MADISON, WI
|
MILWAUKEE, WI
|
SHEBOYGAN, WI
MEETING MINUTES
Project:
University of Wisconsin Eau Claire Campus – New Student Union
Project No.:
DSF #07E2D, Bray #2934
Meeting Date:
January 28, 2010
Present:
Lisa Geer, DSF
Russ Van Gilder, DSF
Terry Classen, UWEC
Charles Farrell, UWEC
Rick Gonzales, UWEC
Susan Harrison, UWEC
Beth Hellwig, UWEC
Tim Lauer, UWEC
Mike Rindo, UWEC
Michael Umhoefer, UWEC
Jeff Kosloske, UW System-via phone
Kate Sullivan, UW System-via phone
David Hatton, Burt Hill
Ray Maggi, Burt Hill
Shawn Plum, Burt Hill
Ashraf Sadek, Bray Architects
Tena Bolstad, Bray Architects
Shane Bernau, Ken Saiki Design
Buck Barker, Rettler Corporation
Reported By:
Ashraf Sadek/tb, Bray Architects
Purpose of Meeting:
Steering Committee meeting to review updated building design and confirm program
Discussion/Action
Morning Meeting
1.
Introduction, sign in sheet was passed
a. Note-Students will have tag team approach, as they have classes and obligations to attend to through out
the day
b. Ash Sadek, Bray Architects will lead the meeting
2.
Beth explained steering committee hasn’t met for a long while, this is an amazing project, however remember
budget is 48.8 million, not a penny more is available and early indications are that the project is over budget.
This is a great building that is functional, but UWEC will need to make some compromises together as a group,
so everyone is coming together as a group to get where we need to be. Confident the resulting product will be an
outstanding student union building.
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
3.
4.
5.
6.
One of the biggest issues – EFFICIENCY
a. The groups throughout the day will address where we are in terms of efficiency and what needs to be cut
back on to accomplish the efficiency goal of 60-65%
Meeting schedule for the day
a. Steering Committee 8:30am – 11am
b. User groups 11am – 12pm
c. Lunch 12pm – 1pm
d. User groups 1pm – 3:14pm
e. Steering Committee 3:15pm – 5pm
Issues that will be addressed today
a. Building efficiency
b. Overall scope
c. Budget
d. Schedule
Russ noted - going through the meetings today, don’t panic about scope or budget at this point, need to make sure
user groups expectations are met in terms of assignable square footage; look for ways to balance ratio between
assignable and gross square footage to assure ourselves we have an appropriately designed building in terms of
efficiency; the Current program developed through extensive user group meetings, iterations back and forth
between folks on campus and design team
a. Project notes (program, square footage, efficiency, construction estimates)
i. Project originally described as 172,000 gross square feet and 112,000 assignable square feet
ii. Current space tab identifies 98,000 assignable square feet and 176,000 gross square feet
iii. May be some variables in the way that the assignable square footage is being counted
1. As a group, will look for areas to tighten up that may be now counted as gross square
feet and should be counted as assignable square feet
2. As we go through documents be aware of and forward these possibilities, so at the end
of the day we can reevaluate the building as it is shown on paper and congratulate
ourselves for tightening the building “efficiency gap” or recognize there is more work
to do
b. Square footage not assignable is gross square footage
i. Percent of assignable square footage to gross footage = efficiency ratio
c. As it is listed on paper now, the building is not efficient
d. Size relates directly to the cost of the building
e. 4-6m over budget construction cost
i. 3 construction estimates tell us we are 4-6 million over budget (from independent estimators-2
contractor and 1 cost estimating professional)
ii. This is a manageable number per Russ, it is a long way out from finishing the documents and
bidding
iii. According to current trends, the economy will be the same in 12 months as it is now, which is
an advantageous bidding climate
iv. Now seeing a variety of projects come in 10% - 20% under budget
v. Important to not cut the building program too much, meaning-don’t get to bid day and come in
4 million under, too much program was cut, it is then a problem to get it back in
vi. Tools and strategies to further manage the budget include:
1. ALTERNATE BIDS “portion of the project that gets designed but could be removed
from project if bids came in high”
a. easy examples for those opportunities in this project:
i. Bar in Cabin
ii. Amphitheatre
iii. Finishes
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
2.
