Staff Senate Staff Senate Home
Minutes are available on the UFPB web site http://www.facilities.montana.edu/committees/ufpb/display.html
July 22, 2009 (from Staff Senate minutes) Mandy reported that temporary trailers are being proposed to house the staff of Hamilton Hall. A large nitrogen tank will be install at McCall Hall, tenant s are housed there as part of a Dept. of Agriculture grant. The Public Arts committee, a sub-committee of Facilities Planning, is looking at a couple of campus locations, near the duck ponds and the courtyard of Wilson Hall, for the installation of a donated Walt Whitman sculpture.
May 27, 2009 (from Staff Senate minutes) Mandy reported an effort is under way to standardized signage, Kiosk’s are being vandalized, and a replacement for sandwich boards is being discussed. Location and landscaping for the Jim Dolan, Walt Whitman sculpture are being discussed.
April 22, 2009 (from Staff Senate minutes) Mandy reported a landscape plan was presented for a Bobcat sculpture to be created. The Alumni Association is paying ($75,000) for the sculpture and will recoup the money by selling smaller versions. Jim Dolan would like to donate a sculpture to MSU as part of a “grand scheme” he has for MSU. He envisions “Walt Whitman sitting on a park bench.”
October 22, 2008 Mandy Hansen (from Staff Senate Minutes) reported on the following:
September 24, 2008 Mandy Hansen (from Staff Senate Minutes)reported on UFPB's last meeting, including: (i) a roundabout at 11th and College (those present at today's Staff Senate meeting were concerned about the appropriateness of the location, as well as the need for driver education for roundabouts in general); (ii) recycling efforts - currently predominantly led by ASMSU, but the whole campus needs to take a role; (iii) a facilities planning publication detailing financial and other information; (iv) improved functionality of service drives; (v) Town & Country grocery store's wish to work with MSU regarding a new store, restaurant and office space, proposed for the Campus Cinemas' site.
July 23, 2008 (at Staff Senate meeting) Mandy Hansen reported on the July 22 meeting: Leon Johnson brick replacement going out to bid (a project started 10 years ago that ran out of funding); finish materials on Gaines Hall remodel presented (informational); bike pad sites and elimination of no ride zones; nine emergency call box locations; methods to prevent an area behind the SUB, reserved for emergency access, from being used inappropriately(informational); the reactivation of the UFPB Sculpture subcommittee; plans for a noise abatement study and future standard-setting.
June 11, 2008 Sheron McIlhattan reported on recent activity including a State A&E camera, mounted on the Fitness Center, taking regular still photos of the Gaines renovation; a request for an additional antenna (Verizon) on the Johnstone roof; a presentation by Jeff Davis, Facilities, on sustainability; a donor sign in the Chemistry Building.
April 23, 2008 Sheron McIlhattan explained that a new UFPUB secretary has been appointed and minutes are now up to date. Highlights include potential sound polution from the exhaust system resulting from the Cooley Lab renovation (the system is "back on the drawing board"); Howard Hall landscaping and electronic signage; temporary buildings accommodating instructional labs for chemistry students during the Gaines Hall renovation; and identification of a location (on Lincoln) for the new ASMSU outdoor recreation center. Those present at today's meeting agreed that the noise issues described are of concern to Staff Senate, and Sheron was specifically asked relay this to UFPUB.
January 8, 2008 Members Present: Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, York, Blunck, Everts. Members Absent: Bristor, Dooley, McCoy, Rutherford (ASMSU), Thull, Yarnell. Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff, Drummond for Banziger, Members Excused: Agre-Kippenhan, Jacobsen. Guests: Al Bertelsen, Debbie Drews, Karen Hedglin, Robert Putzke, David Singel, Megan Walker, Mandy Hansen
The University Facilities Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm to discuss the following: Non-Agenda Items:
NON-AGENDA ITEM – GAINES INSTRUCTIONAL LABS SITING
During the demolition and renovation of Gaines, it will be necessary to relocate instructional labs currently located in Gaines. Previously, Hedglin had discussed using temporary trailers as facilities for these labs. Recently, information regarding temporary buildings that can be used as labs has become available. The temporary buildings are made of SIPS (structural insulated panels) and are manufactured in Belgrade. They are easy to assemble, functional, safe, and will contain proper restrooms. The location for the buildings will be the same as previously discussed for the trailers (the lawn area north of the Chemistry Building). It is anticipated that these buildings will be used for two years during the Gaines renovation and is important to note that the students have expressed concerns that this space be left open in the future for use by the students. Hedglin noted that neither the State nor the University want to keep these buildings on a permanent basis and we are planning to write a Memorandum of Understanding between the State and the University stating that the buildings will be disassembled and disposed of at the end of the Gaines renovation by the contractor.
Lashaway moved that the Board recommends that location be used as a temporary location of lab facilities for the duration of the Gaines project alone and that the Board will rely on the project committee to decide what is the most cost efficient manner to deliver that temporary lab facilities in that location. Butler seconded the Motion and it was unanimously approved by the Board.
Hedglin advised that there is money in the project budget to restore the area to grass. Hedglin will return to UFPB with further information regarding the size and number of the buildings. These buildings will need to be in place for use in May, 2008.
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:00 pm
October 30, 2007
Members Present: Banziger, Rimpau, Stump, York, Butler, Rutherford (ASMSU), McIlhattan, Thull, Bristor, Everts, Hansen, Garnick, Jacobsen
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Banzinger for Putzke
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Sharrock, McCoy, Roloff, Yarnell Agre-Kippenhan Miles, Albertelsen,
Members Excused: Putzke
Guests: George Thompson, Debbie Drews, Candace Mastel, Mike Hamilton from Leo Daly Architects, Mike McNeal with USDA, Bill Rae as Guest Reviewer, Bob Lashaway, Victoria Drummond.
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
How does facility fit into character of the campus? Building will be developed to maintain Quad connection to other buildings and designed in “L” shape with service side to the south and front to the east. USDA is funded by the government and will have a sustainable natural design with bio-materials. Want building to be warm as people approach. Building will have three stories with 15-foot floors, glass offices and glass labs for natural light. Loading dock is designed for easy access to semi-trucks.
Concerns over proposed building design integrating with the campus and reminds some of a detention center. Most buildings on campus with a flat roof will either be renovated or torn down. Students concerns about material Seleucia cedar and concrete would prefer brick to be incorporated. This building should have better relationship with Animal Bioscience Building and Plant Bioscience. Buildings should not look alike but want continuity on campus. Building should be built with brick. Need visible front door and pedestrian friendly. Elevation to north/west stark and not pedestrian friendly.
Exposed roof fans will be noisy. Consider isolators or put fans in building or another container for noise control. Committee would like to review scheme at next stage.
Recommendation to President by Jeff Butler to accept Towne Farm Shop MAES drawings as presented by Milleson Architects dated October 21, 2007, for elevation as shown. Seconded by Jim Thull. Unanimous approval.
September 18, 2007
Members Present: Agre-Kippenhan, Banziger, Drummond, Rimpau, Stump, York, Butler, Rutherford (ASMSU), McIlhattan, Thull, Miles, Albertelsen, Bristor
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff, Putzke for Burns
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Sharrock, McCoy, Roloff, Yarnell
Members Excused: Hansen
Guests: Karen Hedglin, Mike Absalonson (Architects Design Group), Lutz
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
September 4, 2007
Members Present: Agre-Kippenhan, Banziger, Drummond, Garnick, Rimpau, Stump, York,
Butler, Rutherford (ASMSU), McIlhattan,
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Sharrock, Thull, McCoy, Roloff, Yarnell
Members Excused: Bristor, Jacobsen
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff, Putzke for Burns
Guests: George Thompson
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
August 7, 2007
Members Present: Agre-Kippenhan, Banziger, Drummond, Garnick, Hansen, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, York
Members Absent: Butler, Dooley, Johnson, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Thull
Members Excused: Bristor, Burns, Jacobsen, McCoy, McIlhattan, Roloff, Yarnell
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Duffey for Jacobsen, Lashaway for Roloff, Putzke for Burns
Guests: Debbie Drews, Candace Mastel
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
March 6, 2007
Members Present: Banziger-Acting-Chair, Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Miles, Rutherford (ASMSU), Rimpau, Roloff, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Johns, Johnson,
Members Excused: Garnick
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Victoria Drummond-Associate Planner; Mandy Hansen–CEPAC–Alternate, Karen Hedglin, Facilities Project Manager; Mike Dowling – Dowling-Sandholm Architecture, Peter Fields-MSU Athletics; Michael Stevenson-MSU Foundation; Dick Prugh-Prugh and Lenon Architects, Michael Everts-MSU Architecture, Russ Katherman-Montana A and E Division; David Singel-Chemistry
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
Pedestrian circulation and possible future parking garage locations have been examined; the proposed “Victory” walk from the SUB south to the Bobcat Plaza will have the effect of drawing the stadium back into the campus. The South entry of the Fieldhouse is to be the front door to this facility, and with the inclusion of the Indoor Practice Facility in this area, Athletics hopes to create on Athletic Entrance into campus. The future expansion of the both the indoor and outdoor tennis facilities have been taken into consideration. A motion was made by Stump to accept the general site location, east of the Fieldhouse and south of the Tennis Facility as presented, it was seconded by Thull and the motion passed with one abstention.
