 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Doing More With Less
Improving Existing Shelters on a Modest Budget
An Article by George Thomas Miers
When it comes to existing Animal Shelters, and the limited funds on which most shelters operate, “doing more with less” sounds like a good deal. This is probably why many of my clients and fellow Board members have asked me to address the issue assuming, I suppose, that if I could come up with such interesting and innovative designs for new facilities, then certainly I should be able to do something creative with existing ones. Having heard this enough times, I decided to give it a try and the ideas presented herein are a result of that effort. However, before starting off on this path, several warnings are in order.
Warning #1 – Most older shelters require so much renovation work to meet current building and ADA codes – let alone upgrading the plumbing, HVAC and electrical systems to those found in newer facilities – that they are rarely good candidates for “full renovation upgrades.” Much of the reason for this is because they were constructed so poorly in the first place as well as the fact that domestic animal care “support systems” and public expectations have changed so dramatically over the past ten years. In addition, many older shelters were located in such remote, undesirable and out of the way locations (next to the sewer plant, corp yard or airport), that maintaining the facility in the same location also begs the question “is this a really good use of public or donor money?” or a case of “placing good money (and lots of effort) on top of bad?”
Warning #2 – “Don’t shoot yourself in the foot.” As an architect who works extensively with both the public sector and non profit groups, I have all too often seen situations wherein a facility needing, and even designated, to be replaced was granted a small budget for minor “mandatory” repairs only to find that the repairs – (actually the expenditure of repairs) – became the reason not to proceed with a new replacement facility. As a point in case, several years ago during a walk-through of the Redondo Beach Police Facility (one of the more undersized urban police facilities in California!), one councilman turned to another and stated, “I can’t believe we’re considering a new facility – we just painted the rooms two years ago, and they still look good!”
Retrofit Candidates Having issued the above warnings, the following are a few thoughts for consideration.
Kennels – Older kennels come in a variety of sizes and configurations but generally they are of an indoor/outdoor variety as depicted in figures #1 and #2. These kennels generally are double loaded with dogs facing one another and have exposed concrete floors, concrete masonry CMU side walls (often only up to 4’-0” with galvanized chain link above), exposed trench drains along the aisle, an open ceiling structure, hanging industrial style fluorescent lights and possibly a hanging space heater.
Typical “older style” Kennels
The construction of the overall structure is generally wood frame, much of which is exposed and there is generally little, if any, exhaust system. While there are a myriad of problems associated with this generic design, not the least of which is harboring bacteria in the exposed wood structure, some of the more significant ones include;
- Open trench drains on the aisle side which, in addition to being unsanitary, serve as a poor threshold over which the public is introduced to and interacts with a dog. Drains in this location also require staff to enter the kennel in order to clean it as they must hose down toward the trench which in turn hoses down the aisle.
- Exposed concrete and CMU Concrete and CMU are porous! They absorb not only water but harbor bacteria and odors and are a significant source of disease transmission and odor in kennels. Furthermore, once cleaned, it takes longer to dry as the water (and chemicals) remain absorbed in the concrete and the dog, upon being returned to the kennel, generally is forced to sit in a wet kennel.
- 4’-0” high CMU walls. Many kennels employ partial height CMU walls with chain link above allowing dogs to go “nose to nose” which is both a serious disease transfer problem and an animal comfort, safety and socialization concern.
- Dogs facing dogs (and only 6’ to 8’ away!) enhance anxiety, noise levels and stress which in turn contribute to a lower resistance to disease and, hence, disease transfer issues (although not to the same extent as cats). It should be noted that while habitats which allow dogs to face and interact with each other may offer benefits for certain select, and better socialized dogs such as those at MasterFoods’ nutritional research facility in Waltham, England (most of whom are raised together at the facility as puppies), this arrangement generally does not work for abandoned or lost Animal Control dogs who are most often stressed, sick and if not anti-social, then too scared to interact with people or other dogs in a positive manner.
- Absence of proper ventilation is a disease transfer issue largely attributed to the spread of both kennel cough in dogs and upper respiratory ailments with cats, (although these problems are more complicated than just poor ventilation).
- Higher ceilings. While of some benefit when minimal ventilation is provided, higher ceilings increase the volume of air needing to be removed, and hence, can become a significant operating cost burden when proper air changes (10 to 12 per hour for dogs) are provided.
- Cleaning systems usually include a typical garden hose, cold water (only) and chemicals which are carted into the room by kennel staff resulting in poorer cleaning procedures, extensive water usage and excessive exposure of staff to chemical cleaning agents.
- Too noisy and too many dogs in one room – If you have ever been in one of these, you know what this is about.
So what can be done?
Keeping in mind Warnings #1 & #2 above, the following ideas can be incorporated on a relatively modest budget although obviously the more of them implemented, the greater the undertaking and the higher the cost. Also, each improvement presented can be implemented on its own without the others, although certain improvements such as the hung ceiling are of greater value if combined with other work such as installing a proper air handling unit.
A.1) Trench drain covers or
grates come in different widths and can be cut to fit most trenches. They are generally inexpensive items costing about $15-$25 per linear foot or about $60-$100 per 4 foot wide kennel depending on the type of grate (metal or plastic) and the design of the trench it needs to cover (are there insets to support the grate or do they need to be added?). See Fig. 3. ZURN is one of the leading manufacturers of grates their website is: www.zurn.com.
A.2) Concrete Sealers and Coatings. Despite advertisements to the contrary, most heavy duty concrete sealers do not work well in shelters and have a limited life span of 6 months to a year before absorption once again occurs. Epoxy paint is not a good solution for floors as it is too easily scratched and the epoxy membrane compromised. The best solution is to install an Epoxy Resin Coating (ERC) such as manufactured by Stonhard, Selby and a few other companies which include a troweled, multi-layered application of epoxy resins finished with a sand grit (which can be adjusted to the user’s liking). This product not only holds up well to the daily application of hot water and chemicals, (we can attest to as long as 12 to 15 years on several of our projects), but the sand application also creates a slip resistant surface which is safe for staff and animals alike. These products range in price from $4 to $6 installed and are designed to be troweled up the wall to create a 6” integral cove. Assuming a 4’ x 6’ kennel, a 4’ x 4’ area in front of the kennel, integral base and coating of the trench drain, each interior kennel would run about $300-$400 to cover. Vertical CMU surfaces can be coated with a similar ERC product although this begins to get quite expensive. We have found that for those areas, a higher quality epoxy paint tends to hold up quite well with minimal maintenance.
A.3) “Opaque” Side Kennel Walls should be extended up to 6’-0”. The simplest and least expensive way of doing this is to introduce a durable, non-absorbent panel such as T-Kennels’ Acrylic PVC panels. Alternatively the CMU can be extended but this will most likely result in a higher cost. A T-Kennel 2x6 “Flag” panel runs $295 plus installation.
A.4) Eye to Eye Contact Changing the orientation
of dogs in most double loaded kennels is a difficult challenge. If the aisle is wide enough (8’-0” or greater), a solid wall can be constructed between the two. However, most of these aisles are only around 6’ to 7’ wide, which if divided in half, does not meet minimum ADA width (3’-8”aisle and 5’-0” turn-around space) or adequate staff cleaning area – minimum of 4 feet. A solution to this problem is illustrated in figures #6 and #7. In this retrofit solution one row of kennels is left “as is” while the other side is changed to a side access arrangement wherein 3 (4’) wide kennels are converted into a “flexible” kennel which can hold 1 to 2 dogs (if the dogs are socially compatible), several smaller, compatible dogs or a mother with puppies. In addition to eliminating the eye to eye contact, this arrangement allows staff opportunities to better socialize dogs and also allows the flexibility to introduce some “complexity” into the kennel such as the use of a fixed or hinged panel (see Fig. 8) which creates an “L” or “U” shaped configuration which noted dog behaviorist, Ray Coppinger has found to significantly help dogs cope with captivity and fend off the approach of “Kennel Craze”. The hinged wall panel can be constructed fairly simply from a T-Kennel Acrylic PVC panel attached to the wall with stainless steel hinges and a push button locking mechanism. If a raised concrete dog bed is added at this time, then the panel should be raised above it a few inches to aid in cleaning. This solution is difficult to cost without knowing more about the specific shelter as it involves several trades and will vary from area to area due in large part to the demolitionwork involved.