iv. Bridges
VALUE ENGINEERING Look at what is in the project design now and apply VE
exercise – example stone vanity tops, take stone out and put in solid surface
countertop, that is a 20% difference, other finishes could be looked out.
a. Finishes, potential for a wide range of finishes that could be put in the
building at a wide range of costs
b. Certain components of mechanical electrical system, more difficult to
quantify, but may be some possibilities there
Variety of items to look at if we get farther along and decide the budget is an issue
3.
SCOPE COMMENTS
7. Per Russ: Group has done a fabulous job to get where they are; we need to confirm the design at this point, as
groups revisit the design. This is not an opportunity to make wholesale changes, revisit early design decisions or
make grand design gestures, we want to move forward from this, you have a great product in front of you, don’t
spend a lot of time second guessing yourselves and early design issues. If you see something that is absolutely
missing or is absolutely wrong, bring those issues forward. Focus efforts on moving forward and not taking steps
back.
8. From Charles and Staff: Inventory of furnishing and equipment in current building that will move to new facility.
No cost amount assigned to this list, but is a considerable inventory of items that will move and save money in
the long run.
9. Per Ash: Today’s meeting is to:
a. Confirm the needs of user groups and make revisions as necessary to the drawings if needed. Will then
take this to the engineers and they will calculate spaces, design team will have better idea of space and
efficiencies. There is still time to massage the areas.
b. Schedule, to be certain that you are aware of the schedule
c. Finish on time, but maintain quality
d. The 3 cost estimates were done early on due to a volatile construction market, they aren’t alarming at
this point. A/E and DSF still have to discuss estimate numbers with the estimators. Everyone has their
own way of interpreting the documents.
e. Don’t miss the original goal-create a beautiful union for the students, this can be achieved.
10. Per David: This needs to be workshop, it is unfortunate the design team had to use time to make changes due to
oak tree and site, however it is important to remember the passion that everyone had for this project and to not
forget that passion for the New Student Union. Remember the video that was made and the passion everyone had
for the building at that time.
a. Due to slide of building, have changed approximately 40% of design which creates a domino effect on
the site due to changes to elevations. Every elevation has changed.
b. Design team wants this process to be open and transparent, need groups’ input
c. Changes later in project are more difficult to accommodate
d. That being said, there are some items that can be easily changed now
PARKING
11. What are the final parking numbers
12. The parking committee has to go back to the city for approval, need information to do so
13. There are site issues that affect parking
14. With parking projections analysis, campus can probably absorb parking loss, per Rick
a. Campus is proposing to pave over the site of the new education building to temporarily increase parking
situation, this will be beneficial.
b. This project is in very preliminary stages, has potential to provide 104 spaces
c. When the Union project goes to the city to be reviewed, likely to submit the parking project at the same
time, (even though it will be engineered separately) and piggyback on the Union project. This should
give the city great relief that campus has found another way of temporarily increasing the parking
situation, feel it will help this project in the review process
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
15. Approximately 133 spaces identified that would be permanently lost, per Ash this number was before they
developed the design, so this number will need to be reviewed
16. Beth noted that many people didn’t realize the extent of what would need to be modified as a result of moving
the building away from the Council Oak Tree/Site
17. Per Ash-easy to shift a building, but one also needs to see the whole design and view entire impact of the shift,
such as making sure entrances are located properly and program spaces are allotted as they need to be, which
then changes elevations and configurations within the building
DISTANCES
18. How close is the redesigned site to Phillips? - kept 100 foot distance
a. Need to know as continued loading dock activity to the current Davies, including accessibility and
traffic, is one of the site issues
19. How close to the Council Oak - 50 foot distance
REVIEW OF BUILDING DESIGN DOCUMENTS, including architectural, civil, and landscape
20. Description of the overview of site and the strategy for modifying the floor plans, so from a big picture, everyone
can understand where the Design Team started to make modifications to the building
a. Original Option #1 showed the building 60 ft away from Phillips, which is too close
b. Original Option #1 showed a 30 ft radius from the Council Oak, they understood they needed to be at
least 50 ft from the tree
21. New design options started 100 ft away from Phillips and 50 ft away from Council Oak
DESIGN THOUGHTS, Ray Maggi, Burt Hill
22. West side where cabin was located and moving dock had issues
23. Early discussions were to angle toward Phillips, realized there is a setback there; the taller volume of the building
is set back so what they would be moving back is a 1-story volume of the BlueGold, may not positively affect
