2014 01 13 master plan draft

Kemble StreetLenox, Massachusetts

Draft – 12/26/13SUBMITTED TO NICHOLAS J. PUMA, CFO AND MANAGING DIRECTOR

MASTER PLANNING PROJECT TEAM

ARCHITECT:CLARK & GREEN, INC., GREAT BARRINGTON, MA

SITE PLANNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:WALTER CUDNOHUFSKY ASSOCIATES, ASHFIELD,MA

CIVIL ENGINEER:FORESIGHT LAND SERVICES, PITTSFIELD, MA

STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:BECI, PITTSFIELD, MA

MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL PLUMING ENGINEERS:NOVUS ENGINEERING, DELMAR, NY

Page 1

S HA KES P EA R E & C O MP A NY - T EN Y EA R MA S TER P L A NN I NG R EP O R T

Excerpts, Shakespeare & Company’s mission (from the S&C website):

To create a great classical theatre company that interacts closely with its localcommunity and attracts visitors from all over the world, on a site which, througharchitecture and landscape, reflects the generating principles of creativity,harmony, and proportion . . .

The Company believes there is a direct relationship between the development ofthe human mind and the landscape a human being inhabits. It is the search forthe generative power between human thought, nature, and buildings that shapesthe development of the Master Plan for Shakespeare & Company’s new home.The Company is committed to creating a physical environment that challenges,enhances, and inspires human endeavor. The theatres, rehearsal rooms,dormitories, eating places, and landscape . . . nurtures and fosters the creative

Page 2


COVER LETTER

Dear Board Members,

On October 16, 2013, the Architectural Engineering (AE) Team met fortheir kickoff meeting. Nicholas Puma attended and addressed the Teamproviding context and insight into the need for a 10 Year Plan. The AETeam broke into two groups: The engineers began surveying thebuildings. The architects (Clark & Green), site planner (WalterCudnohufsky Associates) and civil engineer (Foresight Land Services)began working on the Master Plan for adjusting the configuration of thecampus – its roads, parking, pedestrian paths, green-open-space andthe relationship of the buildings to the site.

The Ten Year Study is technical assessment and qualitative evaluationof Shakespeare & Company (S&C) buildings and property. It is also aplanning proposal for a dynamic, growing, community dedicated totheatre arts and, in the future, fine arts. To achieve its mission, buildingexpansion or new construction will be required to support expectedgrowth.

The project is a two-pronged effort:1. A physical and technical assessment of each building has beenperformed. Architects have documented plans of each building.Engineers have evaluated existing structural, heating, cooling, andelectrical systems. Deficiencies of each have been recorded.Recommendations for upgrading each building has been developed.

2. The second prong of the 10 Year Study is the development of a MasterPlan. Its purpose is to re-conceive the campus site plan to better serveits current and future use. Its focus is to preserve campus open space,to establish a pattern of vehicular and pedestrian circulation that willenhance safety, convenience and ease of movement for pedestrians,and to take advantage of the natural beauty and character of the campusand the Berkshires.

Appendices contain engineering and building survey data collected andcompiled as a basis for recommendations. The following appendices areattached to this report as a separate booklet:A. Existing Building Plans,B. Building Envelop Assessments,C. Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) Engineering Reports,D. Structural Engineering Reports,E. Civil Engineering Report.

Page 3


…In the human body there is a kind of symmetrical harmony betweenforearm, foot, palm, finger, and other small parts; and so it is withperfect buildings…Propriety is that perfection of style which comeswhen a work is authoritatively constructed on approved principles. Itarises from prescription, from usage or from nature.

Page 4


TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................4

PART 1 - CONTEXT............................................................................6PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................8SITE ATTRIBUTES............................................................................10ARCHITECTURAL ATTRIBUTES.........................................................12PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS....................................................................14EXISTING CAMPUS PLAN AND STATISTICS......................................16PREFACE TO MASTER PLAN............................................................18

PART 2 - CONCEPTS........................................................................20DRIVING FORCES..........................................................................22CONCEPTS....................................................................................23ASSUMPTIONS AND OUTCOMES..................................................24CAMPUS STRENGTHS, DEFICIENCIES AND RESPONSES..................25BUILDING DEMOLITION LIST..........................................................28

PART 3 - IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................30TEN YEAR VISION...........................................................................32PHASING STRATEGY......................................................................34PHASING, YEARS 1 AND 2 .............................................................36PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 3 AND 4 ...........................................38PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 5, 6 AND 7........................................40PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 8.......................................................42PHASING SUMMARY......................................................................44

PART 4 - PROPOSED BUILDING........................................................................4660 ROOM DORMITORY, ON-CAMPUS HOUSING EXPANSION.......48SAINT MARTIN’S RESTORATION.....................................................50ARTISTS’ STUDIOS..........................................................................52NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING.....................................................54

PART 5 - BUILDING ASSESSMENTS..................................................................56ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING OBJECTIVES ........................58BUILDING ENVELOP ASSESSMENT..................................................60MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING ASSESSMENT ....................62STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT.....................................64CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT..................................................66ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES........68

PART 6 - COSTS...............................................................................70CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS........................................72PHASING AND CASHFLOW OVERVIEW...........................................74NEXT STEPS....................................................................................76

Page 5


Page 6


PART 1 - CONTEXT

Page 7


The intent of the proposed sitedesign:▪ An organized campus,▪ Supporting a dynamic, energetic

arts community,▪ Encouraging pedestrian exploration,▪ Organized around a “green

common”. Core▪ Within a peripheral loop road▪ With dispersed and convenient

parking.

Walter Cudnohufsky, Site Planner andLandscape Architect

The impact of the grounds happens the moment the visitor crosses the boundary. Theproperty will be a place apart: every aspect of it calling for a deeper understanding of the world. Landscape and nature drawthe visitor; the gardens are the threshold and underpinning of the environment’s creative experience. Even if the activities onthe property were not performance, debate, education, and training, the grounds would still live in their own right: a uniquecollaboration of American gardening sensibilities, a landmark in the history of landscape design, a place created at thebeginning of the 21st century - standing for all time.

Tina Packer (from S&C’s website)

Page 8


PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

The Ten Year Master Plan is a comprehensive blueprintintended to guide decision-making and support fundraising forcampus improvement and expansion strategies. It is based onconversations and meetings with Nicholas J. Puma, theManaging Director about the nature of the arts community ofShakespeare & Company (S&C) and its operational andprogrammatic needs. To meet these, the report recommendsfour actions:

A. Stabilize and improve campus infrastructure,B. Upgrade or demolish under-performing and inefficient

buildings,C. Renovate, when possible, existing buildings to meet

programmatic goals; construct new buildings, whennecessary, to meet campus needs.

D. Reconfigure campus to concertedly serve visitors andsupport the Shakespeare & Company arts community takingadvantage of its ample size and natural beauty.

Engineering assessments and analyses address items A and B.Engineering includes three basic disciplines, 1 - Mechanical,Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) Engineering, 2-StructuralEngineering and 3-Civil Engineering.

The proposed Master Plan responds to items 3 and 4 above.Design objectives precipitated out of discussions with Mr. Pumaexamining campus activities, functions and future S&C goals.Five objectives guide the development of the Master Plan -

▪ Accommodate expanded on-campus housing - reduce off-campus rental and transportation expenses,

▪ Eliminate high maintenance / low functioning buildings,▪ Expand the Shakespeare & Company arts community to

include both performing and fine arts,▪ Acknowledge Saint Martins architectural importance and

central location,▪ Enhance community coherence with support from a

dynamically organized site that unifies the campus into anenergetic, organic and vital entity.

Page 9


Page 10


Summary of the design team’s impression of current campusconditions -

Campus character:▪ Disorganized, scattered and confusing.▪ Automobile dominates the site, especially upon arrival,▪ Lacks a coherent, accessible and center,▪ Many buildings in disrepair; some are condemned and must

be demolished,▪ Confusion, uncertainty and uninviting for walking and

lingering.Parking:▪ Current parking is irregular in shape, scattered, inefficient,

and poorly paved and either poorly marked or inconsistentlymarked.

▪ Signs leading to parking are temporary, inconsistent andsometimes confusing.

Trees and mass vegetation:▪ Trees and vegetation are poorly maintained. There is on going

effort to remove hazardous trees. Additional tree work isrecommended.

▪ A tree inventory and maintenance plan and budgeting isessential as the campus makes improvements.

▪ Numerous mature specimen trees need special care in keepingwith their importance.

Vehicular Circulation:▪ Arrival from Kemble Street is on axis with a deteriorating Saint

Martins, which is the visual front door of the campus and doesnot provide a welcoming vision for the visitor,

▪ Circuitous, often requiring sharp turns and frustrating deadends.

Pedestrian circulation:▪ Pedestrian circulation with minor exceptions (Miller Building,

Tina Packer Theater, and Bernstein Center) is undefined andundirected,

▪ Generalized pedestrian exploration of the campus is notencouraged by the materials, signage and ease of movement.

Campus buildings:▪ Eclectic and unrelated stylistically,▪ Saint Martins, in its central location and with its grand facade,

is deteriorating,

SITE ATTRIBUTES

Page 11


OF THE SEVENTEEN EXISTINGBUILDINGS:■ FIVE ARE CONDEMNED AND

MUST BE DEMOLISHED,■ TWO ARE UNINHABITABLE,■ FIVE ARE INEFFICIENT AND

COSTLY TO OPERATE,■ THE SECONDARY BUILDINGS

HOLD LITTLE VALUE FORSHAKESPEARE & COMPANY’SFUTURE,

■ FOUR REMAINING BUILDINGSARE THE CORE OF THE FUTURE

Page 12


ARCHITECTURAL ATTRIBUTES

Page 13


THE FOUR PRINCIPALBUILDINGS ARE WIDELYDISPERSED AND UNRELATED INCHARACTER AND SCALE.

THESE BUILDINGS CONSTITUTEAPPROXIMATELY 2.5 ACRES(7%) OF THE 33 ACRE CAMPUS.

Page 14


PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS

Page 15


Repair HVAC system, minorupgrades, may be demolished 3,392 1st / Main 3,392 2 5,789

2nd Floor 2,397

Demolish 937 1st / Main 937 2 1,7122nd Floor 775

Restore 13,728 Basement 11,270 3 to 4 34,6071st / Main 13,7282nd Floor 6,7063rd Floor 2,903

Add Lobby cooling, HVAC upgradesand improvements 11,174 Basement 1,579 2 14,733

1st / Main 11,1742nd Floor 1,980

Demolish 695 1st / Main 695 1 695No work required; north end ofbuilding is currently vacantseparated from EBT by firewall,rented out intermittently (footprint istotal building area) 56,163 1st / Main 31,820 2 65,163