A.5) Ventilation upgrades: Modifying existing shelters to provide proper air changes (ideally 10 to 12 per hour) is a difficult and generally more expensive retrofit task. In most California locations where indoor/outdoor kennels are provided, temperature fluctuations generally allow year round use of the outdoor portion of the kennel. In these situations the ability to provide for air movement during summer nights by way of electric and gravity fans and heat from space heaters may be a reasonable, inexpensive solution, which allows limited funds to be spent elsewhere. However, in harsher climates and where conditioned air is desired, there are a number of energy efficient and reasonably priced air handling units on the market which can be located on the ground and ducted into the space (locating these on the roof may be unpractical due to sloped roofs and structural loading). For an average kennel “ward” of +/- 30 kennels which might measure 18’ to 20’ x 60’ or 1200 SF, a 5 to 6 ton HVAC unit such as made by Carrier or Trane would be needed. This unit would provide heating and cooling with up to 10-12 air changes per hour but should include a heat recovery mechanism for energy efficiency (the pay back for the heat recovery unit is under 5 years). At approx. $600/ton the base unit would run about $2500 to $3000 with an additional $2000 for the heat recovery unit. Adding installation costs of approximately $4-$5000 and electrical upgrades of $1-$2000, the total installed cost should be in an $11 to $12,000 range, which at 1200 SF would come to approx. $10/SF which is less than ½ the cost of HVAC in a new facility. By contrast a new ventilation system with the capacity to provide a similar 10-12 air changes per hour combined with a gas fired space heater would run approximately ½ this amount or +/- $5/SF.
A.6) Acoustical Ceilings
As discussed earlier many older shelter kennels have higher exposed structural ceilings. While higher ceilings can often have an aesthetically positive appeal for humans, most dogs don’t seem to care! A higher ceiling results in greater cubic footage of air and, thus, if conditioned air exchanges are desired, there will be a greater amount of air being moved and conditioned. Over the course of a year for a 550 SF dog ward, the difference of 1 foot in height or volume can result in an added energy cost of $1,000. A solution to this problem is to install a water resistant acoustical ceiling such as Armstrong’s Ceramaguard 2x4 anti-microbial lay-in panel which also provides for excellent sound attenuation, (which is significantly better than hanging sound panels!). Introduction of a ceiling will most likely require a new lighting system which also can be a positive addition for both animals and people alike. The acoustical ceiling can be expected to run in the $3-$4/SF range while 2x4 lay-in fluorescent lights with warm lamps and a gasket lens will run $5-$6/SF. Thus, a 1200 SF kennel space might cost $8-$10/SF or $9600 to $12,000 installed.
pumps and a portable hose reel, hose and nozzle and supplies) will run approximately $15-$16,000 installed. The cost per station however, goes down as the size of the project increases.
Essentially, each pump runs around $5000 and a wall mounted RCU runs approximately $400/station. The hose reel assembly and supplies run approximately $1500.
A.8) Compartmentalization – Generically, these older kennels place far too many dogs in one space. Typically in our new facilities we place only 6 to 8 dogs per ward which is beneficial for both disease transfer and lowering the acoustical stress levels of all involved. Figs. 5 and 7 illustrate one way to help mitigate this problem in these older style kennels.
Cat environments
Cat environments are much easier to retrofit than dog kennels. Cats occupy significantly less square footage – approximately 7 to 15 SF per cat (including circulation space depending on the habitat) as opposed to dogs who occupy 80 to 100 SF (36 to 40 SF for the kennel itself and the rest is circulation on either side). In addition, cats do not instill as much damage on their environment. Hence, issues of trench drains, epoxy resin floors and chemical cleaning systems need not be incorporated. As a result, it is much more frequent to see a relatively inexpensive cat room modification in an existing shelter such as Peninsula Humane Society’s Community Cat Room which was designed and constructed by shelter staff within a large room primarily occupied by cages (too many cages for a single room!). See photos.
 |
 |
Before: PHS Cat Habitats (Cages) |
After: PHS Cat Habitats (Rooms) |
Notwithstanding, the “easier to deal with” aspects of a cat room, there are, however, a number of important issues to keep in mind when designing cat room environments.
1) Stress – Based on research by Kate Hurley DMV and the U.C. Davis Shelter Medicine Program which she heads, cats are much more susceptible than dogs to illnesses brought on by stress due to the high percentage of cats who enter shelters with feline herpes. Dr. Hurley points out that not only are cats stressed by room environments which include cages facing each other but in particular by daily cleaning procedures which require removing the cat from its habitat (cage) in order to clean because the cage has no alternative area for the cat to reside while cleaning takes place. (This is also a safety issue for staff).
