CROTCHED MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 2005

LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT 
In 1952 Harry Gregg commissioned Crotched Mountain’s first campus plan. 
It is in the form of a painting in which you can see the present buildings of the Crotched 
Mountain Rehabilitation Center. 
He saw in his mind the needs of veterans of World War II, children with polio, and the 
rehabilitation needs of New Hampshire’s citizenry for the next fifty years. 
He understood the architecture necessary to make caring and healing happen. 
From this plan Harry Gregg and the Crotched Mountain team made the hospital, school, athletic 
facilities, and even the connecting links become reality. 
Today, we are presenting a new vision based on a strategic plan whose development was led by the 
Crotched Mountain Foundation Board of Directors under its chair, Dr. Gil Fuld. 
Instead of one person’s view, hundreds of community meetings, focus groups, charrettes, 
engineering studies, and public reviews have brought forth this vision. 
Yet in many ways we have come full circle to Harry Gregg’s picture.  
One key aspect of his picture remains incomplete. 
In addition to the primary facilities, the picture also shows a network of roads and houses, 
barns, and even two churches--a community made from the elements of a typical New England 
neighborhood. 
Independently, fifty years later, we have used a community strategic planning process to come 
to the same conclusion. 
Harry Gregg’s vision remains as current today as it did when he told his architects of his 
dreams of a community on top of a mountain in New Hampshire. 
And now we have found that it is time to build that neighborhood. 
The picture may be the same, though we have some updated reasons for continuing on this journey. 
Autism has replaced polio as a major presenting disability. 
Adult brain injuries, often from today’s autos and industrial accidents, have raised the demand 
for rehabilitation. 
What remains the same, however, is the need for excellent care, education, and a supportive 
community. 
Today’s campus plan builds on many strengths. 
Foremost among them is the excellence of staff and volunteers who make such good things happen at
Crotched Mountain. 
This plan also captures our tremendous momentum in quality improvement and technical expertise 
in clinical services, education, and health care. 
Most importantly, this plan builds on Crotched Mountain’s values of caring and supportive 
relationships that make it possible to recover from trauma and loss, as well as to carry out the 
demanding work of support to individuals and families. 
Crotched Mountain has been well served by the campus planners who have brought a combination of 
technical depth and artistry to this new vision. 
The new picture of Crotched Mountain which we have painted envisions using “green” building 
strategies to build a new school and many new homes. 
We will do so within a protected forest watershed with universally accessible recreation and 
community-gathering opportunities. 
But more fundamentally, we are building a new community of mutual support. 
We are supporting the staff’s values of caring to make possible a sustainable opportunity for a 
community of individuals to come together in support of each other and of those who are valued 
for their vulnerability and their unique gifts.    
Donald L. Shumway 
President and CEO 

SECTION 1
CONSULTANT INTRODUCTION
To prepare an effective, comprehensive and realistic campus Master Plan, one has to know the 
territory.  
Within the allowable time frame, one must become intimately familiar with the site, the functions
it supports, and the overall mission of the organization.  
This information comes from multiple sources: organizational history, conversations with the 
people who live and work on site, and on-site reconnaissance, to begin with. 
The best solutions make maximum use of what already exists.  
In the case of Crotched Mountain, there is a fifty-year legacy of programmatic success. 
The mission has evolved over these five decades, as have the facilities.  
However the essential vision, originally articulated by Harry Gregg, remains the same: a facility
dedicated to the skilled care and personal development of people with multiple disabilities, 
located on a spectacular forested mountaintop with panoramic views, supported by an integrated 
program of medical care, rehabilitation, education and residential care.  
Throughout the 50-year history, Crotched Mountain has understood the environmental value of their
prominent mountainside, and has been a careful steward of the land and the larger watershed.
As client needs and service sectors have shifted, the Crotched Mountain mission has grown to 
reflect a greater understanding of the need for “building communities of mutual support,” as 
well as supporting greater independence.  
As a consequence of this evolving mission, the facilities themselves need to grow and change.  
While past decisions have reflected thoughtful choices, and periodic studies have assessed 
programs and facilities, there has been no overall Master Plan to guide these decisions.   
Despite the best intentions and heroic efforts on the part of CMRC, the changes have been 
piecemeal.  
Deferred maintenance is taking its toll.  
The infrastructure is beginning to fail.  
The inefficiency in energy use alone is costing Crotched Mountain more than can be sustained, 
particularly in a time of rapidly escalating fuel costs.  
The distribution of programmatic services is inefficient as well, with incremental decisions 
locating offices in available locations that waste valuable time and resources of staff and 
clients alike.  
The intention motivating this study was to produce a comprehensive plan that evolved from the 
mission of Crotched Mountain Foundation and the Strategic Plan goals outlined by the Board of 
Directors. 
Of particular importance were the goals to build communities of mutual support through strategies
of new housing, a new school, accessible recreation, environmental sustainability, land 
protection and reduced operating expense. 
The Master plan was also developed with an understanding of the limitations and opportunities 
present in the existing site conditions.  
The Master Plan presented in this report is the result of interviews and conversations with 
dozens of staff, department heads, Board members and facilitated “town meetings” open to the 
entire community; hundreds of hours spent walking, photographing, sketching, and assessing the 
site; study of historical accounts, zoning regulations, local and regional plans, natural 
resource studies and documentation (including a natural resource inventory recently compiled by 
the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests); and on-going review by an advisory 
committee of CMRC department heads.   
Through this organized approach—gathering data, analyzing and assessing the site, developing and 
testing concepts, drawing alternative site plans, evaluating them against established criteria 
and goals—the plan was further refined.  
A word of caution:  this is not a “final” plan.  
It is an on-going process—one that is flexible and incremental.  
Through graphic illustration and verbal summary, it gives shape to the vision articulated in the 
Strategic Plan by indicating schematically how the site can be organized.  
As the vision is implemented, there is room for modification.  
In fact, flexibility has been a primary objective throughout the process.   
Ideally, this Master Plan will provide a framework to guide future actions, and to ensure that 
all steps lead to a common goal: a multi-faceted and sustainable community of mutual support. 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The Campus Master Plan presented here is an ambitious concept that addresses a complex set of 
goals:  
It creates an integrated and cohesive campus, linking the residential neighborhoods in the 
northern or “upper” campus with the programmatic “inner” campus to the south.    
It clarifies circulation, through a radical redesign of roads: 
~The short, inner loop road brings visitors and outpatients to an expanded clinical wing and 
campus center, and provides a drop-off for children going to Wonderworks; 
~The perimeter road handles the heavier truck traffic for fuel, food and maintenance deliveries,
as well as school staff and public users of the athletic facilities; 
~The road bisecting the inner and upper campuses is removed, reducing pedestrian hazard; 
~By removing all vehicles from the heart of the campus, the pedestrian—whether on foot or in a 
wheelchair—enjoys a safer and more pleasant passage throughout the campus.  
Through judicious infill, new buildings aggregate services in a more efficient pattern, while 
providing a sheltered corridor by which clients and staff may move throughout the inner campus 
buildings; an extended Jenks Link connects to the new school, to the campus center, and the 
internal pedestrian spine.  
Vertical as well as horizontal movement is facilitated by day-lighted ramps that double as 
atriums.   
A new school enjoys its optimal location: south-facing, with expansive views, adjacent to 
gymnasium and existing voc ed classrooms and the proposed and enlarged community hall/auditorium 
at the south end of Hayden Field.  
A sizable sheltered drop-off protects students as they move from cars or vans into the new 
school.  
By removing utilitarian uses from prime site locations, these spaces are freed up for use by the 
community at large; the maintenance facility moves to a new perimeter site, creating space for 
the first new residential neighborhood and an expanded Charity Park; the new community hall 
repairs the former jumble of buildings at the southeast, creating a new public entrance to the 
gymnasium, made possible by moving the power plant and central receiving north of the current 
school the Brain Injury Center enjoys needed access to substantial vocational, clinical and 
meeting space.   
A similar use of infill places a mix of housing types in and among the existing group homes 
along Fox Meadow Lane, creating intimate gathering spaces, common houses, and courtyards which 
encourage community interaction.  
The lane itself is narrower, promoting a pedestrian feel and restricting all but the most 
essential vehicles from intruding.  
Included in the long-range plan are essential pieces that are currently missing from the campus: 
a Campus Center facility with dining room overlooking Hayden Field and the hills beyond; a 
conference center at Carter Hall with expanded parking; a multi-purpose building that provides 
studio and gallery space, a convenience store for residents and staff alike, and work 
opportunities for clients; an open-air chapel that enjoys the highest point within the campus. 
Underlying the specific elements is the intention to celebrate the site itself: 
its premium views within the larger context of southern New Hampshire’s mountain ranges.  
Buildings remain low in profile, and large amounts of the campus are left as open lands—woodlands
and fields, hillsides and level play areas, are linked with a system of trails that provide 
universal access to the natural context that defines the character of Crotched Mountain.  
Despite the density of the proposed campus master plan—or rather, because of it—the unifying 
characteristic is a tight-knit community of care within a spectacular and healing natural 
environment. 
This report will describe the Campus Master Plan conceptually and in detail.  
Additional background information—including site and building assessments, summaries of previous 
studies, identified space needs and tabulations, and multiple graphics illustrating stages of the
master planning process—is included in a separately bound Appendix.   

LOCUS
The Crotched Mountain Rehabilitation Center is located within 1400 acres of biologically diverse 
and rich woodlands on a south-facing mountainside in southern New Hampshire, owned by the 
Crotched Mountain Foundation.  
The CMF property lies in three municipalities—Francestown to the east, Bennington to the north, 
and Greenfield—and within New Hampshire’s Southwest Regional Planning Commission area.  
The property drops more than 1000’ in elevation, from a high point of 1,900’ above sea level, 
near the 2,066’ peak of Crotched Mountain, to a campsite and recreational waterfront on the 
north edge of Sunset Lake, at 869’.    
The northern half of the land is part of a large block of unfragmented forestlands totaling 
6,700 acres within a five-mile radius of Crotched Mountain.  
To the east and northeast, lands within the 820-acre Francestown Town Forest are protected.  
Large blocks of land to the west are undeveloped but not in conservation protection. 
(Further information about the natural resource values is contained in the summary of the study 
completed by the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests in April 2004.) 
The CMRC campus sits on a hilltop plateau of 114 acres, entirely within the Town of Greenfield 
and accessed by the state-maintained Crotched Mountain Road.  
The campus is circumscribed by a 1.5-mile peripheral road, with additional interior roads 
providing full vehicular access throughout the site.  
With an average elevation of 1,300-1,350’, the campus enjoys spectacular views to the east, 
south and west.    
The mountains encircling the view from the campus include Uncanoonuc (1,321’) to the east; 
Rose Mountain (1,720’), Lyndeborough Mountain (1,640’) and the Pinacle (1,700’) to the southeast;
Winn Mountain (1686’) and the Wapack Range to the south (North Pack Monadnock at 2,276’ and Pack 
Monadnock at 2,290’). 
The views culminate to the southwest with Mount Monadnock (3,165’) eclipsing them all. 
On clear days, subsequent ranges are visible beyond.  
Surrounded by this mountainous rim, the CM plateau enjoys a mostly southern and southeastern 
exposure.  
Winds, however, can be fierce, particularly in the colder seasons.  
A trail climbs north from the peripheral road up to a knoll where, at 1,500’, the view extends 
nearly 300° from northeast to northwest. 

