FAQ: How Can I Make My Restaurant Quieter?

Restaurants and kitchens are often particularly loud rooms, in addition to the actual activities within them.   A desire for easy to sanitize surfaces can often lead to too many hard surfaces, that do not absorb enough sound.  As a result, the room has a long reverberation time, which makes the noises in the room last longer, overlapping with one another, leading to a louder room overall.  As a compounding effect, people will often talk louder to be heard through the din, making the situation even worse.  As an end result, restaurants can lose some customers, simply because the overall experience isn't a good one, simply due to the noise.

There are several possible solutions to cut down on the noise:

• Some noise can be reduced at the source:
• Clinking glassware, glassware, and plates can be reduced by switching to plastic or paper, if feasible.
• If not, noise can be reduced somewhat by adding tablecloths or placemats under dishes, but that won't address "fork-on-plate" noise.
• Of course, none of this addresses conversational noise.
• Several common solutions can be used to reduce the reverberation time in the room, and therefore the noise level in general:
• We go into acoustics and reverberation time in this post, but the simple version is to add as much absorptive area as possible.  Here are some possible solutions:
• An acoustical ceiling can be added
• Carpeting or rugs could be added on the floor (beware of tripping hazards)
• Upholstered seating can be installed.  Be careful, however, because when in use, the soft surfaces are covered by people.  The backsides and undersides of the seats could still be made soft.  Additionally, the chairs could be oversized (tall backs, etc)
• Tablecloths could be added
• Acoustic wall panels could be added (or disguised as artwork-paintings or drapes)
• A common solution is to add absorptive material, or to a lesser extent carpeting, to the undersides of tables and chairs.
• Another less intuitive solution is to add taller, reflective dividers within booths, to help people hear one another better within their table, and hopefully speak more quietly in general.
• Hanging acoustic elements can be added, whether they are panels or more sculptural.

What We Do: Architectural Acoustics: Reverberation time

One of the many things architects can consider in the design of buildings is architectural acoustics.