While this is a problem that relates to cages specifically, there are a variety of solutions offered by different cage manufacturers. (Note that individual rooms or community rooms have alternative areas for cats to go and are cleaned differently.) One system offered by T-Kennel (a subsidiary of Shor-line) is their new cat condo units with and without the side “private quarters” (see photo). These units allow enough room for a cat to move while cleaning occurs. The “private quarters,” in particular, accommodates this in a manner similar to a feral cat guillotine cage. The unit shown runs around $2600 or $500 per condo and $300 per “private quarters”. If a base with shelves is included add $500 per cabinet.
 |
T-Kennel Cat Condo |
Isolation And Overcrowded Rooms
While developing fun, people oriented environments for cats has become more popular, as discussed above the co-housing of the cats (not unlike dogs) should only occur amongst healthy cats who get along with one another. Most shelter cats enter with limited information available as to their background and, hence, they need to be heldand observed in isolation. One of the biggest problems in shelters is that Isolation Rooms either do not exist or there are not enough of them and, hence, too many cats end up being placed in one room mixing healthy and ill cats together. This problem is further exacerbated by orienting cages such that cats are facing towards each other resulting in both an increased level of stress (as discussed above) and airborne disease transfer via sneezing cats and kittens.
While the problems presented by overcrowded rooms is difficult to solve without building more space, there are a number of relatively simple solutions worth considering relative to changing the orientation, number and generic nature of the cage design in a specific room. Figures 9 thru 12 below illustrate a typical cat room and a variety of approaches to reorienting cages/habitats.
 |
 |
Figure 9 Typical Cat Room |
Figure 10 Back to Back Cages |
 |
 |
Figure 11 Single Loaded Rooms |
Figure 12 Condos |
The most important messages conveyed by these diagrams are:
1) In order to minimize stress, do not orient your newly arrived and isolation cats towards each other so that they can make eye contact2) limit the number of these new and “isolation” cats to no more than 10 to 14 per room, if at all possible.
The dimensions of your existing rooms will generally dictate the changes which are possible. In the diagrams we are showing that a minimum 12-14 foot wide room is needed to either back up cages with aisles on each side (fig 10) or divide into two rooms which is the more preferable solution (fig. 11). Fig 12 meanwhile illustrates the ability to install built-in Cat Rooms or “Condos,” similar to the Peninsula Humane Society Condos shown earlier. (Note that we have illustrated an “L” configuration which maximizes the number of spaces but allows cats the ability to avoid eye contact). For rooms that have a width less than 12 feet, only one row of cages should be installed. As the width begins to exceed 14 feet, many other options become possible including the creation of Cat Community Rooms in the center or corner of rooms.
Another fairly inexpensive, albeit “make-shift,” solution which is workable in more benign climates is to purchase a small prefabricated modular storage container designed for exterior use and install a few operable windows. While it will not win an architectural award, it does provide a healthier environment for the animals.
Ventilation
Cats are prone to upper respiratory ailments and hence, ventilation is a significant concern. Once again, air changes using outside air (and no interior “make-up” air) at a minimum 10 to 12 air changes/hour are especially important. However, to accomplish this, either an HVAC system or an exhaust only system with space heaters is needed similar to that described earlier in the Kennel section. However, this becomes more complicated as additional rooms and interior spaces need to be served.
over each cat. A simple, no cost procedure which can significantly improve air quality is to carefully deposit kitty litter outside the room in a manner which minimizes dust entering the air.
Room Materials
Since cages are cleaned individually, rooms usually are mopped and only occasionally washed down. While the use of Epoxy Resin Coatings (ERC) for floors and either ERC or epoxy paint for walls would be ideal, even in newer shelters, less expensive materials such as sheet vinyl floors with coved bases (+/- $3.50 to 4.50/SF installed) and FRP walls or wainscots (Fiberglass Reinforced Panels) which run $2.50 to $3.00/SF of wall surface installed are acceptable alternatives. Changing light fixtures to warmer, incandescent fixtures or existing “cool” fluorescents to warmer lamps can also help improve the rooms appearance at a relatively small cost.
The above ideas have been presented as “general” solutions to “typical” problems. Obviously, every shelter is different relative to both its physical facility and its operations and goals. As a result, any solution to a particular problem should be evaluated in relationship to these criteria. Expenditures of public and donor money on facility improvements should always be viewed as a means to a desired “program” end and not the end itself. Thus, notwithstanding my two earlier warnings, if the “end” result of improvements can be clearly defined such as to reduce the number of unwanted companion animals by increasing adoptions or to improve the condition of the animals held while at the shelter, then the decision as to whether the expenditure is worthwhile and cost effective can be made more easily.
George Miers & Associates
Architects & Planners
1150 Moraga Way, Suite 150, Moraga, CA 94556
Phone: (925) 631-6900 ~ Fax: (925) 631-6910
george@gmaarchitects.com