Capital Improvement Task Force
The Capital Improvement Task Force (formerly, the Planning Committee) was renamed in October 2010 and charged with working "very closely with all relevant Committees in an iterative, transparent, and collaborative way to develop a plan to recommend to the Meeting for the construction of an elevator and other capital improvements."
Click this link to see a list of committee members.
Renovation Discernment
In 2002, the Faith, Facilities and Financial Realities task force examined issues surrounding maintenance and possible renovations at our campus. An enormous amount of work, research, discussion, and seeking followed. With broad unity proving to be elusive, in 2008, the Meeting for Business approved the Property Committee’s tightly focused proposal that it and the Planning Committee engage architects to develop plans for an elevator and new entrance, items on which there was unity.
Shortly thereafter, the Planning Committee was formally recognized and charged with pursuing technical renovation issues and drawing together the threads of a possibly emerging consensus about a comprehensive renovation.
An extensive review process, involving the Committee, many members of the Meeting, and the firm of Quinn Evans Architects resulted in a set of recommendations that were presented to the Meeting Community for review and comment in March of 2010.
The Planning Committee revised it's recommendations to take into account comments and input that it has received, and in October 2010 the committee acquired new members and a new name. As the Capital Improvements Task Force, the committee will continue to work with other committees and the Meeting Community to resolve differences on several important issues and find consensus on the outlines off a plan for construction of an elevator and other high-priority capital improvements that will be the focus of a major fund-raising capital campaign.
The following documents are provided to assist Friends in reviewing and familiarizing themselves with the history and background of the Meetings discernment around renovation issues. Friends who anticipate being present for the anticipated worship sharing around these issues are encouraged to review these documents as time perrmits.
In particular, note the nine-year compilation of minutes and related documents, drawn from Meeting newsletters and assembled and edited by Marcia Reecer, Sabrina McCarthy, David Etheridge, and Sara Satterthwaite.
- July 1990 — FMW National Register of Historic Places Registration
- June 2006 — Chatelain Architects - Master Plan for Friends Meeting of Washington
- May 2009 — Quinn Evans Architects - Evaluation of Existing Conditions
- May 2009 — Quinn Evans Architects - Meeting House Building Analsysis
- March 2010 — Quinn Evans Architects - Renovation Recommendations Brochure (Note: Also see the following update from the Planning Committee.)
- September 2010 — Planning Committee Update
- March 2010 — Henry Freeman Associates - Framework for a capital campaign
- December 2001 to September 2010 — FMW Newsletters - History of Renovation Discernment (Web version)
- December 2001 to September 2010 — FMW Newsletters - History of Renovation Discernment (Printable PDF version)
Since it's formation in October 2010, CITF has been meeting twice a month. In June 2011, the Task Force published a summary report of its discernment to that point and began the process of re-engaging the architects in the design effort:
In February 2012, the Meeting approved funds for further architectural study and costing.
After extensive negotiations and consideration, the Task Force, in March, decided to engage a new architect who appear to offer more experience in working with Quaker meetings on relatively small-scalle projects such as ours. The new architect is Lippincott Architects, who will work with us in cooperation with an architect and engineering firm, Gauthier Alvarado Associates to provide costs and architectural study of a design for an addition to provide elevator accessibility to all of our buildings, roughly as outlined in the above CITF update.
In May, the architects (LGA) provided the first rough skteches of two possible schemes. These sketches provide a starting point for further discussion, but do not reflect any decisions or recommendations of CITF: