferred Maintenance Projects The following four short-term or deferred maintenance projects have been identified. Refer to Section 4 of the master plan for additional information on phase implementation 1. Repair or replace the eight (8) units identified in the “deferred maintenance projects” portion of the HVAC replacement plan 2. Renovate Chace HVAC and rehabilitate the open-loop geothermal well system 3. Revise thermostat zoning in the Main House 4. Review and revise the Barn and Chace Building Automation System (BAS) settings to incorporate nighttime and weekend setbacks 5. Lighting Inventory and replacement options Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


1. HVAC INVENTORY & REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE Included in the appendix to this report is an inventory and replacement schedule for the major HVAC equipment located in the Main House, Firbank, Chace, Barn, Brinton House and Waysmeet (Appendices A-D). These buildings have been assessed as they contain or are contenders for more sophisticated HVAC systems. Smaller residential buildings have not been included in this evaluation. The replacement schedule is organized by the estimated “date to replace,” which was determined by the date of manufacture and the typical equipment lifetime. Typical example of campus furnaces

Any broken units, and many of the units for which the “date to replace” is before 2012, may be considered deferred maintenance projects and should be replaced in the short-term (1-4 years). For the six buildings considered in this analysis, there are eight (8) units that fall under this category. They are presented in Appendix E along with the estimated efficiency of the replacement units (based on industry-leading high efficiency units). Note that the replacement schedule includes cost estimates for the equipment replacements as well as the resulting annual energy savings. This can be used to determine the “simple payback” of the replacement - that is, the number of years it will take for the amount saved on energy expenses to be equal to the original equipment replacement cost.

Corridor heater in Firbank

2. CHACE RENOVATION AND GEOTHERMAL REHABILITATION The two-story Chace dormitory building comprises (24) guest bedrooms (12 per floor). The HVAC design for this building relies on two (2) 10-ton water-to-water geothermal heat pumps (located in the basement of the Barn) that provide hot and chilled water to fan coil units located in each room. However, both heat pumps are currently out of service; hot water heating is currently provided by a 30 year-old fuel oil boiler, and cooling is provided by window air conditioners. Boiler unit

For the purpose of the energy analysis the following HVAC renovation scenarios for Chace have been considered: 3 - ANALySIS

Page 59


• Continuing with the current boiler/window unit configuration, • Repairing the existing heat pumps, • Installing new high efficiency heat pumps • Replacing the heat pump/fan coil system with through-wall packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHP’s)

Furnaces in Main House basement

It is unlikely that repairing the existing heat pumps is economically feasible. Further study is required to determine the exact cost of repairs (estimated as 80% of the cost of installing new units), and they are likely to fail again due to scale and build-up in the geothermal water loop. Pendle Hill should consider rehabilitating the geothermal wells and replacing the existing water-to-water heat pumps with new high efficiency units (up to 20.1 EER). Doing so would decrease annual energy expenditures for Chace by up to 55%, and would decrease pollution (CO2 emissions) by up to 47% compared to the existing boiler/window unit configuration. The simple payback for this measure is estimated at 5.5 years (based on new ClimateMaster TMW series heat pumps). Additionally, if Chace is demolished or repurposed in the next five (5) years, the new heat pumps would easily adapt to the new HVAC system. Refer to Section 4 of the masterplan for specific redevelopment proposals for Chace.

Geothermal valves in Barn basement

The cost/payback analysis can be found in Appendix F. GEOTHERMAL WELL REHABILITATION It was noted during site observations that the open-loop geothermal system performs poorly and has frequent issues with scale and fouling associated with the ground water quality. Resolving this problem is paramount to ensuring long-term operation of the geothermal system and should be performed before new heat pumps are installed for Chace. Rusted mechanical equipment

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

In an open-loop geothermal system, proper maintenance of the supply and diffusion wells is of utmost importance to maintaining system operation and optimum efficiency. Diffusion wells have a greater tendency to become fouled with mineral and organic Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


deposits, which can clog screens or even become lodged in the loop piping. The local water quality should be evaluated for the presence of these substances, but it is often overlooked during the design process. Pendle Hill should develop a maintenance plan for the geothermal system that includes regular inspection and removal of mineral scale and bio-fouling. The extent of the rehabilitation depends on how well and frequently the system is maintained; in this case it may be necessary to replace the existing screens entirely in addition to chemical or physical scale removal methods. Further study is required to determine the appropriate testing and cleaning processes and the cost to perform the maintenance.

Control panels

3. MAIN HOUSE THERMOSTAT ZONING Main House serves two primary functions: the first floor is a dining and community facility, and the second floor is residential. These two uses have dramatically different space heating requirements, yet the current thermostat zoning does not allow the two floors to be separated. A thermostat located in the first floor common room controls the south half of both the first and second floors, and a thermostat in the second floor hall provides the similar control for the north half of the building. Manual thermostat with directions

Modern programmable thermostats can track energy performance over time

3 - ANALySIS

The first and second floors should be controlled separately, so that the dining and community spaces can be set back at night, and the residential spaces can be set back during the day, when the guest rooms are likely to be empty. This may be accomplished by simply re-wiring and possibly relocating the thermostats, which could likely be performed by Pendle Hill staff. Space heating is provided by four (4) new, high efficiency gas furnaces (93% AFUE) that should easily adapt to this alternate control scheme. Studies performed by the U.S. Department of Energy indicate that energy savings of approximately 1% may be realized for every 1째F of setback per eight-hour period. In Main House this could result in up to 10% energy savings for each furnace (assuming a 10째F setback at night on the first floor and during the day on the second floor), or approximately $630 per year at little or no expense.

Page 61


4. BARN AND CHACE BUILDING AUTOMATION SYSTEM SETTINGS Temperature settings and schedules for the Barn and Chace are controlled by a Facilitator system from Johnson Controls. This system has the ability to schedule all the heating and cooling units for these buildings through a central computer located in the basement of the Barn. Currently, the system is managed by Johnson Controls technicians, and Pendle Hill staff generally do not make changes.

Incandescent track lighting

Pendle Hill should consider placing one staff member in charge of learning and managing the Facilitator system. This person should review the temperature settings and schedules for each unit at the beginning of each heating and cooling season. To ensure uniformity and consistency, consider developing and implementing an Energy Management Policy that defines acceptable heating and cooling setpoints and schedules. 5. LIGHTING INVENTORY AND RENOVATION OPTIONS Lighting throughout the Pendle Hill campus is provided by a mixture of compact fluorescent lamps (CFL’s), T8 and T12 fluorescent tubes, and a few incandescent floodlights and sconces. For study purposes a lighting inventory was compiled for Main House, The Barn, Chace, Firbank, Waysmeet and Brinton House with estimated annual electricity consumption and cost, can be found in Appendix G.

Outdated lighting, unsightly lenses

Pendle Hill should consider replacing all 34W T12 lamps with electronically-ballasted, low-wattage 25W T8s. Additionally, all 3- and 4-lamp fixtures should be retrofitted to hold two lamps. Lamp-reducing retrofit kits are relatively inexpensive and widely available, and many come with a reflective backing or lens so that adequate light levels are maintained. Refer to Appendix item H for example replacement options for each type of lamp identified in the six buildings mentioned previously

Switching to T8’s from T12’s saves energy!

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Utility Analysis The following figures show the breakdown of electricity consumption by end-use (Figure 1) and by mon

2011 (Figure 2). The high percentage of electricity associated with HVAC (79%) is attributable to the heat The following figures theand breakdown of electricity consumption by end-use 1) andforbythe month forand su that serve show the Barn Brinton guest rooms. These heat pumps are also(Figure responsible winter 2011 (Figurepeaks 2). The high percentage of electricity associated with HVAC (79%) is attributable to the heat pumps in electricity consumption shown in Figure 2. that serve the Barn and Brinton guest rooms. These heat pumps are also responsible for the winter and summer peaks in electricity consumption shown in Figure 2. Process Lighting

The diagrams to the right show the breakdown of electricity consumption by end-use (top) and by month for 2011 (bottom).

Loads 2%

Process Loads 2%

16%

Lighting 16%

The high percentage of electricity associated with HVAC (79%) is attributable to the heat pumps that serve the Barn and Brinton guest rooms. These heat pumps are also responsible for the winter and summer peaks in electricity consumption shown in the lower diagram.

Plug Loads 3%

HVAC 79%

Plug Loads 3%

HVAC 79%

Annual electricity consumption by use type

Figure 1: Electricity End-Uses

Figure 1: Electricity End-Uses

2011

60,000 50,000

50,000

40,000

kWh

40,000

kWh

60,000

2011

30,000

30,000

20,000

20,000

10,000

10,000

-

Jan

Feb

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Nov

Dec

Figure 2: Monthly Electricity Use Figure 2: Monthly Electricity Use

3 - ANALySIS

Monthly electricity consumption

Page 63

practical energy s

101 e. evans street, suite 2, west chester, p


The information in this section has been compiled from ongoing discussions with the Pendle Hill project advisors as well as an all day session in Autumn 2011 led by the Design Team which was focused on getting to know Pendle Hill. There was a charette style event with Pendle Hill’s full staff as well as smaller group interviews. As program needs both develop and are addressed on an ongoing basis this list should be revisited from time to time.

PROGRAM NEEDS EDUCATION The main challenges for the Education department are centered around facility independence and modernization while retaining the unique nature of deep and transformative study at Pendle Hill. As education programs are second to conference/ guests in terms of revenue generation, access to their facilities are sometimes compromised to meet the demands of the latter. This is relative to both residential accommodations as well as meeting space. Dedicated facilities are needed for successful and dependable accommodations for the students and faculty. There is also a need for quiet spaces for contemplation. Further, many of the faculty lack adequate office space and/or meeting space for very small groups (2-3people). As Pendle Hill attracts students from varying demographics and nationalities there is a need for better, universally welcoming accommodations. Additionally this includes improved accomodation for physical disabilities. From a marketing standpoint, the Education department needs upgraded facilities to continue to attract new students, encourage return visits and promote the program by word of mouth. DEVELOPMENT As the Development department is responsible for bringing in funding and business they have immediate physical needs as well as bigger picture marketing needs. Physically, they have a need for modernization of office facilities focused on technology upgrades - this will allow them to more effectively market digitally. There also is a need for a “fireside chat” room; a place where they can make big “asks” from potential donors.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


On a broader level, they need to be able to lift up the unique strengths of the campus in a development world with many organizations competing for donor attention. Pendle Hill’s uniquely spiritual and intellectual campus and philosophies blend neatly with their facilities and amenities. However, aspects of marketing this to new audiences and returning long time friends simultaneously, can present challenges. Being heavily reliant on private donations Pendle Hill must be mindful of the campus legacy and future. This duality creates richness, but also tension relative to development.

Firbank library

Weaving loom in art studio

OPERATIONS As Pendle Hill faces significant business challenges, there is perhaps more pressure on the Operations department than others. Conference and guest services is the prime revenue generator for the campus and in order to meet the Pendle Hill business model projections the amount of business will need to increase dramatically in coming years. This will require additional “market competitive” rooms (considered welcoming by new and returning friends) by - this will need to be a combination of existing and new stock. Relative to “market competitiveness” guest accommodations need to focus on several key amenities: • Increased room size • Private bathrooms • Better technology connectivity • Accessibility • Modernized finishes and fixtures In order to keep up with increased occupancy on campus the foodservice facilities will need to be expanded and modernized as well. This should include more professional food storage, preparation, cooking and serving areas as well as a larger dining room. Additionally the success of the garden/food production program coupled with the increase in mouths to feed will necessitate more growing space, processing facilities and composting area.

Main House kitchen

To accommodate these increased guest and foodservice loads hospitality and housekeeping will also need more streamlined and expanded facilities. 3 - ANALySIS

Page 65


Key to the success of all of these components is the effective movement of goods and people on to and around campus. This means clear and effective entrance, drop off and circulation paths.

Main House guest room

ADMINISTRATION The Administrative department is the glue holding the other departments together - the campus support system. As they grow and evolve so too will this department. In order to perform at peak levels the workplace needs to be optimized. The following will need to be addressed: • Thermal comfort • Technology upgrades • Space adjacencies • Collaboration spaces • Privacy • Storage

Barn lobby

Barn copy/work room

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Conlon Room at Brinton House conference center

3 - ANALySIS

Page 67


GROUNDS ASSESSMENT VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION The campus is very walkable, once a guest enters the campus there is often no need to use a car. The primary walking route lies within the triangle between Firbank, Main House, and the Barn. Minor paths reach out to the surrounding housing buildings, and the walking trail circumnavigates the property. Main entrance signage

Monumental markers at Waysmeet

Parking is dispersed throughout campus and is unassigned; resulting in a number of cars moving across campus during the day. Vehicular routes and pedestrian paths often intermingle sometimes forcing a guest to step into the grass as a vehicle passes. Cycling is popular and a number of community bikes and some shelters are available for guests. Access to surrounding sites via bicycle is less common due to safety concerns on many of the roads surrounding Pendle Hill. Wayfinding at Pendle Hill does not meet its full potential due to a few factors: inconsistent path/paving materials, redundant routes, and a lack of clear cues/signs. Primary walking routes through the campus may vary in material type and width, and meet up with a number of forks and intersections, all making the intended routes unclear. A lack of signage and explicit gateways also makes it difficult for a driver to clearly identify the main entrance, where to park, or where to drop off a delivery. There are two main entrances, the entrances to Brinton House and the main Campus from Plush Mill Road, and a restricted access entrance from Rogers Lane. None of these entrances currently provides a first time visitor clear cues as they approach the site; the main entrance piers are overshadowed by the size of the piers at Waysmeet, giving confusing visual signals.

Crosswalks at Main House do not connect to sidewalks or paths

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


ExISTING VEHICULAR CIRCULATION Primary Secondary Limited Parking Areas

ExISTING PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION Primary Secondary Trail Wayfinding Conflict Areas

3 - ANALySIS

Page 69


PRIORITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF OPEN SPACE: ORGANIZATION- Spaces should have a strong relationship to each other and to Campus buildings. Public and private, and service areas should not detract from one another. VARIETY- Open spaces should appeal to guests of various ages and activity levels. FLEXIBILITY- Spaces should be adaptable to changing programs and activities as Pendle Hill changes through time.

OPEN SPACE Pendle Hill is predominantly wooded, with a mature tree canopy broken up by small pockets of sunnier open spaces. These spaces serve a nice balance of uses: gathering with groups, storage of materials, food production, play, parking, hiking, and quiet reflection. They are generally well organized and sized to suit Pendle Hill’s current needs. For the most part they also relate well to the various buildings, which are sited around the campus either singly or in small clusters of twos and threes. One challenge presented by the scattered arrangement of the buildings is that “back of house” areas sometimes abut a primary space; an otherwise beautiful gathering area sometimes faces a group of trash cans, a clothesline, or a parked car. Ideally these utilitarian spaces would be grouped and screened or separated from public areas. The wooded nature of the campus also constrains two particular uses: open play lawns and food production. The vegetable garden does not receive an ideal amount of sunlight in its current location, and large lawn spaces for play are limited. As Pendle Hill intensifies its uses it will increase the importance of a maintaining a well organized and well balanced group of exterior spaces.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


EXISTING OPEN SPACES ExISTING OPEN SPACES

Active Outdoor Space Passive Outdoor Space Back of House

Active Outdoor Space

Parking

Passive Outdoor Space Back of House Parking

3 - ANALySIS

Page 71


This analysis was developed based on Topographic Plans and NRCS Soils Data. Design and construction of individual stormwater management facilities requires further detailed analysis by a Civil Engineer, including watershed calculations and infiltration testing in specific locations.

SOILS AND HYDROLOGY The soils on campus are mainly Manor loams; these soils are typically very well drained with a substantial depth to bedrock and water table. They are good for plant growth and can support food production, ornamental gardens, rain gardens and various other landscape types. “Made Land� soils exist in the Northern section of Brinton House Woods, these soils have been disturbed by past development and are often compacted, poor soils that do not promote infiltration of water and do not support as broad a range of plant growth as the other soils on site. Another section of Man Made soils exists as the Berm. This area has been built up over time to help buffer noise from the Blue Route, and has been created from a mixture of wood, brush, and available fill soils. In general the soils and topography contribute to positive drainage throughout most of the campus. The south side of campus is crowned at the Center Green, stormwater drains away from this space towards the property lines in all directions. The north side of the campus is dominated by a valley, with the Pond at the lowest point collecting water from the surrounding areas. The Brinton House parking lot is the high point of this side of the property. Isolated problem areas exist due to poor micrograding around buildings, low spots and siltation. Some of these areas have had a severe impact on buildings, allowing water into foundations and leading to mold and structural damage. Siltation of the pond and standing water around the grounds are less immediate concerns but do require ongoing maintenance.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


HyDROLOGy DIAGRAM Water Flow (Sheet Flow) Water Flow (Concentrated Flow) Water Problems Buildings Experiencing Water Problems

SOILS DIAGRAM MgC2 - Manor Loam, 8 to 15 Percent Slopes, Moderately Eroded MgD - Manor Loam, 15 to 25 Percent Slopes Me - Made Land, Schist and Gneiss Materials MgB2 - Manor Loam, 3 to 8 Percent Slopes, Moderately Eroded The Berm

3 - ANALySIS

Page 73


LAND MANAGEMENT Pendle Hill is an arboretum, trees dominate the grounds. Several are mature and unique; and many are in good health. This partially wooded land cover lends itself to various land management challenges. Ongoing management requirements include felling of hazardous trees, selective pruning, cleanup of leaves and gutters during the fall, dropping branches in the winter. A considerable additional effort is required to manage the various kinds of invasive pressure.

Caption

Caption

Caption

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

On the groundplane invasive species outcompete native species and detract from the appearance of the grounds. The least impacted zones tend to be those areas maintained by mowing, or spaces densely established with ferns. Invasives at the understory level displace native understory trees and shrubs, reducing the quality of habitat for wildlife. Some zones are completely dominated with Bamboo, Norway Maples or Phragmites. Control of these various invasive species requires a strategy, controlled effort and is difficult to accomplish with limited resources, as is the case at Pendle Hill. 1. Woodland with large numbers of Norway Maples in the understory 2. Dense Stands of Bamboo, Phragmites, Gooseneck Loosestrife 3. Norway Maples, Stands of Phragmites and Bamboo, English Ivy 4. English Ivy, Vinca 5. English Ivy 6. Invasive Understory 7. Meadow well managed by seasonal mowing 8. Invasive Groundplane 9. Invasive Groundplane around periphery of mowed lawn 10. Shrub layer includes Honeysuckle, Privet and Euonymous 11. Some invasive species in garden areas 12. Central Green well managed by mowing. Some planting beds overgrown. 13. English Ivy, Pachysandra 14. Katsura, English Ivy, Euonymous, some stands of Bamboo 15. Garden areas, well managed. 16. Lawn and Vegetable Garden well managed 17. Lawn areas well managed 18. Woodland invaded with Garlic Mustard, some invasive understory.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


LAND MANAGEMENT ZONES 14 7

13 12

6 1

3 5 2

15

9 10

2

16

11 8 3

4

17

18 High Value Trees Existing Trees Extreme Invasive Pressure High Invasive Pressure Moderate Invasive Pressure Low Invasive Pressure

3 - ANALySIS

Page 75


4

PROPOSAL

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


CRAFTING A VISION

When it comes to crafting a vision for the future of Pendle Hill’s campus Maslow’s Hierarchy of need is a suitable metaphor for understanding the path forward. Put simply, in order to reach the more esoteric “Mission” of Pendle Hill, first the physiological needs of the campus need to be met. But before that process should start, it is critical to define the end goal. This is so important early on as what makes short term actions which address the lower part of Maslow’s triangle most effective is when they are building blocks or support pieces for future efforts. If considered only situationally these decisions can be ineffective uses of finances and potentially even damaging to other current and/or future endeavors. INDIVIDUAL

PENDLE HILL

SELF-ACTUALIZATION

MISSION

recognizing and realizing one’s full potential; becoming everything that one is capable of becoming

Self-Actualization

Center of God's work in transforming the world. nurturing through worship, work, study and service

Mission

ESTEEM

Self-respect, sense of value and contribution, confidence, independence and freedom

TOUCHSTONES

Esteem

Touchstones

LOVE/BELONGING

Sense of place, attuned to nature, exemplary and visionary,

COMMUNITY

Feelings of belongingness and ability to form and maintain emotional relationships

Love/Belonging

Internal community/communities, relationship to external communities

Community

SAFETY

FISCAL STABILITY

Personal anf financial security. health and well being

Increased revenue, market competiveness, decreased expense, loss prevention

Safety

Fiscal Stability

PHYSIOLOGICAL

PHYSICAL PRESENCE

The literal requirements for survival

Deferred Maintenance, MEP Systems, Site Drainage, Land Management

Physiological/Survival

Facilities & Grounds

MASLOW

PENDLE HILL

DECISION MAKING PRINCIPLES: • When making short term decisions the future vision should be considered • “Low hanging fruit” should not be picked just because it is in reach • Early moves should set sequences in motion • Do work once • Value life cycle cost and/or payback over first cost • Balance revenue generation with expense reduction • Stay ahead of problems 4 - PROPOSAL

Page 77


DIAGRAMMING RELATIONSHIPS Before jumping in to the long term campus plan it’s important to understand and develop a set of conceptual relationships. For the purpose of this exercise these relationships were first explored independent of the existing physical context. The goal is to understand how campus users and activities should organize themselves before beginning the push pull process of working within the confines of a specific place.

I

G

P

N

F

H

S

R W O

O

K

T

A

U

U

S

B

C

F

I

L

During the study it became clear that there are four distinct arms of Pendle Hill’s operations and users Work (staff), Study (students & faculty), Meeting (conference guests and visitors) and the Public (neighbors, non-program attending visitors, etc). Within each arm (except for the Public) there are two distinct zones - places for activities and places for residing.

G O

M E

H

E

N

G

T

D

I

G

S T H O

U

D

U

E

S

I

E

S

T

N

S T U

E S N

Y

U U

T

R U

N

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

A

T

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan

In thinking about how circulation works with this set up the logical sequence is movement through a public area to a central node and then disbursement outward through the activity spaces to housing. This is essentially a stepped sequence from public to private spaces. Note that in the diagram the border is shown solid around the natural areas and is only dashed at the public zone - this suggests that the permeability of the campus is controlled and limited. The final component of the diagram is that everything is located within an envelope of nature. Even the public zone, which is shown as a lighter shade of green, is still understood to be natural and not a built up area.


CAMPUS MAP WITH CONCEPT DIAGRAM OVERLAy

B B

B

N

In this map of campus the diagram colors have been overlaid to different sections of campus to show how these relationships could be achieved. The goal is to develop zones on campus which help to provide clarity and organization to activities and user groups.

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 79

0 25'50' 100'

200'


PENDLE HILL CAMPUS VISION EXISTING+

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Page 81


“ExISTING+” VISION L

S

O P P O

F

O

R

T

This conceptual approach has been titled “ExISTING+”. The intent of this is to indicate a focus on what currently exists and as well as improvements and additions in the future (the plus sign).

U N

I

T

L O

S I E

N

T

G

I

I

Y SHO

5-7 3-4 1-2 $

RT

T

PR

RIT

LIS

O

When looking ahead to Pendle Hill’s future this proposal has been divided in to a “Priority Shortlist” of initiatives and a “Longlist of Opportunities”. The Priority Shortlist will focus on the years immediately following the beginning of the capital campaign and those items which are the highest priority relative to either reducing current or near term costs as well as supporting the Pendle Hill business model projections. We have further broken the Priority Shortlist in to three likely timeframes in which these initiatives can and should be considered. Each of these phases contains three components: deferred maintenance, a major building (or renovation project) and smaller initiatives which can be infilled around the larger project. As construction projects are long in duration there should be an expected overlap in the phases. The Longlist of Opportunities looks beyond the timeframe of the Priority Shortlist to consider Pendle Hill’s long-term needs and opportunities. The opportunities in this list will be described in the master plan but in less detail than that given to the Priority Shortlist. As goals, finances, politics and context change over time it is more important to focus time and effort on a determinate scope for the near range while sketching out a conceptual framework for the future. This framework is important as Pendle Hill should focus their near term decision making on supporting and provisioning for the long term vision. Understanding that any one capital campaign can’t take Pendle Hill all the way to the vision presented in the following pages, short term actions should be seen as the first steps in a long term journey. In that sense, today’s decisions and actions must support long term goals.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


ExISTING+ VISION CAMPUS MAP

New Hermitage

New Guest Residence Building

New Guest Parking Area New Foodservice & Dining Building

New location for Labyrinth

Welcome Center & Memorial Garden

New Hermitages

B B

B

N

B

Reconstructed Hermitage New Hermitages

Chace Redevelopment

Future Staff Townhomes

Social Functions Staff Student Guest

4 - PROPOSAL

0 25'50' 100' Enhanced Central Green

Page 83

200'


DEFERRED MAINTENANCE PRIORITy PHASE 1 Address critical backlog of building and grounds deferred maintenance - As there are building systems and deferred maintenance items in some of the in-use buildings which are trending towards future collapse it is recommended that these be addressed immediately to avoid massive future expense. Outside of specific deferred maintenance items there are several areas that should be focused on in this phase:

Example phase 1 current deferred maintenence conditions

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

• Basement waterproofing is a problem throughout campus and needs to be brought under control for all buildings which are planned for future use. • Correct site drainage that impacts the foundations of existing buildings • Roofs with known recurring leaks or problems should be addressed early in the re-roofing sequence. • Mechanical equipment replacement as indicated in the equipment replacement schedule. • In buildings where mechanical equipment is scheduled to be replaced, attic venting and insulation as well as window replacement should be considered at the same time. By doing so there is an opportunity to optimize, or “right-size” the mechanical equipment. Doing so independent of critical envelope upgrades will lead to an oversized system in the future. • Plumbing fixture replacement in high volume locations • Lamp replacement per relamping recommendations starting with high use fixtures (greater than 8 hours per day). • Hazardous material abatement in public locations • Interior finish repairs where public safety is a concern • Eliminate invasive plants that pose an immediate threat to high quality trees. • Replace degraded pavement and ensure adequate widths and slopes for visitors with limited mobility within core areas. • Introduce simple, clear signage to begin to clarify parking, service routes, and key buildings to address short term traffic/pedestrian safety issues Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Corrective measure examples < Metal roof installation > Clean, dry and insulated basement > Sidewalk repair (These images are illustrative and not taken on Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s campus)

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 85


CADBURy COURT DEMOLITION PRIORITy PHASE 1 Cadbury Court is a heavily blighted building development in the center of campus. It has been an ongoing problem for the last 30 years and irreparable damage has been incurred to the buildings over time. An early recommendation of Priority Phase 1 is the complete demolition of the Cadbury Court buildings. The goal is to erase Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s negative experience (both emotional and financial) with the buildings and replace them with something that will be a source of pride and enjoyment.

> View of EXISTING+ proposal showing former location of Cadbury Court < View of existing campus FCI plan showing current location of Cadbury Court

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

The ExISTING+ vision seeks to reclaim Cadbury Courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land as part of an enhanced central green space on campus. The full realization of this improved landscape may be some years in the future so the Cadbury building footprints will need to be backfilled for the short term. In addition to replanting the area with grass, temporary and cost effective beautification solutions could include native grasses and plants or portable, raised box planters for demonstration gardening.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Temporary landscape examples: < Portable raised planters can be great opportunities for seasonal demonstration gardens. Since theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re portable they could be relocated on campus when the central green concept is realized > A wildflower garden is low maintenance, beautiful and can attract butterflies and other interesting critters. This could also potentially be incorporated in to the long term design of the landscape > Planting native grasses can help create a low maintenance landscape that could be self sustaining for a number of years. This could echo the meadow at the entrance to campus. (These images are illustrative and not taken on Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s campus)

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 87


FACILITy USE OPTIMIZATION PRIORITy PHASE 1 Over time Pendle Hill has adapted themselves to their facilities as their program needs have ebbed and flowed. What this has led to is a very high degree of intermixing of user groups, functions and activities - sometimes under the same roof. In moving towards the ExISTING+ vision, there are some early reorganization moves that Pendle Hill can make which will help improve the overall use and quality of their campus with little capital expenditure. The chart on the facing page shows a long term breakdown of how bed allocation will shake out across campus. In preparation for future priorities several early reorganizations include the following:

Example current guest room configurations

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

• Bring Little Barn online and utilize space for staff housing. • Convert Main House to all guest housing. Relocate staff currently housed there to Upmeads, Crosslands, Waysmeet or Roadside. • Remove all guest housing from Firbank and dedicate all rooms as education first. Only sell for guest housing if unoccupied. • Upmeads is currently underutilized and is slated for redevelopment as a campus gatehouse (described in subsequent sections). Utilize upper floors for housing of multiple staff members. • Crosslands is currently being underutilized. When necessary, consider housing multiple staff members there. • Convert Waysmeet to staff housing. The building is best suited for dorm style living appropriate to interns or other short term staff/residents. • As noted in subsequent sections, Chace is planned to be converted to staff housing apartments. In the short term it should be used for guest housing until the new guest residence is constructed.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


CAMPUS BED ALLOCATION 2011

STAFF BEDS

ID BH

NAME

PRIMARY FUNCTION

Brinton House

Dormitory

CC

Cadbury Court

Family Dwellings

4

CH CL

Chace Crosslands

Dormitory Single Family Home

1 1

EH

Edgehill

Single Family Home

1

FB

Firbank

13

LB MH

Little Barn Main House

Library/Art Studio/dorm rooms/staff housing Staff housing Multifunction

RS

Roadside

Single family residence

UP

Upmeads

Single family residence / /conference center

WF

Wakefield

Staff housing

WM

Waysmeet

Conference housing

NB

New Guest Residence

STUDENT BEDS

7

2012-2013 GUEST BEDS

BEDS OFFLINE

STAFF

21

2

1

5

4

19

1

3

2

STAFF BEDS

1

1

1 8

18

10

21

24 1

7

16 3

2

2

GUEST BEDS

Demolished 10 1

4

STUDENT BEDS

1 5

3 1

BEDS OFFLINE

1

4

8

GUEST BEDS

21

10

7

8

STUDENT BEDS

PROPOSED CONCEPT

Planned use as rental property 2

2

18

Demolished 9

9 30

SUBTOTAL

29

16

TOTAL

66 111

22 18

16

65 103

25 8

24

67 116

NOTES: 1. Chace proposed “staff beds” reflects one staff member per apartment. There are (4) two bedroom apartaments in the proposed design. If two staff are housed in these units it could be possible to expand the staff occupancy of the building to 14. 2. Main House is proposed to have 16 guest beds, however, this number may be able to be increased as the rooms which are currently staff apartments may fit multiple guest beds. 3. When foodservice and dining services are moved out of Main House some of the ground floor space could potentially be converted to additional guest beds. This is an opportunity to cost effectively provide accessible units on the ground level. 4. The design of the New Guest Residence Building should allow for a future third story expansion. This could add an additional 16 beds. Pendle Hill Masterplan Existing Building Inventory - DRAFT

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 89

7/5/2012 Page 1 of 2


Most of the current rooms on Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s campus are below 200 square feet and some are even less than 100 square feet.