HISTORY
The mid-mountain plateau with its spectacular views captured the imagination of Harry Gregg, who 
believed that healing best occurs in a place of natural beauty. 
A Nashua-based entrepreneur with a history of philanthropy, Gregg had previously purchased land 
at the bottom of the mountain along Sunset Lake in the 1920s, where he built and offered a free,
two-week “fresh air” summer camp for inner city children that operated for decades.  
Through his friendship with Dr. Ezra Jones, New Hampshire’s first orthopedic specialist, Gregg’s 
commitment to disabled children deepened, and in 1936 they founded the New Hampshire Society for 
Crippled Children.  
This collaboration led to the vision of a multi-faceted hospital for “crippled children,” within 
a village setting on Crotched Mountain, offering extended and more consistent treatment than 
Jones’ urban clinics could provide.  
In 1942, Gregg purchased the 600-acre Russell Farm, midway up Crotched Mountain. 
In addition to the medical center, he envisioned educational facilities on a working farm managed
by a capable farmer.  
Children would be housed in a family-type setting, no more than ten children in a house managed 
by a “house mother.”  
After a decade of fund-raising and building support, construction began in 1950 and in 1953 the 
hospital opened.  
Within the first two years of operation, the 40-bed hospital treated 159 children.  
Throughout its 50-year history, CMRC has seen a frequent change in its focus and the clientele 
served.  
With the development of the Salk vaccine, for example, there was a dramatic decline in the number
of polio cases and long-term rehabilitation; Crotched Mountain shifted to treating more children 
with cerebral palsy and other physical disabilities.  
When he realized New Hampshire was one of only three states without a school for the deaf, Gregg 
inaugurated one in 1955, under the dynamic leadership of Helen Crathern; typically, half of 
students at the School had multiple disabilities.  
By 1960, Crotched Mountain had expanded its services to include vocational training, a school for
special education, and a medical treatment center for adults.  
This rapid growth required a more sophisticated management structure and better communication 
among the various departments.  
Harry Gregg, then in his 80s, retired from his central role and the first salaried president was 
hired who, in turn, appointed the first medical director.   
A comprehensive study of programs and facilities undertaken in 1968—A Reconnaissance Review of 
Administration and an Plan for the Future—recommended new systems that would clarify admissions 
policy, improve internal communication, establish clear goals and objectives, and monitor client
progress.  
In 1975, federal legislation brought about another dramatic change. 
Public Law 94:142—The Education for All Handicapped Children Act—provided public funding for 
special education, but also mandated that public school districts be responsible, in effect 
“mainstreaming” children with special needs.  
Plans to expand the School for the Deaf were scuttled, and Crotched Mountain began to shift its 
focus to children with multiple handicaps and those with behaviors that could not be accommodated 
in the local school district.  
The ability of Crotched Mountain leadership to anticipate change in service needs and future 
funding and translate this into new programmatic priorities is an essential ingredient of the 
Foundation’s on-going success and survival.  
In the 1980s, Crotched Mountain Foundation expanded programs into the locations away from the 
Greenfield campus, with residential services in New Hampshire and Massachusetts communities.  
A new rehabilitation program for adults with severe brain injuries was brought to the mountain, 
along with improvements to the school, gymnasium, and road system.  
The 1984 Comprehensive Study by Kenneth F. Parry & Associates--Richard A. Moon Associated 
Architects evaluated site and building conditions and uses, and explored alternative designs to 
incorporate housing and upgrade facilities within the lower campus.  
Objectives at that time parallel issues today: improving barrier-free access, increasing housing 
options, improving work conditions, expanding facilities, and decreasing the institutional 
atmosphere, in the interest of better serving a changing clientele.   
The 1980s and 90s brought several major investments on the campus, including nine group homes 
built on Fox Meadow Lane, the construction of a protected, glassed walkway between the Children’s
Hospital and the School (Jenks Link); protected entrances to Children’s Hospital, the Brain 
Injury Center, and the Foundation buildings; and a significant upgrade to the Children’s Hospital 
facilities.  
In addition, new lighting at the south end of campus and a comprehensive signage system reflect 
the desire to improve appearance and way-finding on the campus. 

CURRENT PROGRAMS
Today, the Crotched Mountain Foundation provides services throughout the Northeast to more than 
2,000 people annually, including infants in a developmental pediatric clinic, 122 students 
enrolled at the Crotched Mountain School, and 31 adult clients in the Brain Injury Center.  
As of December 2003, there were 72 clients in residential homes or apartments.  
Wonderworks, the child care program, served 70 preschoolers, and more than 1000 people were 
treated through the Outpatient Clinic.  
The full-time staff totals more than 700, with 75% in direct service (teachers, teaching 
assistants, residential counselors, doctors, nurses, nursing assistants, therapists of various 
stripes).
The 23 buildings on campus include several large dormitory-style buildings which have been staff 
residences; the 50,000 square foot Children’s Specialty Hospital and Medical Residence; a newly 
rebuilt auditorium; the administration building; the gym and pool complex; and a maintenance 
facility; in addition to the school, the 48,000 square foot Brain Injury Center, the Outpatient 
Clinic, and Wonderworks.  
On Fox Meadow Lane are nine four-bedroom group homes and a four-unit apartment building.  
More than 100 staff were supported in workforce housing in 1990; however, by 2003 those numbers 
had dropped to 60 to allow more housing options for students. 
Although the camp by Sunset Lake was closed in the 1970s, barrier-free docks and a renovated 
boathouse-qua-recreation center support a summer aquatics program.  
Water from wells on CMRC land is stored in two 200,000-gallon water tanks on the campus, and a 
serpentine trench wastewater treatment facility, built in 1981, handles sewage.  
Crotched Mountain has a history of self-sufficiency in power generation as well; wind turbines 
formerly were on site (at the knoll), and a co-generation plant operated until the spring of 
2003, when one of the diesel engines failed. 
Crotched Mountain is in the process of completing a study to determine the future path of energy 
production on campus prior to making additional investments in plant. 
The natural environment remains an important context for Crotched Mountain, and an extensive 
trail network throughout the undisturbed forestlands is open to the greater public.  
Crotched Mountain is also in the process of completing a master plan of recreation programs that 
will have a primary focus of accessibility for all. 

SUMMARY
Flexibility in services offered and the willingness to take on increasingly difficult human needs
is certainly one reason why Crotched Mountain has continued to survive through changes in 
funding, legislation and clientele.  
Through the insight and commitment of staff and leadership, Crotched Mountain provides an 
interdisciplinary, multifaceted, holistic and integrated program of service.  
From the beginning, the power of place and the role it plays in healing and rehabilitation has 
governed site decisions, from the burying of utility lines to the low profile of the buildings.
However, Crotched Mountain faces many challenges to remain a fiscally and programmatically 
stable institution.  
Anticipated changes in funding, staffing, and clientele, as well as a somewhat worn physical 
facility and infrastructure, have prompted a long-range look at Crotched Mountain Rehabilitation 
Center.  

SECTION 2
SETTING THE CONTEXT 
WHAT IS A MASTER PLAN? 
A Master Plan is as much process as it is product.  
It is intended to be an inclusive and on-going articulation of problems and opportunities, guided
by an overall vision that is encompassing and inspirational.  
A well-crafted Master Plan is a map as well as a method, outlining a conceptual approach to 
decision-making over an extended period of time.    
Ideally, a Master Plan incorporates and accomplishes a number of things: 
It is driven by a vision that is comprehensive and encompassing. 
It is a program of objectives as well as a strategy for achieving those objectives. 
It translates the collective values and intentions of the organization into realizable and 
tangible actions. 
It is achieved through an inclusive and on-going process, engaging and informed by a broad 
spectrum of stakeholders. 
It is intended to be conceptual and flexible, particularly since it is implemented 
incrementally and over time.
It provides continuity for that incremental implementation, ensuring that small projects are 
accomplished in harmony with the overriding goals or vision. 
It provides a conceptual framework for the essential first steps, such as infrastructure (roads,
parking, utilities, energy), ensuring these early actions don’t need to be “undone” to make way 
for future expansion. 
Ultimately, a Master Plan establishes the cost implications that help in long-range planning 
for development. 
Crotched Mountain began the process by creating a Strategic Plan, which assessed the strengths 
and challenges facing the organization and then established a number of ambitious goals: building
supportive residential communities, new models of educational services, state-of-the-art and 
family centered clinical services, strengthened fiscal and managerial operations, within the 
context of a healthy and sustainable environment.  
Starting with those goals, the planners then assessed the complexities of the site, looked at 
the relationships between various uses and users on the campus, identified the optimal 
associations, and determined the best fit of those uses to this site.
Through the Master Planning process, the consultants asked community members at all levels to 
address certain fundamental questions, such as:
What are the priority needs and current conflicts that are limiting or preventing the optimal
delivery of services at Crotched Mountain? In other words, what is holding CMRC back?
What organizational strengths and site assets provide unique opportunities for improving the
campus and accomplishing the mission?
What would an ideal campus look like?
What are the ideal relationships among the parts?
How could reorganizing or redistributing functions, facilities or programs improve delivery of
critical services?
What actions must take place early on to unlock the puzzle?
What are the imagined costs or consequences of not implementing (some portion of) the plan?
What critical aspects need additional study to clarify future actions?
And finally, why now?

WHY NOW? UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT
Crotched Mountain Foundation recently celebrated its 50th anniversary.  
This significant threshold is, in itself, sufficient reason to take a careful and studied look 
at the organization, its history and its future place in the field of rehabilitative health care.
However, there are many other reasons why it is particularly timely that the Foundation engage 
in a Master Planning effort.  
For example:    
Clients are not well-served by the current buildings: Lighting, acoustics, and noise from the 
heating systems compromise hygiene and health for clients and staff; serious repair and/or 
replacement of facilities is urgently needed, particularly in the educational facilities serving 
children with autism and other sensory integration disabilities.  
Program services are at their limits: Every department needs additional space, and needs improved
quality space.  
In particular, the school building is inadequate: adapted to various changes of use over time, 
the classrooms and hallways are too small, the air quality poor, and water infiltrates the 
basement. 
The Brain Injury Center also lacks needed space.  
Existing utilities need replacement: The septic system is permitted until 2008, at which time a 
new system will need to be renegotiated with the State. 
The co-generation tower needs replacing, and the failure of one engine last year took the system 
off line.  
Energy costs are rising, and there is a strong desire for an increased measure of self-reliance.
Water lines need to be replaced.  
Buildings are fatigued and challenge clinical services: Multiple renovations notwithstanding, 
many buildings are no longer suited for the kinds of uses they serve.  
In addition, departments have been dispersed across campus, occupying available space as needed, 
which has led to inefficiencies for clients and staff alike.  
New, flexible structures that can adapt to changing clientele and services are required.  
Current funding will be cut: Cutbacks in government funding, including Medicaid, and other 
sources will require CMF to implement strategies that reduce expenses while maintaining quality. 
Circulation patterns are hazardous: As the number of staff grows, so do the number of cars, and 
clients moving between residential areas and the rest of the campus must share the road as 
sidewalks are few.   
Staff turnover is costly: Greater incentives are needed to retain the best staff and reduce 
turnover of the support staff. 
Available and affordable housing, attractive state-of-the-art facilities, and other improvements 
to the site will help attract and retain staff.  
Additional housing is necessary: People with disabilities have too few options for affordable 
housing that is part of an active diverse community with the program supports they need over a 
lifetime. 
Parents of many clients worry who will support their adult children when they are not there. 
There are positive reasons, as well, to undertake a Master Plan at this time: 
A commitment to a range of housing options and a change from a shift model to a family 
care-giving model require the remodeling of existing facilities and the construction of new 
residential communities to support this venture. 
Recent improvements to the campus, at considerable cost, indicate a commitment to quality 
facilities; future needed investments to buildings and infrastructure can be made confidently 
if guided by a common vision.  
The commitment to land conservation by the Crotched Mountain Foundation is possible if expanded 
programs and housing are clustered within a densely developed campus center; CMF has an 
opportunity to provide the Town of Greenfield and larger region with a significant block of 
permanently protected conservation land if infill use of the existing campus is approved.    
New leadership of Crotched Mountain has brought exceptional energy, experience and vision to the 
organization; there is a collaborative spirit and a high degree of dedication among program 
directors.  
The Board of Directors is highly motivated and involved; they are poised to engage in a serious 
capital campaign to support needed changes on campus, as evidenced by their intensive work in 
2003 to develop the Strategic Plan.  