In discussion, it was noted that the changes to Appendix A as well as previous changes made to the Naming Policy on February 20, 2007 do not change the intent of the policy, and are considered administrative changes only. Therefore, these changes will not require a public notice and comment period, but will require the approval of the President.
A motion was made by Thull to accept the changes to Appendix A of the Naming Policy as presented, it was seconded by Stump and passed unanimously.
The new entry that serves both the Gaines Lecture Hall and the four-story Gaines will be aligned with both Romney and the Black Box Theatre, with an approximate 10’ grass area setback to the building. The landscape edge up to the building will be low maintenance gravel. The low oxidation black painted steel and store fronts with glass panels will coordinate with the new construction on the H and PE Complex. The brick selection closely match the existing brick on the 4-story portion of Gaines, and will give a unified appearance. The roof design overhangs will protect the area from direct sun to the south, with the exception of a small amount of solar gain during the winter months.
In discussion, it was noted that the glass panels depicted at the roofline of the Gaines Lecture Hall would bid as an Alternate. The service access will be coordinated with staging for the removal of Gaines 101.
The Gaines Lecture Hall goes to bid May 2007 with construction to start right after Graduation 2007. The funding for Gaines 4-story is still in the hands of the Legislature.
Stump made a motion to accept the Final Design as presented, York seconded and it was approved unanimously.
February 20, 2007
Members Present: Llewellyn-Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Rutherford (ASMSU), Stump, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles, Thull
Members Excused: McCoy, Rimpau, Roloff
Members Represented: Duffy for Jacobsen
Guests: Victoria Drummond-Associate Planner; Mandy Hansen–CEPAC–Alternate, George Thompson-Facilities Project Manager; Deborah Rosa-CTA Landworks; Erik Kirsch-CTA Landworks
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
January 9, 2007
Members Present: Banziger-Acting Chair, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Jacobsen, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, Thull York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johns, Johnson, (ASMSU)
Members Excused: Llewellyn-Chair,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Al Bertelsen, Director-Strand Union; Victoria Drummond-Associate Planner; Lisa Duffy-Assistant to the Dean of Agriculture; Carlene Nolan-Pederson-Ayers-Saint-Gross; Loras O'Toole-University Engineer
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
The west side location was determined to provide adequate space for the placement of the proposed generator, north of the existing transformer, as well as provide room for the possible relocation of the condenser (currently located at the southern exposure) and several locations for potential future equipment. The concept for a visual screen that will appear to be architecturally part of the building will be conceived through collaboration between, Facilities - Planning, Design and Construction, Facilities-Operations and Maintenance, and the ITC group.
Bike parking pads may evolve in this area, and the timeframe of this development may determine the type of screening placed around this equipment yard. The recommendation is to design a screen that can be a model for additional screening projects.
York proposed a motion to approve the placement of the generator north of the existing transformer at the western exposure of Renne Library and to approve the "equipment yard" site as presented, with the contingency that an architectural screen design be developed by Facilities Planning, Design and Construction in partnership with ITC, and that ITC contribute reasonable funds toward long-range site design for this area. The motion was seconded by Thull, and passed unanimously.
Appendix A of the Naming Policy does not address the philanthropic naming of individual rooms or space within a building. In light of the Capital Campaign and that this form of naming is deemed to be a favorable method of recognition for gifting, it is proposed that Building Naming Committee seek input from the Alumni Foundation to develop a formula, and return to UFPB with guideline recommendations that will be attractive to potential donors. Victoria Drummond, Associate Planner, will coordinate with the Building Committee. Jeff Jacobson, Dean of Agriculture and Lisa Duffy, Assistant to the Dean of Agriculture were charged with representing this request.
This meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
November 14, 2006
Members Present: Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, Miles, Rimpau, Thull, York
Members Absent: Llewellyn-Chair, Dooley, Jacobsen, Johnson, Rutherford (ASMSU), Stump
Members Represented: Hansen for McIlhattan, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Phil Iverson, Project Manager, Facilities Planning, Design and Construction
In the absence of the Chair, the meeting was conducted by Walt Banziger. The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm to discuss the following:
Phil Iverson, Facilities Project manager provided pictures and site location for the current COA request. The Board determined that the Animal Bioscience Building project is at 75% funding and that the signage materials are durable. The location of the sign may need to be moved slightly to accommodate snow removal. Lashaway moved to allow the Animal Bioscience Building project signage to remain until March 30, 2008. Butler seconded the Motion and it was unanimously approved by the Board.
The meeting adjourned at 4:20 pm.
Members Present: Llewellyn-Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Rimpau, , Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Johnson, Miles, Rutherford (ASMSU), Stump,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Mike Dowling, Dowling Architecture, Colleen Hebert, Safety and Risk, Karen Hedglin, Project Manager, Facilities-Planning Design and Construction, Russ Katherman,, State A and E Division, Marina Little, Dowling Architecture, David Singel, Gaines Building Committee
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
A brick and glass panel entry and a lecture hall of insulated metal panels in a saw-tooth pattern are planned for placement along the south side of the existing four-story Gaines. The footprint for the proposed new structure will be 10 feet north of the existing sidewalk. The west wall of the new lecture hall will extend 4 feet further west of the existing Gaines and will encroach on the existing service drive.
An entry serving both Gaines Hall and the Lecture Hall and is designed to blend and enhance the current Gaines exterior as well as the proposed exterior reconstruction. The Tower on the entry is complimentary to the five-story tower on Gaines and houses new restrooms and an elevator serving four levels of Gaines. Mechanical for the new restrooms will be shielded from view by a 20 by 15 foot screen.
In discussion, it was noted that the encroachment on the existing western service drive is not acceptable as this is the only access servicing this area and as this is already a very narrow access, to narrow it further would increase the safety issues of people using the west exit of the lecture hall.
Lashaway made a motion to accept the concept design with the following contingencies: Maintain the service drive at its current width by moving the west wall four feet. Include a 15-second alarm door to discourage unnecessary use of the western exit of the lecture hall except as an emergency exit. The motion was seconded by Butler and passed unanimously
Safety and Risk teach defensive driving classes and it was noted that in the recent rash of local highway related deaths, the majority were not wearing their seatbelts. Therefore, this signage will be a good public service encouraging drivers to wear their seatbelts. Similar signs are common at many federal, state and local community sites.
The new signage (approximately 81/2 by 10 inches) will be placed in accordance with state installation guidelines using existing stop sign posts at the exits of Campus. This form of installation will reduce the need for separate posts. The Parking Committee, University Police and the City of Bozeman have reviewed the signage proposal.
Lashaway made a motion to accept the Buckle-up Signage Proposal; it was seconded by Butler and passed with the majority in favor and one opposed.
This meeting adjourned at 4.50 p.m.
October 3, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Jacobsen, Johns, McIlhattan, Rimpau, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles, Rutherford (ASMSU),
Members Excused: Banziger, Yarnell
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Al Bertelsen, Director - Strand Union
Phil Iverson, Project Manager - Planning Design and Construction
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
September 19, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn – Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles Rutherford (ASMSU),
Members Excused: Jacobsen, McCoy, Rimpau, Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Kathy Brewer, Data Information Specialist-Planning Design and Construction, Mark Headley, Studio Forma, Phil Iverson, Project Manager-Planning Design and Construction
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
Temporary Bobcat Plaza Signage - The UFPB Executive committee reviewed a proposal brought by the Bobcat Track and Field Association for placement of a 4 foot by 8-foot sign on skids. The primary function of this signage will be as an aid for the fund raising program announcing the “Future site of the Bobcat Plaza”; project identification will consist of Prugh and Lenon Architects at the time of installation, with a space reserved for addition of the project general contractor in the future. The proposed duration for this signage will be for the duration of the football season and then again in the spring during track and field season and construction. Placement of the proposed signage was approved by the UFPB Executive Committee. Upon reporting to the UFPB Board, it was determined that the following “sunset” clause will be added.
Huge strides have been made in bringing the campus development plan to life for the upcoming public forums in October 2006.by the following Production Team members.
Ferd Johns, AIA, Architect, Professor of Architecture, Design and Production Head
Mike Everts, AIA, Architect, Assistant Professor of Architecture, Design and Production Head
Allison Orr, Graduate Architecture Student, Design Assistant and Graphic Illustrator
Laura Grafel, Graduate Architecture Student, Senior Production Team member
Matt Davis, Graduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
Eric Druse, Graduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
Craig Hadley, Undergraduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
The power point presentation begins with the Analysis of the Existing Campus, which links to graphics showing the historic core of campus, a perspective of the Centennial Mall, Wilson Seating, Campus topography, Campus streams, Bike trails, Transit routes, Green Spaces and views in and out of campus. Master Design Proposals give elements of Plan A and Plan B. There are various key elements depicted, giving viewers the option to pick the best of each providing valuable input for the development of the final Design. Under Design Concepts, the team has developed imagery of such concepts as the proposed continuation of east/west axis through campus, the extension and mirroring of historic green spaces to the north of campus, new tree-lined boulevards at South 7th and 11th and more. This imagery will correlate to the Development Statistics showing what exists, what is proposed and how each change will result in a net gain in space and parking for the campus. A dynamic parking graphic shows how the distribution locations of each proposed parking garage will allow 5 minute walking radius to key academic and administrative buildings on campus. Arial Perspectives have been developed showing how the campus might appear as it develops using the proposed plan. Spatial Quality is a series of renderings depicting walking views of campus as it may develop with possible integration of commercial elements and green spaces. There are also some birds-eye views of areas such as the proposed bridge over 19th. The Design Details give prospective as to the sizes of roadways, setbacks, service areas, and screenings. All of the elements of this portfolio serve to give the viewer a clear vision to the direction for the future of the MSU Campus.
