M e e t i ng N ot e s
|
4041 Mill Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64111 t 816.931.6655 f 816.931.9640
Project:
Meeting Date:
UMKC Student Success Center
Project No.:
K580601
Distribution:
Attendees
Attendance:
Location:
Minutes By:
Attachments:
Mel Tyler
Kristen Abell
Bill Smith
Marcie Barajas
Brenda Bethman
Jennifer DeHaemers
Thomas Ferrel
Ursula Gumey
Susan Hathaway
Greg Schultz
Bill Smith
Dennis Strait
Deb Ford
David Reid
Trudi Hummel
Amanda Garbach
April 20, 2011
UC Project Room
GEA
PowerPoint Slides
These notes are the Architect’s record of this meeting. To revise these notes, send written comments to the Architect within
one week of receipt.
Item
 The schedule was reviewed – currently in the middle of the design phase

The diagrams from the last time the group met were reviewed: Level 0, Level 1 and
Level 2. Program zoning and stacking has essentially stayed the same, but started to
zoom into each specific program’s requirements

Specific Program areas have been refined, and compared with University Standards
(Karen and Julie provided information/verification).

Since the group met last, GEA has been studying the zoning map, how the building could
be laid out.
 GEA created verification diagrams – graphic representation of program, organized by each
level’s zoning. Magenta spaces are lobby / common areas. The blue areas are shared
spaces between the departments. The beige spaces are specific to the departments. Thick
solid lines indicate private offices and enclosed program. (see attached PowerPoint for
layouts)

GEA reviewed several plan options: One Option for Level 0, Two Options for Level 1 and
Three Options for Level 2.
 Level 2 - Option A




Commons being separated from offices control possible noise level.
Keep demising wall between 106
Has a better space for Pierson to keep its current front door
However, UMKC would like GEA to explore a solution that helps make the front door
/ main entry of Pierson the West entrance.
 Level 2 - Option B

Liked the shared lobby space as a guide rather than gate keeper
architecture
Document1
interior design
landscape architecture
planning
graphic design
4/26/2011 4:47:00 PM Page 1 of 3
Item


Preferable separation of Pierson from the Success Center
Explore connection to the Mall, interior and exterior visual connection – move the UC
office off the Southwest wall to create a stronger connection between Mall activity
and interior Student Success Activity (It was noted the development of separate
entry and identification of Pierson is not part of the current scope of work.)
Current shared space shown in this option has mail/copy, break along the Southeast
wall – GEA to explore more open functions to draw people back to the Southeast
wall through the services, could be conference

 Level 2 – Option C

Question of acoustics, seems like it could be much noisier without the shared space
as a buffer from the commons.
Separating one-stop from the other components is good thing --activates both sides
of the commons. For the few weeks a year there will be a substantial queue, good
that it will not interfere with other Success Center Activities
One-stop and One-card part of one space is typical --set up camera, take picture
against wall, lock equipment under cabinet for security


 Level 1 – Option A


Review different options for the Event Classroom—should also be shared with tutoring
functions
Mitigating noise and meeting issues, more separation for Welcome Center
conversations, 1:1 with prospective students. Not so good for Disability Services, too
much public frontage.
 Level 1 – Option B

Welcome Center – With Event Classroom, traffic coming in and out might be
concerning with prospective students having conversations – up to 5 sets of parents
and prospective students at once – recognize that it does not need to be private
office spaces, but do need to be able to conduct conversations
Possibly treat the low wall area of the Dining Space to be a full-height wall, would
help diminish dining room noise carrying into Level 1 program
Location of Mind and Body and Disability Services – good, the shared reception
seems to be working nicely. Great that they still have their own separate spaces for
testing and relaxation rooms.


 Level 0

Look into the shared blue space for this level, better integration and function. Needs
to have a private conference space, and a hoteling station for Med School Advising


Medical Advising – without Private offices or private spaces, huge concern about
FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) discussions – concerned about
hearing phone calls – discussing test scores. Seems like students would not feel
comfortable without adequate privacy. Sometimes 8 weeks of solid back to back
advising. Even with a “door open” policy in current private offices, associates have to
get up to close door several times a day


ISAO – two counselors – maybe their space is not private – but a private space that
they can go is necessary, need phone and monitor. For their “check-in”, they will
need to schedule something upstairs
 General Acoustics

Concerned about large tour groups – student groups that occur 4 times a year, High
school students are noisy, could make working difficult if everything is completely
open without buffers
architecture
Document1
interior design
landscape architecture
planning
graphic design
4/26/2011 4:47:00 PM Page 2 of 3
Item
 General Security issues –


Concern about security for equipment within the departments
File security could be as simple as a secured furniture solution
 Pierson – The Success Center could help the way-finding and changing the “front door”,
main entry point for Pierson

Direct Events related to the Success Center into Pierson and other Pierson
considerations:
 SEARCH Symposium each year
 Study Abroad Fair
 Consider the Traffic from elevator regarding the Main entry to Pierson – where they
are coming from, the West will not be the front door for them, means that the East
entry still should be clear.
 Need to change staging area for the tables and chairs that university picks up and
uses across campus
 Hard-scaping issue on the west side – prominent power unit, sewer smell issue by
ramp, ramp may not even be ADA, more concern than just painting and adding
signage –although exterior connection from Pierson to Swinney is important, it is not
within the scope of work of the Student Success Center

Student Success Signage –it will need to highlight and name the building. Must affect
identity, primarily the North and South sides

One-stop – mainly for current students. Discuss the possibility of combining it with an
“Information Hub,” station with student or staffer would help funnel people

Success Center Hours of Operation:
 Mel will talk to CAD about after hours – possibilities for the Upward Bound to use
Mel to figure out University College’s hours – meeting with the group that is organizing the
program next week, will discuss what they are thinking in relation to office hours.
 Mel and Paris – talk about sharing dining with an Event Classroom and moving coffee. Need
to understand issue with Freshens – what to do with it. It is discussed that it might make
more sense to move over into Swinney. UMKC to start brokering conversations with regional
Sodexho regarding the coffee shop.
 Next step – price for building improvements, programming improvements.



Starting the process for pricing, mechanical and other building upgrades will take a
large portion of the budget
Might also have to look into phasing options as possibilities, given the tight budget –
there may only be enough money to touch Level 2 as the budget currently stands
Next time the group gets together, GEA will revise and consider input to create a
version of the reviewed plans that will become ‘The Plan’
architecture
Document1
interior design
landscape architecture
planning
graphic design
4/26/2011 4:47:00 PM Page 3 of 3