STRATEGIC PLAN: ESTABLISHING CMF’S GOALS 
Over a six-month period in 2003, the Board of Directors engaged in an intensive Strategic 
Planning Process to identify CMRC’s strengths and challenges, to review the mission and 
establish a vision for the future.  
The result was a carefully crafted articulation of goals and objectives for the Foundation, 
based on a commitment to a lifelong alliance with people with disabilities and their families.
The overarching vision is the creation of a community of mutual support and sharing, providing 
superb clinical rehabilitation and educational services, with a diverse and dedicated workforce, 
within a healthy and sustainable environment and a strong community connection. 
The Plan is summarized in five strategic goals: Build safe and supportive communities that foster
independence through interdependence, emphasizing relationships, individual choice and community 
connections.  
Provide educational services that meet individual learning goals, needs, and styles.  
Create and sustain healthy environments by providing our clients, staff and community with 
places to live, work, learn and play that are beautiful, energy efficient, sustainable and 
protective of our land heritage.  
Offer medical, therapeutic and rehabilitative services that rely on advanced technical skills, 
are family centered, and foster personal relationships.  
Strengthen our management capacity and financial resources. 
The Strategic Plan creates specific guidelines against which to measure the Campus Master Plan. 
It also sets priorities for implementation.  
While many of the objectives are programmatic and organizational, others have very specific site
implications—such as building and locating a new school, designing residential neighborhoods, 
finding safe pedestrian routes, integrating functions for greater efficiency, and providing more
links to the natural environment surrounding the Crotched Mountain campus.  
The Strategic Plan suggests a number of themes—expanding, integrating, protecting, community 
building, linking—that are keystones for a Campus Master Plan. 

COMMUNITY CHARETTES: ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY
This study has not happened in isolation from the people who live and work at Crotched Mountain.
In fact, the Crotched Mountain community has been involved in the Master Planning process for 
nearly two years.  
The work that went into the Strategic Planning effort continued with two “community charettes” 
in August 2003.  
The term “charette” describes an intensive design session, usually against a deadline.  
In this case, it was a two-day focused meeting of some 70 key people, representing senior 
management as well as the various departments, programs and services of Crotched Mountain.  
Led by landscape architect Walter Cudnohufsky, architect Bruce Coldham, and building performance 
consultant Marc Rosenbaum, the charettes asked participants to share their perceptions of the 
organization, the site, and their vision of the future.  
(Some of the “Solution Concepts” are illustrated in Appendix B.) 
The charettes—and the community-wide “town meetings,” focus groups, and other formal and informal
discussions held as part of the Master Planning process—were intended to bring tangible closure 
to the Board’s Strategic Planning process and to address the physical and programmatic Master 
Planning portion of the process.  
Using the participants’ wisdom and collective knowledge of site and program, the highly 
energetic sessions were intended:  
To fully engage the participants in a productive and fun effort to improve CMRC; 
To experience different ways of observing and understanding the CMRC campus; 
To raise and articulate key questions relative to the strategic plan and CMRC future; 
To understand, clarify, and establish priorities among elements of the internally derived 
strategic plan; 
To demonstrate the link between physical conditions on campus and the quality of life for those 
working and living here; and 
To articulate some early solution concepts and actions to launch the improvements at CMRC. 
In addition to brainstorming sessions inside, the group moved outdoors to evaluate various areas 
on campus.  
As a result, the charettes generated a list of proposed actions—immediate, near term and long 
range.  
These actions (illustrated in the appendix) helped to outline and prioritize the scope of work 
for a subsequent Campus Master Plan.  
Among the major intentions: 
Develop a stimulating, safe, accessible pedestrian environment, including barrier-free trails 
that enable clients to fully experience the natural world; 
Move the cars to the perimeter to create a pedestrian core to the campus; 
Provide stimulating aspects (indoor/outdoor connections) from private interior spaces without 
compromising privacy
Create a range of social spaces and meeting places, from small intimate settings to larger 
gathering places, throughout the campus; 
Expand the internal connections between buildings through infill;
Increase the number and variety of housing options on campus;   
Create a campus focal point: a community center, or campus  gateway; 
Pursue alternative energy systems, including a new cogeneration facility and the possibility of 
wind power;  
Improve the environmental quality of existing buildings and their interior spaces, especially 
the school. 
These ideas and, more particularly, the broad participation of the community in shaping the 
priorities, provided the basis from which the Campus Master Plan takes shape.  
The ultimate conclusion is that the physical facilities at Crotched Mountain are not up to the 
quality of the services the staff deliver, and in fact are holding the organization back from 
its greatest potential.   

NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY: PRESERVING CRITICAL HABITAT 
At the same time the programs and facilities at Crotched Mountain were under study, the 
Foundation engaged the services of the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests to 
conduct a three-fold inventory of the complex array of natural resources on land owned by CMF.  
The inventories included a timber and forest assessment, conducted by the Society for the 
Protection of New Hampshire Forests; a study of natural communities and rare or endangered 
species, by the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau, New Hampshire Division of Forests and 
Lands; and an assessment of wildlife habitat completed by the Audubon Society of New Hampshire.
This comprehensive study, accompanied by a full set of maps, gives CMF a wealth of information 
about their property and recommendations for the protection of critical resources.  
(A brief “Summary of Crotched Mountain Natural Resource Inventory is found in Appendix C.)
The natural resource study culminated in a map of “Special Management Areas,” dated April 2004.
These management areas include rare or endangered species, wetlands, swamps, streams, beaver 
ponds, vernal pools, and related buffers.  
They also include “exemplary natural communities” deserving of protection, such as the rich red 
oak rocky woods on the dry, enriched south-facing slopes just north of Sunset Lake, shown on the 
map above with a 600’ buffer due south of the main CMRC campus. 
The first decisions of the campus planning process were to review, accept and incorporate all 
the recommendations contained in the natural resource inventory.  
The Campus Master Plan for Crotched Mountain consequently designated a 1000-acre portion of the 
CMF property—approximately two-thirds of their land—for protection under a conservation 
restriction, the details of which are yet to be articulated.  
Included in the area to be protected are all of the “Special Management Areas” and their 
associated buffers, wetlands communities, and a large band of contiguous undisturbed forestland 
that constitutes the northern portion of the CMF property.  
This forestland abuts protected lands to the east and north, providing an extraordinary stretch 
of wildlife habitat. 
(See Appendix D for a fuller description of the Campus/Conservation Boundary.) 
The remainder of the property provides sufficient space and opportunity for future expansion of 
the Crotched Mountain campus and program services.  
Though outside the designated conservation areas, any future development will respect the natural
resources as well, by observing these guidelines as much as possible: 
Concentrate development on disturbed lands. 
Look to areas that are already developed for infill opportunities; find ways to reuse disturbed 
sites such as the capped landfill; cluster new development on small footprints to minimize 
coverage.  
Protect significant features. 
Rather than placing new structures to claim the outstanding views, keep the building profiles 
low; stay well outside buffer zones to wetlands, vernal pools, seeps and unique woodland 
communities; establish a lighting program that assures safety while minimizing unintended light 
pollution of the surrounding landscape.  
Maintain unfragmented forestlands. 
Protect extensive woodlands that are contiguous with already protected zones; identify wildlife 
corridors and protect those links.  
Use existing roads to access new development. 
Make use of existing woodland roads and wetland crossings when designing new residential areas; 
widen the cut only as much as absolutely necessary; maintain a diverse woodland edge along 
roadsides.  
Use a native palette for new plantings. 
Where new plants are needed (for shade, buffer, interest), use primarily native species similar 
to those in surrounding woodlands; avoid if possible the introduction of non-native species, 
with particular attention to invasive exotics.  
Monitor disturbed areas continually and remove opportunistic exotic plants that appear. 
Conservation lands held by CMF as well as the developed portions of the campus provide an 
excellent opportunity for recreation accessible to everyone.  
Existing trail networks, Class VI roads, indoor gyms and pools, and the popular 
wheelchair-accessible tree house comprise an extensive inventory of existing recreational 
options, and make the site a destination for those seeking accessible recreation.  
Further development of universal design-based trails, platforms and screens for viewing wildlife,
accessible docks for fishing and swimming, and other options have the potential of seeding a 
community development initiative of significant value.  

GREENFIELD, NH, MASTER PLAN 
Any Campus Master Plan must be sensitive as well to the larger political context in which it 
lies, including the municipality whose rules, regulations, and permitting authority will 
influence what can and cannot happen on a site.  
The developed Crotched Mountain campus is located in the Town of Greenfield, NH, which in turn 
is one of 36 towns within the Southwest Region Planning Commission region.  
This agency, one of nine regional planning authorities in New Hampshire, prepared an update of 
the Greenfield Master Plan, adopted by the Greenfield Planning Board in June of 2003.  
The Master Plan includes analyses of traffic and transportation, construction materials, 
community facilities, natural features, population and housing, and land use, and concludes with 
a future land use plan for the town.  
Sixteen accompanying maps, illustrating town-wide resources, facilities, and development 
constraints, are available in .pdf format on the Town website: www/greenfieldnh.org/masterplan.  
Crotched Mountain Foundation, and the 675 acres in CMF ownership in Greenfield, are largely 
ignored in the Town’s Master Plan. 
Nevertheless, Crotched Mountain is a significant asset to the community: it is the Town’s 
largest employer by far, and its open space and recreational resources are used by local 
citizens and neighboring schools.  
In addition, CMF contributes payments in lieu of taxes to the Town. 
Last year these totaled over $90,000. 
Similar to other towns in the region, Greenfield saw tremendous growth in the 1980s, when 
population grew 56%, from 972 in 1980 to 1519 just ten years later.  
At the same time, property values more than doubled, with the median home value increasing from 
$49,900 in 1980 to $118,600 in 1990.  
The Town’s concerns about the need for diverse housing, controlling sprawl, encouraging economic 
development and supporting tourism as well as the impact of increased traffic on road conditions,
suggest ways in which site development at Crotched Mountain can support municipal objectives:  
By providing additional staff housing, CMF can reduce the amount of commuters who travel to the 
mountain.  
By creating new, diverse residential communities on the mountain, CMF can expand the mix of 
housing options in town.  
Development will be concentrated on the campus, largely as infill, served by an existing road 
largely in state ownership, and thus would not contribute to development sprawl.  
Since CMF hopes to be increasingly self-sufficient in energy, sewage treatment, and interior road
maintenance, it should not place undue burden on the Town;   
By placing 1000 acres in permanent conservation, CMF will expand significantly the amount of 
protected wildlife habitat, protect watersheds, and provide a network of trails open to the 
public.  
CMF supports tourism goals by establishing Crotched Mountain as an accessible recreation 
destination.  
Through the training and exposure of CM clients to small commercial ventures, CMF is encouraging
local economic development.  
CMF continues to protect public water supply, by increasingly using environmentally sound 
practices in all aspects of its operation.    
Night lighting, a source of some complaint by townspeople, will be better shielded, diminishing 
the impact on the larger community. 
(Improvements in light shielding and lighting technology were put in place in December 2004 with 
dramatic results in reduction of light pollution.) 
Appendix E contains a fuller summary of the Greenfield Master Plan, as it relates to future 
planning at Crotched Mountain. 

SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES  
The New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning has published a list of “smart growth 
principles,” 
which coincide with the priorities articulated by the Southwest Region Planning Commission goals.
Land use and campus planning at Crotched Mountain should fit well within these principles as 
well.  
Maintain traditional compact settlement patterns to efficiently use land, resources, and 
investments in infrastructure; 
Foster the traditional character of New Hampshire downtown, villages, and neighborhoods by 
encouraging a human scale of development that is comfortable for pedestrians and conducive to 
community life; 
Incorporate a mix of uses to provide a variety of housing, employment, shopping, services and 
social opportunities for all members of the community;’ 
Preserve New Hampshire‘s working landscape by sustaining farm and forest land and other rural 
resource lands to maintain contiguous tracts of open land and to minimize land use conflicts; 
Provide choices and safety in transportation to create livable, walkable communities that 
increase accessibility for people of all ages, whether on foot, bicycle, or in motor vehicles; 
Protect environmental quality by minimizing impacts from human activities and planning for and 
maintaining natural areas that contribute to the health and quality of life of communities and 
people in New Hampshire; 
Manage growth locally in the New Hampshire tradition, but work with neighboring towns to achieve 
common goals and address common problems more effectively; and 
Involve the community in planning and implementation to ensure that development retains and 
enhances the sense of place, traditions, goals, and values of the location community. 
In essence, Crotched Mountain Foundation has created its own village atop the mountain, and 
future site development will incorporate a mix of uses within a concentrated footprint, so that 
a significant amount of the natural environment surrounding the core campus can remain protected
and open to the greater public.  
More information on Smart Growth can be found at the website for the New Hampshire Office of 
Energy and Planning:  
http://www.nh.gov/oep/programs/SmartGrowth. 

SECTION 3
SITE AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT

SITE RECONNAISSANCE 
Starting with the goals outlined in the Strategic Plan, informed by the imaginations and 
experience of CMRC families, staff and directors, and supplemented by research and conversations 
on the history and the local and regional political context of Crotched Mountain, the Master 
Plan studied the physical features of the site, both natural and built.     
To best understand the complexities of a site, particularly one as diverse and intensively used 
as this one, it is helpful to separate issues and analyze them independently.  
The consulting team looked at soils, slopes, aspect (direction the slopes face), drainage 
patterns, vegetation, views, wind—the natural conditions on the site.  
Similarly, built features were examined: roads and circulation patterns, parking lots, building 
locations and entrances, as well as a thorough examination of the buildings themselves.  
A considerable amount of time went into creating a map of the utilities on site—the electric, 
water, storm, sewer, gas, and phone lines, which have been installed and in some cases abandoned 
over the years.   
A comprehensive summary of energy use was the product of a full-day charette involving principals
of the master planning team, a contingent from CMRC, and representatives of BVH Integrated 
Systems.  
The study considered inner (southern) and upper (northern) campus building groupings separately 
by load (heating, hot water, cooling and electrical). 
Note: Fuller assessments of site characteristics, energy use, building conditions and space needs
are found in the Appendices noted below, along with additional drawings at a larger scale. 

PHYSICAL SETTING 
The combination of steep slopes, rocky soils, seasonal high groundwater, and occasionally fierce 
winds makes the campus at Crotched Mountain a challenging site to develop.   

SLOPES  
The Crotched Mountain campus takes advantage of a moderately sloped ridgeline on which most 
development has taken place.  
Universal access to the facilities is enhanced by building into the slopes at the south end of 
the campus.  
The land drops precipitously outside the perimeter loop road, which provides excellent views 
from within the campus.  

SOILS 
Crotched Mountain soils are constrained by steep, rocky conditions and seasonal high groundwater.
Pockets of deeper, well-drained soils are found within the campus as well as to the west and 
south where existing roads provide access, but bedrock outcrops particularly along the primary 
north-south ridgeline will hinder excavation.   
 
DRAINAGE 
A pronounced ridgeline bisects the Crotched Mountain property from north to south.  
The interior campus is built close to this watershed line. 
The sloping site and a comprehensive drainage system have eliminated most conflicts between water
and site use. 
However, groundwater does seep into some basement areas, and some utility boxes are occasionally 
swamped. 
Crotched Mountain Road, a Class II state highway, provides the only access to the CMRC campus.  
Alternative access is not possible given steep terrain and intervening wetlands.  
the exterior loop road keeps the cars on the perimeter—an ideal campus design.  
Interior private roads provide convenient access but bisect the site and compromise pedestrian 
safety. 
Smaller parking lots dispersed throughout the campus help reduce the impact of the car. 
However, some lots intrude into the interior of the site, giving priority to cars over 
pedestrians. 
Larger lots at the south end of campus are in high demand, with cars frequently overflowing onto 
adjacent drives and roadways.  

INTERSECTIONS
Irregular alignment, inconsistent pavement widths, conflicts with pedestrian routes, inadequate 
directional and warning signs, characterize intersections at CMRC--the result of a complex site 
and incremental growth.  
In particular, the intersection at Staff House Circle, South View Road and Verney Drive is 
confusing, overly wide, and consequently dangerous.  

PEDESTRIAN
Whether on foot, in a wheelchair, or a bicycle, there are few sidewalks that provide safe 
ambulation on site.  
Pedestrians are at some risk as they walk or wheel along or across roadways throughout the site.
Interior corridors provide some sheltered access between buildings, but slopes are steep for 
those pushing chairs.

UTILITIES
Installed over time, utilities criss-cross the site with particular concentration at the south 
end of the campus and under Hayden Field.  
Many routes have been abandoned, and records are lacking.  
Some systems (septic, water distribution, cogeneration) need upgrade or replacement.  
A study of night lighting in August 2004 by Sebesta-Blomberg & Associates, Inc., recommended ways
to reduce glare and light pollution, as well as improve energy conservation on site; 
Appendix L includes a brief summary of this study as well as the utility map. 
As mentioned above, these improvements were put in place during the fall 2004.  
(An assessment of the energy systems and heating load was conducted by BVH Integrated Systems, 
Inc., and is summarized in Appendix S.) 

BUILDABLE SITES
The most optimal areas for new construction on the larger 1400-acre property are at least ten 
acres in size, with slopes less than 15% and well-drained soils that can accommodate septic 
systems, on or near existing or former roads.  
Three outlying areas were identified as potential building zones.  
Within the campus plateau, there are a number of infill possibilities that would better link the 
existing facilities.  
Fitting uses to possible building sites is a primary task of the Master Plan. 

CONSERVATION
As summarized in Section 2, and more fully described in Appendix D, approximately 1000 acres of 
CMF’s outlying property will be put in conservation; any development would occur within the 
striped zone shown below. 

SITE SUMMARY 
The incremental nature of development of the Crotched Mountain campus over five decades has 
resulted in a relatively compact and low profile administrative and programmatic core, with a 
more dispersed and suburban residential design.  
(Appendix N describes the diverse “Character Zones” within the CMRC campus.) 
Of greatest concern is the confusing circulation pattern, which is devoid of any clear gateway, 
is inadequately addressed by the new system of signs, and lacks clear and protected pedestrian 
ways within the heart of the campus.  
A similar consequence of incremental growth creates problems within the buildings themselves.

BUILDING ASSESSMENT   
A summary survey of the buildings at Crotched Mountain began with a preliminary look at the 
structural character (materials, code compliance, energy efficiency, etc.).  
Through a series of interviews with staff and administration in most departments, a summary 
assessment of space allocation resulted in a tabulation of existing use and optimal projected 
space needs. 
For building assessment purposes, the campus can be divided between the southern or “Inner 
Campus” and the northern or “Upper Campus.”  
The Inner Campus is densely developed with essentially linked buildings of varied use/occupancy 
and construction type.    
The Upper Campus, on the other hand, is more dispersed and uniform residential development.

INNER CAMPUS BUILDINGS 
Here is the concentration of Crotched Mountain’s 50-year building history.  
In the absence of any prior Master Planning, growth has been piecemeal, apparently without a 
holistic understanding of exactly how this now-connected sequence of buildings is seen in terms 
of code compliance.  
In past years, significant renovations have not strictly observed the current building 
code-imposed limits to building “heights and areas,” which is the foundation parameter of code 
compliance.  
Absent the resources to examine the entire Inner Campus, it is a completely understandable end 
result.  
Future construction as proposed in the Master Plan presents the opportunity to resolve this 
shortcoming.  
A comprehensive assessment of the Inner Campus defines the formal use categories and building 
construction types, and identifies a sequence of formal “buildings” separated by masonry fire 
walls or connectors, shown in red on the adjacent diagram.  
The assessment specifies the remedial work necessary to establish five  fire walls in the 
prescribed locations, (the firewalls shown at the junction of Hayden and Jenks Link may not be 
required if the Link is classified as a connector) and stipulates particular requirements such 
as extending sprinkler coverage and grading to maintain certain parts of buildings as 
stories-below-grade.   
The intent is to firmly create a basis of current code compliance for all future renovation, 
changes of use, and addition to the Inner Campus from now onward.  
This document— Appendix O—is intended to be filed with state and local building officials to 
ensure that the cohering effort of this planning is not lost; indeed it should make matters a 
great deal easier for future design teams. 
A detailed investigation of the construction of all Inner Campus buildings was undertaken in 
conjunction with the above, and findings are reported in Appendix P: “Building Construction.”  
In general, the buildings are low rise (three stories) unprotected1 steel frame.  
In some cases, columns and intermediate floor structure are protected while the roof structure 
is not.  
Steel-framed construction of this type is common and provides a high level of flexibility for 
substantial changes of building use.  
However, since steel is such an efficient conductor of heat, and because these steel-framed 
buildings (as almost all such buildings) have been designed and constructed without regard to 
avoiding “thermal bridging” between the warm interior and the cold exterior, there is a 
substantial need to remove many locations where condensation and mold conditions might thrive.  
Since much of the initial building was completed prior to the 1970s, the insulation levels are 
minimal, and the value of the exterior building enclosure or envelopes is generally in need of 
upgrading—increasing the insulation, improving the window glazing panels and the frames, as well 
as eliminating the thermal bridges and reducing air leakage. 
The condition of the existing building stock has not been systematically examined. 
Rather, a summary survey has been compiled by considering “what is working and what is not 
working” — from both the resident/staff and service/maintenance staff standpoints — for each 
building.  
This preliminary document is included as Appendix Q, as a structure for reporting a more thorough
investigation.  
Principal initial findings include the following: 
Below-grade spaces are typically challenging to maintain reasonably healthy indoor air quality. 
Of all the buildings in the Inner Campus loop, the present school building and Bromley are the 
ones in most need of rehabilitative intervention.  
Generally speaking, most of the interior space (and including but to a lesser extent the recently
renovated spaces) do not have a sufficient standard of comfort and air quality required for the 
basic well-being of particularly sensitive clients, or even for the health and high morale of 
the staff. 
The incremental evolution of the Inner Campus buildings on the gently sloping mountain side has 
resulted in a jumble of floor plate elevations, noted by Parry and Moon in their 1984 study.  
This condition makes it difficult—but not impossible—to achieve a high standard of accessibility.
A “Levels Diagram” associated with the as-built plans of the inner campus (Appendix R) shows the 
vertical displacements.
Because the buildings of the Upper Campus are sufficiently small and dispersed, there is not a 
comparable concern as to code compliance.  
However, the buildings—particularly the group homes along Fox Meadow Lane—are far from achieving 
a quality of interior comfort, amenity, and resource efficiency consistent with CMRC aspirations.
Energy systems: 
A comprehensive summary of energy use is included as Appendix S.  
The product of a full day charrette involving all principals of the master planning team and a 
contingent from CMRC, it considers inner and upper/outer campus building groupings separately by 
load --heating, domestic hot water, cooling, and electricity.  
The campus has an array of energy systems ranging from small oil-fired boilers individually, 
serving the smaller dispersed buildings, to large systems serving portions of the inner campus 
buildings. 
Until recently the inner campus was heated primarily by the cogeneration plant, which is now at 
the end of its useful life.  
Hayden and Bromley heating systems are separate.  
Cooling is supplied in a less systematic fashion.  
Cooling systems are distributed and vary from a large absorption cooler powered by the heat from 
the cogeneration plant (or a boiler when the cogen. is not operating); direct expansion units, 
large and small, serving Hayden, and the Jenks Link; air cooled chillers serving Carter; and many
spaces not cooled at all.  
The whole array needs comprehensive assessment to improve operating efficiencies and synergetic 
functioning and maintainability. 