The information available from this presentation will be available for viewing on the MSU-Tomorrow website following the October forums.
In discussion, it was noted, the location for Athletics’ enclosed football practice facility is likely to be decided in the very near future. The Planning Committee is to meet with Athletics and the President to workout details.
Discussion on location of the Animal Bio Science Facility indicates a site selection is pending. Mark Headley with Studio Forma will bring further information to the UFPB Board at the October 3rd, 2006 meeting.
September 5, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johns, Johnson, Rutherford (ASMSU)
Members Excused: Jacobsen, Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
August 22, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Rimpau, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Johns, Johnson, Miles, Thull
Members Excused: Rutherford (ASMSU), Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Pat Simmons - Antenna Technical Committee; Ed Adams, Civil Engineering, Bret Gunnink, Civil Engineering, Rolf Groseth, Office of the President
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 1 - CABLE TV CONNECTIONS - SATELLITE DISHES - Simmons noted that two departments desire to have cable TV connections - one in Leon Johnson Hall and one in Huffman. Both locations would be costly to serve by Bresnan Communications and have requested that they be allowed to install ~20" satellite dishes to get reception. Installation might be roof or wall mounted. Simmons wanted to know whether the Board would consider such requests if further developed or not. Consensus of the board was that departments should use the buried/tunnel commercial TV cable whenever economically available but to consider such requests on a case-by-case basis, and to develop some guidelines as we go.
This meeting was adjourned at 5.00 p.m.
August 8, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Sharrock, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles, Thull
Members Excused: Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, Duffey for Jacobsen, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Mandy Hansen, Financial Aid Officer
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
It was noted that the core region of campus has an adequate number of building sites to likely accommodate any expansion within the next 20 to 30 years. The building sites denoted on the build-outs do not necessarily depict a specific building, or its footprint, but rather should be viewed as place holders which will offer alternatives for future building placement. Likewise, interior campus parking markers are viewed as sites for future surface or garage parking development. Outlying parking lots (when developed) will be serviced by a shuttle system to the interior of campus.
To define the Campus edge the area along College at approximately 14th and 15th would be landscaped and developed as a new campus entry gateway, and a cooperative development with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust for a proposed greenway and bike path along College will also be incorporated. A visitor kiosk and way finding would be developed to make the campus friendlier.
The campus has several strong north-south axes, some which contain natural streams. Stream restoration/beautification is an essential element of future campus development. A strong east-west link will be developed to link campus across Nineteenth. Initially this greenway link will be connected to the west by a crosswalk with a stoplight. A possible bridge over Nineteenth would be developed in the future.
The agricultural lands will remain within the heart of the campus, surrounded by University development that will act as a protective buffer from the possibility of a future "one-time" sale.
The heating plant will remain in its current location, with possible satellite co-generation plants located throughout the campus. Facilities Services will be moved west of Nineteenth, freeing up more of the central campus for future development.
September 18th, 2006 the design team will again meet with the Executive Oversight Committee to present more advanced drawings, along with a computer simulation (aerial view) of campus as it may look in the future) for further review and comment. October 3rd, 2006 this new presentation will be made to UFPB, and culminate in a series of public forums scheduled for October 10th and 11th, 2006.
This meeting was adjourned at 4.12 p.m.
June 13, 2006:
Members Present: Banziger acting-chair, Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Thull
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Garnick, Jacobsen, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Yarnell
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Al Bertelsen, Director - Strand Union Building; Mandy Hansen - CEPAC Alternate; Pat Simmons - Technical Antenna Committee - Chair
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
Land Resources and Civil Engineering in conjunction with Engineering, Inc. and Inland GPS, Inc. wish to install a GPS system that will be an official site for the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) on the MSU Campus. Three sites have been considered by the Technical Antenna Committee for the receiver, and were presented to the UFPB. The favored sites were inside the existing Long Term Storage chain link fence. In discussion, Burns noted that due to storage requirements within this lot, the most suitable site would be on the south side near the gate (Site 2 as detailed in meeting handouts). It was noted that this location would likely afford the most protection for the receiver antenna as well.
Burns made a motion to recommend the installation of a federally authorized GPS base station for use in teaching and research by two MSU departments and also the City of Bozeman and the Gallatin County GIS departments.
The GPS antenna needs to be located where it will have a 360 degree clear view of the horizon and sky, with no obstructions above 10 degrees. This antenna needs to be very stable and due to "sway" factor of tall buildings, a ground site is preferred. The antenna will be mounted to a concrete column with approximately 9 feet of exposed height and an additional buried depth of 7 feet and protected by bollards. The recommended site for the concrete column and GPS Receiver Antenna is within the University Police Long Term Storage area. The column will be located within the chain link fence on the south side, near the gate. The chain link fence will provide security for the antenna and bollards will be placed in front of the column to protect it. Power requirements for the antenna are minimal, similar to that of a digital clock radio. Data will be transmitted via a coax cable connected to MSU's network. The Director of the Montana Water Center has agreed to allow the connections of equipment and power within the mechanical room of one of the Faculty Court buildings.
An additional broadcast antenna will be installed on Leon Johnson Hall. This UHF antenna will require power and connections to the MSU data network and will use an already existing equipment room for the installation. The new UHF Broadcast antenna will replace the existing GPS antenna on the Leon Johnson penthouse, and will utilize existing coax cable into the building. This antenna frequency is licensed by the FCC and estimated to be 461.075 MHz.
The following contingency for the installation is made:
If for whatever reason, sight of the horizon is blocked in the future, it will be the sole responsibility of the owners to move the antennas to more suitable locations at no cost to MSU.
Butler seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
This meeting was adjourned at 3.55 p.m.
May 30, 2006
Members Present: Banziger, Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Sharrock, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Yarnell
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Garnick, Johnson, Miles, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU)
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Karen Hedglin, Project Manager; Russ Katherman - Montana State A& E, George Tuthill, MSU - Native American Student Center Building Committee Chairman, Dennis Sun Rhodes - AmerIndian,
John Worth - ThinkOne, Bill Hanson - ThinkOne
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
The Building Committee reviewed numerous design concepts which have significance to the Native American culture. These included designs based on the Feather, the Tipi, the Turtle, the Drum and the Horse. A melding of the Feather and the Turtle concepts, which emphasizes the cultures oneness with nature through its use of passive solar, natural lighting and ventilation, has been selected by the Building Committee. Orientation on the site will allow the building (the Feather a symbol of Spirit) to arch toward the east to symbolically greet the rising sun. The Turtle (a symbol of Mother Earth and protection) portion of the building will be a place of gathering for the people and will look out into the sculpture garden. The linear design will allow the building to encompass an existing well used foot path with hopes that people will now be drawn through the building to the classrooms or around and through the sculpture garden. The intent is that this building with its multiple entries will not "turning its back" on either the Bozeman or Campus Communities. It is intended to be a place where the Community will be drawn to learn, attend lectures, share in ceremonies, dinners, and enjoy the drums.
A Sculpture garden which will incorporate as many of the existing plantings as possible,will be located on the Southeast and will also be a place of gathering for outdoor activities. The area facing Hannon will be developed into a pleasing patio that connects to the large group study lounge.
In discussion, it was noted that a services area for deliveries will be placed on the 7th Avenue side of the building. Handicapped parking access will be from the existing Roberts parking area or the existing Hamilton Parking. The Board gave their support for the fundraising campaign to begin using the concept as presented. The design team is requested to return after schematics are underway for further approval. A presentation of the initial design concepts will also be made to the Presidents Council.
Agricultural group follow-up meetings have been underway and very informative. The importance and usage of the lands west of Nineteenth not only to the College of Agriculture, but also to Engineering and Chemistry has been one of the focus issues. Road-trip follow-up meetings with Dean of Agriculture, Jeff Jacobsen are also scheduled.
June 26th through the 30th, a Charrette will be held to further work on the details of the build-out scenarios. The LRCDP Executive Committee will meet June 30th.
May 16, 2006
Members Present: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Yarnell
Members Excused: Burns, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Jacobsen,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Susan Byorth, Burns Technology Center; Bill Rea, Burns Technology Center; Michael Stevenson, MSU - Athletics; Bill Mackin, Project Manager; Karen Hedglin, Project Manager; George Thompson, Project Manager; Jon Ford, Manager, Environmental Services; Peter Fields, Director, MSU - Athletics
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
The Lobby is designed to be an inviting refuge and to be a contrast to the brightly lit upper deck and to the hallways radiating off of the Lobby. This area will be furnished with approximately 20 movable chairs designed for ease of laptop use and upholstered in two contrasting grey fabrics. The countertop areas will be a black Corian or similar solid surfacing with recessed monitors. A theatrical feel is evidenced with its cool palette, directing attention to the Donor Wall, with its two plasma screens, and milky panels with contrasting frosted lettering sandwiched within clear glass. The "continuum" sculpture will also contrast well to this environment. The atrium ceiling tile directly above the Lobby will be replaced with black acoustical tile set in black "T" bar. Soffit regions will be painted a grey tone. Railing along the upper deck will be faced with grey translucent panels designed to appear fluid and to filter some of the light spillage. The north brick wall will be faced with panels constructed of perforated metal with a birch tone wood veneer which lends acoustically as well as visually. The current flooring will remain, but the base will be replaced with black rubber base.