2nd Floor 9,000North End - undeveloped 1st / Main 24,343 1

Demolish 5,567 1st / Main 5,567 1 5,567Demolish 8,580 Basement 2,074 1 10,654

1st / Main 8,580

Preserve temporarily until demolition 1,125 Basement 1,072 2 2,8911st / Main 1,1252nd Floor 694

Cosmetic upgrades - paint andlighting 8,605

Basement /Lower 8,686 3 25,208

1st Floor /Main 8,605

2nd Floor 7,917Mixed use - currently residentialupper floor and maintenance shoplower floor. Code complianceissues. 824 1st / Main 744 2 1,568

2nd Floor 824Demolish 1,667 Basement 1,580 2 4,799


To be demolished 3,151 1 3,151To be demolished 3,958 1 3,958To be demolished 3,787 1st / Main 3,787 2 6,826

2nd Floor 3,039To be demolished 1,819 1st / Main 1,819 2 3,159

2nd Floor 1,340To be demolished 374 1 374

Page 16


EXISTING CAMPUS PLAN AND STATISTICS

Page 17


Page 18


PREFACE TO MASTER PLAN

In 2000, Shakespeare & Company purchased 66 acres withmultiple buildings at 70 Kemble Street in Lenox Center. Thirtysix acres along with the Springlawn Estate and Carriage Housewere sold in 2008. The current campus is 30 acres with 17buildings.

Since taking possession of its property, the Company hasdeveloped two major theatre venues – the Tina Packer Playhouseand the Bernstein Center. It has also established the outdoortheatre, the Rose Footprint, and continually expanded its yearround educational programming.

Having survived the recent recession, the Company has nowreached a plateau of stability. Taking a breath and looking to itsfuture, the Company is now contemplating a conceptual andphysical expansion of its performing arts community into aninclusive performing and fine arts community.

In evaluating the campus operation and function, the missingpieces inrealizing a high-functioning, efficient, coherent, unifiedcommunity are:

1. On-campus housing for approximately 60 Companymembers, staff, students and visiting artists: This willprovide substantial savings in rental of off-campus housingand transportation.

2. Refurbishing Saint Martin’s as a mixed use, vital campusand community center: The building is architecturallyclassical and centrally located therefore a powerfulcomponent of the campus.

3. Unification of the site through creation of a central greencommon around which all of the arts community buildingswill be positioned.

Page 19


Page 20


PART 2 - CONCEPTS

Page 21


Page 22


DRIVING FORCES

Five principle decisions and requirements shape theMaster Plan:1. Expansion of campus housing: Economic practicality

drives the need to expand campus housing to eliminate off-campus rentals. Lawrence Hall currently housesapproximately 55 residents. South East Cottage and WestCottage (both deteriorating and low functioning buildings)provide an additional 20 units. Population expansion of theCompany during the summer approaches 150 residents.Currently, additional staff, Company members and visitingartists are housed off-campus in contracted rental housing.Rental vehicles support their transportation needs.

2. Demolition of derelict and low-functioning: Monks Hall,Monks Hall Nursery, Field House and Farm House have beencondemned by the Lenox Commissioner of Buildingsbecause of their advanced state of deterioration. Otherrecommends for demolition are noted on the BuildingDemolition List at the end of this section.

3. Recognition of Saint Martins’ importance : The buildingis an iconic architectural presence. It’s axial relationshipwith the entrance and its central location make it a powerfuland dominant element. As a deteriorating edifice it iscurrently a negative force. Its restoration will create apositive force and central hub for the expanded artscommunity and physical campus.

4. Vision for the future to include fine arts: Expansion ofthe arts community to include fine arts requires housing,studio and gallery space. This expanded communityconnects art, artists, and visitors. S&C will become a multi-faceted arts community developing unique marriagesbetween creative disciplines. Opportunities for visitors tosee artists at work will attract audiences and interactionsbetween the arts and the public.

5. Re-conceiving the campus: To realize the Company’smission, the campus must assertively support, challengeand inspire a dynamic, energetic arts community. Thebeauty and organization of the landscape must encouragesafe pedestrian exploration. Simplified vehicular navigationmust provide easy, intuitive access to ample parking.

Page 23


Organizing concept: A welcoming, campus organized arounda protected green pedestrian core. A peripheral loop road toaccess dispersed and convenient parking.

Primary Concepts▪ Establish a unifying element that links key buildings and

defines a relationship between built and naturalenvironment,

▪ Strengthen the orthogonal geometry of Saint Martins;extend into landscape,

▪ Consolidate and expand the natural environment, reclaimwetlands that were historically a prominent feature of theproperty; harness them as a campus feature, use landscapefeatures to strengthen relationships between disparatearchitectural styles,

▪ Protect adjacent property owners from unwanteddisturbance,

▪ Promote safe, comfortable and enjoyable pedestriancirculation around the campus; provide inviting pedestrianspaces, protection and prominence,

▪ Simplify vehicular circulation, avoid pedestrian / vehicularconflicts,

▪ Expand parking,▪ Plan for future expansion,▪ Design with human scale in mind for both site and building

improvements▪ Foster the use of the entire campus as a “laboratory” for

enriching the actor training and the live theatre experience

Additional Concepts and Implementation Ideas▪ Create a more integrated and cohesive campus organized

around a central “green” that will -▪ Locate and define key gathering places on the campus with

emphasis on the 4 “keystone” buildings.▪ Reduce car dominance by putting a loop drive at periphery

and strategic parking lots dispersed along the loop system.▪ Plan for flexibility in designing the spaces between the

buildings; allow for improvisational and interactive site useto happen.