• What is it?
• Reverberation time is basically how "loud" a room or space is.  Specifically, the time (measured in seconds) that it takes for a certain noise level to drop 60 decibels (dB).  The 60 decibel drop is an arbitrary decision to standardize the measurement, but it is a relatively useful choice, given it is about the difference between an orchestra at full fortissimo and the background noise in a room.  
• Why is it important?
• Reverberation time contributes (or detracts) from the quality of a space in several ways, in different environments.  Here's a chart showing optimum reverberation times for various rooms.
• The biggest difference (or at least the most recognized) is made in performing arts environments, one of our specialties.
• In choral or lyrical instrumental performance environments, a long reverberation time  (like a cathedral) is desirable, stretching and blending the various sounds into one another, adding a great resonance to people's voices, making them sound better.  It's probably no coincidence that people tend to sing in the shower, usually the room with usually the longest reverberation time, due to usually having all hard finishes.
• In lecture halls or spoken-word environments, a short reverberation time is desirable, as long reverberation times will blend the consonants together, making certain words hard to distinguish.  
• In practice rooms and rehearsal halls, many musicians prefer to have short-resonance spaces, so as to be able to hear themselves accurately, without the embellishment and "sugar-coating" of a well-designed hall.  (Though, some of us enjoy practicing in reflective stairwells, using the reverberation to fool ourselves into thinking we sound much better than we actually are.) 
• Outside of performance buildings, reverberation times still make a difference:
• Often, the desire for low-maintenance finishes in restaurants and kitchens makes people select too many hard finishes.  This results in a long-resonance space, and therefore makes for very loud, even unpleasant dining experiences, driving some customers away.
• In classrooms, studies have linked poor acoustical design with several metrics.  Students who cannot make out what the teacher is saying tend to have lower test scores. Also, teachers who must continually shout over background noise tent to have to take more sick days.  
• To hear the difference, check out an audio comparison at Armstrong Ceiling's website, here.
• How do we do it?
• Reverberation time is usually measured in the field by playing a sound, stopping it, then recording how long it takes for the sound level to drop 60 decibels.  It can, however, be calculated ahead of time by taking the volume of the room (multiplied by a constant), and dividing it by the sum of the total Sabins of absorption in the room.   See here for more detailed information.
• A sabin, named for the Harvard acoustic researcher who first researched reverberation times, is a measurement of absorption, whose units are curiously measured in area (m^2, or sqft.)  However, to be a useful measurement in sabins, the area is multiplied by a coefficient of how much sound it absorbs.  For example, a square meter (or square foot for imperial units) of open window reflects no sound, and so have a perfect coefficient of 1, and would be measured as one sabin.  Something of the same size that reflects a quarter of the sound back would then be 0.75 sabins.   
• Notably, since materials will absorb sound differently at different frequencies, a standardized metric, called the Noise Reduction Coefficient (NRC) exists to test a material at four common octave bands; at 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz; (Approx Middle B4, B5, B6, and B7) and average performance between the four.  Typical NRCs vary from 0.70-0.90 for high-absorption acoustic ceilings, to 0.05 for glass, brick, or gypsum board. 
• These calculations can also be done in reverse, where we take a room of a desired size and desired reverberation time, and calculate out the required absorption needed, which we can then incorporate into the design of the room.   Most projects we do this ourselves, but in highly sensitive cases like music schools and performance halls, we will partner with an acoustical consultant to get it just right.
• In many cases, the equations can be simplified, and a good reverberation time can be obtained by simply selecting a good ceiling and floor finish.
• However, in more specialized cases, we often need to add acoustical panels around or in the space, both to absorb sound, and to break up any strong echoes  We also sometimes add movable curtains that can be opened to allow the acoustical qualities of the room to be changed as desired. All of these elements need to be carefully placed, both to work with the acoustic geometry of the rooms, as well as to fit within a coherent room design.
• When in the process do we do it?
• Early in the design process, we will take into account the desired volumes of spaces, and select a ceiling and a ceiling height that works for most of the simple spaces
• Later in the design process, for any particularly complicated or demanding spaces, we will look into any necessary additional acoustic panels or elements, and incorporate them into the design of the spaces.
• Where are some good examples that we've worked on?
• Casper College
• At Casper College, we worked closely with our acoustical consultants to properly balance the acoustics of all the major spaces.   The required acoustic panels were treated as a design opportunity, helping to give character to the various spaces.
  
  
• The main concert hall was made up of glass-fiber-reinforced gypsum panels on the ceiling and walls to evoke the windswept plains of the area, while diffusing the sounds throughout the hall, with absorbing panels at the rear.   There are also absorptive curtains  that can be deployed in front of these diffusive panels that will allow the users to controls the acoustics of the space.


• In the instrumental and choral rehearsal halls, the adjustable acoustic curtains were hidden by pilasters that, along with the curved acoustic diffuser wall panels, also give detail and a human scale to the large space.  
  
• At the percussion rehearsal hall, absorptive wall panels were placed both low and high, to avoid reflective standing waves and flutter echoes, while the mid-height diffusive acoustic wall panels were woven together with both absorptive and diffusive concrete blocks, to accomodate the deeper tones of a percussion suite.  They were carefully placed on the walls as an expression of the common basic rhythms that percussionists play, while additional glass-fiber-reinforced panels from the main auditorium were hung in the space to diffuse the sound from below.
• Mimosa Park Elementary
  
• At  Mimosa Park Elementary we preemptively addressed acoustical concerns about an overly-loud cafeteria space by spraying a acoustical treatment onto the ceiling, adding acoustical panels on all walls, and adding hanging acoustic panels in the center of the space.  This was done early enough in the design and construction process that all of these elements were folded into the coherent design of the cafeteria, instead of tacked on afterwards.
• JB Martin Gymnasium
  
• At JB Martin Gym, we were specifically tasked with fixing the acoustics of an existing gymnasium, that was far too "loud" a space to be useful.   Nearly all speech was unintelligible, even through the loudspeakers, and being in the space during a loud athletic event was almost unbearable.  HMS remedied the situation by applying a sprayed acoustic ceiling to the entirety of the gym ceiling, as well as placing acoustic wall panels at the perimeter, solving the school's problem, even with an increased capacity of the gym.