NEW GUEST RESIDENCE BUILDING PRIORITy PHASE 1 In order to meet the ambitious goals of the Pendle Hill business plan there needs to be a net add of guest beds on campus over the next +/-7 years. This is not achievable with the existing building stock on campus. To keep up with the intentions of the business model a new building will be necessary. The location selected for the new residence building begins on the northernmost edge of the current location of Wakefield. Given the current state of that building the cost of repair versus replacement is very high. The location is more valuable than the structure. The new residence building will extend South using roughly the same depth as wakefield.

The average size of standard guestrooms at budget or economy hospitality service providers is around 300 to 400 square feet per room. The average size suite can be 800-1,000 square feet.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


GUEST ROOM & FULL BUILDING CONCEPT PLANS

EN P OT

TIA

L FU

I E TH TUR

RD

ST

ADD ORy

ITIO

N

20’ INSIDE DIMENSION

14.5

N MMO

CO

14’ INSIDE DIMENSION

8’

280 SQUARE FEET PER ROOM x 18 ROOMS (16 GUEST + 2 COMMON AREAS) 5040 SQUARE FEET INTERIOR FINISHED SPACE

’ 14.5 G

0’ +/- 6 OMS O R UEST

AREA

0’ +/- 6 MS ROO UEST

G

35’ +/- 1 ALL OVER

For the purpose of the masterplan, an occupancy goal for this building has been set as 30 beds. Each room will contain one queen bed and one twin bed as well as two desks, a modest closet/storage area and a bathroom. Although building code may require less, the recommendation is that two rooms on the bottom level be fully accessible units. The overall room size will need to increase for these units as they will require slightly larger bathrooms for wheelchair maneuverability. Conceptually, the building is proposed to have a single loaded exterior circulation zone facing south. This is a more cost effective approach than a double loaded interior corridor as it does not require infrastructure and conditioning. By having this walkway outboard of conditioned space on the south facade it will also provide shade from summer southern sun thus reducing cooling costs.

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 91


The Pendle Hill accessibility review report identifies the following “priorities for accessibility”. The report’s recommendation is to pursue in order as this list moves from making accessibility “possible” to making it “welcoming”. 1. Accessible Path & Services - site entrance, parking, building entrances, restrooms, means of egress. 2. Accessible Activities - meeting rooms, classrooms, dining services and recreation spaces 3. Accessible Communication - signage and wayfinding 4. Accessible Accommodations - sleeping rooms and showers The primary concerns of building codes are: • • • • • • •

Occupant loads Fire protection & life safety systems Emergency means of egress Energy efficiency Plumbing fixture counts and efficiency Structural stability Physical safety and health

ACCESSIBILITY & CODE COMPLIANCE PRIORITY PHASE 1 ACCESSIBILITY As Pendle Hill’s campus includes many buildings and site features constructed prior to the 1992 acceptance of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines for “public accommodations” there are many conditions on campus which do not meet the current accessibility code (ANSI 117.1). Pendle Hill performed an accessibility review for the campus in 2007-2009. The report summarizing the findings and recommendations has been included with this master plan as Appendix J. The master plan design team agrees with the general findings of this report, however, the phasing of major accessibility upgrades to Main House and the Barn will need to be done in conjunction with other projects and intiatives. Upgrading these facilities out of sequence may lead to work being redone afterwards. BUILDING CODE Building codes are a set of rules that specify the minimum acceptable level of safety for buildings. The main purpose of building codes is to protect public health, safety and general welfare. As building codes are adopted at state and local levels it is important that Pendle Hill remain aware of the current adopted codes by the state of Pennsylvania and Nether Providence Township as well as any relevant local amendments. It is recommended that when any renovation project encompassing more than replacement of finishes and/or fixtures is pursued that a full code review for the given building be performed by a design professional (licensed architect and/or engineer). Based on the findings, work required to address code deficiencies should be incorporated in to the project work.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


< Main House is an example of a facility which requires accessibility upgrades. The main entrance, shown here is up a step and does not have proper clearance on the pull side of the door. > The Barn is one of the older facilities on campus which has had some minor accessibility upgrades. Shown here are an accessible parking spot, circulation route and entrance. > Accessible entrances and circulation are critical first steps to making accessibility possible but they alone do not make it “welcome”. (diagram from US Department of Justice brochure “ADA checklist for Polling Places”)

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 93


DEFERRED MAINTENANCE PRIORITy PHASE 2 Continue to address the critical backlog of building and grounds deferred maintenance. There are several areas that should be focused on in this phase: • Continue roof replacements in order of need • Exterior facade repairs, cleaning and repainting • Mechanical equipment replacement as indicated in the equipment replacement schedule. • In buildings where mechanical equipment is scheduled to be replaced, attic venting and insulation as well as window replacement should be considered at the same time. By doing so there is an opportunity to optimize, or “right-size” the mechanical equipment. Doing so independent of critical envelope upgrades will lead to an oversized system in the future. • Plumbing fixture replacement in medium volume locations • Lamp replacement per relamping recommendations for medium use fixtures (4-8 hours per day). • Hazardous material abatement in private locations • Complete all safety and health related interior repairs • Begin interior finish refreshing and modernization • Reclaim the vegetated understory in the periphery of core areas. Remove invasive species in small, defined areas and introduce robust native understory species, gradually securing areas before moving on to the next space. • Correct areas of standing water through minor grading or through introduction of rain garden soils and plants to help water infiltrate into the soil

Example phase 2 current deferred maintenence conditions

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


< Painting not only protects substrate materials from water damage but also increases the visual appeal of buildings. Consider engaging staff in building maintenance days. (image from Habitat for Humanity) > Windows should be replaed with energy efficient units to prevent heat gain in warm weather and heat loss in cool weather. (diagram from http:// www.venturabuildersblog.com) > Toilet replacement should be either water efficient fixtures or dual flush systems as shown here. (diagram from Sloan Valve Company)

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 95


SITE ORIENTATION PRIORITy PHASE 2 One of the key areas in which Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current campus is under developed is site orientation and wayfinding. As indicated in the vehicular and pedestrian circulation diagrams in the Grounds Assessment section there are a number of key site access points and circulation nodes on campus. As part of priority phase 2 it is recommended that Pendle Hill engage a signage designer to design and implement a comprehensive campus signage program focusing on these areas. Critical to effective campus signage will be a clear articulations of welcoming and wayfinding as well as a consistent and legible graphic style. Not only will this initiative help orient visitors to the site, but it will also serve to bring up the overall character of the campus thus feeding in to business development and marketing. When done correctly, signage can yield high rewards in a very cost effective way. A major component of the site orientation will be the entrance sequence to the main campus. This will incorporate a new parking area and foodservice/dining facility as well as a repurposing of Upmeads as a welcome center to campus. The goal is to enhance guest orientation and contain vehicular traffic to the periphery of the main campus - thus creating a more pedestrian friendly area beyond. With regard to Upmeads, the ground floor of the current portion of the building being used as a house will convert to guest services while the current library can serve multiple roles of general store, historical exhibit space and coffee lounge. The upper floor of the house will house staff members. Refer to longlist notes for the Barn for additional synergistic opportunities arising from the Upmeads repurposing. Effective site orientation markers make use of clear directional signage as well as built forms signifying important locations.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Over the long term ExISTING+ vision Pendle Hill will develop a hierarchy of paths to help guests identify primary routes. Important pedestrian routes connecting primary public buildings should be noticeably wider than secondary routes, and different uses such as vehicular drives, pedestrian walks or hiking trails should be identified by different material types. Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


PROPOSED CIRCULATION MAP VEHICULAR

PEDESTRIAN

Primary Secondary Limited Long Term Parking Short Term Parking

Primary Secondary Trail

3

A

4

4 5 D

6 7

B

2

1

B

ill M

Ro

ad

1

h

er

us

rn

Pl

Tu

Ro

ad

C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 - PROPOSAL

Vehicular Signage Minor gateway, Brinton House directional Major gateway, Main Campus directional Small sign orienting guests to main buildings and spaces Visitor Center with map of campus & program information Pavement change to indicate limit of vehicular travel Pavement widths differentiate public and residential spaces

Page 97

A B C D

Commuter & day visitor parking Resident parking Maintenance and special permit parking Conference guest parking


LAND MANAGEMENT PRIORITy PHASE 2 A land management strategy is required to preserve and enhance Pendle Hill’s grounds. This strategy would be a multi-phased approach, focusing first on securing high profile “Core Zones” and gradually expanding into neighboring zones as spaces become controlled. This effort will require an increase in resources to beyond what is currently available; maintenance staff now are equipped only to react to the most immediate needs due to budget and manpower constraints. Larger volunteer resources should be recruited for seasonal invasive removal efforts, possibly from Pendle Hill Alumni or neighbors who use the walking trail. Consider seeking funding from national and regional public funding agencies and engage local organizations for additional volunteer resources. The appendix provides an overview of the strategies that should be implemented in the various spaces throughout the campus. In the long term a detailed land stewardship plan should be developed, which would consist of a more detailed inventory of soils, hydrology, and plant communities and develop a very specific schedule of actions.

Current views of various land management conditions.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


> Examples of effective land management techniques relevant to Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grounds (These images are illustrative and not taken on Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s campus)

Page 99


CHACE REDEVELOPMENT PRIORITy PHASE 2 Although Chace is a building with great utility (24 rooms with 28 total beds), it has fallen behind relative to deferred maintenance and is no longer meeting the current market demands Pendle Hill faces. It also is located in a strong location relative to other campus activities. Chaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current state of baseline functionality also makes it a key player in the reshuffling which will be happening to implement the master plan space optimization (priority phase 1). The long term recommended use for this site is staff housing apartments. However, in the short term it may need to continue to be utilized for guests until the new guest residence building (priority phase 1) is complete. Existing view of Chace south facade

For the purpose of this study, a renovation and modest addition has been studied to determine the fit potential for the existing structure - which includes a rigid rhythm of concrete block walls extending from the crawlspace to the roof. Should a renovation be pursued, it would need to include a complete gutting of the interiors, structural reinforcements, facade repair/replacement and full new fit out of interiors. Ultimately, a cost benefit analysis will need to be performed by a specific design team to determine if a major renovation and addition will be more cost effective than a tear down and new build. Some basic cost estimating information has been provided in this report for preliminary planning only. Note that depending on the pressure to the campus foodservice systems, this initiative may need to be switched with the new foodservice building in priority phase 3.

Current location site adjacent to Barn

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


ExISTING BUILDING PLANS

RENOVATION CONCEPT PLANS

DOR

ORRI

EC ” WID

. EDRM (1) B S y A (2) B

OM EDRO (2) B AyS (3) B

4’-0

For the purpose of the masterplan, an occupancy goal for this building has been set as apartments for 10 staff members ranging from one to two bedroom units. Preliminary building code interpretations classify this building as R-2 occupancy, which is for permanent occupants (as opposed to transient, which would be R-1). In addition to this occupancy classification allowing for a less stringent life safety design a building with this many residential units is not required to have any “fully accessible” units. Accessibility has been prioritized in other parts of this study, however, it presents a dilemma with Chace. Given the extremely tight existing dimensions of Chace, increasing bathroom size from the layout above to meet accessibility standards would require building an addition of 2-3 feet the entire length of the building. This would impact the cost effectiveness of the project and will need to be considered during the planning phase of this initiative.

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 101


DEFERRED MAINTENANCE PRIORITy PHASE 3 Continue to address the critical backlog of building and grounds deferred maintenance. There are several areas that should be focused on in this phase: • Complete all roof, window and exterior facade repair • Mechanical equipment replacement as indicated in the equipment replacement schedule. • In buildings where mechanical equipment is scheduled to be replaced, attic venting and insulation as well as window replacement should be considered at the same time. By doing so there is an opportunity to optimize, or “right-size” the mechanical equipment. Doing so independent of critical envelope upgrades will lead to an oversized system in the future. • Complete plumbing fixture replacement in all remaining locations • Lamp replacement per relamping recommendations for all remaining use fixtures (less than 4 hours per day). • Complete all remaining hazardous material abatement • Ongoing interior finish refreshing and modernization • Tackle invasive species in the peripheral areas of campus and reclaim for native habitat. • Introduce stormwater infiltration through Rain Gardens, Bioswales, or porous pavement. Use these elements as a teaching tool on water management and stewardship. • Introduce a forebay upstream of the pond to reduce silting and nutrient load. • Remove unattractive, declining or undesirable trees within the core of campus, plant replacement trees for the future growth of the arboretum. Example phase 3 current deferred maintenence conditions

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


< Carpet tile is a cost effective product, can be installed by staff and has low maintenance costs. > Replacing aging ceiling tile with new tile or paainted surfaces will reduce the risk of falling debris as well as improve the quality of spaces > Painting interior walls is a low cost way to improve spaces and can be done by people of all skill levels. (These images are illustrative and not taken on Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s campus)

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 103


BRINTON HOUSE MODERNIZATION PRIORITy PHASE 3 Brinton House is one of the most significant revenue sources on campus. Although the building is in decent working order, it is out of date with many competing facilities. In order to remain a tool for competitive revenue generation it needs to be cosmetically and technologically upgraded. If a whole building renovation cannot be undertaken due to the revenue loss from the whole facility being off line, the first areas that should be tackled are the public spaces. This should be followed by groups of rooms based on location (e.g. top floor of Steere Wing) so as to minimize the amount of rooms lost at any given time.