the floorplan to what they needed on the west side of the building
24. Decided to modify east and west ends as minimally as possible to get this to work.
25. They looked at the west side, and overall as a strategy, had to move cabin eastward to avoid 50 ft radius of tree,
something had to give, had to push and pull other spaces, including kitchen a little southward primarily on the
upper floors as spaces shifted and there were retail spaces on the west side of the building: can we relocate those
on the east side location? To free up some space, slid cabin in, straightened building to remove kink on the
Southside, because loading is coming from the south
26. Mechanical pieces including mechanical yard, back of house mechanical spaces, electrical and all the pieces fall
into place
27. Keep 100 feet from Phillips and modify west end because that is where changes had to occur for loading and the
way the cabin came out of the side of the building
28. Remember goals and address review comments
a. Keep cabin unique
b. Affect Southside elevation in a positive way
c. Coordinate materials around and make it more cohesive as a building
d. Get program to work
DESIGN CHANGES, Ray Maggi, Burt Hill
29. Site plan configuration they are proposing keeps new Union 100 feet from Phillips
30. Little bit of programming from west side moved to south side
31. The design now continues the stone base curving plinth to the south side main entrance which brings a
continuation of materials from the north side to the south side of the building and creates an entrance on the south
side that is very similar now to the north side
32. Building is now stepping back which helps to make the east corner look a little less tall
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
33. The south side always had a step back between the 2 stair towers and what would be administrative offices above
that, in moving the wall of the kitchen a little further south….
34. Radius of 50 feet around the Council Oak site is clear of the cabin and any mechanical equipment yard while
maintaining the loading in the south configuration yard so a vehicle can pull in and back out
35. No vehicles need to continue beyond furthest west point and in front of Nursing like they had to do before
36. From a site plan perspective, the site will maintain a “front yard” for the Nursing building
37. What was lost
a. Last 2 bays are now inside the building
b. Note that sliding the building plan to the 60 feet from Phillips would accommodate spaces better, but
they felt maintaining the distance was more of a priority
DISTANCE FROM PHILLIPS
38. Rick-issue on east end, to minimize east side impact (distance from Phillips)
a. 60 feet from Phillips is not impossible, there are implications that need to be taken into design process,
i. How will they get trucks in and out during construction?
ii. How will they deal with student traffic from the main campus up the hill during construction?
b. Rick notes-shifting and redesigning of the building take time and adds to the schedule, efficiency is
extremely important, but so is schedule. Remember shuffling the inside of the building takes time; while
the schedule is important, efficiency is important as well, there needs to be a balance so the design team
can get to the working drawings.
39. Russ - As you can further massage design don’t think of 60 feet as absolute, give yourself another 20 feet, so that
if you need you have leeway for design available
40. Kate-if you can get everything within 100 feet, do it, however if there are fewer internal changes to the building
when encroaching on the 100 feet, that may be a possibility
41. Ray-if everyone’s needs are met and everyone is happy with the design while maintaining the 100 feet, that is
what will happen
CONSENSUS: If something can happen to increase efficiency and it encroaches on the 100 ft., that is ok.
42. Rick—it is the SITE that is important and that we are trying to preserve, not just a tree, goes far beyond the tree
itself.