Overall, reverberation time is one of the many factors that affect a user's perception of a space, and is therefore only one of the many factors we take into account for the design spaces and buildings.

More information on the Casper College School of Music

More information on Mimosa Park Elementary School

More information on the JB Martin Gym Renovation 

More information on HMS-designed Performing Arts Architecture

More information on HMS-designed Educational Projects

Case Study: Rendering Comparisons at the JB Martin Gymnasium Renovations

The JB Martin Middle School had a older gymnasium building, that was starting to show its age, and also starting to no longer meet the needs of its occupants, and so the decision was made to renovate the space.

The pragmatic requests were easy enough to provide for, but the qualitative aspects were more difficult to show and predict.  In particular, the users had requested a light, open, lively, larger feeling space, though existing conditions precluded the possibility of actually enlarging many of the spaces.  As a result, our solution was to use finishes, and slight changes to make spaces feel more open and dynamic, as well as adding exterior/interior space to make the building "feel" bigger.  Since this project was done in Revit, we were able to use renderings to better get the feel of the spaces before work was done, to better verify that the proposed interventions would actually work.  See below for some examples of the proposals and their solutions.  Pay particular attention to how the renderings reflect the final product.   Some reflect it almost exactly, while others were adjusted and tweaked during construction.

Exterior of Building, showing the gymnasium seating and storage addition, and the canopy to help add a focal point to the school's courtyard.  The top image is existing conditions, the second is the Pre-construction rendering (note bumped-out portion for additional seating), bottom is the final post-construction photograph.  Other than some colors being off, and the omitted landscaping, the pre-construction rendering looks accurate to the final product, down to the framing of the canopy.

Exterior of building, showing lobby addition

Lobby of building, showing new ceiling and finishes.  The top image was the existing conditions, the second was the pre-construction rendering, raising the ceiling as much as possible to the roof above.  During construction, additional above-ceiling elements were discovered and the ceiling was re-designed to accommodate them, as shown in the 3rd image.   The final image is the completed construction, matching the revised rendering almost exactly.

Main Gymnasium, towards addition at end.  The top image is the existing conditions, and the second is the pre-construction rendering, re-painting in lighter colors, reducing the school colors to a stripe.  During construction, the colors were re-tweaked to add school colors at the structure and ducts, as shown & checked in the third image.   The fourth image is the final photograph.  Nearly everything is similar to the rendering, except the light fixtures show up differently, the structural bracing shows up, as well as additional framing for the goal posts.

Girls' locker Room.  The first image shows the existing conditions, particularly the shower-turned storage. Note the high lockers.  There was a specific owner request for the coach to be able to have visual control of the whole locker room from her office. The second image shows the pre-construction design, as seen form the coach's office, with the room painted a bright white, with limited splashes of school colors.  Note how the lower locker banks allow for visual control.  The third shows the final product.   The red elements were eliminated during construction.

FAQ: How Much Does A New Rehearsal Hall Cost: Budgeting For Planning Music Rehearsal Facilities

Pdf version is downloadable here

Casper College Instrumental Rehearsal Hall

Across the country, music educators are making do with the facilities they inherited, often with their programs hampered by the limitations of these spaces.  Renovating or building new music facilities is an inherently complicated exercise, but it is one of our specialties at HMS Architects.  At the risk of oversimplification, here are some ballpark figures based on our current and previous projects, to educate the educators on what is involved in planning a music rehearsal facility.

Detail level of estimates

Estimates typically increase in detail level as the design progresses, and could include costs by rough overall building square footage numbers, room-by-room square footage numbers, or even detailed accounting of every element at the end of design.  However, at the end of the day, all of this is done to estimate the final bids of several contractors who have their own individual methodologies and pressures that affect their bids. 

However, for the purposes of planning projects some years in the future, here are some rough figures and considerations.

Building Efficiency

Building efficiency measures the net usable area in relation to the more commonly used gross overall building area.  This building efficiency varies by building type, but in our experience, music facilities have historically tended to be particularly inefficient, around the 40-60% range.  This means that about half of the overall building area is devoted to non-programmed spaces, including walls, chases, corridors, stairs, restrooms, janitor’s closets, mechanical rooms, etc.

