Sanctuary Proposal
The Sanctuary Task Force would like to thank everyone who was able to come out to the round table discussions to add their voice to the Sanctuary project. It is so important to us to hear your thoughts. If you didn’t have an opportunity to join the discussions, the members of the sanctuary task force would be delighted to talk with you: Michael Mills, Sandy Sherrard, Ken Fredeen, Kathie Sutton, and Pastor Melissa. Additionally, we are including a summary of the proposal below. We also invite you to write down your thoughts, and email them to the task force by emailing Kathie Sutton by March 16. Her email is tkssutton@aol.com. The following are the questions we asked round table attendees to respond to:
What excites you about this sanctuary project?
What concerns you about this sanctuary project?
After March 16, we will be going through all of your feedback and working to address it with Eric and Julie from HMR Architects as well as the HPC Session–and then we will report back!
Project Overview
Specific details about the background of this project can be found in our communication from a few weeks ago. Click here. At the round table presentations, Sandy Sherrard (Chair of Buildings & Grounds) also shared the ways that this project helps to extend the work of the “Making Connections” campaign and address maintenance concerns that have developed over the past few years.
Audio Visual
This project strives to live into our Presbyterian charge to provide for a space of worship that “encourages community, is accessible to all, and opens us to reverence for God. Worship space is not to be an escape from the world, but a place for encountering the God of all creation who gathers us in and sends us out.” Audio and visual is a big part of that. This proposal provides for a new sound system that would comprise digital mixing architecture with control via multiple cross- platform devices (e.g. iPads, Android tablets, and smartphones). Inputs would include new wired receptacles (to avoid visible cables and tripping hazards on the floor), direct input boxes to convert unbalanced electronic instrument outputs to balanced signals, suspended microphones to pick up congregational sound, new wireless microphone transmitters and receivers compatible with FCC requirements, a feed from Zoom, and a new hearing assist system to meet ADA requirements for a public assembly space. Outputs should include new sanctuary loudspeakers aimed to cover the congregational seating, a feed to Zoom, and possibly one or more monitor outputs for the band. This arrangement will allow for control of different sound system feeds by different individuals. For example, the Zoom operator could control a Zoom-specific mix that includes wireless lavalier microphones and microphones suspended within the sanctuary, while the pastor or music director could control an in- person congregation-specific mix that does not include the suspended microphones.
This may be paired with smaller screens two of which will face the congregation (allowing the congregation to see) and two of which will face the chancel (allowing the worship leaders to see).
Lighting
Addressing the glare and lighting issues in the sanctuary is a major goal of this project. The primary focus of any lighting design is considering the safety, security, and well being of the occupants as they enter and exit the Church. This takes into consideration issues like glare and sightlines. The Task Force’s proposal is to use uplighting to make it so the sanctuary is bright (enough light for the aging eye and to counteract other issues of glare, namely on the front window), accentuate the architecture of the space, and provide for a flexible lighting scheme in which fixtures would draw the eye of worshipers heavenward. On top of that, this plan accounts for digital lighting controls and apps will produce further savings by managing lighting schedules. Tablets, phones, and laptops can be programmed with an app to activate and control lighting. The control system would be connected to a network modem allowing one to control the lighting remotely.
Shading of Main Stained Glass
The Sanctuary Taskforce recognizes that as we adjust the lighting in the room the glare will change. We are hoping to address as much of the problem with interior lighting as possible (limiting any obstruction of the stained glass). That being said, should the problem persist (which it is likely to to some degree), the following ideas are being considered: interior motorized shade, self tinting glass, privacy glass, and exterior tinting. In addition to addressing the glare from this window, the proposal also plans to build a “casing” to frame window. This will be complimented by the fact that we are removing the tall cabinets and installing lower aesthetically consistent built-in storage.
Side Windows
The light in the sanctuary is also affected by the side windows. The proposal contains options to both restore the existing side windows and to replace the stained glass windows to increase functionality, insert screens, as well as increase energy efficiency. In this decision we are working to balance function, sustainability, and tradition. Either way, the plan is to replace the “old ramp doors” with windows that match the rest.
Layout & Seating
Accessibility, function, flexibility and theological aesthetic all played a key role in the proposed design for layout and seating.
Stage: This plan proposes a chancel or stage to be one step up from seating level to increase visibility and thus function. This stage is to be assembled from multiple pieces, with a semi-permanent section across the front wall. This will allow for wiring to go beneath the floor and to remain out of sight. Then there will be a front section that can be rearranged if a different layout is desired. Ramp to be installed in northeast corner to increase accessibility and ease of equipment.
Removal of Interior Stair: The existing interior stair at the front of the sanctuary is rarely used. The stair is not required by code for emergency egress. Removing the stair will free up space along the east wall and allow for a new symmetrical arrangement of built-in storage and chancel stage.
Seating: Seating is one area where we can really bring flexibility into our worship space. Holding together traditions of the past and flexibility for the future, the proposal is to continue to have both pews and chairs. The proposal is to have eight of existing pews to be refurbished and modified by cutting in two at divider and reconstructed as angled pew. The remainder of seating will be new wood chairs that can be ganged together or arranged separately, as required. This provides for flexibility in how the front of the sanctuary is used. The chairs will have upholstered seats and hymnal storage. Matching cushions will be made for the pews.
Storage
Proposed Storage Solutions:
Front Cabinets: Remove existing wood cabinets at east wall. Provide new wood lower cabinets with doors below large stained glass window. Provide new wood low storage with hinged top to left and right of new cabinets. Lowering the storage will keep it discreet and prevent detracting from the sense of openness around the east stained glass window. Fold-out choir risers could be incorporated into storage units. Existing stair to lower level to be removed. See Proposed Drawings.
A/V Room/Storage Closet: Remove existing shelves. Reorganize closet and add tiers of shelving on north and west walls to maximize storage.
Chancel Furniture
To create a cohesive space, the proposal includes recommendations to replace the chancel furniture including the pulpit/lectern, communion table, baptismal font, candle/cross, etc. This furniture will likely be commissioned from a local artist and the hope is that those artists will be connected to the life of the church and wider community. Each of the historic items will be incorporated into the life of the church in other ways. Additional items to be added include flower stands that match the chancel furniture.
Finishes
Addressing the finishes includes both addressing some maintenance needs and offering overall aesthetic cohesiveness to the space. Finishes include but are not limited to: repainting the walls and ceiling (addressing the peeling paint in the rear bay of the nave where the paint is flaking), refinishing the existing wood floor and add more so that the bulk of the space features wood flooring and adding a carpet runner (which will replace the current carpet). Updating these finishes not only address some needed maintenance but will offer a cohesiveness to this project.
Finances
This proposal outlines the proposed scope of the project (with a few options) as well as the estimated construction cost. That is $946,133. To be good financial stewards and to ensure a cohesive final product, Session has voted to take this as one project. HMR also recommends that any “order” or stages be determined during the next phase in conversation with a contractor. We do not have an estimate for the fee for the contractor at this time. The fee for the ongoing work of the architect and all consultants will most likely be 12.5% of the (unescalated) construction costs. This would be $118,750 ($28,500 of which has already been paid for the feasibility study and concept design – meaning there is approximately $90,250 yet to pay). With this in mind, the whole upcoming cost of the project would be approximately $1,036,383.