COUNCIL OAK TREE/SITE
43. Beth asked “During construction would infringing on the 50 feet of tree radius impact the health of the tree?”
a. Shane - Because the tree isn’t full size, the 50 feet is set aside for its future and full growth, they don’t
anticipate the roots being out 50 feet at this point.
b. Lisa - Could isolate the tree and critical root zone with fencing to prevent the trucks from encroaching,
can calculate this footage by checking the bands of the tree. As much space as you can give to alleviate
impaction on roots is ideal, while ensuring you have construction access on that site.
i. The distance was previously calculated at 1“ of diameter = 1 foot distance from tree
1. 18-20 foot radius is crucial
2. 25-30 foot radius gives a little breathing room
3. Last document Shane has says diameter of tree is 17” and that was about a year ago,
which means an estimated 18” diameter for the current year should be accurate
ii. Kate-at a previous meeting, it was decided a 30’ radius for the construction zone and a 50‘
radius for the building zone
1. Russ-that is a doable number
RETAIL
44. Beth-commented, the retail being so close to the cabin might have some influence in terms of what is sold, they
are working with entrepreneurial students to come up with ideas for the retail
45. David-it is a perfect spot for retail as people come through the door, the retail is right there
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS OVERVIEW, Ray Maggi, Burt Hill
46. Looking at matchline on old plan, can see how much things have changed, moving 70’ westward
47. The building has straightened out
48. Loading now coming in from south side, not west side
49. A lot of back of house areas moving slightly north as the cabin and staircase slide almost 2 structural bays
eastward
50. Kept elevator core in current location
51. Tried to minimally affect the bookstore, kitchen layout, storage, and kitchen equipment which was already laid
out; tried to maintain those lines for the bookstore and back of house for the kitchen, while moving everything
west of that….the overall strategy was to affect the western side of building
52. Susan noted-useless angles spaces, by straightening out should be more efficient and gain more usable space
a. David-some angles are being used for duct work space, plenum, mechanical systems, space for
perforations and duct work, while they look like they are not being used, they actually
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, FIRST FLOOR, Shawn Plumb, Burt Hill
53. A201a and A201…first floor plan
a. By wrapping stone around gave more space on south side of building
b. Basically enter the same location
c. Instead of restrooms and lounge, changed it to a lounge as you enter
d. Felt there should be more activity as you enter the building
e. Relocated retail to this area, so it is right when you walk in,
i. Just 1 instead of 2 retail spaces, they could add an additional one if users would like them to
ii. Do they want 2 separate spaces or 1 combined space, this discussion needs to happen
iii. Area can still be massaged in terms of design layout
f. Vending machines
i. 4 vending machines, area in a circulation area with access to vending and a lounge
ii. 4 behind retail
iii. Total of 8
g. Tuck the rest rooms off the beaten path so they aren’t right there when you walk in,
h. Idea - possibility of a media wall “ribbon of media”
i. As you come in you enter an area with media wall, screens displaying what is going on
campus, CNN, etc., backing up on the vending, Wall would hide everything, vending tucking
behind media wall, could have touch screen stations tucked behind the wall as well.
i. Idea - Could design as “cyber café” space
i. High top café table
ii. ports along wall to plug laptops into
iii. much more active space along entry to “cyber café”
iv. Could put retail in along with cyber café
j. The lounge would be somewhat off the beaten path with view of buses docking
k. The windows, 6 ft wide with glazing, look into the vestibule, so as you come in, it isn’t a solid wall, you
can see through
l. Charles-back corner will be some of the most coveted space on campus, more valuable like this than
retail, so far back, yet you can see what is going on, get there early, plop down and never leave
m. Beth-retail was originally for revenue, is this new layout ok?
i. Charles-yes, will make the revenue up in other ways
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
n.
o.