▪ Identify, protect and make the best use of the resources

CONCEPTS

Page 24


Desired outcomes▪ A well-organized campus in discernable precincts▪ Self-directing automobile circulation▪ Unobtrusive but convenient parking▪ Reduced amount of paving▪ Minimal car/pedestrian conflict▪ Pedestrian priority throughout the site▪ Designed to pedestrian scale▪ Pedestrians are protected and prominent▪ Nature predominates▪ Central green space▪ Green image & theme – featuring the stream wetlands and

ponds▪ Green sustainable solutions and interventions wherever

possible▪ Open recreational fields▪ Substantial all season buffer to road and abutting properties▪ Park like front entrance on Kemble Street

Design Decisions▪ feature Saint Martins▪ “artist’s village” adjacent to the Rose Footprint to aggregate

function and add human scale▪ Landscape elements help to integrate buildings▪ Additional employee/actor housing▪ Village-like accommodations provide options across campus

Program Assumptions▪ Rose Footprint parking staggered with other venues,▪ Maintenance Building will move from the central campus to

west side of the Bernstein Center▪ Existing parking, roads and buildings will be preserved as

much as is possible,▪ Vehicular domination at theatre entrances will be limited to

the minimum that is acceptable,▪ Parking requirements amount to approximately 500 cars.▪ Provide parking along roads to reduce pavement, cost and

runoff,▪ Buses will drop off and pick up near each theater entrance

and park behind Bernstein Center.

ASSUMPTIONS AND OUTCOMES

Page 25


CAMPUS STRENGTHS, DEFICIENCIES AND RESPONSES

STRENGTHS MASTER PLAN DESIGN RESPONSE

Saint Martins Build upon use its central position as acampus hub and community center, itsiconic image, it’s prominent relationshipto the property entrance,

Green entry Enhance the vehicular entrance withlandscape and gardens; demolish theMiller Building, screen new parking

Tina Packerand BernsteinCenter

Connect the two primary theatre venuestogether with a green common; the“common” becomes the organizingelement for buildings, pedestrian andlandscape exploration.

DEFICIENCY MASTER PLAN DESIGN RESPONSE

Eclectic andincoherentcampus

Remove buildings that are low-functioning and high-maintenance;aggregate new building in clusters tocomplement existing buildings.

Confusingtrafficpatterns

Develop perimeter, looped drive withspur roads to parking and buildingservices.

Incompleteand poorlysignedwalkways notisolated fromvehicularcirculation

Develop a hierarchy of well signedpedestrian paths constructed ofconsistent material.

Centrallylocated wetand poorlydrained areas

Establish rain gardens, wetlands,drainage streams - a design feature tocomplement the improved landscape.

Page 26


A welcoming campus is organized around acentral green common. A peripheral road

provides simple access to parking areas. Theexpanded landscape at the main entry, the westlawn and central common create a green campus.

Page 27


Demolishbuilding

Page 28


BUILDING DEMOLITION LIST

The following buildings either must be demolished or arerecommended for demolition:

Buildings condemned by the Lenox BuildingCommissioner - scheduled for demolition by S&C beginning ofSpring 2014:▪ Building 14. Monks Hall▪ Building 15. Monks Hall Nursery▪ Building 15. Field House▪ Building 16. Farmhouse▪ Building 17. Farmhouse Shed

Uninhabitable buildings:▪ Building 8. Pool House - never completed, unusable▪ Building 12. South Cottage - foundation collapsing

Low-functioning, high maintenance buildings:▪ Building 2. South East Cottage - Code violations, foundation

collapsing, roof framing failures▪ Building 9. West Cottage - currently inhabited but

inefficient and expensive to maintain▪ Building 5. Laundry - unoccupied and uninhabitable, for

storage only

Low quality building - removal recommended by Master Plan:▪ Building 7. Maintenance Building - poor condition,

Page 29


Page 30


PART 3 - IMPLEMENTATION

Page 31


■ AN ORGANIZED CAMPUS,■ SUPPORTING A DYNAMIC, ENERGETIC

ARTS COMMUNITY,■ ENCOURAGING PEDESTRIAN

EXPLORATION,■ ORIENTED AROUND A “GREEN COMMON”,■ PROTECTS A GREEN PEDESTRIAN CORE,■ WITHIN A PERIPHERAL LOOP ROAD,■ WITH DISPERSED AND CONVENIENT

Page 32


TEN YEAR VISION

Page 33


Page 34


PHASING STRATEGY

Six Key Actions

Six key actions are proposed for the phasing of theShakespeare & Company Master Plan. These will becoordinated with an inter-dependant demolition plan forcondemned buildings, unused and substandard buildings.

1. A centrally located pedestrian “green common” will beconfigured.

2. The Maintenance Building and its parking and staff parkingwill be relocated to the west side of the Bernstein Center.

3. On-campus housing will be expanded through theconstruction of a 60 unit dormitory; part of Saint Martinswill be renovated to provide expanded dining facilities forthe larger on-campus population.

4. A peripheral loop road will be established around theperimeter of the property.

5. Saint Martins will be renovated.6. Artists’ studios will be developed.

Phasing Alternatives

Sequencing of this phase-in strategy has been based onconstruction logic. It is a guide and can be altered. Otherfactors will likely play into Master Plan implementation.Therefore, it is the intent of this proposal to establish thisPhasing Strategy as a guide and basis for variation dependenton factors not apparent to the Master Plan Team at this time.