Examples of current interior conditions at Brinton House

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Consider the following interior finish upgrades in public areas: • Remove existing carpet. For durability consider installing wood floors in common areas as they will have a much longer lifespan than carpet. If carpet is used, carpet tile has much lower facilities maintenance costs as opposed to broadloom carpet. • Repaint all walls to develop a unified and fresh color concept. This will go a long way to enlivening the interior spaces. • Replace acoustical tile ceilings in the dining/meeting area with new grid and tiles, upgrade lighting fixtures. This is more expensive than only replacing the damaged tiles but will go a long way to improving the professional nature of the room. • Consider upgrading lighting fixtures as not only will this improve the quality of light and energy efficiency, but it will also help to make the building feel more like competing conference centers. • Consider replacing folding chairs and tables as they present a very dated and cobbled together approach. There are many options in the current furniture marketplace for cost effective mobile furniture that would help create a contemporary conference space.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Consider the following interior finish upgrades in private areas in addition to carpet, paint an lighting notes for public spaces: • Where wood floors have been damaged over time they should be sanded and refinished. • Where appropriate, bathroom’s should be renovated to meet the modern amenities provided in the marketplace. With regard to technology Pendle Hill has invested in several improvements subsequent to initial staff interviews at the start of the master planning. The Conlon room now has an LCD display, speakers, microphones and other equipment necessary for AV presentations. There also is wireless access throughout the building. It is important that now that these technologies are up and running that they be maintained. Additionally, they need to be re-evaluated against market standards every 3-5 years.

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 105


CAPACITY CALCULATION Existing Brinton House capacity: 42 Existing Main House capacity: 93 Existing campus capacity = 135 Existing Brinton House capacity: 42 NEW DINING FACILITY: 158 Campus Dining Capacity Goal = 200 DINING FACILITY RULES OF THUMB Dining room ranges from 10-15 square feet per diner. 13sf/diner is a comfortable number to plan around. Commercial kitchens tyoically range from 1/4 to 1/3 the size of the dining room. AREA ESTIMATION (calculations assume a single dining area and kitchen) Dining room: 158 diners x 13sf/diner 2,054 sf Kitchen: 2054 sf x .33 678 sf Bathrooms: 500 sf Storage: 500 sf Lobby: 500 sf SUBTOTAL: 4,232 sf 15% circulation contingency: TOTAL

635 sf

NEW FOODSERVICE & DINING FACILITY PRIORITY PHASE 3 Pendle Hill currently has a thriving and passionate food program on campus. In addition to working with local farmers the kitchen staff has a well tended garden on campus where they harvest their own produce. All of this dedication to “farm to table” cooking hinges though on the ability of the kitchen to meet the campus demands and when campus occupancy is at capacity it sometimes is difficult for the kitchen staff to keep up. The obstacle here is the foodservice facilities, which are currently located on the ground floor of Main House. The current kitchen is small and cramped and the dining room flow is less than ideal. Combined with the growth projections for conference guests and sales in the near future, an expanded facility is needed. One of the core initiatives in the EXISTING+ vision is the construction of a new foodservice and dining building. Not only will it be able to meet the demands of the campus in an improved professional foodservice environment, but it’s location is part of a centerpiece of public activity. The new dining spaces will also double as event spaces. The planning of a foodservice and dining facility is detailed and extensive - and expensive. It is recommended that Pendle Hill keep a close watch on their business growth and the ability of the staff to keep up with demand. The timing of the new facility is critical to achieve the right balance of expense to revenue. And key to future success will be a design which allows for flexibility over time. There is no crystal ball to tell when the right moment is to tackle this project, but waiting too long could have a negative impact to guest sales and repeat business.

4,867 sqaure feet

This will be an exciting project for Pendle Hill which will help to redefine the central campus and bolster their business model for years to come. It also will free up a good amount of space in Main House which can be repurposed for guest residences and/or conference space.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LAyOUT

WARMING KITCHEN & SERVERy

ENTRANCE HALL & PARLOR

MAIN

G

T WIN

RE

EVEN

E

HOUS

ST UE G G IN W ILD NE BU CE EN

SID

MA

ST GUE SS E ACC

IN

M

AI

N

DI

NI

NG

OU AN TDO D E OR VEN DI T A NIN REA G

WI

NG

KI

TC H

V

EN

IS IT O R

EN CH KIT ESS C AC

P

EEN

A

U

MP

R

A RC

E

K

NT

IN

CE

R SG

G L O T

Existing Brinton House capacity: 42 Existing Main House capacity: 93 Campus Dining Capacity Goal: 200

BA

RN

NEW DINING FACILITY (to replace Main House): 158

E US

MP

CA

DS

EA M UP

Main Dining Wing to be sized to accomodate average daily occupancy. Event wing to be sized for overflow dining, private events and conferences.

KI

E

C AN

R NT

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 107

PA R

NG

LO T


LONG TERM OPPORTUNITIES

Sample hermitage structure (not on campus)

Main House reading room

Barn lobby, view to bookstore

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

HERMITAGES Historically there have been several guest accommodations on campus which have been spaces for contemplation removed from other residential buildings and often incorporated in to the natural landscape. In recent years these spaces have fallen so far in to disrepair that they are no longer suitable for occupants. The ExISTING+ vision includes several locations in different types of landscapes for new hermitages. These little structures should be seen as self sufficient, contextual and experimental. To that extent, there is an opportunity to partner with regional design and construction educational programs (both at the secondary and higher education levels) to maximize community engagement and soften construction expenses. MAIN HOUSE One of the more significant buildings on campus, Main House is also one of the most challenging from a program and deferred maintenance perspective. Many of the priority shortlist initiatives will touch Main House, but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s full renovation has not been targeted as a priority. This is a large building whose long term function can be determined after the initial phases of work. The initial though is that it should be dedicated to conference spaces and guest rooms (similar to Brinton Houseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s usage), but the final determination is still some years in the future. BARN Similar to Main House, the Barn will be touched by many of the deferred maintenance (meeting room floor most importantly) and priority initiatives. The biggest considerations with this building in the future regard the bookshop and guest services. With these two functions relocating to Upmeads additional space will be freed up on the ground floor. This space should be renovated to house fully accessible restrooms as well as meeting space to be used by staff and/or conference guests. Additionally, technology improvements are necessary ranging from improved wireless internet access to AV equipment for presentations in the work area and in the main meeting space.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Main House outside dining

4 - PROPOSAL

Page 109


WAYSMEET Waysmeet has most recently been used for guests residences. This usage though doesn’t fit with the ExISTING+ usage diagram as that area of campus is targeted for staff residences. Waysmeet is a unique building though as it is too large for a single family residence but still constructed and laid out more as a house than a guest residence facility. Given the nature of the building it may be best suited for intern or short term staff housing. Given its general condition, it will be impacted by many deferred maintenance items and a refresh of interior finishes and fixtures would make it a much improved place for staff. Waysmeet living room

Firbank Art Studio

Sample townhomes - small scale and articulated form (image is illustrative, not taken on campus)

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

FIRBANK Being that Firbank was one of the most recent major construction projects on campus, it is in pretty good condition. However, it is showing some signs of aging and would benefit from some minor interior finish refreshing. The biggest issues here are multiple uses as rooms are currently used y students, staff and guests. Refer to the Facility Use Optimization initiative for more information. NEW STAFF RESIDENCE TOWNHOMES A modest bank of staff residence townhomes has been shown as part of the ExISTING+ vision. This is highly speculative and is intended to indicate location only for future development. WATER CONSERVATION With so many occupants on campus, a commercial foodservice operation, gardening and extensive landscaping, water usage is a significant operating expense. Fresh water supply is a looming crisis on the horizon and could begin to impact southeastern Pennsylvania in the next 20 years. The other regional concern is contamination by upstream hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) being employed to extract natural gas in the Marcellus Shale. This all suggests that there will most likely be sharp increases in costs for potable water in the not-so-distant future. The best way for Pendle Hill to protect themselves from this financial burden is to being water conservation measures sooner than later.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


RAINWATER HARVESTING Utilizing rainwater on campus will not only reduce water consumption but also help to control surface drainage - which is currently a problem. There primary source for rainwater collection is building roofs drainage systems. Rainwater can be captured in above ground rain barrels tied in to downspouts or in more sophisticated underground cisterns. The easiest and most cost effective use of rainwater is for watering plants. More sophisticated uses such as toilet flushing are possible but require larger investments in equipment and infrastructure. This approach is recommended as a consideration for new construction only. Rain collection barrel (not on campus)

Underground rain collection cistern

i m a g e Roof mounted solar hot water collector

4 - PROPOSAL

GREYWATER RECYCLING Greywater is an industry term for water generated by a building which does not include human waste. Sources include laundry, dishwashing, shower and lavatory water. Greywater is suitable for reuse for irrigation or for toilet flushing (although again this requires infrastructure and equipment). Greywater recycling most likely will be cost prohibitive for existing buildings and is recommended as a consideration only for new construction. The new foodservice and dining building will be generating a lot of greywater so this may be a feasible opportunity. RENEWABLE ENERGY Renewable energy is a central component of energy independence and emissions reduction, but at current energy prices it is not positioned to be a viable first choice for facilities. That is, it will be much more cost effective and impactful to focus first on building envelope (roof, walls, windows, etc) deficiencies. Only once the envelope has reached a baseline efficiency should cost benefit analyses be performed to assess renewable energy generation versus additional building envelope upgrades. SOLAR HOT WATER In todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s solar energy market, utilizing the sunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s radiation for water heating is far more efficient (and quicker payback) than for energy generation. This is a proven effective technology in a residential application and generally involves roof top collectors and a pump to circulate water. Depending on the regional and microclimatic conditions a

Page 111


supplemental water heating system may be necessary for parts of the year when there is not enough solar radiation incident on the roof. This technology is recommended for all new residential construction and possibly for existing structures if the payback fits with other budget initiatives.

Roof mounted PV array

Small scale wind turbine

Plans for Memorial Garden & Labyrinth

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

PV GENERATION As noted above, photovoltaic generation (using the sunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s radiation to generate electricity) is not as efficient of a conversion as solar hot water generation. However, as energy prices continue to climb and the cost of solar installations continue to drop this trend may be reversed. An important consideration is that PV does not have to be installed on buildings. Parking lots are great locations for PV arrays as they can do double duty as shades for cars and hot parking/road surfaces. WIND GENERATION Some find the image of a wind energy generating turbine repulsive and obtrusive while others find it inspiring and symbolic of movement toward a clean energy economy. While the debate rages on the importance of the argument is that there needs to be a lot of space around the turbine for access to wind - that means it either needs to be located in a very large open area or be tall enough to get above nearby trees and structures. While it is reasonably feasible to predict solar energy generation wind energy generation is very difficult to predict as wind conditions vary so greatly and are impacted massively by surrounding trees and structures. At this time, wind energy generation does not seem to be a feasible method of energy generation but should be re-evaluated in the future. MEMORIAL GARDEN & LABYRINTH Pendle Hill engaged a Landscape Architect in 20## to prepare a conceptual design for a Memorial Garden and Labyrinth in the open space between Roadside and Chace. To date there has been minimal work performed to see this design through. The idea of the Memorial Garden is supported as part of the ExISTING+ vision but the current location is not necessarily the best location. This should be reconsidered for an open space closer to public areas.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


TRAFFIC CALMING Vehicular traffic through campus should be minimized through organization of parking and service areas. Vehicular drives throughout campus should be kept as narrow as possible, and giving priority to pedestrians throughout campus. Changes in paving should indicate vehicular versus pedestrian zones, and discouraging traffic within limited access zones.

Traffic calming strategies

BIKE SHELTERS Currently, bike riding on Pendle Hill’s campus is impeded by lack of sheltered storage. Bike shelters should be incorporated at all of the main facilities in the same fashion as the barn, allowing for easy access and storage. OUTDOOR GATHERING AREAS It is extremely important to maintain a variety of flexible outdoor spaces to serve the campus. These spaces should continue to cater to people of different ages, interests and abilities. Major public spaces should remain clustered around the Center Green, with spaces for play, dining, and teaching. The Berm Woods, Brinton House Woods, and adjacent spaces should remain geared towards contemplation, and residential spaces such as Waysmeet Court should provide residents with a special sense of ownership and privacy.

Bike shelter

COMMUNITY ARTS CENTER KILN jOINT VENTURE Pendle Hill’s neighbor, the Community Arts Center (CAC), has approached them about a joint venture to construct an outdoor kiln. Initial conversations focused on CAC funding for the construction on Pendle Hill land. Subsequent discussions have suggested that all work would occur on CAC property. In either scenario, this joint venture should be pursued as it represents a strengthened and synergistic bond between the two institutions and increased exposure to Pendle Hill’s campus.

Outdoor gathering areas are located throughout campus

4 - PROPOSAL

FOOD GARDENS The gardens should be expanded into the adjacent sunnier sections of Firbank Field for more space and improved production. Permaculture, especially shade tolerant

Page 113


groupings, should be incorporated into the surrounding wooded areas. In addition to their utilitarian roles, these areas should be utilized for education and outreach to the surrounding community.

Greenhouse at organic garden

WALKING PATH NETWORK The walking path network should be simplified and a hierarchy developed to make the various routes through campus more intuitive and manageable for first time guests. Pavement materials should indicate use, such as concrete for walking paths and mulch for the perimeter footpath. Signage, both directional and interpretive will play a major role in a cohesive and rich nature walk experience. BUILDING IDENTIFICATION Following up on the aforementioned Site Orientation initiative a comprehensive building identification signage program should be implemented. The goal is to improve guest orientation on campus as well as to reinforce the graphic identity first developed with the initial work. Signage is very important to creating a campus feel and this is a great opportunity to tie various parts of the site together thematically.

Perimter loop trail

Arboretum signage

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

INFORMATIONAL & EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE Current interpretive signage on campus is limited to several informational signs at strategic locations (e.g. the meadow, beech tree, etc.) and existing arboretum signage. The types of current signage reflect Pendle Hill’s wonderful DIy (Do It yourself) ethic and should be expanded on to address not just specific trees and events but various other aspects of Pendle Hill’s campus. This should include other planting and vegetation, food production, families of plants, rare species and stewardship efforts. This will enhance the general visitor and arboretum experience while reinforcing Pendle Hill’s pedagogical goals. SECURITY Although fortunately there have been very few concerning security incidents, it is nevertheless recomended that Pendle Hill engage a security consultant to develop a plan suitable for the campus and neighborhood.

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


4 - PROPOSAL

Page 115


MAJOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FEASIBILITY COST ESTIMATES 1. New Guest Residence Building, +/-6,000 square feet Unit cost $250/sf - $275/sf = $1.5m - $1.65m construction +/- $100k for furniture +/- $350k for demo & site 2. Chace Redevelopment, +/- 6,300 square feet Unit cost $175/sf - $205/sf = $1.1m - $1.3m construction +/- $100k for furniture 3. New Foodservice & Dining Facility, +/- 5,000 square feet Unit cost $275/sf - $300/sf = $1.35m - $1.5m construction +/- $100k for furniture up to $200k for kitchen and servery 4. Cadbury Court Demolition $40-50k for a demolition contractor managed by PH, $60-90k for a construction manager led process Notes on estimates: • These estimates are based on open shop labor (non-union). Typically, union labor can add 20-25% or more to open shop costs. • Estimates exclude construction contingencies. This is reccomended to be 10% of the construction cost. • Estimates exclude “soft costs” - professional fees for architects, engineers and other design professionals, surveying, soil testing, permitting, insurance, legal fees, etc. A good planning figure for soft costs is 20% of construction cost. • Estimates exclude FF&E (furnishings ,fixtures and equipment).