SPACE NEEDS
In order to understand the future space needs, the Master Plan consultants interviewed more than 
fifty of the CMRC staff to determine current and future requirements.  
Again, the primarily residential needs of the Upper Campus have been considered separately from 
the more complex sets of needs for the service departments within the Inner Campus. 
For the Inner Campus, data have been organized by department as follows:
School, Children's Hospital-Hayden, Brain Injury Center-Mellon, Outpatient clinic, Clinical
services, Wonderworks, Administration functions, Support spaces and functions, Community spaces,
Building services and maintenance. 
Space needs data is presented in detail in three forms:
A short narrative description of the quality of spaces required (Appendix T);
A numeric tabulation of the areas required (Appendix U); and
A diagrammatic depiction of the essential adjacencies (proximities) required (Appendix V). 
The quantitative area requirements for specific needs of each department and sub-department are 
tallied and the sub-totals are increased by “structure and circulation” multipliers which cover 
the need for corridors, stair and elevator shaft ways, mechanical system ducts, as well as 
interior and exterior wall thicknesses. 
The systematic survey of space needs has revealed that all service departments need to expand by 
25% to 50% — up to 100%, in the case of the Outpatient clinic.  
The administrative offices appear to require less additional space; their principal requirement 
is additional meeting rooms.  
Modest amounts of additional space are needed everywhere.  
This significant finding, together with the determination that the existing school building is 
unsuited to satisfying the growth needs of the school, has lead to the proposal to construct a 
new “high performing” building for the school and using the renovated existing school building 
as the “shuffle space” to create the dispersed additional space needs throughout the Inner 
Campus. 
For the Upper Campus, space needs have typically been considered in terms of housing units or 
beds, rather than additional square footage.  
However, a gross approximation of square footage is also included in the Space Needs tabulation.
CMRC’s housing need is the subject of further consideration in the next section. 
(A summary tabulation of the amount and type of housing, and the phasing of its development 
included in Appendix W: “Housing Needs.”)  

MAJOR ISSUES TO RESOLVE:
In undertaking the Campus Master Plan, Crotched Mountain Foundation understood the challenges 
before them.  
Simply stated, CMF must find a way to address serious space needs and building rehabilitation 
without significantly compromising the outstanding character of the site and its setting.  
In a little more detail, the following issues need to be addressed in a cohesive fashion: 
Roadway circulation is confusing and possibly dangerous; newcomers don’t know where to go, 
despite an extensive new sign system.  
There is no gateway, no place where a visitor is oriented to the site.
Cars and deliveries intrude within the most interior space on the campus; there is no place that 
cars do not traverse. 
Aging facilities have gone through multiple renovations for changes of use; some have limited 
flexibility, poor air quality, inadequate storage, and no room for expansion.   
There is no central gathering space, where the campus community can come together, indoors or 
outdoors. 
Visitors and family members have limited options for sitting and talking either indoors or 
outdoors. 
There are limited sheltered outdoor spaces, a definite liability in such an exposed and windy 
site in a northern climate. 
There are few sidewalks, and those walking or wheeling must share roadways;  
Residents and staff traveling from Fox Meadow Lane must walk or wheel uphill past the maintenance
facility to get to the south campus. 
The greatest public use is at the “back door” of the campus (gymnasium entry), or hard to find 
(Outpatient Clinic). 
Programmatic space needs would increase buildings by 70% overall; greatest need for expansion and 
improvement in quality of space is the school, followed by the Brain Injury Center and the 
Outpatient Clinic. 
More housing for staff and clients is needed, with an emphasis on family care and a range of 
options. 
Housing for community members will increase the diversity of these neighborhoods. 
Random expansion in the past has sent associated functions into disparate sites, affecting 
communication and efficiency. 
Circulation between buildings is complicated by multiple floor levels.
Most utility systems need updates or replacement. 
In addition to developing a cohesive plan to ameliorate these significant issues, the Campus 
Master Plan must recommend a strategy to implement the plan over a number of years or perhaps 
decades, without creating the sense that the campus is “under construction” during that time.   

DILEMMAS
Comparing the Crotched Mountain campus to the comprehensive list of desired improvements and 
expansions, one comes up against apparent contradictions.  
Dilemmas such as these may initially appear to be inherent conflicts, ones that have no 
resolution.  
However, they may provide clues to a larger understanding or a more comprehensive presentation 
of the needs to be addressed.  
Tough questions often help to clarify the program.  
Many of the dilemmas facing Crotched Mountain Foundation have to do with location: the very thing
that makes this such a fabulous site—namely the mountain itself—also presents very real 
challenges to the mission of the Foundation.  
The questions before Crotched Mountain might be phrased as follows: 
How can CMF create a fully accessible, barrier-free campus on a steep mountainside? 
How can CMF maintain ease of access to all buildings and services, while reducing the impact of 
vehicles and creating a pedestrian core? 
How can CMF maintain an economy of scale while individualizing care and housing? 
How can CMF create a domestic or “village” character while providing institutional-scale hospital
programs and facilities? 
How can CMF welcome the public with a “front door” entry at what is currently a “back door”—a 
utilitarian cluster of support facilities at the farthest point from the entry? 
How can CMF build new facilities adjacent to existing ones without obscuring distant vistas from 
within the campus (and without creating an institutional feel of monolithic buildings)?
How can CMF maintain cost-efficient services while embracing cutting edge “green” technologies? 
How can CMF improve the appearance of the campus grounds without significantly increasing the 
maintenance costs?   
How can CMF create facilities that are flexible enough to accommodate future uses, without 
knowing what the future client group or needs will be? 
There are no easy answers to these dilemmas; they are posed to challenge us to a deeper 
understanding of the issues facing Crotched Mountain.  
Perhaps the answers begin to shape themselves when the dilemmas are not posed as “either-or,” 
but as “both-and.” 

SECTION 4
GOALS AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN
MASTER PLAN GOALS AND ACTIONS
The proposed campus master plan for Crotched Mountain is an ambitious effort to bring the 
facilities—including a new state-of-the-art school, clustered housing, expanded health 
facilities, and community gathering places—up to the caliber of the services offered.  
The plan establishes a fully accessible and well-integrated community of care, so that Crotched 
Mountain can realize its mission—to serve individuals with disabilities and their families, to 
embrace personal choice and development, and to build communities of mutual support.   
Through the process of site and facility assessment, and through prolonged dialogue with the 
greater Crotched Mountain community – town meetings, advisory committee, Board of Directors – 
the following goals have evolved and garnered broad-based support. 
GOAL #1:  
CREATE A VITAL, INTEGRATED, MUTUALLY SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITY SETTING. 
Create attractive, mutually supportive, highly affordable and stable residential neighborhoods. 
Celebrate diversity within the neighborhoods: market rate and affordable, client, staff and 
community, family units and single room occupancy, occasional visitors and long-term residents.  
Incorporate community gathering places as well as private spaces for residents. 
Establish a discernable heart, a focal point that brings the larger community together. 
Establish a cohesive identity, a design palette that integrates the diverse elements of the 
program and population. 
Provide a human scale to the institutional facilities. 
Use program as well as facilities to bring people together with the objective of forming “close 
and lasting relationships.” 
GOAL #2:  
CREATE AN EXEMPLARY NETWORK OF SAFE, STIMULATING, AND ACCESSIBLE PATHWAYS. 
Build a continuous internal corridor linking all program facilities. 
Provide barrier-free pedestrian pathways to safely link all areas of the campus, to enable 
clients to move independently and protected from vehicles. 
Create interesting and stimulating pathways and destinations.
Expand indoor/outdoor connections, and provide at-grade access for multiple level buildings. 
Protect clients from exposure to elements at key entry points. 
Establish pedestrian priority for the internal core of the campus. 
Provide convenient parking around the periphery, and efficient drop-off points around the Inner 
Campus. 
GOAL #3:  
EXPAND AND IMPROVE BUILDING STOCK TO BETTER INTEGRATE AND CONSOLIDATE PROGRAM SERVICES.
Build facilities that provide sufficient space for clients and staff and that are healthy, 
resource efficient, and easily accessible. 
Consolidate related program areas for more efficient and economical delivery of services; 
relocate programs where necessary.
Cluster and infill buildings for maximum efficiency and site economy.  
Centralize kitchen, delivery, energy services as much as possible. 
Aggregate public uses around those existing facilities with high public draw. 
GOAL #4:  
REORGANIZE THE PUBLIC INTERFACE TO SIMPLIFY ACCESS, CONSOLIDATE ENTRIES AND CREATE A FRONT DOOR. 
Reduce confusion and hazard by redesigning the entry intersection.
Establish a clear gateway with orientation information and possible Hospitality Center. 
Create an expanded campus center with multiple entrances for day users and visitors on an 
interior loop road. 
Direct all deliveries around the exterior loop road. 
Upgrade the “back door” experience of public use by integrating a new entry to the gym with a 
community hall. 
Eliminate and/or narrow certain inner campus roads to reduce conflict and vehicle prominence.  
GOAL #5:  
RESPECT AND PROTECT THE NATURAL SETTING OF CROTCHED MOUNTAIN AS A PRIMARY HEALING FORCE.
Keep a low profile to all buildings, to preserve interior views to the mountain ranges beyond. 
Cluster all new buildings to reduce the footprint. 
Identify and improve the health and vitality of the ecological communities on site. 
Increase and improve designated parklands and add diverse gardens throughout. 
Establish a green corridor that links diverse environments across the campus. 
Celebrate the history of CMRC by protecting architectural and agricultural vestiges and 
incorporating them in the site plan. 
GOAL #6:  
INCORPORATE SUSTAINABLE PRINCIPLES AT EVERY LEVEL OF SITE DESIGN, BUILDING AND MANAGEMENT. 
Establish clear performance goals and measurable objectives.  
Shift campus away from dependence on fossil fuels and toward a renewable energy basis. 
Contain and/or recover nutrients; avoid their becoming pollutants. 
Make use of what already exists and build on earlier investments, as much as possible 
GOAL #7:  
ANTICIPATE FUTURE CHANGES; DESIGN WITH FLEXIBILITY IN MIND. 
Design buildings that can change use as clients, programs, and funding sources change.
Incorporate room for expansion in the Campus Master Plan. 
Phase development according to need and market; establish clear thresholds for evaluation. 