Page 35


Page 36


Phase I - YEARS 1 AND 2

CONDEMNED BUILDING REMOVAL, PARKINGEXPANSION, ST. MARTINS REMEDIATION,CLEANUP AND PROTECTIONA.Remediate and demolish condemnedbuildings – Monk’s, Monk’s Nursery, FieldHouse, Farm House,and Farm House Shed.Excavate area of AUL if foundations areremoved. Construct rehearsal decks on

remaining foundations.B.Demolish South Cottage

C.Inspect St. Martins for hazardous materials -lead paint, asbestos, etc. Remediate St. Martins

as required. Repair roof and flashing of St. Martins;seal up window openings that are broken or leaking;

remove all deteriorating non-structural buildingcomponents; re-grade around building to eliminate waterinfiltration into the basement.

CONSTRUCT NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING,DEMOLISH POOL AND MAINTENANCE, LANDSCAPECONSTRUCTIOND. Construct new Maintenance Building. Reconfigure parking

and driveway loop as needed.E. Demolish Maintenance Building and Pool Building.F. Relocate Rose Footprint.G. Establish Green Commons – initial drainage work including

daylighting existing pipes, establish water course connectionto Bernstein Centre pond, & initial wetland/rain gardenplantings. Establish connection at Tina Packer Playhouse;stairs, slope grading / planting, accessible pathway.Implement initial phase of lighting, and sidewalks.

H. Partial expansion of parking for Tina Packer Playhouse.

B

A

A

C

D

GEF

H

PHASING, YEARS 1 AND 2

Phase I Summary:The primary actions within this Phase 1 isthe relocation of the Maintenance Building to thewest side of the Bernstein Center and the initiation of thedevelopment of the “green common”. Demolition of thecondemned buildings, Maintenance Building and the PoolBuilding clears away the area intended to be the green

Page 37


Page 38


Phase II - YEARS 3 AND 4

EXPAND ON-CAMPUS RESIDENTIALCAPACITY, INSTALL ST. MARTINS DININGFACILITY, DEMOLISH REMAININGCOTTAGESA.Construct new dormitory and parking adjacent

to Lawrence Hall.B.Saint Martins Dining Hall and Kitchen Renovation

-segment north wing with firewall and build Kitchen,Dining Hall and, third floor offices.

C.St. Martins parking lot constructionD.Demolish Southeast Cottage and West Cottage.

Complete expansion of parking at Tina Packer Playhouse.E. Buffer improvement work: fencing and planting.F. Access drive and delivery upgrades- includes reconfigured

parking lot at lower level of St. Martins

SITE AND LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTIONG. Further development of Green Commons, drainage, water

features. Complete drainage work for wetland/watercoursefeature. Complete loop drive complete

B

A

C

DD

E

E

F

G

G

Phase II Summary:Primary actions within this phase focus on the expansion of on-campushousing. The construction of a 60 unit dormitory, clustered with the existingresidential Lawrence Hall takes place. To accommodate expanded on-campusresidential population, expanded dining facilities are required. The North Wingof Saint Martins will be restored into a large Dining Hall and Kitchen.

PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 3 AND 4

Page 39


Page 40


Phase III - YEARS 5, 6 AND 7

ST. MARTINS RENOVATIONA.Reconstruction of St. Martins into a mixed-usefacility. (See plans for St. Martins ).

SITE & LANDSCAPE UPGRADES INCLUDINGTINA PACKER PLAYHOUSE SITE

B.Landscape improvements at Kemble Street entryincluding entry drive and loop reconfiguration; tree

planting and landscape beds; old TPP parking lotrehab and arrival reconfiguration, small scale landscape

projects, gardens, hardscape, tree planting, buffer work, Way-finding & additional lighting, landscape and

pathway upgradesC. Demolition of the Miller Building and relocation of

Administration to St. Martins.

PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 5, 6 AND 7

BA

B

C

B

B

B

B

Phase III Summary:The most ambitious phase, with respect to cost and impact on the campus,takes during this phase - the restoration of Saint Martins. The building willbecome the center of community activity and vitality. Once constructed,Administration can move into it and the Miller Building can be demolished.

Page 41


Page 42


PHASING PROPOSAL, YEARS 8

Phase IV - Year 8 (2021)

ARTISTS’ STUDIOS CONSTRUCTIONA. Construct artists’ studios.B. Construct parking for Rose and Art Studios

B

AC

Phase IV Summary:The final phase in the Ten Year Master Plan constructs facilities to support theexpansion of the Shakespeare & Company performing arts community into anall inclusive arts community. Studios for fine artists and other performingartists such as musicians will be constructed.

Page 43


Page 44


PHASING SUMMARY

Remediate and demolish condemned buildings – Monk’s, Monk’s Nursery, Field House, Farm House,andFarm House Shed.Construct rehearsal decks on remaining foundations. (Farmhouse foundation is all stone so may beExcavate AUL (Site Activity & Use Limitations) if foundations are removed.

B Demolish South CottageSaint Martins - Inspect for hazardous materials such as lead paint, asbestos, etc.Saint Martins - Remediate as required.Saint Martins - Repair building envelop to stabilize structure - roof and flashing of St. Martins; seal up windowopenings that are broken or leaking; remove all deteriorating non-structural building components; re-gradearound building to eliminate water infiltration into the basement.

Construct new Maintenance Building.Reconfigure parking and driveway loop as needed.

