Background Information to December 2010 Paw Print Article on Campus Plan
In 2006 Prep was nearing completion of the final building project from its 1995 campus
use plan: PACCAR Commons, the Lee Family Arts Center, and the Thomas Healy, SJ
Chapel/Theater. At that time, Prep wisely decided to hire the Meng Group to analyze all
of the facilities on campus. Unlike the 1995 plan that focused on much needed additions,
the goal of this study was to provide a blueprint for an ongoing maintenance plan
concerning current structures and systems (mechanical, electrical, etc.).
The Meng Group noted that our buildings have never been subjected to a thorough
seismic analysis, something of particular significance due to advances in design that have
emerged in recent years. We hired Coughlin, Porter, Lundeen (CPL) to conduct this study in
fall, 2008.CPL concluded that Adelphia Hall does not satisfy the criteria from the national
standard, which is not surprising for a structure of this type and age.
Our initial discussions at the Board level focused solely upon Adelphia. However, after
much consideration it became clear we should first address the most important and basic
question, “What do our students need?” That is, rather than simply reacting to a problem
we decided to place it within a broader context. Thus began the campus use study which
we initiated in spring, 2009 and concluded in December, 2009.
Seattle Prep solicited requests for proposals from architecture firms to conduct a Campus
Use Master Plan in the spring of 2009. After interviewing four candidates, it became clear
to all Facilities Committee members that the Seattle firm LMN was the best choice to
conduct this study. LMN has extensive experience in design of education facilities, with
more than 90 planning and design assignments on 25 different campuses.
Planning Process
Master planning started in July with an evaluation of all school buildings and the campus
itself. LMN and its consultants reviewed the condition of all structures and systems to
identify inadequacies. They also reviewed existing reports and drawings in order to build
on previously completed work. As part of the evaluation of the campus, the team
completed a review of the land use code. The design team then held numerous meetings
with faculty, staff, students, and parents to identify issues and develop a program of
required space needs. An online survey was also used to gather information from the
larger school community.
Based on the facility evaluation and the program of required space needs, LMN
developed numerous planning options for the school to consider. Each option was
developed to a conceptual level with input from the design team engineers and cost
estimator. The school was then able to evaluate many different possible options in order
to decide on the best long-term solution for the campus.
Needs Assessment
Our interview and survey results indicated that there is consensus among the various
constituencies regarding program and other needs. The following school needs received
the highest response levels:

Adelphia Hall – including seismic, systems, and pedagogical inadequacies.







The “Knot” of Adelphia, McDonnell, and related buildings – the tightly packed
group of buildings have different floor levels and interconnected systems making
changes very difficult.
Peyton Hall – including systems, pedagogical, and campus place-making
inadequacies.
Cafeteria and Lack of a Campus Gathering Space – the cafeteria is too small and
remote and it does little to contribute to an expressed need of a central social
gathering space on campus.
Sense of Place and Entry – there is no defined entry to the campus and no
hierarchy of building entrances.
Spiritual Space – it would be beneficial to have a better chapel space and
possibly informal outdoor spaces for meditation.
Athletics – there is a clear need for better fitness facilities, lockers, and a possible
auxiliary gym.
Lower Delmar Site – is it possible to better utilize the land that is owned by the
school on the north side of Delmar?
Land Use Restrictions
In addition to the identified program needs, LMN reviewed the current land use code as it
pertains to the campus and discovered significant limitations. Zoning code restrictions
related to maximum allowable lot coverage and building height significantly restrict our
building options. Some of the options developed by the design team would require that
we apply for zoning variances, which are expensive, slow, and can be challenging in
residential neighborhoods.
The campus is currently built to within six square feet of allowed lot coverage, and
Adelphia is currently taller than allowed for the Seattle Prep campus. If rebuilt in
compliance with current zoning codes, a new structure in Adelphia’s place would lose two
floors and the footprint could be expanded by only six square feet.
Problems with Adelphia and Peyton
Going into the campus planning study, we knew that we had a problem with Adelphia
based on its age. The study confirmed that Adelphia lacks seismic capacity, its mechanical
and electrical systems are at the end of their life, and the learning environment is
substandard.
One of the biggest surprises uncovered by the study is that there are nearly as many
issues with Peyton. While Peyton’s structural condition is far better than Adelphia, its
mechanical and electrical systems are also beyond their useful life and will soon need to
be replaced. In addition, the building was originally designed as a residential dormitory
and, in its current configuration it is not well suited to the academic use it now serves.
Lastly, the size, location and configuration of the cafeteria as the primary food service
facility were noted by nearly everyone as needing improvement.
With the input of our entire campus community, we have identified our future school needs
and issues. As a result of the extensive study by LMN, we have concluded that a
comprehensive solution to our campus needs must address the inadequacies in Peyton as
well as Adelphia.