In discussion it was noted that the light levels within this region, although considerably lower by contrast than surrounding areas within the building, is expected to be approximately 10 to 12 foot candles. This will be sufficient to meet necessary safety and egress requirements.
Garnick made a motion that the palette of colors, materials and final concept be accepted as presented. Banziger seconded and it passed unanimously.
ADA access will be increased by "breaking" the berm to allow access over a relatively flat area to the basketball court. This berm cut will be a grass surface or a compacted pathway material similar to decomposed granite. The horseshoe pits will be accessible from the current access drive.
Concerns regarding a safety buffer between the Volleyball court and the Horseshoe pits have also been more closely examined. This buffer would include the distance of the 10 foot sand out-of-bounds area for volleyball, 15 feet of grass and an additional 3 foot boundary around the Horseshoe area. It is felt that the total of 28 feet is likely sufficient. It was also noted that the Horseshoe pins will be removable, again lessening the chance of an accidental impalement.
The fine sand specifications for the Volleyball area have not yet been addressed. A suitable material will still need to be chosen
Stump made a motion to accept the schematic design as revised for the Hedges Landscape. Banziger seconded and it was passed unanimously.
Prugh and Lenon, Architects, with the aid of several MSU Architectural students have constructed a build-out of the proposed Athletic Corridor on the South edge of Campus, (between the current Tennis Facility and south to the Track Facilities and West to Eleventh) and was inclusive for all the current structures within that corridor. They also provided additional structural elements depicting the proposed Athletic additions. These mobile pieces can be placed in various configurations within the framework of the existing structures (such as the Fieldhouse and the Stadium) as a visual aid for siting considerations
Athletics has programmed this series of developments into four phases, which encompasses anticipated development over the next 25 to 30 years. These improvements are slated to start with the construction of additional Stadium Skyboxes, the revenue from which will assist with a funding base for additional projects. The phasing of these projects will also allow athletics to open up existing facilities for future uses in a "domino" effect as new are developed (i.e. existing weight room may become a Student Athletic Academic Center). One main component of Phase I of the proposed Athletic Corridor will be the addition of a Multiple Sport In-door Practice Facility. This structure will encompass approximately 90K square feet and be 85 feet in height. An E-W orientation would be best for a building of this height to reduce shadowing. It was noted that indoor practice facilities such as this can be constructed in such a fashion as to be very attractive. Additionally, Athletics will need to maintain three outdoor practice fields which can be rotated to minimize damage to turf.
The idea of an Athletic Corridor, its components, its possible impact on parking and exterior campus green space will be examined more closely in a collaborative effort between the MSU-Tomorrow work team and MSU Athletics, in hopes of providing siting information by early summer of 2006. This would allow MSU Athletics to begin their fund raising campaign yet this summer. A Planning Charrette is scheduled for June 26th through 30th.
This meeting was adjourned at 4:53 p.m.
May 2, 2006
Members Present: Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johns, Johnson, Yarnell
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Garnick, Sharrock, Jacobsen,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Pat Simmons, Associate Director, ITC, Al Bertelsen, Director, Strand Union Building, Mandy Hansen, Alternate - CEPAC Representative
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, with Bob Lashaway acting as Chair, to discuss the following:
Whereas: ASMSU has executed a Memorandum of Understanding, joining with Galavan, with the intent of combining resources dedicated to operating the Galavan system and the Bobcat transit contract.
Whereas: ASMSU has committed to contributing the annual assessment (approximately $90,000 per year), which formerly paid for Bobcat Transit services, to the new Public Transit organization, in exchange for equal or better transit service for MSU students, which are anticipated to begin by August, 2006.
Whereas: MSU desires to promote alternative modes of transportation to serve the campus and to promote efforts to manage demand for traffic and parking facilities on campus.
Therefore, the UFPB recommends the following to the President:
Two new equipment cabinets will be installed and the user intends to make the available space in this area more useable for both the user and the owner. The three new proposed antennas will also be smaller. There will be a time span of approximately 30 to 45 days where both the existing and the new equipment will be in place, after which the old cables will be removed and any exterior holes will be repaired. There will be no visual impact to the penthouse on North Hedges from this installation. Any attachments to walls will be made with Transite. Chinook Wireless will also work with OFS-Grounds and Auxiliary Services to ensure protection for sprinklers.
Whereas the Antenna Committee recommends this upgrade, Stump made a motion to recommend acceptance of this proposal to the President. Thull seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
Simmons noted that there are several additional antenna/site camera proposals that will be brought to UFPB in the near future.
A motion was made by Stump to allow the placement of lockers in the corridor of the Third Floor of the EPS Building, with the following stipulations:
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 2 - MSU CLEAN-UP DAY Butler reported that on Friday, May 5th at 2:45 p.m. Facilities Services in its entirety will don their work shirts, be transported to the northern edge of Campus and proceed southward in a "military" style sweep of Campus collecting litter as they go. This exercise is intended to help MSU - Grounds prepare our Campus for Commencement Day. This is the first of what will likely become an annual clean-up event.
This meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.
April 18, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan submits a report:
Members Present: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, Johnson, McIlhattan, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Yarnell
Members Excused: Jacobsen
Members Represented: Hansen for Miles; LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Dave Skelton, Bobcat Track and Field Association, Elizabeth Growney, Prugh and Lenon, Dick Prugh, Prugh and Lenon, George Thompson, Project Manager, OFS-PDC, Debra Rosa, CTA LandWorks, Jon Ford, Manger, OFS - Environmental Services, David Kack, Western Transportation Institute, Colleen Lindner, ASMSU, Jeff Holloway, Museum of the Rockies
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm to discuss the following:
ITEM No. 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from the April 4th, 2006 meeting were approved as distributed.
ITEM No. 2 - BOBCAT PLAZA
Dave Skelton, Elizabeth Growney and Dick Prugh, Prugh and Lenon, presented the final siting plans for the Bobcat Plaza and the Bobcat Pavilion. This new site plan shows both structures shifted 8 feet north and 5 feet west of their original site. With this new positioning, there will be no impact to the sewer line to the north.
Johnson made a motion to accept the siting for both the Bobcat Plaza and the Bobcat Pavilion as depicted in this new plan, and to allow the Track Club to begin its fund raising campaign as soon as the approval of the President is acquired. The final materials to be used in the construction of these two projects will be presented for approval at a later date. York seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
ITEM No. 3 - EPS Lobby
This item will be presented at a future date.
ITEM No. 4 - HEDGES LANDSCAPE
George Thompson, Project Manager, and Debra Rosa, CTA LandWorks, presented conceptual design and project phasing for the Hedges Landscape project. The first phase of this project will consist of a basketball court with breakaway hoops and an asphalt surface, a sand volleyball court with a stationary net, horseshoe pits bordered by concrete and sand filled and an asphalt tetherball station.
The landscape design shows the area of irrigated sod rimmed by an approximate 3 foot berm to aid in screening the nearby existing loading dock and dumpster. A series of 8 foot trees is planned for placement to the east and south of the courts during this first phase of construction.
In discussion, it was noted that for ADA access, an opening through the berm needed to be considered to allow ready access from the handicapped parking area. It was also noted that as this plan does not call for any added lighting, there may be safety concerns which will need to be addressed. One suggestion put forth would be to remove a portion of the proposed berm to the west and replace it with 3 large trees to screen the loading dock and dumpster. CTA and Thompson will schedule a meeting with Robert Putzke, Director - University Police to discuss safety issues. The sand for the volleyball court will also need to be investigated. Typically the sand used in this type of court is very light weight and is highly mobile in the wind, which may make it necessary to replace/refill the sand on a regular basis. It was suggested that heavier weight large round grained sand be investigated for use. One additional area of concern was the adjacent nature of the horseshoe pits to the volleyball court. This area needs to be investigated further to ensure no in ordinate injury type safety risk exists between the two features. This project will be re-presented after further investigation is complete.
ITEM No. 5 - TRANSIT SYSTEM
David Kack, Western Transportation Institute, and Colleen Lindner, ASMSU, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the status of the Bozeman Public Transit application to the University Facilities Planning Board. ASMSU has executed a Memorandum of Understanding, joining with Galavan, with the intent of combining resources dedicated to operating the Galavan system and the Bobcat transit contract and has committed to contributing the annual assessment (approximately $90,000 per year), which formerly paid for Bobcat Transit services, to the new Public Transit organization, in exchange for equal or better transit service for MSU students, anticipated to begin by August, 2006. The system will provide 14,000 hours of service annually, with 6 days a week, using 5 buses during peak times, and a "flag and ride" system. The proposed routes are planned to serve high priority areas and users. It was noted that evaluation of the working services will likely take 3 years after implementation. Galavan has also received a grant for a future bus barn.