E Demolish Maintenance Building and Pool Building.F Relocate Rose

G

Establish Green Commons – initial drainage work including daylighting existing pipes, establish water courseconnection to Bernstein Centre pond, & initial wetland/rain garden plantings. Establish connection at TinaPacker Playhouse; stairs, slope grading / planting, accessible pathway. Implement initial phase of lighting,and sidewalks.H Partial parking expansion for the Tina Packer Playhouse

H

A Construct new dormitory and parking adjacent to Lawrence

BSaint Martins Dining Hall and Kitchen Restroation - Segment north wing (with firewall); build Kitchen, Dining,3rd floor offices.

C St. Martins parking lot constructionD Demolish Southeast Cottage and West Cottage. Complete expansion of parking at Tina Packer Playhouse.E Buffer improvement work: fencing and planting.F Access drive and delivery upgrades- includes reconfigured parking lot at lower level of St. Martins

GFurther development of Green Commons, drainage, water features. Complete drainage work forwetland/watercourse feature. Complete loop drive.

ASaint Martins restored completely into mixed use facility housing office, residential accommodations for visitingactors, fine artists, select S&C members.

B Demolition of the Miller Building and relocation of Administration to Saint Martins.

C

Landscape improvements at Kemble Street entry including entry drive and loop reconfiguration; tree plantingand landscape beds; old TPP parking lot rehapilitated and arrival reconfiguration, small scale landscapeprojects, gardens, hardscpape, tree planning, buffer work, way finding and additinoal lighting landscape andpathway upgrades.

A Construct Artists Studios.B Construct parking for Rose and Artists Village

ARTISTS VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION, SITE AND LANDSCAPE UPGRADESYear8 - 9,2021 -2022

Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

EXPAND ON-CAMPUS RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY, INSTALL SAINT MARTINS DINING FACILITY, DEMOLISHREMAINING COTTAGES

SITE AND LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION

ST. MARTINS RESTORATION, SITE & LANDSCAPE UIPGRADES INCLUDING TINA PACKER PLAYHOUSE SITEYears5 - 7,2018 -2020

A

C

D

CONDEMNED BUILDING REMOVAL, ST. MARTINS REMEDIATION, CLEANUP AND PROTECTION

CONSTRUCT NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING, DEMOLISH POOL AND MAINTENANCE, LANDSCAPECONSTRUCTION, PARTIAL PARKING EXPANSION

PH

ASE II

PH

ASE III

PH

ASE

IVPH

ASE I

Page 45


Page 46


PART 4 - PROPOSED BUILDING

Page 47


Page 48


Based on discussions with Nicholas J. Puma, the need foradditional housing on campus is paramount. Currently, severalexisting cottages on-campus are being used to house staff andsummertime Company members. These cottages are inefficientto maintain, house a limited number of people and containnumerous code violations. Roof and foundation defects existamongst a host of other deterioration problems.

During the summer, off-campus rental and off-campustransportation costs are significant. The construction of an on-campus building to house all staff and summertime studentsand Company members would theoretically provide a rapidpayback.

The attached hypothetical dormitory contains sixty bedroomswith the possibility for 2 beds in each. It is an efficiently laidout plan. It is a simple building that answers the need foradditional housing that is economical to build, easy to maintainand highly energy efficient. It is depicted only for the purposesof estimating a cost of construction.

Footprint area = 8,300 SFHeight = 3 storiesTotal area = 25,000 SFNumber of bedrooms = 60Construction system = Steel frame, concrete decks, insulatedmetal panel cladding, heat pump in each room =NFPA 13 sprinkler system required

60 ROOM DORMITORY, ON-CAMPUS HOUSING EXPANSION

Page 49


Page 50


SAINT MARTIN’S RESTORATION

Total restoration - west wing ofbuilding Kitchen Basement 4833 3

Dining 1st 4879Offices 2nd 1741

Total restoration Residential and meeting space Bsmt 5,623

Total restoration Adminstration and meeting 1st / Main 5,633

No work Existing rehearsal1st/.N.Wing 1,217

No work Existing rehearsal 1st/S. Wing 1,068Total restoration Residential 2nd Floor 4,457Total restoration Residential 3rd Floor 2,712 3 to 4 18,425

Saint Martins Dining/ Kitchen

12,741

11,453

Saint Martins central location and distinguishing architecture make itthe most important building on the Shakespeare & Company campus.Designed by McKim Mead and White (architects for Grand CentralStation, the NY Public Library, Penn Station) it was built in the 1930’s;the North Wing was built in the 1950’s.

The main entrance to Shakespeare & Company is axially on line withthe main entrance to Saint Martins and its iconic facade provides thebackdrop to the entry . Currently the building is not in service and isdeteriorating. Its renovation would be the largest building project thatS&C will have undertaken. Yet it would convert a long ignorednegative presence into a powerful organizing force and center for thecampus and the arts community.

The Master Plan proposes a two-phase restoration. The Dining-Kitchen wing would be restored in coordination with the constructionof the new 60-Unit Dormitory. This facility would be larger thanLawrence Hall’s dining facility. And because of its central location,ease of accessibility, attractive views of the campus, would providedining for S&C patrons, campus residents and staff.

The remainder of the building wouldbe restored in years 5 and 6 toprovide Administrative space,Meeting, Conference Center andResidential space for visiting artistsand for patrons of Shakespeare &Company. The consolidation of acritical mass of activity, a mixed usecenter full of vitality - theintersection of all components of theShakespeare & Company artscommunity.