OVERALL MASTER PLAN GOAL: 
Crotched Mountain is known as a national/regional center for education, rehabilitation, medical 
care, life sharing and recreation accessible for everyone.  

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
Through its Strategic Plan, the Crotched Mountain Foundation articulated a holistic vision of a 
living community.   
It combines progressive ideas for employment, the arts, recreation, housing, natural resource 
conservation, educational, energy efficiency, therapeutic care and rehabilitation, lively sharing
and desired privacy.  
Throughout, the ability to make choices and build relationships is paramount. 
The Campus Master Plan presented here endeavors to embody that demanding set of intentions, 
particularly the effort to promote community while protecting privacy.  
By taking a long-range view, by encompassing the broadest possible range of services and 
facilities imagined for the future of Crotched Mountain, the Plan establishes a comprehensive, 
integrated, user-friendly and accessible campus.  
The Plan is expansive, but need not be overwhelming since it will be implemented in stages and 
over time.  

CAMPUS ZONES 
Three distinct campus districts are proposed: 
Inner Campus:  
A densely developed core of linked buildings, housing programmatic services, embraces an open 
field at the south end of the campus. 
Residential Neighborhoods:  
A rich mix of housing units, clustered in small neighborhoods and linked by a pedestrian spine, 
extends through the north end of campus. 
Conservation  Lands:  
Surrounding woodlands and mountainside, protected under a conservation easement, are accessible 
by a network of trails that envelop and extend from the campus. 
KEY ACTIONS  
The Campus Master Plan is complex, detailed, and multifaceted.  
Yet the principle actions can be reduced to five basic categories:  
Remove: 
eliminate certain roads, excavate land, remove interior parking, and raze those buildings that 
cannot be rehabilitated.   
Relocate:  
Aggregate departments and functions to enable services to be more efficient (school, maintenance,
kitchen, etc.)  
Renovate: 
Upgrade buildings and infrastructure to meet code and better serve CMRC clients, and to create a 
more energy efficient and healthier campus. 
Link: 
Infill with new buildings such as the school to connect and/or repair those unused spaces between 
existing buildings. 
Provide protected interior corridors to create fuller accessibility among major campus activities. 
Organize: 
Simplify and structure the campus for greater coherence and legibility; expand the Outpatient and
Campus Center wing to create a new front door, and construct new loop road.  
Throughout the entire process, attend to sustainability in all actions: incorporate green 
building criteria, expand a green corridor within the campus, and protect outlying natural 
resources.  
A fuller discussion of what “green building” entails follows. 

PRINCIPLE COMPONENTS
So far, the Campus Master Plan has described its components in general terms.  
Although the plan is largely schematic, by which we mean more detailed study is necessary before 
anything can be built, a great deal of thought has gone into the specific elements of the plan.  
Although the buildings shown are basically “place-holders,” the relationships among the various 
parts are important and well-considered, as are their locations and the essential character and 
quality of the buildings themselves.  
Among the elements are: 
1. A new high-performance school building, sited in a prime south-facing location between the 
gymnasium and the Brain Injury Center in the Mellon building, manifesting a healing environment 
and welcoming character. 
2. Adjacent to the school is a fully accessible and expanded community hall; sometimes referred 
to as an auditorium, this space would be flexible enough to accommodate a wide variety of 
functions, and include more of the community in one location for important events. 
3. A new campus center wing, linking the Catherwood/Mellon buildings with Bromley and the 
Children's Hospital, provides a western edge to the south campus, with Wonderworks opening onto 
Hayden Field and a new upper level dining hall overlooking it.  
It also provides room for expanded Brain Injury and Outpatient clinics, in proximity to the 
Children's Hospital in the Hayden building. 
4. A central receiving and storage area, located along the perimeter road, with a central kitchen
in the renovated former school building. 
5. Relocated and expanded maintenance facility on perimeter road. 
6. Four linked residential neighborhoods along a pedestrian way, organized to promote vital, 
mutually supportive communities for clients, staff and the Greenfield area community. 
7. Improved interior circulation for pedestrian and electric vehicular traffic to facilitate 
campus-wide movement of emergency and service/food delivery vehicles, while reserving the 
interior of the campus for pedestrian priority. 
8. Redesigned inner loop road to an expanded arrival area and “front door” to clarify 
destinations and reduce confusion. 
9. Reduced dependence on fossil fuels through improved efficiency and greater use of renewable 
energy sources e.g. establishing a central wood-chip fueled heating system for the inner campus 
and central wood-pellet fueled heating systems for each residential neighborhood.   
10. Extensive conservation lands with accessible trail network leading out from the campus. 
(A further discussion of “Site Planning Objectives” is contained in Appendix X, and a compendium 
of “Design Concepts” is illustrated in Appendix Y.) 

HIGH PERFORMANCE  “GREEN” BUILDINGS  
A high priority among the Board and staff of Crotched Mountain Foundation is to improve the 
quality of the existing building stock.  
Dedicated clinical and administrative staff and programs provide valuable services to an 
appreciative clientele of Crotched Mountain, but as has been said, “The buildings are holding us 
back.”  
Insufficient in quality, inadequate in space, with systems nearing the end of their lifespan, 
the buildings are not enabling CMRC to provide optimal support to clients or staff. 
What are the qualities of great buildings?  
Marc Rosenbaum’s summary, delivered during the August 2003 charette, suggested they serve the 
needs of the people who inhabit them by supporting and nurturing health, satisfaction, 
productivity, and spirit.  
Such buildings help connect their occupants to themselves, each other, the natural world and the 
place they inhabit.  
They are:
safe and healthy,
comfortable,
durable,
resource-efficient,
adaptable to the future, and ultimately,
places that people love. 
Buildings can be vital places that produce their own energy, collect and cleanse their own water,
turn their wastes into nutrients, produce food, and filter daylight.  
They can be healthy, invigorating places in which to live and learn.  
“Biophilia”, as expressed by E.O. Wilson, is a useful concept to use in defining great buildings.
Spaces that achieve a high biophilic quality exude an overwhelmingly good feeling by exploiting 
the deep bonds between people and nature.  
Design elements include the ephemeral qualities of daylight, the cleansing ionizing and 
sympathetically gurgling sounds of moving water, views out to natural settings, a fireplace, 
fragrant and visually stimulating qualities of vegetation, the presence of natural materials such
as stone and wood.  
Such spaces, which are first of all comfortable and stimulating, then become intriguing and 
informative.   
Crotched Mountain’s commitment to create environmentally sustainable, resourceful, healthy —in 
other words, “green”—buildings that enclose these biophilic interior spaces, will sustain a focus
on health promotion rather than illness mitigation; on defining and projecting a healing 
environment consistent with CMF’s aspiration to incubate “Centers of Excellence.”  
Such places would be great and potentially astonishing buildings. 
Design strategies can elevate biophilic quality in buildings of any size or use if they:  
bring daylight into the building and connect people with exterior views,  
use native vegetation that attracts and supports native fauna,  
foster connections between the indoor and outdoor environments,  
incorporate characteristic telltales that inform about wind, light, rain and sound,    
use local natural materials in a sculptural way that evokes their origins,   
use operable windows and incorporate natural ventilation,  
incorporate plants for functional and aesthetic benefit,  
design with color, based on an understanding of human response,  
provide protected and open places of various sizes for individual use, small or large group 
gatherings.  
use moving water for functional and aesthetic benefits, and  
incorporate the unexpected. 
Creating such buildings is no easy task. 
It requires innovation at many levels, and it requires a thoroughly integrated design and 
construction effort.  
Operating and maintaining such a building also requires committed people to tend the operations 
that produce energy, collect and filter water, and cycle nutrients. 
There is particular impetus to improve the building stock beyond achieving a basic standard of 
amenity.  
Interior spaces of superb quality will better support CMRC clients in their personal 
rehabilitative quests.  
Such spaces will also give great comfort and reassurance to the families and friends of Crotched 
Mountain’s clients.  
High quality space will more likely attract and retain staff in Greenfield, NH—introducing the 
concept that a superb environment is included as part of a benefits package.  
Finally, a building that is made and maintained according to these principles will attract 
enormous attention.  
It will become a regional and national landmark.  
It will attract interest and support; it will help secure the future of the resident community.
The building in greatest need for improvement is the Crotched Mountain School.  
Despite renovations in 1986, the lower level is damp, and an insufficient enclosure in 
conjunction with ventilation system malfunctions result in a deteriorated indoor air quality.  
The mechanical systems—independent heat pump/unit ventilators in each classroom—are at the end 
of their life.  
Furthermore, the three story configuration and the narrow spine corridors are overwhelming 
impediments to timely movement of the students from one classroom or therapeutic space to another.   
Construction of a new facility is the highest priority within the inner campus. 
The Campus Master Plan proposes a new school be located between lower Mellon and the Athletic 
Complex, in place of the existing Christine Hall link. 
The new 50,000 sq. ft. building is conceived as being three stories, built into the 22-foot 
elevation change between the parking and drop-off along South View Road and Hayden Field to the 
north.  
The bulk of the school itself—80% of the required floor area—will be on the intermediate level, 
which will improve the circulation efficiency of the whole school program.  
The additional stories above and below link the new school to the existing adjacent buildings, 
including the OT/PT department on upper floor of the gym and the vocational classrooms which are 
expected to remain on the lower level beneath the gym.    
A large “atrium rampway” between new and existing structures will enable high capacity vertical 
circulation that is absent from the existing school.  
In keeping with the goals for creating high quality interior space described above, the rampway 
can be created as a light well and a planting conservatory—perhaps including a water sculpture. 
The resulting atrium becomes a focal space that celebrates the circulation rather than merely a 
circulation shaft.  
Locating the new school between the Mellon and the Athletic Complex has many potentially positive
attributes. 
It fills the void in the Inner Campus building grouping left when the old pool building was 
removed; it will allow the creation of a far more convenient circulation spine linking the 
eastern and western buildings of the Inner Campus; it creates a sheltered southeast facing entry
to the school; it allows this entry to more graciously serve the increasing public use of the 
gym and pools; it places the school in a more central location, closer to the established 
athletic and vocational training facilities that are part of it daily routines.  
It becomes a southern gateway to the campus, rather than the back door, as it reclaims and takes 
advantage of southern exposure and views.  
Proximity to the proposed Community Hall for events such as theater productions and graduation 
is much more convenient than the existing situation, where students must travel the lengthy 
distance between school and Carter Hall.  
(More on the Community Hall later.)  
There is however a particular challenge associated with creating a building enclosing 
consistently high quality space in this location —depressing the building sufficiently to retain 
the view from the Hayden Field while obtaining good daylight and indoor-outdoor connections for 
all occupied spaces, including those on the north side of the proposed school. 
It appears possible so long as this imperative is a key design driver from the outset.   
Buildings like this are wonderful educational tools in themselves, not only for students, but 
also for the larger community. 
The operations of such a building, including ways in which energy is conserved, could become 
embedded in the curriculum. 
Students could use the building as a classroom, a laboratory, a canvas, and a workshop.  
The school facility would reflect the priority Crotched Mountain places in healthy environments 
and quality education. 