The proposed buses will be yellow, built on an International chassis and likely be equipped to run on a bio-diesel mix. It is planned for each bus to be equipped with a 3-bike rack, mounted on the front, to accommodate a limited number of passengers who have a need to also bring a bike. Each bus will also be equipped with an easy ramping system for patrons with ADA requirements.
Park and Ride options are still being investigated, as well as the need and placement for bus shelters. Ideally the system would like to continue to use the University SUB as a major, but will also investigate other sites east and west of the Centennial Mall. Investigation of any ADA upgrades for these sites will also be pursued.
A motion will be drafted by Lashaway and distributed for comment to the Board recommending that the University endorse the proposed transit system in accordance with the following:
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 1 - MUSEUM STORAGE UNITS
Jeff Holloway, Museum of the Rockies, was present to request approval to acquire two 26 x 8 x 9 foot storage containers for placement off of the employee parking area. The proposed site for these units will be below grade and render them invisible except for a possible view from South 7th. Placement will allow for an 18 foot fire access to remain between the containers and the building. These are considered to be a temporary storage solution which is necessary as the Museum dismantles one exhibit to allow another to come in. The Museum desires to build permanent storage south of the existing building in the future. It was noted that with the number of requests for storage, MSU needs to investigate the option of building another storage facility.
Lashaway made a motion to approve two metal storage containers for use in this location at the Museum of the Rockies. It was seconded by McIlhattan and passed unanimously.
This meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
March 8, 2006 - from CEPAC Minutes - Sheron McIlhattan reported on the last UFPUB meeting (her notes will be published via the UFPUB link in due course). Topics included the proposed exciting remodel of the EPS lobby, with plasma screens and student study stations; also, the expiration of the pay telephone contract on campus, and the conversion of most of the existing service to campus pay phones.
Long Range Campus Planning - Walt Banziger returned to CEPAC, seeking further input. 1,400 comments had been received via stakeholder meetings in January, and eight guiding principles have been drawn up. Today, Walt asked for those present to comment on physical environment issues. Various views were expressed from the need for service corridors and central delivery points, through the pros and cons of departmental urbanization, maximizing the student experience and public impression, to refurbishing existing buildings and the durability of new construction. Walt requested that CEPAC consider a further meeting to continue discussion of topics which our time constraints disallowed today.
January 24, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The first item discussed was the Duck Pond Renovation. The plan we reviewed a few months ago went out for bid. The bids came back around $750,000. This price is much higher that the architect’s original estimate and not in the scope of a maintenance project for the University. Walt Banziger presented a scaled back plan which will only include safety and maintenance items like putting a new liner in the pond and pumps for aeration. This would include replacing the gravel pathway around the pond. It would eliminate any of the landscaping, lighting, benches, and additional walkways in the original plan. The committee approved the scaled back version.
Tom Stump reported that the bids on the H and PE Complex were opened. The project range was $9.4M to $10.5M with all the extras. The low bid came in at $11.6. This is $2.2M over projections. He reported that the SUB and Theatre renovations came in about $4M over original projections. In total bids are over $6M on the three projects. Because of high costs, they will not move forward on any of the three at this time.
Carlene Nolan-Pederson, Senior Associate Planner, for Ayers Saint Gross was introduced to the committee. She is an MSU graduate and will lead the Stake Holder discussions for the Long Range Campus Development Plan. She showed us her power point that she will present to the stakeholder groups and asked for input. The committee had a few suggestions for her to add to her presentation.
CEPAC members are reminded that the stakeholder meeting for Staff is Wednesday January 25! Noon to 2 PM. Everyone is encouraged to attend. Since the presentation will be the first 15 minutes of each session, you are urged to get there early. If you can’t attend this session, you are welcome to come to any other session; or to attend as many sessions as you can.
January 10, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The only agenda item was the progress on the Long Range Planning Project.
The Work Group has been meeting every Thursday for 2 hours and are making great progress. Items include:
December 13, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
UFPUB met for their regular meeting December 13 in the OFS conference room. Agenda items included:
A power point presentation by Don McLaughlin, Place Architecture. We had asked him for a pedestrian study to help us decide where future sidewalks should be in the long range campus development. He offered us a history of the original Cass Gilbert Plan for the campus and how it has evolved. He offered some suggestions of how he envisioned the campus in the future. He left a CD of the power point and several printed booklets of this presentation.
Progress on the Long Range Campus Development Plan (LRCDP). The Work Group has been meeting every other Thursday from 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM in the OFS Conference Room. The next item they tackle is communication with the campus community. They are working a web page and deciding what email lists they will use. They will appoint a spokesperson who will be in charge of communication. Cathy Conover was unanimously approved to be on the UFPUB committee for this project because of her communication expertise.
Stakeholder meetings are scheduled for January 25, and January 26 to discuss with the campus community this long range plan endeavor. Everyone is urged to attend. Times and locations will be announced at a later date. A list of stakeholders is attached. This is your opportunity to give input on the look and feel for the campus for many years to come. Where will the new buildings go? Where will parking lots be located? Will they be garages or what we have currently? Will we develop neighborhoods for the various colleges and where will they be located? What about green space and trees and walkways?
Renovation plans for the third floor lobby of Leon Johnson Hall were presented. It was agreed that the hall needs improving and the board gave approval to develop a design. LRES PPSP and Cell Biology share admin office in that building along with WAMI. WAMI feels they really have a need to dress up the entrance to their offices since they have numerous off campus visitors to their office. Scott Hedglin, OFS will continue with the design and bring it back to UFPUB for approval.
November 29, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports on today's meeting:
Duck Pond Reconstruction
Preliminary plans for a remodel of the Duck Pond were reviewed. One major issue is that there is not enough water flowing into the Duck Pond for proper aeration to work. The proposal calls for adding water from Herrick Hall and for developing the Story Well to be more productive. Supplying more water in the Duck Pond for recirculation will keep it cleaner.
There is a proposed flag stone walkway on the West side of the pond and benches for seating to enhance the area.
Gravel edges are planned for the remainder of the area on the perimeter surrounding the pond. Cleaning in summer and snow removal in winter are safety concerns when planning any changes to the pond. Also planting of more trees is proposed. The overall plan was approved. It will come back to us for final approval.
One big issue is the big, very old, willow tree that grows on the north west corner of the pond and hangs over the sidewalk and duck pond. It has three main trunks. One of the trunks was removed sometime ago. Drilling samples were done on the remaining trunks. It was found that one of these big trunks, the one that hangs over the sidewalk, is rotten and could fall anytime. The other is OK, but may not be much longer. The University has an obligation to remove any unsafe tree. So the rotten branch will have to come down. Since there may not be much left, the remaining trunk most likely would be removed as well. Please let us hear your comments concerning taking out this grand old tree.
Leon Johnson Lobby Remodel The plan for remodeling the lobby on the third floor Leon Johnson was presented. Many ideas were discussed. Since none of our Ag representatives and no one from Leon Johnson was present, it was decided that we needed some input from someone more closely associated with the project. That project was tabled until we could get more input.
November 1, 2005- Sheron McIlhattan reports
There are four levels of security for research of communicable diseases in animals, BSL I, BSL II, BSL III, and BSL IV.
Level II is a secure facility, where access is limited. Researchers are required to wear special clothing in the “dirty room” and shower upon leaving the secure area. Diseases studied are generally limited those where the disease is transmitted by contact between animals and contaminants are not airborne.
A level III facility is a more secure facility where contamination can be airborne. Researchers are required to wear protective clothing and shower when exiting the “dirty rooms” research area.
At this meeting UFPUB approved the location of the proposed facilities. The facility for small animals will be a Level III facility directly North of Marsh lab. The large animal facility will be a Level II facility just West of Marsh lab.
UFPUB had two concerns, but did approve the location of the proposed buildings.
Proposal by Western Wireless to install antennae on top of Leon Johnson Hall was approved.
Proposal by Verizon to move one of its existing antennae on top of Leon Johnson Hall a few feet to allow reception at ground level was also approved. All the antennae will be painted the brick red color of the trim on Leon Johnson Hall to make them blend in with the building.
Meeting adjourned at 5PM.
October 18, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
Generally, the committee liked the materials and colors presented, except for the brick.
Due to temperature changes, a lighter colored brick was chosen so it would not absorb as much heat as the darker colors.
The Architects looked around the campus buildings to find a lighter color and settled on a brick similar to that in Linfield Hall.
The other colors were coordinated around that color.
Since brick seems not to hold up under the extreme temperature changes from day to night, very specific specs have been written for brick on this campus. Cecilia Vaniman expressed concerns that this particular brick may not meet those specifications.
The committee voted to approve the materials as presented with one concern. The brick must meet the campus specs for brick.
October 4, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
President Gamble had already directed the project team to a general site West of 11th Street, West of the Plant Growth Center,
5 possible designs scenarios were presented. After reviewing and discussing the pros and cons of the sites and the physical aspects of them, including the existing creek, walkways, and parking lots, the playing field was narrowed to 2 building footprints. It was decided that the USDA Building be located in the NW Corner of the 12th Street Lot, using a strong architectural element to define the corner. Two building sites for the future Ag Academic Building which were in the possible design scenarios were designated as possible choices in close proximity to this building. The location of the Ag Academic building has yet to be decided. This building will now begin to define a College of Ag “neighborhood” for future Ag buildings.