▪Dining Room and Kitchen -approximately 10,000 square feet.▪Administrative Offices - 19▪Meeting and Conference Rooms - 3▪Rehearsal Spaces – 2 existing▪Bedrooms – 40 BR’s on all floors

Page 51


Page 52


ARTISTS’ STUDIOS

The Artists’ Studios will provide both housing and studio spacefor artists of all disciplines - both performance and fine arts,including:

▪ Drama and all aspects of dramatic arts,▪ Sculpture▪ Painting and drawing▪ Graphics▪ Printmaking▪ Music performance and composition▪ Literature and poetry▪ Video and film▪ Dance

The Artists’ Village will facilitate and support possibilities forinteraction between artists of all disciplines in the creativeprocess and for critical analysis and celebration of the humanexperience. In order to do this the Artists’ Village will provide:Housing for artistsStudio space

Wood, metal, plastics, printmaking, sewing and ceramics shops▪ Gallery, exhibition and gathering space▪ Performance space▪ Puppet theater▪ Community space – kitchen and café▪ Library▪ Public Restrooms

The buildings would be designed to approach net zero energyuse. Each building is oriented towards the southaccommodating the use of photovoltaic panels. The walls androof would be super-insulated. The building would represent ahome for creativity in the arts, architecture and technicalrealms.

Page 53


Page 54


NEW MAINTENANCE BUILDING

The Maintenance Building is proposed to be located on the westside of the Bernstein Center. The construction system would bea pre-engineered steel. The building size would beapproximately 40’ x 100’. Foundation would be poured slabinsulated below and radiant heating installed within. Insulationof roof and walls would be standard bagged insulationnecessary to meet the energy code.

Page 55


Page 56


PART 5 - BUILDING ASSESSMENTS

Page 57


Repair HVAC system, minorupgrades, may be demolished 3,392 1st / Main 3,392 2 5,789

2nd Floor 2,397

Demolish 937 1st / Main 937 2 1,7122nd Floor 775

Restore 13,728 Basement 11,270 3 to 4 34,6071st / Main 13,7282nd Floor 6,7063rd Floor 2,903

Add Lobby cooling, HVAC upgradesand improvements 11,174 Basement 1,579 2 14,733


Demolish 695 1st / Main 695 1 695No work required; north end ofbuilding is currently vacantseparated from EBT by firewall,rented out intermittently (footprint istotal building area) 56,163 1st / Main 31,820 2 65,163

2nd Floor 9,000North End - undeveloped 1st / Main 24,343 1

Demolish 5,567 1st / Main 5,567 1 5,567Demolish 8,580 Basement 2,074 1 10,654

1st / Main 8,580

Preserve temporarily until demolition 1,125 Basement 1,072 2 2,8911st / Main 1,1252nd Floor 694

Cosmetic upgrades - paint andlighting 8,605

Basement /Lower 8,686 3 25,208

1st Floor /Main 8,605

2nd Floor 7,917Mixed use - currently residentialupper floor and maintenance shoplower floor. Code complianceissues. 824 1st / Main 744 2 1,568

2nd Floor 824Demolish 1,667 Basement 1,580 2 4,799


To be demolished 3,151 1 3,151To be demolished 3,958 1 3,958To be demolished 3,787 1st / Main 3,787 2 6,826

2nd Floor 3,039To be demolished 1,819 1st / Main 1,819 2 3,159

2nd Floor 1,340To be demolished 374 1 374

Page 58


ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING OBJECTIVES

Architectural and MEP (Mechanical and Electrical) Engineering -Understanding the condition of each building – how well itserves its occupants and how efficient its systems function - iscritical to the economical operation of the campus and effectiveserving of the community. The Clark & Green, the Architect,and Novus Engineering, the MEP Engineers, established thefollowing objectives in the evaluation of the buildings -1. Identify and rectify areas of energy inefficiency throughout

the campus – both within and around the buildings,2. Reduce energy consumption - both electrical and fossil fuel

burning,3. Improve building interior environment for the health and

comfort of its occupants,4. Augment the insulation value of existing building envelops

where practical,5. In new construction, detail highly energy efficient buildings

to reduce energy consumption and provide a comfortableand healthy interior environment for buildings’ occupants.

Structural Engineering -BECI, the Structural Engineers, have analyzed each of thebuildings and identified structural deficiencies.

Civil Engineering -Foresight Land Services, led by Rob Hoogs who has profoundlyfamiliar with the campus conditions, has performed anevaluation of existing surface and subsurface systems, utilitiesand services. A utility and drainage reconfiguration plan,aligned with the phased-in reconfigurations proposed in theMaster Plan is the result. The objectives of these subsurface(sewer, water, electric, drainage) and surface (surfacedrainage, parking surfaces, pedestrian paths) upgrades include-▪ safety, efficiency,▪ Longevity,▪ Reliability,▪ low maintenance,▪ compliance with MA and local regulations,▪ preservation of investment in buildings and landscape, and▪ in general, support the beautification and sustainability of

Page 59


Bldg# Building Component Improvement

ImprovementCost

Annual CostSavings

Payback Period(Years)

1 Miller Building Replace windows with high qualityinsulated curtain wall and thermalglass units

$150,000 $5,000 30.0

2 South East Cottage $2,500 $5,000 0.53 Saint Martins NA NA4 Tina Packer Playhouse5 Laundry Building - - -6 Bernstein Center7 Maintenance Building8 Pool Building9 West Cottage10 Lawrence Hall11 Garage Shop12 South Cottage

Building Envelop Summary and Recommendations

Page 60


BUILDING ENVELOP ASSESSMENT

1. Miller Building is currently the administrative center.Built in the 1960’s, it is architecturally unremarkable. Thebuilding envelop is not adequately insulated. It’s heatingsystem is inefficient and therefore costly to run. Due topoor delivery of heat and excessive air infiltration, it is anuncomfortable building and therefore not healthy for itsoccupants. When Saint Martins goes into service, it willbecome the administrative center of the campus. TheMiller Building will be vestigial. Once eliminated, theentry to the property can become a compellinglandscaped gateway.

