MINUTES OF

THE UNIVERSITY FACILITIES PLANNING BOARD

March 26, 2003

 

 

Members Present:            Bancroft, Chair; Garnick; Lashaway; Mathenia; Ostermiller for McCoy; Pohl; Quisenberry; Rippy; Sharrock; Waldon; York

 

Members Represented:            Connie Shelhammer, College of Agriculture

 

Members Absent:            Becker; Brittingham; Dooley; Martindale; Miles; Roloff; Stump; Yarnell

 

Guests:                                     Pam Barrett, OFS Planning

                                                Jon Ford, OFS Landscape & Grounds

                                                Mark Headley, Overland Partners Inc.

                                                J.D. Jacoby, OFS Architectural Services

                                                Christy Jordan, OFS Architectural Services

                                                Connie Shelhammer, College of Agriculture

                                               

 

The Planning Board met beginning at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the following:

 

 

ITEM NO. 1 –  ANIMAL BIOSCIENCE SITE SELECTION – Mark Headley presented an analysis of the nine potential sites for the new Animal Bioscience Building that were endorsed previously by this Committee.  After a brief synopsis of the benefits and drawbacks to each site considered, Headley presented a proposal to site the building east of Linfield Hall.  This proposal includes redeveloping the service area between Leon Johnson, Animal Resource, and Linfield Halls, necessitating the relocation of the pedestrian corridor between Lewis Hall and Leon Johnson Hall.  The proposal included a master plan-level concept to create a corridor or series of quadrangles between Linfield and Herrick Halls, with focal points running between them.  Quisenberry stated that the new building will be laboratory and graduate student spaces, while most of the office space would remain in Linfield Hall.  The service drive at the north end of North Linfield Hall would also be reworked as part of this project.

 

Rippy questioned whether any parking would be supplied with this building.  It was determined that since no parking would be removed to site this building, there was no need for the project to provide any, except for the replacement service drive area and a designated spot for the USDA Inspector.  Bancroft suggested that the idea of a corridor/mall and quadrangles as a master plan concept be continued as an on-going discussion.  The issue of the brick popping off Leon Johnson Hall onto this project was noted.  The new building will not encroach within the defined “falling brick zone”, but that this zone will be investigated further and noted on the drawings.  South Linfield Hall and Animal Bioscience Building may be connected at the second floor level.  The Animal BioScience may also be connected to Leon Johnson.  Bancroft suggested that the 11th Street entry to the South Linfield and the large lecture hall be more prominent, in order to minimize pedestrian traffic at the service court.

 

Motion by Garnick to accept proposed site.  Second by Ostermiller.  Approval was unanimous.  This plan is to be presented to the PEC next Monday.

 

In response to a project status request, Quisenberry stated that they are working on federal funding and meeting with the development committee.  The President has charged this committee to have at least $9M committed to the project by December, 2003.  There is not yet a plan to proceed to construction documents.  A public fundraising effort is planned for next Spring for the rest of the money; if it is successful, then this project will go to the 2005 Legislature for construction approval.

 

ITEM NO. 2 – HAMILTON HALL PARKING LOT – While this project was approved at a December, 2002, meeting of this Committee, it was reintroduced for further discussion of the landscaping.  Jon Ford noted concerns regarding landscaping south of the new Hamilton Lot, since the utility tunnel runs through that location.  Snow removal would require the storage of snow on top of the tunnel, and vegetation must be at least 4 feet away from the tunnel.  Ford also noted that the area in discussion was not remediated with the tunnel work, so the soil remains very heavy clay and compacted, which make plant growth difficult.   As the goal of the proposed hedge was a visual barrier, Ford proposed replacing the hedge with a cluster of lindens, which would provide less of a visual screen, but more of a sense of separation and visual relief from the parking.

 

Vaniman noted the “dry river” concept is part of the Centennial Mall design, and expressed hesitancy in not continuing on with it.  It was noted that a berm would be hard to maintain and expensive.  Bancroft stated his concern that a grove of trees would not necessarily solve the original problem of blocking sight of the parking lot from the Mall.  Lashaway felt this grove would compliment the groves in front of the Library.  Ford responded that lindens stay low and pyramidal, and some undergrowth could be inserted sparingly.

 

Motion and approval by consensus to abandon the hedge idea and let Landscape and Grounds do what they felt is best, within the budget.

 

ITEM NO. 3 – CHEEVER-HAYNES BRIDGE RAIL MODIFICATION – The bridge between Cheever and Haynes Hall presents a liability to the university, because the walls of the walkway start about 12 inches above the floor – leaving a sizeable gap for people, expecially children, to fall to the ground below.  OFS Architectural Services proposed a solution of installing 1-1/2” square brushed aluminum rails to reduce the open spaces to three 3-1/2” spaces.  Bancroft noted that the proposed solution was attractive, but probably would not withstand snow removal processes.  A single heavy channel was suggested, leaving the maximum code allowable space below and above the channel.

 

Motion by Lashaway to approve alternative single channel concept, and to require Architectural Services to work with the building supervisors and Campus Maintenance to figure out the details of the design.  Second by Pohl.  Approval was unanimous.

 

ITEM NO. 4 – LOGO SIGNS FOR FIELDHOUSE EVENTS – Vaniman noted that BACCII is this coming weekend, and logo signs for it will be in place at the 11th&Kagy corner, and at the north corner of the Fieldhouse on Grant.  The logo sign are on stanchions which do not penetrate the ground.  Lashaway asked this Committee for permission to allow Facilities Services to work with this type of sign issues without needing approval from this committee on each occurrence, with the understanding that questionable installations would be forwarded to the Executive Board of this committee, and solicitations for permanent installations would continue to be presented to this committee.  Consensus approval was obtained.

 

Vaniman also noted that the “Art Attack” installation for this year would be horses, but otherwise the same as the trout walk that occurred last year.

 

No other new items were raised for discussion.

 

There being no further business before the University Facilities Planning Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 a.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

Pamela J. Barrett

Architect/Associate Planner for

Cecilia R. Vaniman, UFPB Secretary

 

Pc:              Geoffrey Gamble, President

            Shari McCoy, Assistant to the President

            Joseph Fedock, Interim Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

            Charles Nelson, Registrar and Direction of Admissions

            Cathy Conover, University Relations