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

PHASED INVESTMENT Part of the difficulty with estimating costs relative to a long term campus master plan such as this is that construction costs are constantly fluctuating and overall are escalating with time. Additionally, accurate estimates require detailed designs. As explained in subsequent sections the master plan is the first step in a very lengthy design and construction process and cannot provide the information required for detailed estimating. What can be done now are some very rough “ballpark” estimating for major construction projects in the first three priority phases based off of anticipated building areas and number of stories as well as some assumptions with regard to structural systems, exterior cladding types and interior finishes. In the sidebar to the left are the resulting cost ranges for unit prices and extended cost. While major construction projects can be estimated with a reasonable degree of accuracy, assessing the value of deferred maintenance is a very difficult thing to do. While some items (roof replacement, for example) can easily be assigned unit costs, others are more difficult as they represent unique conditions or assemblies which require detailed estimation by the professional performing the work. Further, the deferred maintenance items which the design team has included in this report are only those which are visibly apparent. Given the age of most of the buildings on campus it is highly likely that there will be deferred maintenance items hidden below the surface. These may reveal themselves over time or present themselves when other work is initiated. A list of common deferred maintenance unit costs has been included as appendix item K to assist with budgeting for some of the quantifiable repairs. Note that construction costs are continuously escalating due to material cost fluctuations (due to availability and transportation costs) as well as labor inflation. The estimates included in this report will need to be adjusted over time. As discussed in the deferred maintenance section of this report, it is most effective (from a cost and performance perspective) to look at a series of similar projects instead of one off replacements. As such, it is the recommendation of the design team that Pendle Hill Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


PRIORITY PHASE FEASIBILITY ESTIMATES: PHASE 1 • Deferred Maintenance: Cost TBD • Cadbury Court Demolition: $40-90k • Facility Use Optimization: $0 • New Guest Residence Building (total project cost incl. contingency, fees, FF&E, etc): $2.25-2.5 million • Accessibility & Code Compliance: $200k allowance PHASE 2 • Deferred Maintenance: Cost TBD • Site Orientation: $50-100k??? • Land Management: $50k??? • Chace Redevelopment (total project cost incl. contingency, fees, FF&E, etc): $1.75-2 million PHASE 3 • Deferred Maintenance: Cost TBD • Brinton House Modernization: $100k • Nwe Foodservice and Dining Facility (total project cost incl. contingency, fees, FF&E, etc): $2.25-2.5 million Note: Deferred maintenance costs are unable to be estimated at this time. A deferred maintenance action plan will be needed to establish cost estimates and phasing to work with Pendle Hill budgeting.

4 - PROPOSAL

develop relationships with a group of trusted and vetted contractors to lead ongoing deferred maintenance efforts on campus. An example of this would be to bid out a roofing contract for a series of buildings over a series of years. A contractor could be selected based on proposing a time phased approach to multiple roof replacements to best align with Pendle Hill’s annual funding and cash reserves. Additionally, estimated replacement costs have been included in the HVAC replacement schedules. These costs are for current planning only. Similar to other deferred maintenance estimates they will fluctuate over time. Mechanical and electrical equipment in particular are prone to cost changes as technologies change. The most successful master plans are ones which balance revenue generating projects (such as the new guest residence building) with expense reducing and loss preventing initiatives (such as chipping away at deferred maintenance or complying with current building or accessibility codes). It’s important to understand that the three phases of priority initiatives may in all likelihood exceed short term financial allocations. It will be up to current and future leadership at Pendle Hill to remain committed to the execution of the master plan with a focus on long term fiscal health. The following are budget related recommendations: • Include short term funding for catching up on deferred maintenance. • Include adequate funding for facility and grounds ongoing/scheduled maintenance. • Include capital improvements funding which allows the campus to take on items from the priority phases and long list of opportunities on a consistent annual basis. • Consider developing an annual savings plan for future facilities modernization Savings should be allocated by building based off of square footage and building type (e.g. residential ,educational, foodservice, etc) and reserved for future use.

Page 117


5

CONCLUSION Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


FIRST STEPS IN A NEW DIRECTION

In the development of this master plan report the Design Team has spent many days on Pendle Hill’s campus studying the buildings and grounds and meeting with staff, residents and board members. There has been near unanimous support and excitement for campus improvements and the generation of a master plan. Clearly Pendle Hill’s people are ready to move forward, yet design and implementation take time and patience. Considered and coordinated actions are much different than quickly going after “low hanging fruit”. This report only points to the exciting progress to unfold in the coming years and decades. It is by no means a finished design ready for shovels to hit the ground upon its submission. Rather, this master plan should be understood as the first step in a long term, committed process. It establishes a framework and some guidelines for future development. Each of these new developments will need its own champions and leadership. Some will require design professionals and others will can be achieved with current staff and resources. This master plan is a response to Pendle Hill 2012-2013; it is of the moment and should not be accepted as absolute. As Pendle Hill continues to evolve - physically, financially, socially, spiritually - this plan will need to be revisited and maybe even revised. As noted above this is a framework, one which is open for reinterpretation of details while helping to keep things moving in a determined direction.

Masterplan Study

Phasing Plan  + Budgeting

Capital Campaign

Design Work

Construction

   

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 119


KEEPING THE VISION IN SIGHT

As on any campus it is a constant challenge for Pendle Hill to balance facilities maintenance and capital improvements with the day to day deadlines and the activities which demonstrate its mission in action. These challenges are sure to remain and most likely will become more and more complex as the niche (for educational and overnight offerings) that Pendle Hill serves continue to become increasingly competitive. One of Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strengths though, as an institution, is its ability to remain dedicated to the values and ethics which are its spiritual foundations. Quakers have a long history of focusing on philanthropy and service. For Pendle Hill to be able to continue to do so, however, it needs to be able to meet its own needs first. This involves staying committed to the physical campus and working towards a shared, committed future vision. As mentioned earlier, this masterplan is intended to be a framework which can adapt and change as its context changes. In that regard, the final recommendation of this master plan is that it be revisited and re-adopted in defined intervals by the Board and staff to ensure that it remains a useful and feasible tool for future progress.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


FINAL THOUGHTS With the commission of this master plan, Pendle Hill has taken an important first step to ensuring that their already rich campus history continues to grow and deepen for future generations. Over the past 80 years, the campus has grown and changed. Staff are dedicated to retaining its historic mission and values. However, the facilities are approaching a recognized fulcrum point, where they may transition from being assets and facilitators to liabilities or hindrances. While at first blush this seems to be an unfortunate predicament, it is actually an opportunity. In recent decades flush economic times have led to a trend toward widespread, large scale campus redevelopment. This master plan, however, pursues a different approach; favoring renovations, subtle new construction and simple solutions over widespread decontextualized redevelopment. The goal is to build off of the existing to enhance what is already a special and wonderful place. Now is a time for a new kind of growth and change - in response to the unique physical, social, economic, and environmental context of our time. Pendle Hill, and Quakerism at large, have always excelled at being what is needed. It is that sensitivity and consideration which will facilitate Pendle Hillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s continued importance, specialness and success for many generations to come.

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 121


Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


PROJECT TEAM

5 - CONCLUSION

Re:Vision

Page 123

ARCHITECTURE


APPENDIX A

Existing HVAC Equipment Inventory (excludes single houses and outbuildings)

COOLING

put

MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH HP MBH HP MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH MBH -

IDENTIFICATION HEATING

Efficiency Unit # EFLHQty F-5 - 1 B-1 - 1 6.0 SEER HP-11,0001 6.0 SEER HP-21,0001 11.0 EER WHP-4 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-3* 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-5* 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-6* 1,0001 11.0 EER WHP-2 1,0004 11.5 EER WHP-1 1,00025 - B-4/5 - 2 13.0 EER GHP-7 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-8 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-9 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-1 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-2 1,0001 13.0 EER GHP-10 1,0001 10.0 SEER CU-1 1,0001 80% % FCU-1 2,20024 16.4 EER GHP-4 1,0001 85% % CT-1 1,0001 B-2 - 1 B-3 - 1 11.4 EER PTHP-1 1,00012 9.7 EER PTAC-1 1,0009 9.7 EER PTAC-2 1,00024 9.7 EER PTAC-3 1,0003 13.3 EER WHP-3 1,0001 11.0 EER AC-1 1,0001 F-6 1 F-7 1 F-1 - 1 F-2 - 1 F-3 - 1 F-4 - 1

Description Heating Output Furnace 112.0 MBH HW400.0 Boiler MBH Air-Source 60.0 HP MBH Air-Source 60.0 HP MBH Water-Source 48.0 MBH HP Ground-W/W 120.0 MBH HP Ground-W/W 120.0 MBH HP Ground-W/W 120.0 MBH HP Water-Source 42.5 MBH HP Water-Source 13.5 MBH HP HW296.0 Boiler MBH Ground-W/W 120.0 MBH HP Ground-Water 60.0 MBHHP Ground-Water 36.0 MBHHP Ground-Water 36.0 MBHHP Ground-Water 42.0 MBHHP Ground-Water 30.0 MBHHP Condensing Unit Fan-Coil - Unit Ground-Water 64.6 MBHHP Cooling - TowerHW129.0 Boiler MBH HW129.0 Boiler MBH Package 8.1Terminal MBH HP Package - Terminal - AC Package - Terminal - AC Package Terminal AC Water-Source 48.0 MBH HP Central AC (Coil) Furnace 112.0 MBH Furnace 56.0 MBH Furnace 93.0 MBH Furnace 93.0 MBH Furnace 93.0 MBH Furnace 93.0 MBH

DESCRIPTION UTILITIES

Heating Heating Efficiency Area Served EFLH 1.3Waysmeet GPH 1,200 3.4Chace GPH 1,200 5.0Brinton HSPF 1st Flr1,200 5.0Brinton HSPF 2nd Flr 1,200 3.9Firbank COP Art Room 1,200 3.5Chace COP 1,200 3.5Chace COP 1,200 3.5Barn COP Mtg Room 1,200 3.9Firbank COP Apts 1,200 4.2Firbank COP 1,200 80%Firbank AFUE 1,200 3.5Barn COP M-P Room 1,200 3.8Barn COP 1,200 3.8Barn COP 1,200 3.8Barn COP 1,200 3.8Barn COP 1,200 3.8Barn COP 1,200 - Brinton - Apt/Conf - Chace 4.8Barn COP 1,200 - Firbank 1.1Brinton GPH 1,200 1.1Brinton GPH 1,200 3.2Brinton COP Guest1,200 Rms - Main- House - Chace Upmeads Res. 4.7Firbank COP Art Room 1,200 Upmeads Lib. 95%Upmeads AFUE Res. 1,200 95%Upmeads AFUE Lib.1,200 90%Main AFUE House 1,200 90%Main AFUE House 1,200 90%Main AFUE House 1,200 90%Main AFUE House 1,200

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Cooling Heating Elec Gas Oil Elec Make Elec (kWh/yr) Model(ccf/yr) (gal/yr) Serial Cost ($/yr) Williamson - 1454-17-3 1,500 $8121195 2,909 Weil-McLain - 478 N/A 4,080 $ 7,911 10,000 York 14,400E1CS060A06A 24,400 MCYM147276 $ 2,196 10,000 York 14,400E1CS060A06A 24,400 MCYM147211 $ 2,196 ClimateMaster 4,364 14,769HS048GSSSLSDNSA 19,133 92L017846 $ 1,722 ClimateMaster 9,231 12,058GSW120AGC10NFNS 21,289 K12665204 $ 1,916 ClimateMaster 9,231 12,058WE120GSCMFNPNSB 21,289 B13728423 $ 1,916 ClimateMaster 9,231 12,058WE120GSCMFNPNSB 21,289 B13728424 $ 1,916 12,727 ClimateMaster 15,331HS036GSSSLSGCSA 28,058 92M018248 $ 2,525 25,217 ClimateMaster 28,262CS012GLOAASSESA 53,479 93K010715 $ 4,813 Weil-McLain - PFG-7-PIN 8,630 N/A $ 11,244 ClimateMaster 9,231 12,058WE120GSZS1NPNSA 21,289 97J039429 $ 1,916 ClimateMaster 4,615 5,553WE060GSZS1NPNSA 10,169 97J043114 $ 915 ClimateMaster 2,769 3,332HS036GSZSRBGQSB 6,101 97G030708 $ 549 ClimateMaster 2,769 3,332HL036GSZSLBGQSB 6,101 97G030707 $ 549 ClimateMaster 3,231 3,887HL042GSZSRBGQSB 7,118 97G030735 $ 641 ClimateMaster 2,308 2,777HL030GSZSRBGQSA 5,084 97G03 -$- - - 458 Trane 4,800XL1400 - TTY048B100A0 4,800 Z1318MF1F $ 432 16,248 N/A - N/A 16,248 N/A $ 1,462 Trane 3,110 4,733GEHB04811J0120 7,843 W03L51703 $ 706 Evapco 4,388 - LSWA-20C 4,388 $ 930321 395 Peerless - WBV-03-110-WPC 369338-2001008 1,320 $ 2,559 Peerless - WBV-03-110-WPC 369337-2001008 1,320 $ 2,559 Sanyo 9,474 10,683STW0932H2P 20,157 Various $ 1,814 LG 4,639 - LW5011 4,639 Various $ 418 12,371 LG - LW5011 12,371 Various $ 1,113 LG 1,546 LW5011 1,546 Various $ 139 ClimateMaster 3,609 HS048GSCMLSGCSD 3,609 E10712677 $ 325 Carrier 3,273 CNPVP3617 3,273 0610X40490 $ 295 Bryant 355CAV0601201,375 2210A03272 $ 1,791 Bryant 355CAV042060 687 1710A01104 $ 896 Bryant - 340AAV060100 1,205 1911A02362 $ 1,570 Bryant - 340AAV060100 1,205 1911A02356 $ 1,570 Bryant - 340AAV060100 1,205 1411A01471 $ 1,570 Bryant - 340AAV060100 1,205 1411A01482 $ 1,570

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan

LIFESPAN

COOLING

Typical Date to Replace Age Utility Eqp Life Output 1970 201990 1980 202000 Electricity 1991 15 60.0 MBH 2006 Electricity 1991 15 60.0 MBH 2006 Electricity 1992 15 48.0 MBH 2007 Electricity 1997 15 120.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 120.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 120.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1992 15 35.0 MBH 2007 Electricity 1993 15 11.6 MBH 2008 1991 202011 Electricity 1997 15 120.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 60.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 36.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 36.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 42.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 1997 15 30.0 MBH 2012 Electricity 2001 15 48.0 MBH 2016 Electricity 1997 200.3 HP 2017 Electricity 2003 15 51.0 MBH 2018 Electricity 1990 305.0 HP 2020 2001 202021 2001 202021 Electricity 2006 159.0 MBH 2021 Electricity 2007 155.0 MBH 2022 Electricity 2007 155.0 MBH 2022 Electricity 2007 155.0 MBH 2022 Electricity 2010? 15 48.0 MBH 2025 Electricity 2010 15 36.0 MBH 2025 2010 20 2030 2010 20 2030 2011 202031 2011 202031 2011 202031 2011 202031 -