This decision will now go to PEC for final approval.
September 20, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The building is a very long, large building that is 1/4 again as long as Hapner Hall across the street. It will have one underground level and 4 upper levels. A median is proposed down 8th to help regulate traffic flow. The trees along 8th will be saved. Preserving the view of the Bridgers from Montana Hall was taken into consideration. The design is in keeping with other buildings on campus. It will have one elevator with stairs on the south end with stairs in the middle of the building and on the north end. Vehicular entry and exits will be on Harrison to the north and at 8th and Cleveland on the south. There is a problem to be worked out with the service access drive coming from Wilson Hall at that corner. A traffic circle was drawn into the plans, to help with traffic flow, but the details have not been worked out. Access to the garage will probably be through an unmanned arm, or some such electronic device. There is provision for some bicycle storage. No details yet on what or how many bikes.
A power point of the proposed structure was presented. One of the statistical slides showed the following spaces in the new garage.
93 112 122 123 46 496
But the discussion came when students asked how many new spaces would be provided for students, i.e. “E” spaces. The numbers presented were
-107 389
It is possible that another 38 spaces could be added to Level 4 bringing the total new spaces to 534.
But Jo and her group couldn’t tell the students exactly how many of these would be “E” spaces. Or what any of the costs to park would be. At this point, our chair Jerry Bancroft explained to everyone that our charge is to review the architectural design, not to look at costs or actual numbers or which kind of spaces will be in the new structure. He referred the students to the Parking Committee that meets every other Monday. Jo was going to let the students know when that meeting will be.
As discussions continued, it was apparent that the above numbers do not include removing the parking from 8th between Harrison and Cleveland. In later discussions, it was revealed that parking will also be removed from 8th between Harrison and College. This is an additional loss of an unknown number of spaces. Our CEPAC rep at these meetings is Sue Martin. We need to continue to point out the fact that the numbers as presented do not include these loss of street parking for two blocks.
Concerns posed by the committee included:
I brought up the traffic and access problems at the intersection of Harrison and 8th. Even with the current numbers of vehicles we have now, it is hard to make a left hand turn onto 8th from Harrison when exiting the Linfield lot. If we add another 300 or so cars coming into that intersection, a very real bottle neck is being created. I think 8th from Harrison north belongs to the City. Or maybe it is just the east half that is the City’s. Anyway, they have some jurisdicition over the intersection. Bob Lashaway, Jo Oudshoorn, Paul Burns and others say they have met with the City to discuss the street issues. But the comment was made even though the city was definitely studying the problems, they had no money and improvements were not on the immediate horizon.
The committee voted to approve the preliminary design with requests for continuing review for the following:
The meeting was ready to adjourn around 5:30 when someone asked about the RFP. Pam reported that the time period for receiving questions was up today and the RFP Committee has 2 weeks to respond to the questions.
September 6, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
UFPUB Member at Large - Ralph Johnson, professor in Architecture, was nominated to be Member at Large for UFPUB. This position was created for UFPUB to ask individuals with certain expertise to give advice to the committee as the need arises. Johnson has expertise in long range planning and currently that is the big issue before UFPUB. President Gamble will ultimately make the appointment to this one year position.
SUB Renovation - Cecilia Vaniman gave the committee a final walk through of the SUB renovation after months of review. The committee approved the final elevations on the South. The bid date is set for November 3, with construction to start January 2, 2006. This will be an 18-20 month project.
Campus Design Guidelines - UFPUB was asked to include the goal of integrating research and teaching in the Campus Design Guidelines. As the document is reviewed, it will keep this item in mind.
Announcements:
Chemistry Building - The pre-construction meeting for the new Chemistry Building is scheduled for September 13, with construction to begin shortly thereafter. The final bid was $23M. To reach that amount, moving costs and some research equipment costs were removed. The project should last 24 months with move in to begin the 2nd week of August 2007.
Planning board - Jerry Bancroft suggested facilities develop a planning board to show the campus how future projects will fit in the area where the trees were removed. This will help explain to some angry campus members that removing the trees was not just for the chemistry building, but also for several future projects.
Federal Ag USDA Building - President Gamble approved a location west of 11th for the Federal Ag USDA building-- just west of the existing Plant Bio Science/ PGC Complex.
Ag Animal Bioscience Building - There are ongoing discussions for the location of the new Ag Animal Bioscience Research building. Originally, it was planned that the two buildings be in close proximity. Now the question is where will the College of Ag develop an Ag “academic neighborhood” section of the campus which will include the Ag Animal Bioscience building?
Two proposals are on the board:
The adjourned meeting at 4:45.
August 23, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports: we spent the entire meeting going over the important points of an RFP to hire an advisor for Long Range Campus Development. Purchasing Director, Shawna Lanphear led the discussion. In the end a committee was appointed to finalize the RFP.
JULY 13, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan submits: MINUTES OF
Members Present: Bancroft, Chair, Garnick, Lashaway, Mathenia,
Rimpau, Stump, Vaniman,
Members Absent: Brittingham, Dooley, Jacobsen, McIlhattan,
Roloff, Sharrock, Yarnell,
ASMSU
Members
Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Burns for Putzke
Members
Excused:
Guests: Walt Banziger, Jo
Oudshoorn
The University Planning Board met beginning at
ITEM No. 1 – APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from
Lashaway
gave a presentation on the LRBP process. This is an inter-campus process where the needs of AES,
During
the next six weeks, OFS will be gathering information regarding proposed
projects to add to the priority list for the 2008-2009 biennium. Great care needs to be given to developing
accurate projected cost factors for proposed projects, to ensure that if
funding becomes available, it is sufficient to finish the actual project. Bancroft requested that the proposed LRBP
list be brought before the UFPB Board, prior to going to the President, to
ensure that UFPB stays “in the loop” and is aware of and knowledgeable about
what is being recommended. It was agreed
that this will be brought before the Board again the second half of October.
It
was noted that historically, the MSU campus projects have done quite well in
obtaining funding thanks to the great working relationship Lashaway has with
the Legislature and the Board of Regents.
The
LRBP process handout is attached.
ITEM
No. 2 – PARKING GARAGE SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
Jo Oudshoorn presented the advantages and disadvantages of
the Lewis and Clark site versus the
A motion to accept the Lewis and Clark (Harrison &
Eighth) site was made by Lashaway with the following contingencies:
1.
Available funding should be “stretched” if necessary,
in order to maximize the site usage. (e.g. the
preference would be for a four level structure [grade, plus 3 additional
levels] versus a 3 level structure).
2.
Height of the structure should approximate that of
surrounding dorms.
3.
The structure needs to be designed with a “collegiate”
style in mind.
4.
The design should try to preserve as many of the old
trees in the northeast corner as possible.
The motion was seconded by Stump, put to a vote and passed
unanimously.
It was noted that the Green Pedestrian Corridor to the north
of Montana Hall will terminate in the region west of the Parking Structure. It
had been originally thought that this corridor would maintain a width
comparable with the width of Montana Hall for its entire length. After reviewing the anticipated future
development, it was proposed that a collaborative design effort be made between
the Parking Structure Design Team and Don McLaughlin who is working on the
Pedestrian Core Plan to ensure a wider green “node” be maintained at this
location. This will somewhat correspond
to the Green Node being maintained to the South of Montana Hall as well.
Lashaway made a motion that a viable design proposal to
maximize the Green Node be made by the Pedestrian Core Plan Team in
collaboration with the Parking Structure Design Team and OFS Planning, while
keeping in mind the possible need for future expansion of the Chemistry
Research Building and other future building sites. The motion was seconded by Garnick, put to a
vote and passed unanimously.
ITEM
NO 3 –BANNERS ON CENTENNIAL MALL
In the absence of Julie Kipfer, Vaniman made a presentation
on the banners. Samples of both the
fabric and the graphics were shown. Three sets of six banners (18 total) are to be made and hung on the
south light poles, within the Centennial Mall area prior to Catapaloosa.
Vaniman said the light pole manufacturer will be here next week to give a
presentation on their recommendations for banner brackets. The banners will be
double-sided measuring 2’ by 4’ and will reflect MSU’s brand messages and
strengths. The banners will carry a
two-year warranty for UV damage. It was
noted that the resolution and color were not good on the sample fabric.
A motion was made by Lashaway to accept the size and
location for the banners at Centennial Mall, with the contingencies regarding
resolution/clarity and color. The
Executive Committee will make the final bracket decision following next week’s
presentation. The motion was seconded by
Mathenia, put to a vote and passed unanimously.
UFPB will be meeting twice on July 27th. The first meeting will be our regularly
scheduled meeting from
It was noted that UFPB has a new member, as well as several
re-appointments. Dick Pohl and Bill Martindale have retired from MSU. John Brittingham, Brenda Mathenia, and Rose
Waldon’s terms have expired. The new
replacements are:
Sharon McIlhattan - CPAC Brenda
Mathenia - Faculty Mary Miles
– Faculty Ferd Johns
– Architecture Faculty
Also please note that the Meeting schedule for UFPB will be
changing to Tuesday afternoons from
This meeting was adjourned at
Respectfully submitted,
Anne K. McBee For Cecilia Vaniman, Secretary
Attachments: Parking Garage Site Handout LRBP Process Handout
Pc: Geoffry
Gamble, President Walter
Banziger, University Architect Pamela
Barrett, Associate Planner Al
Bertelsen, Director,
Paul Burns,
Parking and Operations Manager, MSU Police Cathy
Conover, Director,
Joseph
Fedock, Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Heidi
Gagnon, Admin. Officer, Administration & Finance
Ferd Johns,
Faculty Representative Linda LaCrone, Assistant to the
Vice President for Research
Mary Miles,
Faculty Representative Charles Nelson, Registrar and
Director of Enrollment Services
Blake
Rassmussen, ASMSU President Connie
Shelhamer, Department of Agriculture End of Minutes
MSU–
Lashaway
Issue: Over the past two biennia we
established and refined the process to consolidate LRBP requests from all of
our affiliated campuses into one consolidated list that goes forward to the
OCHE. This inter-campus process is now reasonably routine.