2. South East Cottage is a wood frame residential buildinghousing about 8 people. It is a compromised structure.

3. Saint Martins4. Tina Packer Playhouse5. Laundry Building6. Bernstein Center7. Maintenance Building8. Pool Building9. West Cottage10.Lawrence Hall11.Garage Shop12.South Cottage

Page 61


PriorityOrder Building ECM

Annual CostSavings Measure Cost

Payback Period(Years)

1 Tina Packer Playhouse Install digital clockthermometer

$1,000 $500 0.5

2 Install hydronicheating coils

$2,500 $5,000 2.0

3 Replace hvac control $3,500 $25,000 7.1

4 Replace boiler $950 $9,500 10.05 Insulate soffit in lobby - - -

6 Bernstein Center78 Saint Martins910 Lawrence Hall1112 Garage (adjacent to

Lawrence)1314 Miller Building1516 West Cottage1718 South East Cottage

Mechanical, Electrical Plumbing Energy / Cost Savings Measures - Priority List

Page 62


MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING ASSESSMENT

Novus Engineering surveyed each building listed in the table tothe left entitled “Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing Energy / CostSavings Measures (ECM) - Priority List”. It is a consolidatedreport listing ECM’s by building in order of payback period - thequickest payback being at the top of the list, the longest beingat the end.

Additionally below is the Engineers’ recommendations for astrategy to address the EMC’s:

Page 63


Building UseConstructionType

BuildingCondition(1 =excellent to5 = poor)

Structural Deficiencies /Priority (1 = not critical to 5= very critical

Other Deficiencies / Priority(1 = not critical to 5 = verycritical Estimated Cost Remarks

Tina Packer Playhouse Assembly 2

Bernstein Center Mixed use - theatre,theatre craft, offices,assembly

Concreteblock, woodframe roofstructure

2 Unreinforced north end / 3 $50,000

Saint Martins Proposed use -offices, dining,kitchen, residential,meeting

Reinforcedconcrete

5 Structurally sound butrequires renovation andreplacement of all systems

Lawrence Hall Residential, kitchenand dining

Brick andconcrete block

2 None Structurally sound, nostructural repairs required.

Garage (adjacent toLawrence)

Shop and apartment Wood frame 3 None

Miller Building Offices 4 None

West Cottage Residential Wood frame 4

South East Cottage Residential Wood frame 5 Roof framing / 5; foundationdeterioration / 5

Roof flashing / 5 Building is uninhabitable,should be demolished

Structural Engineering Evaluation - Executive Summary

Page 64


STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT

Deficiency Priority List

Order ofPriority Building Deficiency Description of Repair

Priority (1 = not criticalto 5 = very critical Remarks

1 South East Cottage Uninhabitable and unsafe Demolish 5 Attractive nuisance

234567891011121314151617

Page 65


Page 66


CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT

Page 67


Page 68


ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES

Page 69


Page 70


PART 6 - COSTS

Page 71


New 60 bedroom dormitory Residential 1st 8,000Residential 2nd 8000Residential 3rd 8000

New pre-engineered steel Workshop, vehicle storage 4,000 1 st 4,000 1 4,000

New woodframe construction, PV roofpanels, superinsulated shells, sprinklersystem throughout.

Mixed use - studios, workshops, rehearsal,bathrooms 1st

New live work lofts Residential 2nd

Restored west wing of building Kitchen Basement 4833 3Dining 1st 4879Offices 2nd 1741

Total restoration Bsmt 5,623Total restoration 1st / Main 5,633

No work1st/.N.Wing 1,217

No work 1st/S. Wing 1,068Total restoration 2nd Floor 4,457Total restoration 3rd Floor 2,712Add Lobby cooling, HVAC upgrades andimprovements Bsmt 1,579

1st / Main 11,1742nd 1,980 14,733

No work required; north end of building iscurrently vacant separated from EBT byfirewall, rented out intermittently (footprint istotal building area) 1st / Main 31,820

2nd 9,000

North End - undeveloped No work 1st / Main 24,343 1

Cosmetic upgrades - paint and lightingBsmt /Lower 8,686 3

1st / Main 8,6052nd 7,917

Mixed use - currently residential upper floorand maintenance shop lower floor. Codecompliance issues. 1st / Main 744 2

2nd 824 1,568

56,163

8,605

824

2No work

25,208

65,163

24,000

2

3

11,174 2

12,741 18,4253 to 4

11,453Saint Martins Dining /Kitchen

8,000

Page 72


CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS

▪ Dormitory▪ Maintenance Building▪ Artists VillageRenovated building costs▪ Saint Martins Dining Hall and Kitchen▪ Saint Martins Main Building - Mixed UseRoadway costs▪ Various road and loop road projectsParking costs▪ Various parking projectsLandscape project costsBuilding upgrades (temporary and permanent)▪ Lawrence Hall▪ Bernstein Center▪ Tina Packer Playhouse▪ Miller BuildingDemolition costs▪ Condemned buildings▪ Cottages▪ Maintenance building▪ Pool building▪ Miller Building

Page 73


Page 74


PHASING AND CASHFLOW OVERVIEW

Page 75


Page 76


NEXT STEPS

Documents

2014 01 13 master plan draft