It is worth noting that the building efficiency numbers will rise and fall based on which spaces count as programmed.   Here we are using one of the least forgiving definitions, for simplicity, but it is not uncommon to count restrooms or janitorial areas as programmed spaces, and that would therefore artificially bump up the building efficiency.

For reference, above is a color-coded first floor plan of the HMS-designed Casper College School of Music.   The overall area is shown in grey and black, while only the red areas are programmed spaces, only 56% of the total area, but relatively high for a performing arts facility.  This particular floor is 27,000 SF, and with the second floor above it, the building was 35,000 SF total. The cost of construction was about $12.7 million, in 2012 dollars, a relatively cost-effective $370 per square foot. It is also worth noting that this building includes a performance hall, which is outside the scope of these estimates.

Music facilities tend to be relatively inefficient for many reasons, including increased acoustical wall thickness, wider hallways, etc., that are uniquely necessary for music facilities.   In addition, this ratio will vary based on many factors, including room quantity, site constraints, program or adjacency constraints, and the skill of the architect.  However, all of these factors will historically affect the ballpark 50% efficiency value (and therefore size of the building, and the price) by about 10%. 

For example, if a department is looking for a 6,000 square foot (SF) rehearsal hall, with 3,200 SF of storage, and eight 100 SF practice rooms to round it out, it would add up to 10,000 SF net, but the building may end up being approximately 20,000 SF gross, or about 100 by 200 feet.  Conversely, if someone mentions a 20,000 SF building, there is probably only 10,000 SF of usable space in it.

Cost per Square Foot

The most common comparison of building cost is cost per square foot, usually measured by construction cost divided by gross square footage.  Based on our previous projects, and checked against other music facilities, in 2015, we expect the cost per square foot to be approximately $300-$600 per square foot in 2015 dollars for music facilities.  For the purposes of this article, we will assume $500 per square foot as a reasonable, safe, and round value.  This figure is considerably higher than most building types.  This is a result of the specialty construction necessary to address the acoustic needs of these spaces, including acoustic treatments, theatrical and recording equipment, structure for large open spaces, heavy double walls, acoustically separate structures, and sometimes even entirely separate mechanical systems within the same building.

Cost of Construction (Hard Costs)

The cost of construction is the most common cost referenced.  It is estimated by the architect, but the final cost is the actual bid cost by the contractor who will construct the building.   This price will include all of the labor, materials and profit involved in the construction of the building.

Going back to our example, at $500 per square foot, that 20,000 SF building would be approximately $10M in construction cost.

Soft Costs

This includes furniture, removable equipment, permitting, surveyors, construction testing, and professional design fees for architecture and engineering.   This cost will vary, but is usually about an additional 25% of the cost of construction. 

In our example, that would come out to an additional $2.5M.

Total Project Cost

The total project cost contains the hard cost of construction, combined with the other project soft costs. 

Going back again to our example, the project’s $10M construction cost would translate to a $12.5M overall project cost.

Inflation adjustments

It’s also important to account for inflation and cost increases when planning for future projects.  Construction is subject to market forces, and while there is some volatility, things tend to cost more in the future.

Our example $12.5M 2015 project would have cost only $11.4M only 5 years ago, in 2010, and only 10.2M 10 years ago, in 2005.  Historically, this has amounted to  2-3% a year, or a 10% increase in all costs for every 5 years, but any year could be different.   The data we have has shown an annual increase of 3-8 % in both 2013 and 2014.  This trend is expected to continue at 3-8%, depending on location, in 2015

Common Spaces

Below is a chart showing the approximate costs of common spaces.  Not every building will need every space, and certain programs may be able to easily squeeze into smaller spaces than the full-sized theoretical optimum.  Usually, programs grow from existing spaces, and can re-purpose those spaces for new uses that fit.  Every program, every site, and every need will be different per project, and every building should be carefully tailored by knowledgeable experts to meet those needs, which is why we are here.  However, these numbers should be enough to allow for some long term planning for the future of your music programs.