(Example Unit) C Make EFLH (Example Unit) Heating Model Output O Efficiency York YP9C120D20MP12C 112.0 MBH Burnham APX399 400.0 MBH Goodman 6.0 SEER DSZC180601B 1,000 60.0 MBH57 Goodman 6.0Deferred SEER DSZC180601B 1,000 60.0 MBH57 ClimateMaster 11.0Maintenance EER TT-049 1,000 48.0 MBH48 ClimateMaster 13.0* EER TMW-120 1,000 120.0 MBH 113 - Offline ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TMW-120 1,000 120.0 MBH 113 ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TMW-120 1,000 120.0 MBH 113 ClimateMaster 11.0 EER TT-038 1,000 42.5 MBH36 ClimateMaster 11.5 EER TRC-12 1,000 13.5 MBH11 Weil-McLain Ultra - UG-299296.0 MBH ClimateMaster 13.0Replacement EER TMW-120 1,000 120.0 MBH 113 ClimateMaster 13.0Needed EER TT-064 1,000 60.0 MBH68 Soon ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TT-038 1,000 36.0 MBH41 ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TT-038 1,000 36.0 MBH41 ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TT-038 1,000 42.0 MBH41 ClimateMaster 13.0 EER TT-026 1,000 30.0 MBH28 Goodman 10.0 SEER DSXC180481A 1,000 - 48 80% % 2,200 ClimateMaster 16.4 EER TT-049 1,000 64.6 MBH54 85% % 1,000 Weil-McLain Ultra - UG-155129.0 MBH Weil-McLain Ultra - UG-155129.0 MBH GE 11.4 EER AZ61H09 1,000 8.1 MBH 9 Kenmore 9.7 EER 1,000 70051 - 5 Kenmore 9.7 EER 1,000 70051 - 5 9.7 EER 1,000 ClimateMaster 13.3 EER TT-049 1,000 48.0 MBH48 11.0 EER 1,000 112.0 MBH 56.0 MBH York YP9C100C16MP12 93.0 MBH York YP9C100C16MP12 93.0 MBH York YP9C100C16MP12 93.0 MBH York YP9C100C16MP12 93.0 MBH -


ESCRIPTION

APPENDIX B

Existing HVAC Performance (excludes single houses and outbuildings)

IDENTIFICATION COOLING

Model 7-3

Serial Unit # Qty Description Utility Output Area Served Efficiency 8121195 F-5 1 Furnace - Waysmeet 478 N/A B-1 1 HW Boiler - Chace60A06A MCYM147276 HP-1 1Electricity Air-Source HP60.0 MBH Brinton6.0 1st SEER Flr 60A06A MCYM147211 HP-2 1Electricity Air-Source HP60.0 MBH Brinton6.0 2ndSEER Flr GSSSLSDNSA 92L017846 WHP-4 1Electricity Water-Source 48.0 HP MBH Firbank 11.0 Art EER Room 20AGC10NFNS K12665204 GHP-3* 1Electricity Ground-W/W 120.0 HP MBH Chace 13.0 EER GSCMFNPNSB B13728423 GHP-5* 1Electricity Ground-W/W 120.0 HP MBH Chace 13.0 EER GSCMFNPNSB B13728424 GHP-6* 1Electricity Ground-W/W 120.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 Mtg Room EER GSSSLSGCSA 92M018248 WHP-2 4Electricity Water-Source 35.0 HP MBH Firbank 11.0 AptsEER GLOAASSESA 93K010715 WHP-1 25Electricity Water-Source 11.6 HP MBH Firbank 11.5 EER PIN N/A B-4/5 2 HW Boiler - Firbank GSZS1NPNSA 97J039429GHP-7 1Electricity Ground-W/W 120.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 M-P Room EER GSZS1NPNSA 97J043114GHP-8 1Electricity Ground-Water60.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 EER GSZSRBGQSB 97G030708 GHP-9 1Electricity Ground-Water36.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 EER GSZSLBGQSB 97G030707 GHP-1 1Electricity Ground-Water36.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 EER GSZSRBGQSB 97G030735 GHP-2 1Electricity Ground-Water42.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 EER GSZSRBGQSA 97G03 - -GHP-10 -1Electricity Ground-Water30.0 HP MBH Barn 13.0 EER B100A0 Z1318MF1FCU-1 1Electricity Condensing Unit 48.0 MBH Brinton 10.0 Apt/Conf SEER N/A FCU-1 24Electricity Fan-Coil Unit 0.3 HP Chace80% % 4811J0120 W03L51703 GHP-4 1Electricity Ground-Water51.0 HP MBH Barn 16.4 EER 0C 930321 CT-1 1Electricity Cooling Tower 5.0 HP Firbank 85% % 3-110-WPC 369338-2001008 B-2 1 HW Boiler - Brinton3-110-WPC 369337-2001008 B-3 1 HW Boiler - Brinton32H2P Various PTHP-1 12Electricity Package Terminal 9.0HPMBH Brinton 11.4 Guest EERRms 1 Various PTAC-1 9Electricity Package Terminal 5.0AC MBH Main House 9.7 EER 1 Various PTAC-2 24Electricity Package Terminal 5.0AC MBH Chace9.7 EER 1 Various PTAC-3 3Electricity Package Terminal 5.0AC MBH Upmeads 9.7 Res. EER GSCMLSGCSD E10712677 WHP-3 1Electricity Water-Source 48.0 HP MBH Firbank 13.3 Art EER Room 3617 0610X40490 AC-1 1Electricity Central AC (Coil) 36.0 MBH Upmeads 11.0 Lib. EER V060120 2210A03272 F-6 1 Furnace Upmeads Res. V042060 1710A01104 F-7 1 Furnace Upmeads Lib. V060100 1911A02362 F-1 1 Furnace - Main House V060100 1911A02356 F-2 1 Furnace - Main House V060100 1411A01471 F-3 1 Furnace - Main House V060100 1411A01482 F-4 1 Furnace - Main House -

5 - CONCLUSION

COOLING UTILITIES

DESCRIPTION HEATING Heating Heating Cooling Efficiency EFLH Serial Elec EFLH Make Model Heating Output -Williamson112.0 MBH 1454-17-31.3 GPH 1,200 8121195 -Weil-McLain 400.0 MBH 3.4 GPH 478 N/A 1,200 1,000 York 60.0 MBH E1CS060A06A 5.0 HSPF MCYM147276 1,200 10,000 1,000 York 60.0 MBH E1CS060A06A 5.0 HSPF MCYM147211 1,200 10,000 1,000 ClimateMaster 48.0 MBH HS048GSSSLSDNSA 3.9 COP 92L017846 1,200 4,364 1,000 ClimateMaster 120.0 MBH GSW120AGC10NFNS 3.5 COP K12665204 1,200 9,231 1,000 ClimateMaster 120.0 MBH WE120GSCMFNPNSB 3.5 COP B13728423 1,200 9,231 1,000 ClimateMaster 120.0 MBH WE120GSCMFNPNSB 3.5 COP B13728424 1,200 9,231 1,000 ClimateMaster 42.5 MBH HS036GSSSLSGCSA 3.9 COP 92M018248 1,200 12,727 1,000 ClimateMaster 13.5 MBH CS012GLOAASSESA 4.2 COP 93K010715 1,200 25,217 -Weil-McLain 296.0 MBH PFG-7-PIN80% AFUE N/A 1,200 1,000 ClimateMaster 120.0 MBH WE120GSZS1NPNSA 3.5 COP 97J039429 1,200 9,231 1,000 ClimateMaster 60.0 MBH WE060GSZS1NPNSA 3.8 COP 97J043114 1,200 4,615 1,000 ClimateMaster 36.0 MBH HS036GSZSRBGQSB 3.8 COP 97G030708 1,200 2,769 1,000 ClimateMaster 36.0 MBH HL036GSZSLBGQSB 3.8 COP 97G030707 1,200 2,769 1,000 ClimateMaster 42.0 MBH HL042GSZSRBGQSB 3.8 COP 97G030735 1,200 3,231 1,000 ClimateMaster 30.0 MBH HL030GSZSRBGQSA 3.8 COP 97G03 1,200 - - - - 2,308 1,000 Trane XL1400TTY048B100A0 Z1318MF1F 4,800 2,200 N/A N/A N/A16,248 1,000 Trane 64.6 MBH GEHB04811J0120 4.8 COP W03L51703 1,200 3,110 1,000 Evapco LSWA-20C 930321 4,388 -Peerless 129.0 MBH WBV-03-110-WPC 1.1 GPH 369338-2001008 1,200 -Peerless 129.0 MBH WBV-03-110-WPC 1.1 GPH 369337-2001008 1,200 1,000 Sanyo 8.1 MBH STW0932H2P 3.2 COP Various 1,200 9,474 1,000 LG LW5011 Various 4,639 1,000 LG LW5011 Various 12,371 1,000 LG LW5011 Various 1,546 1,000 ClimateMaster 48.0 MBH HS048GSCMLSGCSD 4.7 COP E10712677 1,200 3,609 1,000 Carrier CNPVP3617 0610X40490 3,273 Bryant 112.0 MBH 355CAV060120 95% AFUE 2210A03272 1,200 Bryant 56.0 MBH 355CAV042060 95% AFUE 1710A01104 1,200 -Bryant 93.0 MBH 340AAV060100 90% AFUE 1911A02362 1,200 -Bryant 93.0 MBH 340AAV060100 90% AFUE 1911A02356 1,200 -Bryant 93.0 MBH 340AAV060100 90% AFUE 1411A01471 1,200 -Bryant 93.0 MBH 340AAV060100 90% AFUE 1411A01482 1,200 -

Page 125

Heating Elec Utility --Electricity 14,400 Electricity 14,400 Electricity 14,769 Electricity 12,058 Electricity 12,058 Electricity 12,058 Electricity 15,331 Electricity 28,262 -Electricity 12,058 Electricity 5,553 Electricity 3,332 Electricity 3,332 Electricity 3,887 Electricity 2,777 Electricity Electricity Electricity 4,733 Electricity --Electricity 10,683 Electricity Electricity Electricity Electricity Electricity -----

Elec Gas (kWh/yr) Output(ccf/yr) -- -- 24,400 60.0 MBH 24,400 60.0 MBH 19,133 48.0 MBH 21,289 120.0 MBH 21,289 120.0 MBH 21,289 120.0 MBH 28,058 35.0 MBH 53,479 11.6 MBH -8,630 21,289 120.0 MBH 10,169 60.0 MBH 6,101 36.0 MBH 6,101 36.0 MBH 7,118 42.0 MBH 5,084 30.0 MBH 4,800 48.0 MBH 16,248 0.3 HP 7,843 51.0 MBH 4,388 5.0 HP -- -- 20,157 9.0 MBH 4,639 5.0 MBH 12,371 5.0 MBH 1,546 5.0 MBH 3,609 48.0 MBH 3,273 36.0 MBH 1,375 687 -1,205 -1,205 -1,205 -1,205 -

LIFESP

Oil Typica (gal/yr) EqpOu EFLH AgeHeating Lif EfficiencyCost ($/yr) - 1,500 - $ 2,9091970112.0 M2 - 4,080 - $ 7,9111980400.0 M2 6.0 - SEER$ 2,196 1,000 1991 60.0 M1 6.0 - SEER$ 2,196 1,000 1991 60.0 M1 11.0 - EER $ 1,722 1,000 1992 48.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 1,916 1,000 1997120.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 1,916 1,000 1997120.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 1,916 1,000 1997120.0 M1 11.0 - EER $ 2,525 1,000 1992 42.5 M1 11.5 - EER $ 4,813 1,000 1993 13.5 M1 - - - $ 11,2441991296.0 M2 13.0 - EER $ 1,916 1,000 1997120.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 915 1,000 1997 60.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 549 1,000 1997 36.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 549 1,000 1997 36.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 641 1,000 1997 42.0 M1 13.0 - EER $ 458 1,000 1997 30.0 M1 10.0 - SEER$ 432 1,000 2001 1 80%- % $ 1,462 2,200 1997 2 16.4 - EER $ 706 1,000 2003 64.6 M1 85%- % $ 395 1,000 1990 3 - 1,320 - $ 2,5592001129.0 M2 - 1,320 - $ 2,5592001129.0 M2 11.4 - EER $ 1,814 1,000 2006 8.1 M1 9.7 - EER $ 418 1,000 2007 1 9.7 - EER $ 1,113 1,000 2007 1 9.7 - EER $ 139 1,000 2007 1 13.3 - EER $ 325 1,000 2010? 48.0 M1 11.0 - EER $ 295 1,000 2010 1 $ 1,791 2010112.0 M2 $ 896 2010 56.0 M2 - - - $ 1,5702011 93.0 M2 - - - $ 1,5702011 93.0 M2 - - - $ 1,5702011 93.0 M2 - - - $ 1,5702011 93.0 M2


APPENDIX C

HVAC Replacement schedule and proposal

LIFESPAN

IDENTIFICATION

PROPOSED DESCRIPTION REPLACEMENT

Typical Date to (Example Unit) Cooling Cooling Eqp Life Unit Replace Make Output Efficiency Age # Qty Description (ExampleArea Unit)Served Model Make 1970 20 F-5 1990 1 York Furnace YP9C120D20MP12C Waysmeet -Williamson 1980 20 B-1 2000 1 Burnham HW Boiler APX399 Chace -Weil-McLain 1991 15 HP-1 2006 1 Goodman Air-Source HP DSZC180601B Brinton 1st Flr 57.5 MBH York 18.0 SEER 1991 15 HP-2 2006 1 Goodman Air-Source HP DSZC180601B Brinton 2nd Flr 57.5 MBH York 18.0 SEER 1992 15 WHP-4 2007 1 ClimateMaster Water-Source HPTT-049 Firbank Art Room48.4 MBH ClimateMaster 15.7 EER 1997 15 GHP-3* 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-W/W HPTMW-120Chace 113.2 MBH ClimateMaster 20.1 EER 1997 15 GHP-5* 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-W/W HPTMW-120Chace 113.2 MBH ClimateMaster 20.1 EER 1997 15 GHP-6* 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-W/W HPTMW-120Barn Mtg Room 113.2 MBH ClimateMaster 20.1 EER 1992 15 WHP-2 2007 4 ClimateMaster Water-Source HPTT-038 Firbank Apts 36.2 MBH ClimateMaster 15.6 EER 1993 15 WHP-1 2008 25ClimateMaster Water-Source HPTRC-12 Firbank 11.3 MBH ClimateMaster 13.3 EER 1991 20 B-4/5 2011 2 Weil-McLain HW Boiler Ultra UG-299 Firbank -Weil-McLain 1997 15 GHP-7 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-W/W HPTMW-120Barn M-P Room113.2 MBH ClimateMaster 20.1 EER 1997 15 GHP-8 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-064 Barn 68.6 MBH ClimateMaster 22.0 EER 1997 15 GHP-9 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-038 Barn 41.2 MBH ClimateMaster 23.0 EER 1997 15 GHP-1 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-038 Barn 41.2 MBH ClimateMaster 23.0 EER 1997 15 GHP-2 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-038 Barn 41.2 MBH ClimateMaster 23.0 EER 1997 15 GHP-10 2012 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-026 Barn 28.9 MBH ClimateMaster 24.5 EER 2001 15 CU-1 2016 1 Goodman Condensing UnitDSXC180481A Brinton Apt/Conf 48.0 MBH Trane XL1400 18.0 SEER 1997 20 FCU-1 2017 24 Fan-Coil Unit Chace N/A 2003 15 GHP-4 2018 1 ClimateMaster Ground-Water HP TT-049 Barn 54.6 MBH Trane 22.5 EER 1990 30 CT-1 2020 1 Cooling Tower Firbank Evapco 2001 20 B-2 2021 1 Weil-McLain HW Boiler Ultra UG-155 Brinton -Peerless2001 20 B-3 2021 1 Weil-McLain HW Boiler Ultra UG-155 Brinton -Peerless2006 15 PTHP-1 2021 12GEPackage Terminal AZ61H09 HP Brinton Guest Rms 9.2 MBH Sanyo 12.7 EER 2007 15 PTAC-1 2022 9 Kenmore Package Terminal AC Main House 70051 5.2 MBH LG 11.0 EER 2007 15 PTAC-2 2022 24Kenmore Package Terminal AC Chace70051 5.2 MBH LG 11.0 EER 2007 15 PTAC-3 2022 3 Package Terminal AC Upmeads Res. LG 2010? 15 WHP-3 2025 1 ClimateMaster Water-Source HPTT-049 Firbank Art Room48.4 MBH ClimateMaster 15.7 EER 2010 15 AC-1 2025 1 Central AC (Coil) Upmeads Lib. Carrier 2010 20 F-6 2030 1 Furnace Upmeads Res. Bryant 2010 20 F-7 2030 1 Furnace Upmeads Lib. Bryant 2011 20 F-1 2031 1 York Furnace YP9C100C16MP12 Main House -Bryant 2011 20 F-2 2031 1 York Furnace YP9C100C16MP12 Main House -Bryant 2011 20 F-3 2031 1 York Furnace YP9C100C16MP12 Main House -Bryant 2011 20 F-4 2031 1 York Furnace YP9C100C16MP12 Main House -Bryant -