Now, it is time to establish a more formal input-gathering process to apply to
the development of our own
·
Objective: To present to the President’s Executive
Council, a draft list of proposed LRBP projects that has been recommended by
OFS Planning and informed with input from UFPB and UPBAC/Deans.
·
Schedule: (Primary schedule objective is to meet the August deadline noted in the
LRBP Instruction Packet sent out to all campuses).
o
13Jun05 – PEC Discuss Proposed
o
29Jun05 – Draft LRBP List prepared by OFS
o
30Jun05 – OFS Discuss Proposed Bozeman Campus
LRBP Process and draft LRBP List with OFS Advisory Committee
o
13Jul05 – UFPB review/discuss Draft LRBP List
o
Jul/Aug – Other constituent groups
§
UPBAC – Main intent would be to gain input from
the Deans; however, UPBAC is not scheduled to meet before fall, so unless a
special meeting is convened trying to use UPBAC may not be a viable option.
§
Deans Council – This group is apparently
scheduled to meet on 26Jul05, 09Aug05 and 23Aug05 – so we could get on their
agenda, which would meet our 26Aug05 inter-campus deadline.
o
26Aug05 – MSU Bozeman LRBP List ready to begin
overall campus consolidation process
o
(Note: Fac Council, CEPAC and Professional
Council are not included above since each has representation on one or more of
the groups already proposed for input. It may be appropriate for OFS to meet
with each council this fall [and each odd year during the LRBP info gathering
process] to inform them of the LRBP process to increase their awareness of the
process itself and their various representatives’ obligations. IF we
desire to include any of these groups as an active participant in the campus
process, we could consider how to incorporate that into the cycle for the 2009
session since we do not have time to structure it for this cycle.)
2008-09 LRBP
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
June, 2005 > MSU-Bozeman distributes MSU-LRBP
Instruction Packet to Affiliated Campuses
September, 2005 > MSU-Bozeman LRBP team visits each campus to tour/discuss
proposed LRBP
projects
October, 2005 > Campuses make final revisions to their top priority project
scopes and cost
estimates
November,
2005 > MSU-Bozeman LRBP team presents
proposed MSU Consolidated Project Priority
List to President Gamble for consideration
December, 2005 > President Gamble and LRBP team present draft MSU
Consolidated Project
Priority
List to Chancellors for discussion in
January, 2006 > Finalize MSU LRBP Consolidated Project Priority List
February, 2006 > Transmit MSU LRBP Project Priority List to OCHE
> OCHE submits Project Priority Lists to A/E Division
March, 2006 > Deadline for data entry of final MSU Capital Project data
into SABHRS/MBARS
System
March, 2006 > MSU-Bozeman produces MSU Consolidated LRBP document
April, 2006 > Transmit MSU LRBP document to OCHE
> MSU LRBP team, UM LRBP team, and OCHE LRBP representative
meet in
> Campus tours of LRBP top priority projects by A/E Division
representatives
June, 2006 >> OCHE transmits electronic MUS LRBP Priority List to
A/E Division via
SABHRS/MBARS
July, 2006 > BOR approves MUS LRBP Project Priority List at regular
meeting
> OCHE transmits any changes in the MUS LRBP Project Priority
List to A/E Division for consolidation, with other state agency LRBP projects,
into the Capital Construction Program
Late October, 2006 > Statutory date for Governor to
approve Capital Construction Program
November,
2006 > A/E Division publish Capital Construction Program document,
and distribute to
Legislative
Committees
LRBP PROJECT PRIORITY RANKING GUIDELINES
The following list is a general
hierarchy of priority ranking rationale. Project priorities should be justified
using these guiding principles. Consideration should be given for projects that
address elements from several of the categories as well as projects that
continue or complete phased work that has been previously authorized or funded.
1.
Health and
Life/Safety
Projects that improve or
eliminate conditions that present an immediate threat to health or life/safety,
where it has been determined that there exists no possibility for operational
changes to remedy the situation, and the necessary remedial action is beyond
the resources of the institution.
2.
Major
Maintenance of Building/Utility Systems
Projects that correct a problem
that, if left uncorrected, increases the potential for serious or continued
damage to buildings, building components, or infrastructure systems, and would
negatively impact the institution’s ability to deliver its programs.
3.
Code
Compliance
Projects which
involve improvements to comply with state or federal regulations or
institutional standards. Condition requiring corrective action does not
present an immediate threat to life/safety, i.e., requires an event
(earthquake, fire, etc.) before the problem is manifest. Examples: Seismic
problems, fire code problems,
4.
Operational
Efficiency/Savings
5.
Adaptive
Renovation
Projects which
facilitate better utilization of an existing facility or the adaptation of an
existing facility to changing or expanding program requirements.
6.
New
Construction
Construction of any new
facility, either free standing or addition, generally
in response to program expansion.
Authority Only
Projects for which no state funds are being requested and
only authority to spend non-state funds for construction is needed.
Authority-Only projects are usually not prioritized in the capital program
publication of the LRBP, but are listed at the end of the proposed capital
construction program. Includes projects that improve or
upgrade operating systems or reduce overall facilities liabilities which will
result in demonstrated operational cost-savings that help offset the capital
investment. Examples: Energy conservation, demolition of existing
facilities, etc.
LRBP PROJECT EVALUATION PRINCIPLES
The
following principles will guide MSU in the process of evaluating projects
submitted for consideration through the Long Range Building Program, and will
be used to inform the process of consolidating MSU’s individual affiliated
campus project lists for submittal to the office of the Commissioner of Higher
Education and the Board of Regents.
1.
Decisions
will be informed by relevant comparative and historical campus data, e.g.,
faculty/staff/student FTE, square feet, Facilities Condition Inventory,
historical and projected enrollment, space utilization, etc.
2.
Requests
for new facilities or major renovations/additions to existing facilities will
consider previous approvals for planning and/or design. Marginal supplemental
assistance required to complete previously appropriated projects will also be
considered.
3.
LRBP
maintenance requests should reflect the relative scale of each campus’
facilities assets and budgets.
4.
We
cannot defer the maintenance of critical campus (or building system)
infrastructure components beyond useful life.
5.
Decisions
will be informed by data regarding the distribution of LRBP funds in previous
Legislative Sessions.
6.
New
and adaptive renovation proposals should be based on documented program need,
e.g., growth, changing technology, space, facilities condition, etc.
7.
Current
campus priorities will be expected to reflect priorities from previous years.
8.
Campus
priorities are expected to reflect their approved campus strategic plans.
9.
Decisions
will be informed by the general hierarchy of project types, as shown in the
preceding MSU LRBP Project Priority Ranking Guidelines.
10.
Priorities
for new construction and adaptive renovation will encompass associated deferred
maintenance or life safety enhancements as much as possible.
PRELIMINARY PRIORITIZED LIST -
LONG RANGE BUILDING PROGRAM -
MSU
Priority
Project Title
Estimate
1
Gaines -
Renovation
$20,000,000
2
Herrick -
Fire Alarm
$180,000
3
Campus -
Water/Sewer Upgrade
$750,000
4
Campus -
Roof Replacements
$1,500,000
5
Cobleigh
- Replace Elevator
$160,000
6
Campus -
Code/Deferred Maintenance
$4,000,000
7
$250,000
8
Leon
Johnson - Replace Brick - North Side
$4,700,000
9
Electrical
- Primary Upgrade
$1,500,000
10
$20,500,000
11
Irrigation
- Reservoir Expansion
$5,000,000
12
Reid -
$650,000
13
Campus -
Classrooms Renovation
14
Campus -
Recommission Various Buildings
$300,000
15
16
Sherrick
Hall - Basement - Asbestos Remediation/Fire Sprinklers
$250,000
17
Romney -
Fire Alarm
$180,000
18
Heating
Plant - Fluid Cooling
$200,000
19
Chemical
Storage and Handling Facility
$70,000
20
$800,000
21
Campus -
Vehicular Access - Phase I
$1,500,000
22
Reid Hall
- Replace HVAC/Add Cooling
$3,500,000
23
Campus -
$500,000
24
Cobleigh
-
25
Renne -
Library Expansion - Phase I
$4,000,000
26
Reid -
Fire Alarm System Replacement
$180,000
27
Renne
Library Expansion - Phase II
$15,000,000
28
Haynes -
Upgrade Heating and Ventilation
$350,000
29
Cooley -
Adaptive Renovation
$12,500,000
30
Visual
Communications -
$250,000
31
Campus -
$3,000,000
32
Leon
Johnson - HVAC - Deferred Maintenance
$1,000,000
33
Cooley -
Fluid Cooling
$200,000
34
McCall -
Install Process Cooling
$150,000
35
Irrigation
- System Pump Replacement
$90,000
36
Culbertson
- South Egress or Fire Suppression System
$500,000
37
Traphagen
- Renovation
$5,000,000
38
Campus - Space
Utilization Study
$350,000
39
Haynes -
Seal Brick and Replace Windows
$570,000
40
Roberts -
Electrical System Repair
$500,000
41
$7,500,000
42
Traphagen
- Repoint Masonry
$500,000
43
Reid -
Secondary Electrical Upgrade
$100,000
44
Linfield
- Renovation
$17,000,000
45
Romney -
Renovation - Planning
46
Culbertson
- Replace Windows
$180,000
47
Herrick -
Renovation
48
Howard -
49
Culbertson
-
50
Reid -
Fire Sprinkler Design/Estimate
$45,000
51
Campus -
Street Replacement
$450,000
P:LRBP/2008-09/Preliminary
Projects List June 2005
To:
University Facilities Planning Board
From:
MSU
Re:
Proposed Site for
UFPB gave approval for the
After due consideration the
Advantages
Lewis & Clark
Already under asphalt Already under asphalt Gradient presents possible
construction cost savings.