(As reprinted in the program for the 2015 annual conference of the International Council of Fine Arts Deans)
Pdf version is downloadable here
More about HMS-designed Performing Arts Projects
More about HMS-designed Educational Projects
More about Casper College School of Music

The Hahnville High School Field House is Substantially Complete

The Hahnville High School field house expansion and renovation has been substantially completed by Crescent Commercial Construction on August 19th, 2015, for St Charles Parish Public Schools, in Boutte, Louisiana.

This Brick-clad CMU, existing building consists of 9,680 SF of renovated area, with 3,204 SF of added space, including a newly added second floor mezzanine, and contains four renovated locker rooms (Football Locker Room and Freshman Football, Track and Field, and an enlarged Girls P.E. Locker Room) in addition to a meeting room, training suite, conference room, coaches offices, and a storage facility.

Construction took seven and a half months since January 5th 2015, and has been substantially completed a month and a half ahead of schedule, just in time for football season.  Including the eight months of design, the entire length of the project has been seventeen months.

Work continues on the adjacent weight training and exercise room, part of the same project, scheduled to be completed in another month.

More about Hahnville Fieldhouse
More about Hahnville Exercise Building
More about HMS-designed Educational Projects
More about HMS Projects on the Boards
More about Hahnville High School
More about Hahnville Athletics
More about St. Charles Parish Schools

Tulane Catholic Center is Substantially Complete

The Tulane Catholic Center has been completed on August 7th, 2015 by F. H. Meyers construction. This three-story, 8,400 square foot building is constructed with a rain screen siding system on structural metal studs. This building contains a social area, a chapel with a sacristy, a conference room, two classrooms, and a small library with a study room.

Construction took about a year, starting in August of 2014, and has been completed in August of 2015. The final building cost of the project was approximately two million dollars.

The grand opening will occur on Friday August 21st, 2015. We thank the Archdiocese of New Orleans and F. H. Meyers for working with us on the project, and wish them the best in the future.

More information about the Tulane Catholic Center
More information about the Archdiocese of New Orleans
More information about F.H. Meyers Construction Corporation

Lafayette Cemeteries No. One and Two Caretaker Cottages Construction Underway

Cottage Rendering

The City of New Orleans received bids for the Lafayette Cemetery No. One and Two Caretaker Cottages on January 27th 2015. HMS had previously finished the drawings and specifications for cottage replacement for the City of New Orleans Capital Projects Administration after months of design work.

These one story cottages consist of, one 162 SF cottage and another 250 SF cottage. Both with an exterior of cement lap board siding, which mimics the preexisting historic buildings.

The winning Contractor, MST Enterprises, began in June 2015, and is scheduled to be completed by November 2015.

More about HMS Projects on the Boards
More about City of New Orleans

The St Bernard Multipurpose Building is Substantially Complete

The Archdiocese of New Orleans received bids for the St. Bernard Archbishop Hannan Multipurpose Building on May 21st 2015. This metal building consists of 3,450 SF of enclosed area and 550 SF of covered area.

The winning Contractor, Boasso Construction, began work in August, with a contract time of about a year, and is expecting to finish by June 2016.  We look forward to working with Archdiocese of New Orleans and Boasso Construction for the months ahead.

More about HMS Projects on the Boards
More about HMS Residential Projects
More about Archdiocese of New Orleans
More about Boasso Construction, LLC

Allemands Elementary School Construction is Underway

On May 20, 2015, St Charles Parish Public Schools accepted a bid for the Allemands Elementary School Classroom Addition in Des Allemands, Louisiana.  HMS had previously finished the drawings and specifications on schedule for St Charles Parish Public Schools, in order to promptly bid the project, and start construction on time.

This brick-clad, steel-framed, metal stud building consists of 6230 SF of additional built area added onto a 27,000 SF existing building, both all on one floor.   The addition contains 4 additional classrooms, including an art classroom, and additionally a work room, restrooms, and support spaces.

The six bids ranged from $1.1M to $1.25M, within 15% of each other, a fairly tight grouping, signifying a relatively clear set of drawings.  The winning bid was for $1,106,000, or about $173 per square foot, after taking out $28,000 for sitework, which is within $40,000, or 4% of the previous estimate.

The winning contractor, F. J. Arcement Construction Co. Inc., began working in June, for a contract length of 1 year, expecting to finish by June of 2016.  We look forward to working with St Charles Parish Public Schools and F. J. Arcement for the months ahead.