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

COOLING

Heating Cooling Heating Elec Gas Oil Cost Heating Output Efficiency Elec Elec Utility (kWh/yr) (ccf/yr) ($/yr) Model Serial Output (gal/yr)Efficiency 1454-17-3 116.0 MBH 98% AFUE 8121195 - - 1,380 - - $ 1,799 377.0 MBH 95% 478AFUE N/A - 4,628 - - $ 6,030 E1CS060A06A 56.5 MBH 9.5 HSPF MCYM147276 3,194 7,137 Electricity10,331 60.0 - MBH - 6.0$ SEER 930 E1CS060A06A 56.5 MBH 9.5 HSPF MCYM147211 3,194 7,137 Electricity10,331 60.0 - MBH - 6.0$ SEER 930 HS048GSSSLSDNSA 59.9 MBH 5.2 COP 92L017846 3,083 4,051 Electricity 7,134 48.0 - MBH - 11.0$ EER 642 GSW120AGC10NFNS 120.6 MBH 3.9 COP K12665204 5,632 10,876 Electricity16,507120.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 1,486 WE120GSCMFNPNSB 120.6 MBH 3.9 COP B13728423 5,632 10,876 Electricity16,507120.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 1,486 WE120GSCMFNPNSB 120.6 MBH 3.9 COP B13728424 5,632 10,876 Electricity16,507120.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 1,486 HS036GSSSLSGCSA 44.8 MBH 5.3 COP 92M018248 9,282 11,891 Electricity21,173 35.0 - MBH - 11.0$ EER 1,906 CS012GLOAASSESA 14.9 MBH 4.9 COP 93K010715 21,241 26,736 Electricity47,977 11.6 - MBH - 11.5$ EER 4,318 PFG-7-PIN 270.0 MBH 96.4% AFUE N/A - - 6,533 - - $ 8,512 WE120GSZS1NPNSA 120.6 MBH 3.9 COP 97J039429 5,632 10,876 Electricity16,507120.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 1,486 WE060GSZS1NPNSA 59.6 MBH 4.4 COP 97J043114 3,118 4,764 Electricity 7,882 60.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 709 HS036GSZSRBGQSB 36.7 MBH 4.7 COP 97G030708 1,791 2,746 Electricity 4,538 36.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 408 HL036GSZSLBGQSB 36.7 MBH 4.7 COP 97G030707 1,791 2,746 Electricity 4,538 36.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 408 HL042GSZSRBGQSB 36.7 MBH 4.7 COP 97G030735 1,791 2,746 Electricity 4,538 42.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 408 HL030GSZSRBGQSA 25.7 MBH 4.8 COP 97G03 - 1,180 --1,883 Electricity 3,063 30.0 - MBH - 13.0$ EER 276 TTY048B100A0 Z1318MF1F 2,667 Electricity 2,667 48.0 - MBH - 10.0$ SEER 240 N/A N/A Electricity 0.3 HP 80% % GEHB04811J0120 48.3 MBH 4.7 COP W03L51703 2,427 3,614 Electricity 6,041 51.0 - MBH - 16.4$ EER 544 LSWA-20C 930321 Electricity 5.0 HP 85% % WBV-03-110-WPC 139.0 MBH 95.6% AFUE 369338-2001008 - 1,696 - - $ 2,209 WBV-03-110-WPC 139.0 MBH 95.6% AFUE 369337-2001008 - 1,696 - - $ 2,209 STW0932H2P 8.1 MBH 3.8 COP Various 8,693 8,996 Electricity17,689 9.0 - MBH - 11.4$ EER 1,592 LW5011 Various 4,255 Electricity 4,255 5.0 - MBH - 9.7$ EER 383 LW5011 Various 11,345 Electricity 11,345 5.0 - MBH - 9.7$ EER 1,021 LW5011 Various Electricity 5.0 MBH 9.7 EER HS048GSCMLSGCSD 59.9 MBH 5.2 COP E10712677 3,083 4,051 Electricity 7,134 48.0 - MBH - 13.3$ EER 642 CNPVP3617 0610X40490 Electricity 36.0 MBH 11.0 EER 355CAV060120 2210A03272 355CAV042060 1710A01104 340AAV060100 97.0 MBH 97.7% AFUE 1911A02362 - - 1,158 - - $ 1,509 340AAV060100 97.0 MBH 97.7% AFUE 1911A02356 - - 1,158 - - $ 1,509 340AAV060100 97.0 MBH 97.7% AFUE 1411A01471 - - 1,158 - - $ 1,509 340AAV060100 97.0 MBH 97.7% AFUE 1411A01482 - - 1,158 - - $ 1,509 -

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan

SAVINGS

Elec Gas Oil (kWh/yr) Heating (ccf/yr) Output (gal/yr EFLH - (1,380) 112.0 MBH 1,50 - (4,628) 400.0 MBH 4,08 1,000 14,069 60.0 MBH1,000 14,069 60.0 MBH1,000 11,999 48.0 MBH1,000 4,782 120.0 MBH1,000 4,782 120.0 MBH1,000 4,782 120.0 MBH1,000 6,884 42.5 MBH1,000 5,502 13.5 MBH- 2,097 296.0 MBH1,000 4,782 120.0 MBH1,000 2,286 60.0 MBH1,000 1,564 36.0 MBH1,000 1,564 36.0 MBH1,000 2,580 42.0 MBH1,000 2,022 30.0 MBH1,000 2,133 -2,200 1,000 1,802 64.6 MBH1,000 - (1,696) 129.0 MBH 1,32 - (1,696) 129.0 MBH 1,32 1,000 2,468 -8.1 MBH1,000 385 -1,000 1,026 -1,000 1,000 (3,525) 48.0 MBH1,000 112.0 MBH 56.0 MBH - 93.0 47 MBH- 93.0 47 MBH- 93.0 47 MBH- 93.0 47 MBH-


APPENDIX D

HVAC Replacement Cost Savings and Payback

COST DESCRIPTION & PAYBACK

IDENTIFICATION SAVINGS

lec Wh/yr) -

0,331 0,331 7,134 6,507 6,507 6,507 1,173 7,977 6,507 7,882 4,538 4,538 4,538 3,063 2,667

Gas (ccf/yr) 1,380 4,628 6,533 -

6,041

-

-

7,689 4,255 1,345

1,696 1,696 -

-

7,134

-

-

-

1,158 1,158 1,158 1,158

Oil (gal/yr) -

-

Cost ($/yr) Unit # $ 1,799 F-5 $ 6,030 B-1 $ HP-1 930 $ HP-2 930 $WHP-4 642 $GHP-3* 1,486 $GHP-5* 1,486 $GHP-6* 1,486 $WHP-2 1,906 $WHP-1 4,318 $ B-4/5 8,512 $GHP-7 1,486 $GHP-8 709 $GHP-9 408 $GHP-1 408 $GHP-2 408 $GHP-10 276 $ CU-1 240 FCU-1 $GHP-4 544 CT-1 $ 2,209 B-2 $ 2,209 B-3 $PTHP-1 1,592 $PTAC-1 383 $PTAC-2 1,021 PTAC-3 $WHP-3 642 AC-1 F-6 F-7 $ 1,509 F-1 $ 1,509 F-2 $ 1,509 F-3 $ 1,509 F-4

Elec Gas Oil Cost Material Cost Material Simple (ccf/yr) (gal/yr)Area ($/yr) Unit Cost Factor Qty(kWh/yr) Description Served Make Cost Labor Model O/P/C Cost Serial Payback Utility 1 Furnace (1,380) 1,500Waysmeet $ 1,110 $ 691Williamson 1.50 $ 1,036 1454-17-3 $ 328 $ 205 $ 1,569 8121195 1.4 1 HW- Boiler(4,628) 4,080Chace $ 1,881 $ 4,992Weil-McLain 1.50 $ 7,488 $ 2,914 $ 1,560 478 N/A $ 11,962 6.4 1 14,069 Air-Source HP- Brinton $ 1,266 1st Flr $ 3,415York1.50 $ 5,122 E1CS060A06A $ 2,049 $ 1,076MCYM147276 $ 8,247 6.5 Electricity 1 14,069 Air-Source HP- Brinton $ 1,266 2nd Flr $ 3,415York1.50 $ 5,122 E1CS060A06A $ 2,049 $ 1,076MCYM147211 $ 8,247 6.5 Electricity 1 11,999 Water-Source-HP - Firbank $ 1,080 Art Room$ 2,500ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 5,001 HS048GSSSLSDNSA $ 965 $ 89592L017846 $ 6,861 6.4 Electricity 1 Ground-W/W 4,782 - HP - Chace $ 430 $ 10,870ClimateMaster 1.00 $ 10,870 GSW120AGC10NFNS $ 1,935 $ 1,921K12665204 $ 14,726 34.2 Electricity 1 Ground-W/W 4,782 - HP - Chace $ 430 $ 10,870ClimateMaster 1.00 $ 10,870 WE120GSCMFNPNSB $ 1,935 $ 1,921B13728423 $ 14,726 34.2 Electricity 1 Ground-W/W 4,782 - HP - Barn $ Mtg 430 Room $ 10,870ClimateMaster 1.00 $ 10,870 WE120GSCMFNPNSB $ 1,935 $ 1,921B13728424 $ 14,726 34.2 Electricity 4 Water-Source 6,884 -HP - Firbank $ 620 Apts $ 2,185ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 17,483 HS036GSSSLSGCSA $ 3,146 $ 3,09492M018248 $ 23,724 38.3 Electricity 25 Water-Source 5,502 -HP - Firbank $ 495 $ 1,685ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 84,247 CS012GLOAASSESA $ 12,757 $ 14,55193K010715 $ 111,554 225.3 Electricity 2 HW- Boiler 2,097 - Firbank $ 2,733 $ 3,837Weil-McLain 2.00 $ 15,350 PFG-7-PIN $ 4,910 $ 3,039N/A $ 23,299 8.5 1 Ground-W/W 4,782 - HP - Barn $ M-P 430 Room $ 10,870ClimateMaster 1.00 $ 10,870 WE120GSZS1NPNSA $ 1,935 $ 1,92197J039429 $ 14,726 34.2 Electricity 1 Ground-Water 2,286 - HP - Barn $ 206 $ 3,043ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 6,086 WE060GSZS1NPNSA $ 1,272 $ 1,10497J043114 $ 8,461 41.1 Electricity 1 Ground-Water 1,564 - HP - Barn $ 141 $ 2,322ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 4,644 HS036GSZSRBGQSB $ 865 $ 82697G030708 $ 6,335 45.0 Electricity 1 Ground-Water 1,564 - HP - Barn $ 141 $ 2,322ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 4,644 HL036GSZSLBGQSB $ 865 $ 82697G030707 $ 6,335 45.0 Electricity 1 Ground-Water 2,580 - HP - Barn $ 232 $ 2,322ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 4,644 HL042GSZSRBGQSB $ 865 $ 82697G030735 $ 6,335 27.3 Electricity 1 Ground-Water 2,022 - HP - Barn $ 182 $ 1,998ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 3,996 HL030GSZSRBGQSA $ 681 $ 70297G03 $ 5,378 ---29.6 Electricity 1 Condensing 2,133 Unit - Brinton $ 192 Apt/Conf$ 1,905Trane 1.50 XL1400 $ 2,858 TTY048B100A0 $ 1,344 $ 630Z1318MF1F $ 4,833 25.2 Electricity 24 Fan-Coil Unit Chace N/A N/A N/A Electricity 1 Ground-Water 1,802 - HP - Barn $ 162 $ 2,675Trane 2.00 $ 5,350 GEHB04811J0120 $ 1,063 $ 962W03L51703 $ 7,375 45.5 Electricity 1 Cooling Tower Firbank Evapco LSWA-20C 930321 Electricity 1 HW- Boiler(1,696) 1,320Brinton $ 350 $ 2,464Peerless 2.00 $ 4,927 WBV-03-110-WPC $ 1,787 $ 1,007369338-2001008 $ 7,722 22.1 1 HW- Boiler(1,696) 1,320Brinton $ 350 $ 2,464Peerless 2.00 $ 4,927 WBV-03-110-WPC $ 1,787 $ 1,007369337-2001008 $ 7,722 22.1 12 Package 2,468 Terminal HP - Brinton $ 222 Guest Rms $ 814Sanyo 1.25 $ 12,203 STW0932H2P $ 2,522 $ 2,209Various $ 16,935 76.3 Electricity 9 Package 385 Terminal AC - Main $ House 35 $ 160LG 1.00 $ 1,440 LW5011 $ $ - Various $ 1,440 41.6 Electricity 24 Package 1,026 Terminal AC - Chace $ 92 $ 160LG 1.00 $ 3,840 LW5011 $ $ - Various $ 3,840 41.6 Electricity 3 Package Terminal AC Upmeads Res. LG LW5011 Various Electricity 1 Water-Source (3,525) -HP - Firbank $ (317) Art Room$ 2,500ClimateMaster 2.00 $ 5,001 HS048GSCMLSGCSD $ 965 $ 895E10712677 $ 6,861 (21.6) Electricity 1 Central AC (Coil) Upmeads Lib. Carrier CNPVP3617 0610X40490 Electricity 1 Furnace Upmeads Res. Bryant 355CAV060120 2210A03272 1 Furnace Upmeads Lib. Bryant 355CAV042060 1710A01104 1 Furnace 47 - Main $ House 62 $ 687Bryant 1.50 $ 1,030 340AAV060100 $ 303 $ 2001911A02362 $ 1,533 24.9 1 Furnace 47 - Main $ House 62 $ 687Bryant 1.50 $ 1,030 340AAV060100 $ 303 $ 2001911A02356 $ 1,533 24.9 1 Furnace 47 - Main $ House 62 $ 687Bryant 1.50 $ 1,030 340AAV060100 $ 303 $ 2001411A01471 $ 1,533 24.9 1 Furnace 47 - Main $ House 62 $ 687Bryant 1.50 $ 1,030 340AAV060100 $ 303 $ 2001411A01482 $ 1,533 24.9 -