COMMUNITY HALL 
The recently renovated Carter Hall is a beautiful, flexible gathering place that currently serves
multiple purposes, such as staff training, fundraising events, and school events including 
performances and graduation.  
Unfortunately, it is too small to accommodate all students and their families at these events, 
and it is a cumbersome distance from the school. 
The new Community Hall would be located adjacent to the gymnasium and the new school facility.  
A flexible seating arrangement would provide sufficient room and safe egress for the entire 
community, currently a problem in the constrained Carter Hall.  
Convenient for students and public alike, it will be surrounded by ample parking, and its 
entrance provides a more convenient and welcoming entrance to the gym.  
The mezzanine level provides spectator space for events at the gym, and accommodates offices and 
changing rooms for productions.  
Its location anchors the southeast corner of the campus, replacing a hodgepodge collection of 
buildings and uses: greenhouse, cogeneration plant, gardens, etc.   
Carter Hall continues to house staff trainings and Foundation events, as well as the anticipated 
increase in conferences and workshops for which Crotched Mountain is increasingly known.  
As its Centers of Excellence become more widely known and emulated, they become the focus of 
on-going trainings in state-of-the-art health care and education. 

CAMPUS CENTER WING 
To the west of Hayden Field, and extending from Mellon to Bromley, a serpentine building 
completes the Inner Campus loop.  
This new structure, shown schematically, could provide up to 100,000 square feet or more of 
additional space on two levels. 
(Current known and projected needs anticipate using only a small portion of this; the balance 
remains for long-range expansion.)  
The lower level is accessed at grade from the level of Hayden Field to the east, and the upper 
level from the inner loop road to the west.    
This wing houses, among other facilities, a critical missing piece of this campus: the Campus 
Center, in which small and large meeting rooms, cafeteria and snack bar, postal services, game 
rooms combine in a vital community gathering space.  
In addition, the Campus Center wing provides the necessary expansion space for multiple clinical
services.  
A relocated Outpatient Clinic is larger, more central, and easier to find.  
Dental services, adult day programs and the Health Center are conveniently located in this wing,
as well as additional space for the Brain Injury Clinic.  
The programmatic link among all health services—from the Brain Injury Center to the Children's 
Specialty Hospital—is made more efficient and logical.    
Wonderworks is no longer marginalized on the perimeter of the campus, but enjoys healthier, 
expanded space that supports a larger Early Childhood program.  
In addition, its new location provides a secure, protected play space within the embrace of the 
building, with excellent southeast exposure adjacent to Hayden Field.  
Hayden Field itself becomes the campus “common,” with sufficient space for recreational play and 
still enjoying views over the school to the mountain ranges beyond. 
(Note: Appendix Z provides a chart of “Inner Campus Building Area,” showing existing and proposed 
coverage, and the “Space Utilization Diagrams,” Appendix AA , delineate additional spaces 
included in this facility by level.) 
The Campus Center wing completes the internal pedestrian corridor, linking all major facilities 
around the inner campus in a protected and environmentally controlled spine.  
Bromley, in need of substantial renovation, incorporates a new gateway from the upper residential
campus into the southern inner campus with a dual level ramp.  
This pedestrian entry, highly visible and protected, bridges what is now a major divide between 
the two halves of the campus.  
At the south end, a combined winter garden and three-story ramp links the Campus Center with the 
cross campus corridor and the school. 
The extended west-facing façade, along the realigned Verney Drive/inner loop road, expands the 
“front door” with separate entrances to the major facilities within.  
Because the view to the south and east from this mountainside is central to the identity of 
Crotched Mountain, care is taken to retain the low profile.  
The high point of the site—the meadow and hillside adjacent to the old Gregg house/Brien Lodge 
and the proposed chapel site—retain their primacy, with unobstructed distant views of encircling 
mountain ranges. 
The schematic plan shows a building with multiple changes in alignment.  
This rather serpentine design is intended to capture as much solar gain, as well as premium 
views, as possible in an overall north-south alignment.  

SUPPORT SERVICES: MAINTENANCE, CENTRAL RECEIVING, KITCHEN AND UTILITIES 
The Building Services department is responsible for the operations and maintenance of an 
increasingly complex campus.  
A recent decision to hire in-house construction staff rather than hiring out construction 
projects has necessarily increased storage of materials, equipment and tools as well as office 
and staging areas.  
Currently maintenance facilities are dispersed around the campus.   
An early action would combine all building services in a new facility on the perimeter road.  
This location, at the end of the state highway portion of the loop road, keeps deliveries and 
most vehicular traffic on the outside of the campus.  
Storage of hazardous materials, as well as a full recycling center, is accommodated in this 
convenient but peripheral site. 
With the removal of the old maintenance barn and salt shed, what is currently an unattractive 
eyesore that separates the residential area from the school and clinical services becomes the 
first residential neighborhood.   
Central receiving is also moved to the perimeter, taking advantage of the now-vacated school 
building and parking lot.  
Trucks traveling counter-clockwise on the outer loop road can easily back into the loading 
dock/receiving area, where non-hazardous supplies and food are stored in the lower levels of the 
school, in easy reach of the kitchen above.  
From there, foods are distributed via the internal loop system on carts.  
This system removes any need for delivery trucks in the interior of the campus, which frees up 
the inner campus for pedestrian use. 
A new central woodchip fueled heating plant serving the inner campus is located adjacent to the 
central receiving area, where frequent tractor-trailer woodchip deliveries are equally convenient
and removed from the principle residential, academic and clinical areas.   

UPPER CAMPUS—RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS 
A major objective to be accomplished in the Campus Master Plan is to locate additional housing 
on the campus plateau.  
Housing, both on and off the mountain, is intended to serve three constituencies: 
students/clients and their families, staff, and the Greenfield area community, including adults 
with disabilities.  
A long-range vision is to include families of all types, artists in residence, partnership 
organizations, senior citizens, and others who want to be part of a close-knit residential 
community.  
Each of these groups has their own set of specific needs. 

FOR CLIENTS, as for everyone, forming long-term, meaningful relationships is essential.  
We all fare better in creating a meaningful life for ourselves in diverse, integrated community 
settings than in concentrated groupings of people with similar needs. 
A goal for client housing is initially to reduce the number of children living in each group 
home.  
Creating more options for student living—including more family-like settings, apartments for 
students who require specialized services, and transitional housing that supports greater 
independence for clients—is a high priority.  
Providing different environments that encourage interaction and mutual support among all people 
of all possibilities could positively affect relationship bonds of clients who live on the 
mountain.   

FOR CROTCHED MOUNTAIN STAFF, convenient, affordable housing is a benefit. 
Teaching and nursing assistants are being drawn away from Crotched Mountain by lower stress, 
comparable paying jobs. 
Professional staff can earn more in other settings such as hospitals. 
By providing an outstanding working environment and affordable, high-quality housing, Crotched 
Mountain expects to be far better able to attract and retain staff at this level.  
It is a continuing legacy of the vision of Harry Gregg that this magnificent mountaintop site is 
available to the larger community rather than sequestered as a private residential estate.  
Recent conversions of staff housing for client apartments have reduced available housing for 
staff.       

FOR THE GREENFIELD AREA COMMUNITY, as in virtually every community in the nation, providing 
sufficient housing affordable to the majority of the population is a challenge. 
Given the comparative wealth of developable land within Crotched Mountain Foundation’s ownership, 
and the desire to create diverse community housing for its clients and staff, there is an 
opportunity to offer a portion of the housing potential to the open market.  
However, it may be wise to reserve control either of the housing stock itself or the land upon 
which it sits.  
Models exist, within the land trust and cohousing movements among others, which involve rental 
or lease of land rather than outright sale.  
These and other such development considerations will require further study.   
Crotched Mountain has begun conversations with Amherst, MA-based housing development consultant 
John Ryan (Development Cycles) to explore these alternatives.  

HOUSING DESIGN CRITERIA 
A change to family care-giving for students enrolled at the Crotched Mountain School, as well as 
creating more options for affordable staff housing and market units, necessitates a mix of 
housing types: single family, single room occupancy, apartments, and possibly some congregate 
housing units.  
All units should be “visitable” (fully accessible on the first floor), and many if not most fully
accessible throughout.  
Accessibility in many cases would exceed the standards set by the Americans with Disabilities 
Act, as the clients at Crotched Mountain may have equipment or adaptive technology needs beyond 
ADA minimum standards.   
Crotched Mountain has identified cohousing—a recent trend in creating intentional community 
within market housing—as an appropriate model for creating vital, mutually supportive community 
settings.  
Cohousing is attractive to Crotched Mountain because of the underlying social contract that 
supports community relationships.  
It offers the opportunity of drawing the staff into closer contact with the people that Crotched 
Mountain serves, by designing discrete neighborhoods of mixed housing types around common 
facilities.  
Increasingly, the cohousing model—imported from Denmark to the U.S. 15 years ago by two 
visionary young architects from California—is finding niches beyond its initial, broad 
application for groups for whom a mutually supportive living environment is particularly 
relevant.  
In a book to be published shortly (2005) McCamant and Durrett describe the application of 
cohousing principles to housing for the elderly.  
The CMRC Campus Master Plan envisions five residential neighborhoods of 20 to 25 units, 
organized around indoor and outdoor social spaces where accidental encounters and planned social 
events draw people together.  
(A detailed itemization of the housing mix most likely to meet CMRC development objectives 
within the natural and infrastructural constraints of the site is included as Appendix W.   
The attached matrix does not yet cover the development opportunities on outlying Crotched 
Mountain lands.)  
While each neighborhood will necessarily respond to specific site constraints, as well as market 
demands and the relative success of previous neighborhoods, there are certain elements that are 
core to the concept of co-housing:  

CLUSTER HOUSES TO CREATE A COMPACT DEVELOPMENT. 
By building on a small footprint, with narrow setbacks from the streets and between buildings, 
informal encounters are more possible, and more undeveloped open space is protected.  
The contrast between neighborhood node and extensive open lands is positive.  
KEEP THE CARS AT THE PERIMETER. 
Even in a development where accessibility is a primary concern, most vehicles can remain outside,
creating a safer interior space that protects pedestrians, wheelchairs and bicycles.  
A common parking lot or shelter is an efficient use of land, plus another occasion for connection
between residents.  
Where cars occasionally enter, create a clear gateway that indicates pedestrian priority, and 
slows down the car.  

ESTABLISH A CENTRAL PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR. 
This route is a social conduit, but also is wide enough to accommodate the occasional car, snow 
plow, emergency vehicle and delivery van.  
It is designed for the comfort of the pedestrian, with sufficient lighting, drainage, seating, 
shade and smooth pavement.  
The central corridor is within sight of homes and common spaces.  

CREATE EXTERIOR GATHERING SPACES. 
These outdoor rooms support community.  
They provide space for sitting and talking, playing and eating, and occasional organized events. 
Outdoor grills, picnic tables, benches, play structures, even clotheslines, are shared by 
community members.  

A CENTRALLY LOCATED COMMON HOUSE IS KEY. 
This is the neighborhood “living room,” and includes shared kitchen and dining facilities as well
as other community-identified needs: music room, laundry, studio space, guest rooms, 
video/television, or other spaces that needn’t be in individual homes.  
Social and educational events, whether a regularly scheduled common meal or exercise class, or 
occasional birthday party or lecture, can be held here.  
This is the location for distributed meals from the central CMRC kitchen, and the recycling 
station for the neighborhood.  