More information about HMS Educational Projects
More about St. Charles Parish Schools
More about FJ Arcement Construction, Inc

Notre Dame Seminary Bid

Notre Dame Seminary has recently gone to bid. The restoration of the Seminary project consists of renovations of the residential wing and administrative spaces and also a new chapel. Bringing the building up to life safety code and restoring it back to its original splendor was a priority, while also designing aesthetically pleasing spaces. HMS has done renovations to this historic building in the past, including an auditorium renovation.

Front Exterior

Dormitory

Lounge

More information on HMS designed Residential Architecture
More information about Notre Dame Seminary

Construction Underway on Howard Ave. Apartments

Construction is underway for 822 Howard Ave. The renovations and additions include the renovation of three existing stories and a one-story penthouse addition. The design consists of fifteen units, including two penthouses. HMS has been working with the developer and contractor throughout the process as a design-build project.

822 Howard Ave. Front

Penthouse Unit

Loft Interior

More information about HMS designed Residential Projects

Case Study: Renderings vs Reality at Casper College School of Music

In the course of designing the new School of Music building at Casper College, in 2011, we created several renderings to aid in our design decisions for the major spaces, to make sure they look & feel right.  These were also used to show the owner what they could expect as a final product, and also distributed to them to use as promotional materials to drum up support.

The program we used (the then-cutting edge Autodesk Revit 2011&2012,) allowed us (and our consultants) to model the entire building in the computer before anything was built, allowing us to more accurately visualize how the finished product will generally look.  There are several schools of thought in terms of renderings, but we generally strive towards accuracy, minimizing the amount of embellishment.   There are, of course, levels of detail that are not always present.  For example, often we don't need to spend time modeling the light switches and exit signs to get a good sense of the space, but in general, with a more accurate rendering, the client is made aware of the final appearance of the space, and if any problems are found early on, they can be addressed before they become expensive change orders during construction.

When the project was completed, HMS hired a photographer to document the same spaces.  See below for the comparison, to show how closely the renderings (created entirely in the computer while the site was a grass field) compared to the real world building, more than a year later.

Concert hall from back rear.  Rendering is on top, final picture below.  This rendering is from relatively early in the process, and there has been some subtle tweaking of the design during the final CD stage and construction, notably in the upper ceiling and wall panels, and the lower railings.

Concert hall from center.  This rendering has been updated, showing the revised railings, wall panels, and ceiling panels, changed during value engineering.

Instrumental Rehearsal hall.  Rendering is on top, final picture below.   Both views are from the back of the room towards the front, but are from opposite corners - the whiteboard is the same.  For reference, the room is more or less symmetrical, except for the window.  The curtain is adjustable, and can be opened or closed to suit the acoustics of the room.

Choir Room.  Rendering on top, final picture below.  Rendering is fairly accurate, other than missing furniture and curtains, and some slight material inaccuracies with the wooden slats at the top, the ceiling tile material, and the wall diffuser material.

Percussion Suite.  Rough rendering on top, final photo on bottom.   Views are from opposite corners of the same room, facing the same windows.  All the acoustic panels and casework is modeled correctly, although the same ceiling and wall diffuser material issues are present, and the carpet tile was laid in a slightly different pattern.  Notably, the curved acoustic hanging panels needed to be shifted slightly during construction.

Front Lobby.  Rendering at top, final image below.  All the elements are in place, minus the owner-supplied furniture.  The color balance differs slightly, with reality feeling brighter and fresher than the warm and dark rendering.

Main Stair.  Rendering at top, final photo below.  Note how the stair, railing, lights, and benches are all built more or less as drawn, except for a few finishes, selected later.

Upstairs Lobby  Rendering is on the top, with final photo on the bottom.  Geometry is essentially identical, along with colors.   There are only a few  special system and owner-supplied elements missing from the renderings, and the room in general "feels" darker than reality.

For reference, this building was modeled in then-cutting edge Autodesk Revit 2011 and 2012, and rendered in the same program, on our local computers.  Since then, we have continually improved our rendering technology and skills to create better and more-accurate renderings.