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 127

COOLING Output 60.0 MBH Deferred 60.0 MBH 48.0 MBH Maintenance 120.0 MBH * - Offline 120.0 MBH 120.0 MBH 35.0 MBH 11.6 MBH 120.0 MBH Replacement 60.0 Soon MBH Needed 36.0 MBH 36.0 MBH 42.0 MBH 30.0 MBH 48.0 MBH 0.3 HP 51.0 MBH 5.0 HP 9.0 MBH 5.0 MBH 5.0 MBH 5.0 MBH 48.0 MBH 36.0 MBH -

-

Efficiency 6.0 SEER 6.0 SEER 11.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 11.0 EER 11.5 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 13.0 EER 10.0 SEER 80% % 16.4 EER 85% % 11.4 EER 9.7 EER 9.7 EER 9.7 EER 13.3 EER 11.0 EER -

-

EFLH 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 2,200 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 -

Heating Ou 112.0 M 400.0 M 60.0 M 60.0 M 48.0 M 120.0 M 120.0 M 120.0 M 42.5 M 13.5 M 296.0 M 120.0 M 60.0 M 36.0 M 36.0 M 42.0 M 30.0 M 64.6 M 129.0 M 129.0 M 8.1 M -

48.0 M 112.0 56.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0

M M M M M M


APPENDIX E

HVAC Deferred Maintenance Payback Summary

Description Furnace (oil) HW Boiler (oil) Air-Source HP Air-Source HP Water-Source HP Ground-Water HP Ground-Water HP Ground-Water HP

Area Served Waysmeet Chace Brinton 1st Flr Brinton 2nd Flr Firbank Art Room Chace Chace Barn Mtg Room

Status Active Active Active Active Active Broken Broken 1-stage

Date to Replace 1990 2000 2006 2006 2007 2012 2012 2012

Existing Efficiency 1.3 GPH 3.4 GPH 6 SEER/5 HSPF 6 SEER/5 HSPF 11 EER/3.9 COP 13 EER/3.5 COP 13 EER/3.5 COP 13 EER/3.5 COP

Proposed Efficiency 98% AFUE* 95% AFUE* 18 SEER/9.5 HSPF 18 SEER/9.5 HSPF 15.7 EER/5.2 COP 20.1 EER/3.9 COP 20.1 EER/3.9 COP 20.1 EER/3.9 COP Totals

Potential Annual Savings Energy Cost 1,560 gal** $1,226 4,080 gal** $1,881 14,069 kWh $1,266 14,069 kWh $1,266 11,999 kWh $1,080 4,782 kWh $430 4,782 kWh $430 4,782 kWh $430 54,481 kWh $8,011 5,640 gal

Est. Project Cost $1,569 $11,962 $8,247 $8,247 $6,861 $14,726 $14,726 $14,726

Simple Payback 1.3 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.4 34.2 34.2 34.2

$81,064

10.1

*PES recommends that this oil-fired unit be replaced with a high-efficiency natural gas unit **Energy savings reflects the discontinuation of fuel oil. The natural gas replacement units would consume approximately 1,380 ccf ($1,799) and 4,628 ccf ($6,030), respectively.

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


APPENDIX F

Chace Renovation Options

Configuration Boiler + window Acs (current) AC units 1 FCU fan (heating) Boiler Fix WWHPs WWHP (heating) 2 WWHP (cooling) FCU fan (heat/cool) Replace WWHPs WWHP (heating) 3 WWHP (cooling) FCU fan (heat/cool) Install PTHPs 4 PTHP heating PTHP cooling

Estimated Energy Costs Electricity (kWh) Oil (gal) Expense 21,233 4,080 $ 9,822 12,371 $ 1,113 8,862 $ 798 4,080 $ 7,911 58,826 $ 5,294 24,117 $ 2,170 18,462 $ 1,662 16,248 $ 1,462 49,263 $ 4,434 21,751 $ 1,958 11,264 $ 1,014 16,248 $ 1,462 47,587 $ 4,283 24,182 $ 2,176 23,405 $ 2,106

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 129

Material Cost $ -

Labor Cost $ -

O/P/C $ -

Simple Project Cost Payback (yrs) $ -

CO2 (lbs) 117,901

$

17,392 $

3,096 $

3,073 $

23,561

5.2

74,121

$

21,740 $

3,870 $

3,842 $

29,452

5.5

62,071

$

21,272 $

18,092 $

5,905 $

45,268

8.2

59,959


APPENDIX G Lighting Inventory

Hours/Day FIRBANK Art room Entrance Library Computer Room 21-24 Hall 25-28 Hall 31-14 Hall 35-38 Hall 2nd Flr Lounge 3rd Flr Lounge Basement Storage Laundry Storage Mechanical 16 rooms MAIN HOUSE Dining Area Common Areas Kitchen Basement Apt. A-H

Days/Week

Weeks/Year

Annual Use (hrs)

No. Fixts

Fixture Type

Fixt Wattage

Total kW

Annual kWh

Annual Cost

6 10 10 10 6 6 6 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 10 10 1 1 1 4 1 1 8

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 7 5 5 7

52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52

2,184 3,640 3,640 3,640 2,184 2,184 2,184 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 8,760 3,640 3,640 260 260 260 1,456 260 260 2,912

12 1 4 1 8 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 4 5 1 6 4 2 3 2 64

3-F34T12 2-F34T12U 2-F96T12/HO 2-F34T12 2-F96T12/HO 2-F96T12/HO CFL 14W CFL Flood Incand. Flood 2-F34T12U CFL Flood Incand. Flood 2-F34T12U CFL Sconce 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12 2-F34T12 2-F32T8 2-F34T12 2-F34T12 2-F34T12 Lamp

116 72 252 72 252 252 14 14 36 72 14 36 72 14 72 72 72 72 58 72 72 72 14

1.392 0.072 1.008 0.072 2.016 0.252 0.028 0.028 0.072 0.216 0.028 0.072 0.216 0.028 0.288 0.360 0.072 0.432 0.232 0.144 0.216 0.144 0.896

3,040 262 3,669 262 4,403 550 61 245 631 1,892 245 631 1,892 245 1,048 1,310 19 112 60 210 56 37 2,609

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

274 24 330 24 396 50 6 22 57 170 22 57 170 22 94 118 2 10 5 19 5 3 235

12 12 12 12 16 2 8 8

7 7 7 7 7 5 7 7

52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52

4,368 4,368 4,368 4,368 5,824 520 2,912 2,912

6 1 30 7 7 7 21 14

4-F34T12 2-F34T12 CFL Flood Incand. Flood 2-F34T12 2-F34T12 Lamp CFL 14W

144 72 14 36 72 72 14 14

0.864 0.072 0.420 0.252 0.504 0.504 0.294 0.196

3,774 314 1,835 1,101 2,935 262 856 571

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

340 28 165 99 264 24 77 51

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Hours/Day FIRBANK BRINTON Art room Common Areas Entrance LibraryConference Rm Large Computer Dining areaRoom Kitchen 21-24 Hall Hall to Dorms 25-28 Hall 16 Dorms 31-14 Hall BARN 35-38 Hall Corridor 2nd Flr Lounge 3rd Flr Lounge Meeting Room Basement Dean's Office Storage Bookstore Laundry 2nd Flr Hall Storage Copy Room Mechanical 15 offices 16 rooms CHACE MAIN 1st Flr HOUSE Hall Dining Area 12 Rooms 2nd Flr Hall Common Areas 12 Rooms Kitchen Basement WAYSMEET Apt. A-H 7 rooms Common Areas

6 8 10 8 10 8 10 8 6 2 6 12 6 12 24 16 24 24 8 24 8 24 24 8 24 8 10 1 10 1 1 1 8 1 8 4 8 1 8 1 8 8 24 12 8 12 8 12 24 12 8 16 8 2 8 8 8

Days/Week

Weeks/Year

7 7 7 7 7 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 7 5 7 5 7 5 5 5 5 7 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 7 7 7

52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52

Annual Use (hrs) 2,184 2,912 3,640 2,912 3,640 2,912 3,640 2,912 2,184 520 2,184 4,368 2,184 4,368 8,760 5,824 8,760 8,760 2,912 8,760 2,912 8,760 8,760 2,080 8,760 2,080 3,640 260 3,640 260 260 260 2,080 260 2,080 1,456 2,080 260 2,080 260 2,080 2,912 8,760 4,368 2,912 4,368 2,912 4,368 8,760 4,368 2,912 5,824 2,912 520 2,912 2,912 2,912

No. Fixts 12 4 1 3 4 2 1 4 8 32 1 8 2 6 2 6 2 13 3 32 2 32 2 3 12 2 16 4 7 5 8 1 11 6 3 4 10 2 8 3 2 15 64 6 6 24 1 24 30 6 7 24 7 24 7 21 14 14 14

Fixture Type 3-F34T12 1-F34T12 2-F34T12U 1-F32T8 2-F96T12/HO Lamp 2-F34T12 CFL Sconce 2-F96T12/HO CFL Flood 2-F96T12/HO 3-F34T12 CFL 14W Incand. Sconce CFL Flood 2-F34T12 Incand. CFL Flood 2-32W 2-F34T12U CFL 14W CFL Flood Lamp Incand. Flood 2-F34T12U CFL Sconce Halogen 40W 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12 2-F34T12U CFL Flood 2-F34T12 CFL FLood 2-F34T12 4-F32T8 2-F32T8 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12 2-F34T12U 2-F34T12 Lamp 1-F17T8 4-F34T12 CFL 14W 2-F34T12 Lamp CFL Flood 1-F17T8 Incand. Flood CFL 14W 2-F34T12 Lamp 2-F34T12 Lamp14W CFL CFL 14W Lamp CFL 14W

Fixt Wattage 116 44 72 30 252 14 72 14 252 14 252 116 14 60 14 72 36 64 72 14 14 36 72 14 40 72 72 14 72 14 72 114 58 72 72 72 72 14 17 144 14 72 14 14 17 36 14 72 14 72 14 14 14

Total kW 1.392 0.176 0.072 0.090 1.008 0.028 0.072 0.056 2.016 0.448 0.252 0.928 0.028 0.360 0.028 0.432 0.072 0.832 0.216 0.448 0.028 0.448 0.072 0.216 0.864 0.028 0.640 0.288 0.504 0.360 0.112 0.072 0.154 0.432 0.342 0.232 0.720 0.144 0.576 0.216 0.144 1.080 0.896 0.102 0.864 0.336 0.072 0.336 0.420 0.102 0.252 0.336 0.504 0.336 0.504 0.294 0.196 0.196 0.196 Totals

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 131

Annual kWh 3,040 513 262 3,669 82 262 163 4,403 233 550 4,054 61 1,572 245 2,516 631 7,288 1,892 1,305 245 1,305 631 1,892 1,797 245 1,331 1,048 131 1,310 29 19 40 112 711 60 1,498 210 1,198 56 449 37 2,246 2,609 894 3,774 978 314 978 1,835 894 1,101 978 2,935 978 262 856 571 571 571

Annual Cost $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

274 46 24 330 7 24 15 396 21 50 365 6 142 22 226 57 656 170 117 22 117 57 170 162 22 120 94 12 118 3 2 4 10 64 5 135 19 108 5 40 3 202 235 80 340 88 28 88 165 80 99 88 264 88 24 77 51 51 51

71,276 $ 6,415


APPENDIX H Lighting Cost Savings

Quantity 20 49 13 58 124 74 11 6 4 181 6 4 3 13 16 3 12 6

Existing Fixture Type 3-F34T12 2-F34T12U 2-F96T12/HO 2-F34T12 CFL 14W CFL Flood Incand. Flood CFL Sconce 2-F32T8 Lamp 4-F34T12 1-F34T12 1-F32T8 2-32W CFL Halogen 40W 4-F32T8 1-F17T8 Incand. Sconce

Fixt Wattage 116 72 252 72 14 14 36 14 58 14 144 44 30 64 40 114 17 60

Proposed

Fixt Wattage Fixture Type 2-F25T8/HE 43 2-F25T8/HE 43 None 0 2-F25T8/HE 43 None 0 None 0 CFL 14W 14 None 0 None 0 None 0 2-F25T8/HE 43 1-F25T8/HE 21 None 0 None 0 None 0 2-F32T8 58 None 0 CFL 14W 14 Total Savings % of Total Lighting

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Savings kWh/yr Cost Savings Savings 4,464 $402 4,570 $411 0 $0 3,666 $330 0 $0 0 $0 1,444 $130 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2,647 $238 268 $24 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 349 $31 0 $0 1,206 $109 $1,675 18,614 26% 26%

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


APPENDIX J

Pendle Hill Accessibility Report

5 - CONCLUSION

Page 133


APPENDIX J

Pendle Hill Accessibility Report

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


Page 135


APPENDIX J

Pendle Hill Accessibility Report

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan


APPENDIX K

Common Deferred Maintenance Costs The following is a list of several common deferred maintenance item unit costs. This is intended to be used by Pendle Hill to understand the general magnitude of deferred maintenance cost exposure on campus. Note that these estimated costs are for planning purposes only and are subject to final verification. Note also that construction cost escalates over time. • Smaller Window $950 • Larger Window $1,450 • Roof Replacement including removal of 1-layer of asphalt shingles, the installation of ice and water shield where applicable, felt paper, new metal roofing, new gutters, and new downspouts $12.70/SF + $0.60/SF for each additional layer of asphalt shingle removal + $4/SF for roof deck repairs (sheathing replacement) • Stucco Repairs $14.50/SF • Clean and Repaint (exterior) $1.20/SF • Clean and Repaint (interior) $0.95/SF • Asphalt Paving Replacement/Patch $35/SY • Concrete Sidewalk Replacement/Patch $14/SF • Toilet Replacement $530 EA • Vanity Sink and Faucet Replacement $470 EA

Page 137


Reduce Reuse Recycle Re:Vision

Re:Vision ARCHITECTURE

Re:Vision Architecture 133 Grape Street Philadelphia, PA Pendle Hill Campus Master Plan 215.482.1133

Pendle Hill Master Plan  

Pendle Hill is a Quaker retreat located in suburban Philadelphia, PA. In 2012 completed a 6 month master plan that looked at imediate and fu...

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you