INDIVIDUAL HOUSING PROVIDES PRIVACY AND SECLUSION. 
A variety of housing—whether attached or single family—includes private outdoor spaces.  
Front porches overlooking the central pedestrian corridor facilitate easy conversations, and 
“eyes on the community.”  
As mentioned, designing full accessibility into each unit will be important for this unique 
community.  
Those units design for full accessibility may have a parking place nearby.  

COMMUNITY GARDENS AND PASTURES. 
The idea of keeping animals and/or growing food within the CMRC campus has engendered a great 
deal of enthusiasm.  
As in its agricultural past, these elements can be incorporated in the co-housing model used for 
Crotched Mountain. 
Each neighborhood will have direct access to open lands with accessible trails allowing residents
to experience the rich natural environment and spectacular views the site enjoys.  
In addition, a pedestrian corridor would provide the link among these neighborhoods and to the 
southern half of the campus where most programmatic services take place.  
The pedestrian corridor—essentially a narrowed and extended version of Fox Meadow Lane—would be 
wide enough for the limited but necessary vehicular traffic.  
Electric vans to transport those whose mobility is impaired, occasional service and delivery 
vehicles would have access, but most resident vehicles are parked in peripheral lots. 

APARTMENT AND DORMITORY LIVING
Some staff and certain clients prefer an apartment or single room occupancy alternative, and for 
these residents an expansion of the Cedars/Birches/Pines neighborhood is possible.  
High quality buildings such as the relatively new Fox Meadow Apartments could complement the 
existing three brick structures, with a campus quadrangle feel to this central location. 
Once the new school has been built, the former school structure offers a number of reuse 
possibilities, including additional single room or apartment housing units.  
Bringing some residential use into the inner campus enlivens this programmatic core.  

ARTISANS/CHAPEL/HOSPITALITY 
The larger vision for the Crotched Mountain campus includes bringing the arts and commerce into 
the community, with studio space and shops located on the inner loop road in close proximity to 
the residential neighborhoods.  
The “placeholder” structures shown on the Campus Master Plan could provide employment/training 
opportunities for residents, as well as places for artisans to share and possibly sell their 
work.   
When the Media Center was built, the former chapel was displaced.  
Several staff mentioned the need for a quiet place for contemplation and renewal.  
A small, somewhat rustic chapel would claim the “sweet spot” on the site, overlooking the inner 
campus to the east and southeast mountain ranges.  
Access from the steep south side of the loop road could be via a funicular—a small enclosed 
elevator similar to a cog railway—that would carry individuals up a terraced garden hillside. 
A new gatekeeper building replaces the aging and unhealthy Wonderworks building, creating a 
welcome mat, a place for orientation and possibly rooms for overnight guests. 

ROADS 
The existing road system at Crotched Mountain reflects more than anything the incremental growth 
of the site, and has resulted in a system that is confusing at best.  
The Campus Master Plan pulls the parking and delivery areas out of the center of the inner 
campus, eliminates crossroads, organizes intersections, and simplifies way-finding.  
Pedestrians and those in wheelchairs enjoy more efficient and protected pathways between the 
residential and programmatic areas.  
Delivery trucks are kept to the perimeter, where a central receiving area serves kitchen and 
energy generation.   
The inner loop road brings visitors and Outpatients to an expanded front door along the Campus 
Center wing, with small parking pods distributing the cars around the loop.   

GREEN SPACE 
The realignment of roads creates the opportunity to link the existing open spaces on the site, 
with few if any conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles.  
Sheltered outdoor nooks provide gathering spaces and a variety of experiences; attention is paid 
to retaining key views from within the buildings of open spaces as well as the mountain ranges 
beyond.  
A network of accessible trails within the campus links to the extensive trail system to the 
larger expanse of conservation lands.  
An opportunity to create new trails between the campus and the waterfront area should be 
explored.  
Should CMF decide to incorporate animals into the mix, the larger open field could be dedicated 
to pasture and the inner field to athletics. 

PHASING 
The Campus Master Plan is intended to be implemented over years if not decades.  
With a clearly identified and articulated concept, the project can be implemented in stages 
according to funding, programmatic priorities, and logical site sequence without losing the 
coherence and legibility of a comprehensive site plan.   
Since the upper campus and the inner campus are physically and programmatically separate, the two
zones can be developed in parallel.  
In both cases, an early action is required to create “shift space” for subsequent development. 
First steps would include:  

UPPER CAMPUS  
NEW MAINTENANCE BARNS:  
Build new maintenance facility on outer perimeter road which will house in one location all 
equipment, storage of hazardous materials, sand and salt shed, and recycling facility as well as 
offices; remove old barn to free up and rehabilitate this central location for new housing 
development.  
FIRST HOUSING NEIGHBORHOOD:  
Build first neighborhood at former site of maintenance barn, with common house, central 
pedestrian link to south campus and peripheral parking; this becomes housing for those currently 
residing on Fox Meadow Lane.  
EXPAND CHARITY PARK:  
With realignment of road and parking to the new housing development, additional land is added to 
the east side of Charity Park.  
Pathways are realigned to connect the residential spine to the south campus.  
NEW SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITY: 
New housing will have a separate community septic system; suitable soils lie to the east of the 
existing Fox Meadow Lane group homes, or possibly a gravity system could go under Russell Hill 
Road to an area near the former landfill.  
FOX MEADOW LANE INFILL:  
Second and third neighborhoods include renovations to existing units on Fox Meadow Lane, with two 
common houses and some new units to transform the suburban character of the present layout (with
the wide pavement and large setbacks between buildings) toward neighborhood clusters with defined
courtyard spaces.  
Better access to surrounding open space is possible with the removal of GH 9.  
The roadway itself is narrowed to provide a more comfortable pedestrian pathway, but is 
sufficiently wide to allow transport, service and emergency vehicles.  
ATHLETIC FIELD:  
A portion of the upper meadow along the west side of Fox Meadow Lane housing is dedicated to a 
multipurpose athletic field and surrounding track.  
While far from the school, this location provides easy access for residents and a wonderful open 
meadow to complement the dense cluster of homes.  
FUTURE HOUSING:  
A possible cluster of housing to the southeast of the Inner Campus completes residential 
development on the campus. 

INNER CAMPUS  
INFRASTRUCTURE:   
Upgrade and expand sewage treatment facility; replace water lines where necessary; realign 
utility trenches to coincide with long-range plan; locate and build new cogeneration plant.  
SCHOOL:  
Build new “green” school along southern end of campus; incorporate cross-campus corridor, 
greenhouse, and improvements to existing voc tech spaces.  
New parking and a sheltered drop-off area create a welcoming entrance.  
RENOVATIONS TO CURRENT SCHOOL:  
New central receiving area and kitchen facility, as well as new housing on upper level; lowest 
level for some administrative offices and (on the east side) archives and storage.  
COMMUNITY HALL:  
Combine improvements to the gymnasium and a new public entrance with the construction of a 
flexible auditorium/community hall; expand public parking across South View Drive.  
NEW ENTRY LOOP AND ROTARY:  
Excavate Verney Drive and build new interior loop around to Staff House Circle; create safer 
rotary at first intersection to clarify routes and eliminate hazards.  
CAMPUS CENTER:  
Build the “west wing” linking Catherwood/Mellon and Hayden to include expanded clinical space 
for Brain Injury and Outpatient clinics and the Early Childhood (Wonderworks) program; an upper 
level dining hall overlooks Hayden Field, and an atrium ramp/ “winter garden” connects to the 
cross-campus walkway.  
Renovations to Bromley include a dual ramp entry, accommodating the change in grade from the 
residential area to the north to the higher level of the south campus.  
ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS 
The new inner loop road encompasses a number of site improvements that, while an important part 
of the larger vision, may take a back seat to the clinical and residential construction 
priorities.  
Nevertheless, these elements are integral to Crotched Mountain’s sense of place:   
HOSPITALITY CENTER:  
Once Wonderworks has moved to the Campus Center, and the primary entrance intersection rebuilt, 
a new Hospitality Center is located to orient new visitors and provide overnight accommodations 
as needed.  
ARTISAN SHOPS:  
Along the inner loop road, and acting as a buffer between public and residential areas, the 
artisan shops include studio space for resident artists as well as convenience store for 
residents and gallery for artwork.  
CHAPEL:  
The Chapel will command the premium position on site, overlooking Hayden Field and the Inner 
Campus to eastern and southern ranges.  
An informal and open design characterizes this place of rest and renewal.  
FUNICULAR AND GARDENS:  
Access to the upper field and chapel from the Foundation building and lower parking is enhanced 
with a funicular and terraced gardens along the south-facing hillside, at the Foundation’s front
entrance. 

CONCLUSION 
While a great deal of detailed thought has gone into this plan, and has been informed by broad 
participation of the Crotched Mountain community, the ideas are schematic.  
Recommendations are based on current priority of need, the optimal relationships between uses 
and facilities, and a realistic assessment of site conditions and limitations. 
Primarily, this is a road map.  
It establishes concepts and goals which will guide future decisions and actions, ensuring they 
are consistent with the larger vision held by the Crotched Mountain Foundation.  
The master plan is also an insurance policy, that future investments are wisely made and 
efficiently carried out.   
As has already been said, the plan shows a number of “place-holders”—identifying what we believe 
are the best locations and combination of uses for this campus.  
But the details will need to be worked out over time, in sequence, and as funding is available.
As with any long-range plan, there must be room for change.  
As the client base changes and services adapt to current practices, and as market realities shape
decisions, facilities need to respond.  
Thus, one must design for flexibility.  
However, the ultimate goals and objectives, first articulated in Crotched Mountain’s Strategic 
Plan and given shape in this Campus Master Plan, will continue to guide the development of this 
remarkable and caring community.  

Prepared for the Crotched Mountain Foundation
Master Planning Committee:
Donald Shumway, President and CEO
Michael Terrian, Vice President and CCO
Michael Lussier, Vice President and CFO
Michael Redmond, Vice President, Advancement
John Parisi, Facilities Director
Archie Campbell, Principal, Crotched Mountain School
Jonathan Eriquezzo, Director of Residential Services
Douglas Hotaling, Maintenance Supervisor
Terry Webber, Construction Supervisor

Consulting Team
Walter Cudnohufsky Associates, Inc.
Walter Cudnohufsky, A.S.L.A., Principal
Mollie Babize, Project Manager
Candace Dryden, Associate
PO Box 489, Ashfield, MA 01330
413-628-4600 fx 413-628-9117
www.wcala.com
and
Coldham Architects, L.L.C.
Bruce Coldham, A.I.A., Principal
155 Pine Street, Amherst, MA 01002
413-549-3616  fx 413-846-0497
www.ColdhamArchitects.com

With additional consultation from
Engerysmiths
Marc Rosenbaum, P.E.
PO Box 194, Meriden, NH 03770
Fuss & O'Neill, Inc.
Jon Dietrich, P.E.
78 Interstate Drive, West Springfield, MA 01089
MacMillin Company, Inc.
STeven L. Horton, VP Operations
Bruce Lyman, Estimating Manager
17 Elm Street-PO Box 626, Keene, NH 03431
BVH Integrated Services, Inc.
Jim W. Ohlheiser
50 Griffin Road South, Bloomfield, CT 06002