Better access and more student parking to Johnston, Hapner, Hannon and Atkinson.
Reduces potential traffic flow
to 11th
Does not hamper other campus
construction plans for the NW quadrant.
Minimizes conflict with Chem
building.
Disadvantages
Lewis & Clark
Large building in view of the
dorms Large building in view of the
dorms Impact on traffic flow Impact on traffic flow
Scheduling and staging: although
not insurmountable they would impact on the building management capabilities
for the Chemistry building.
Impact on the line fo trees
between the two Linnfield lots
Underground utilities
Recommendation.
It is therefore recommended that
any approved structure be located on the Lewis & Clark site.
The University Facilities Planning Board met on Wednesday, April 6, 2005
and discussed the following items:
February 23, 2005 - Rose Waldon reports:
ITEM NO 2. – CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREA FOR THE BLACK BOX THEATRE
ITEM NO. 3 – H and PE STAGING
ITEM NO. 4. – STRAND UNION CONSTRUCTION STAGING
ITEM NO. 5. – PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE (NON-AGENDA ITEM)
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 am.
January 26, 2005 - Rose Waldon reports:
December 15, 2004- Items discussed are as follows:
December 1, 2004:
September 30, 2004 CAMPUS BUILDING SIGNS. Vaniman reminded the group of the campus standard exterior building sign, and of the trial exception in format that was made to identify the Huffman Building as an emergency command post. A proposal has been submitted to list the contents of a building under the building name on the sign. Discussion ensued as to the methodology of determining which building contents are listed on an exterior building sign, as there is only room for hanging placards per sign that could possibly contain six names. Bancroft noted the Copeland Gallery within Haynes Hall as an example of an interior building space needing exterior recognition. Many ideas, including putting different names on either side of a sign, designing a companion sign, constructing Mall kiosks, and interior building directories were discussed. It was decided that OFS Planning will further investigate the idea of having electronic building directories, and that OFS Planning will poll a few building supervisors to get a feel for the caliber of the building naming issue. The poll will ask these supervisors what they would want shown if we installed new building entry directories, and whether they could limit the choices to six.
New proposed facilities at Marsh Lab were on the agenda. The proposal is for two facilities: A remodel of the existing facility for large animal research into a bio secure building for small animal research; and build a new bio secure building for large animal research.
We met to finalize site issues for the new USDA building for the College of Ag. The Federal USDA-ARS project group is on campus to tie down the exact site location, size, and parameters of the building. This group includes the project people from Washington, DC, Fort Collins, Colorado, the Architect, the Engineers, representatives from the College of Ag on this campus and from Miles City.
The topic for this meeting was to review the work of Collaborative Design Architects from Billings on the proposed new Parking Structure to be located on the corner of 8th and Harrison. Most of the Board members were present as well as Jo Oudshoorn from VP Admin and about 10 students.Lower Level Ground Level Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Total New
Of these 11 are ADAExisting Lot Net Gain
RFP for Long Range Campus Development advisor - It was announced that the RFP that was discussed last time was finalized. It was scheduled to go out on the state’s website this evening before 5 PM. Turnaround is short, there is only a week for bidders to send in their questions; then we have 2 weeks to respond.
Fowler Easement - The Fowler Easement agreement has been reached between the College of Agriculture, the City of Bozeman, and Gallatin County. It will go to the Regents for their approval at their September meeting.
NON- AGENDA ITEM No. 1 – LRBP PROCESS
ITEM No. 4 – UFPB MEETING JULY 27th
NON-AGENDA ITEM No. 2 - MEMBERSHIP
Please see attachments,
below
Proposed Process
Respectfully submitted,Rose Waldon.
The Planning Board met Feb. 23rd beginning at 9:00 am to discuss the following:
ITEM NO 1. – OPPORTUNITIES TO ENRICH STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCE BY IMPROVING THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT OF A CAMPUS
Banziger and Barrett discussed highlights of the Webcast held on February 17, 2005. The program was presented by Michael Flusche, Associate Vice Chancellor of Syracuse University and sponsored by the Society of College and University Planners. Five concepts were presented as a basis to discover opportunities to improve the physical environment of a campus:
Many of the suggestions and ideas discussed in the presentation (e.g. textures, colors, intimate seating areas) were not very high cost but were small or simple ways to enrich the campus. The Board was asked to look over the handout distributed from the program and the discussion will be continued at the next meeting which will include visuals from the presentation.
Barrett reported that the Black Box Theatre will be ready to go out for bid in March 2005. The area west of McCall Hall has been identified for staging. OFS Landscape and Grounds has looked at the area and there are some bushes in that area that will be removed. This item is brought before UFPB for information purposes only.
Banziger provided information regarding the H and PE renovation and possible staging areas. Two possible locations are the parking/service area south of the H and PE pool and the area north and east of the Fieldhouse. The staging area would be situated to allow for parking during events being held at the Fieldhouse. Care will also be taken to insure that no mature trees are damaged by staging.
The field east of the H and PE Center is one area under consideration for construction staging for the SUB renovation. Alternative areas will be considered and will be presented if/when they are determined.
Wankel reported that during a presentation to the Student Senate regarding the proposed parking structure, concerns about safety and security, who will receive parking passes, and funding for the structure were raised. Banziger reported that proposed plans are to build a 3-4 story structure with open sides and architectural features to fit in with the campus. A design consultant will be selected and high priority will be given to safety, security and lighting in the design of the structure. Funding for the structure will be obtained mainly from parking user fees. Putzke advised that these, as well as many additional issues, will be addressed at the Public Forum being held today. Students are encouraged to actively participate in this early stage of the planning process.
The Planning Board met, beginning at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the following:
Respectfully submitted, Rose Waldon
No further items. Respectfully submitted. Rose Waldon
ITEM NO. 2 – EXTERIOR SIGNAGE FOR BUILDING OCCUPANTS. Several departments have requested additional exterior signage at entrances to their departments. Vaniman presented photos of the ITC canopy as an example of one such sign that has been approved by UFPB. Currently, the Counseling Center is requesting permission to repaint their existing sign on Swingle. This sign is not consistent in design or quality with the campus standards and it is recommended that it be replaced. Criteria for sign installation and sign appearance were then discussed. It was determined that an entity having a separate entry could have a separate sign that would exist in addition to the monument-style building name sign. Vaniman stated she would bring back specific recommendations for the Counseling Center.
It was suggested that since a Student Health monument-type sign exists at Swingle, the plywood one over the door be removed.
It was also recommended that the School of Architecture remove their paper sign from the building entry. Bancroft will address this issue with the building users.
PLANNING FOR MASTER PLANNING. Bancroft and Barrett reported on the first meeting of the master planning subcommittee. They presented a preliminary “Path of Critical Thinking”, based on exploration of each goal listed in the university’s five-year plan. This plan would not speak to the administrative or operating plans for the university; it would only address the physical implications that are raised from this exploration. It was noted that university-wide consensus would be needed on suggestions/solutions that are raised in response to this exploration. Key decisions will need to be made at different stages in the master planning process, stakeholders will need to be represented in this process, and consultants will be required to advise at different stages of this undertaking. Lashaway expects the project to take two years from startup to finished document, and that two additional people are needed in OFS Planning to take over other duties (like construction projects), so that Vaniman and Barrett can concentrate on this master plan effort. Discussion began on related issues such as the shelf life of any proposed master plan, who the working groups and stakeholders should represent, and the degree specificity desired in the final document.
CHEMISTRY RESEARCH BUILDING. The architects presented the Schematic Design of the building for review, comment and a recommendation to the President. The presentation included plans and elevations, as well as more developed site concept. This project is on a fast track for design and construction.
REYNOLDS RECITAL HALL ENTRANCE. A new design for the entrance/marquee into the Recital Hall was presented for discussion and a recommendation. This project will set a standard for other such projects in the future.
AG BIO-PGC BICYCLE PARKING PAD. Vaniman presented drawings for a new bicycle pad to be located east of the Plant Growth Center and south of Ag BioScience Building.