Kept services desk in the middle so they have a view of the activity, very centrally located
Incorporated comments to add another door to the suite (review comments) another way to get in and
out of that control point
p. Originally the service center manager was in a storage room, now has office with window and storage
room
q. Comment-don’t have ATM in such an alcove, make more part of vestibule
r. Comments-concern with size of room for ATM, vaults, control room,
i. Shawn-mimicked layout from Malinda, for bank layout
s. BANKCARDS
i. Charles-we make Visa cards here so there is an increased need for security, and an exact
amount square footage needed for the secure area for cards; UWEC was the first school in the
country to make bankcards;
ii. What Malinda sent for layout was what banks require to make cards
iii. Shawn took the hard line copy of vault with counter and replicated on the floorplans
iv. Rick-whatever we do with the bank vault needs to be generic enough to compete so that it is
something that everyone can use
1. Charles-Visa, not a bank itself, runs the card process; MasterCard would have the
same requirements, if a different bank came in they would have to comply to same
requirements
t. ATM is set back 3 feet so as to not be in line of traffic
u. Can close building at night and still have access to ATM if university chose to. Would have to walk
around building and come in at northeast door
v. Kate-is the bank area projecting into the line of walking and sight through the doors when you are in the
vestibule
w. Service desk is projecting in 6feet
i. Kate-this would be a major interruption to north south flow
ii. Ray-between desk and adjacent wall is 13.5 feet ; which is 3.5’ wider than the other corridors
moving through rest of building
1. Kate-Potential wasted space; building is at 54 or 55% efficiency and needs to get to 60
or 65% building efficiency, what is the value of the corridor north and south of that 6
feet projection, its dead space
2. Charles-disagrees:
a. In the side areas, there are 2 stations, one area at least for selling tickets,
could use that area for people queuing for tickets, they can queue up along
the side maybe this will help mitigate obstruction by crowds
b. Now-queuing goes past main entrance. When there are larger events this is
very challenging and annoying for people.
c. During a concert (example) could sell tickets from both stations and put up
barriers and have people queued up out of the way (10’s of thousands of
tickets are sold here every year) this extra space could be invaluable
iii. NOTE-POSSIBLY TIGHTEN PROGRAM HERE
iv. Charles-possibly make the info desk rounder? Reflecting the window, which would get rid of
the dead corners and reduce the choppiness, would facilitate circulation.
x. David-while some spaces may seem inefficient, they are really working in program with the mission of
a student center and focusing the buzz of activity around the student information desk, that is useable
space. You will notice seating as you go along the corridor; they aren’t just a corridor, they are union
streets of activity. Some of the space is used for circulation and some is for encouraging out of
classroom activity. A buzz of activity around service desk “Union Street of activity” outside classroom
equals activity programmable space. Halls are important areas for students.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
Russ-may need to ‘rethink’ how the space is calculated
Beth-as they toured various student unions, they found many that used the halls with couches and
meeting spaces, UWEC really liked this concept
aa. Russ-If you don’t put furniture in the halls, the kids will sit on the floor, or UW will buy furniture later
and put in
bb. They will have four service stations and they need to manage with that, per Charles. Ideal world would
be 6.
cc. Architecture of the dining area has pretty much stayed the same
dd. Remember per Shawn, when you see furniture, it is just Shawn putting a graphic down
ee. Furniture will vary and change, once we have Charles’s inventory, will ebb and flow
54. GRAND STAIR
a. Beth-Steering committee had the most comments about the stairs, especially the width “Commentsmake it more grand”
b. Increased the width of the stair
c. Increased the width and flow of what was designed to help the stair become more of a grand stair, do
they want to look at a more subtle curving of the stair
d. Lowest landing is 3 steps, could be a different material, stone or wood, and then the stair itself starts,
will help separate it from the lower floor
e. Goal is to be not so straight and rectilinear (lines and angles), to have a subtle curve, mimicking the
double height space between the two bays, so the upper floor you would enter and come down to a
middle landing and proceed around, would still have an elevated base, perhaps one or two stairs in a
different material
f. A seating counter with area underneath would still be there and it could follow that curve as well, so you
would have high top seating and seating that is under the landing
g. Base could extend and it would serve two purposes
i. Per code , anything under a certain ceiling height you need to provide a barrier so people don’t
hit their heads and the you would extend the stone for 3 stairs at roughly 18 inches underneath
and provide that walking barrier,
ii. Provides niche/alcove for students to sit with laptop and hide under the landing of the stair thus
becoming one of the areas that is enriched but serves a purpose
h. 3 stair towers on south-widths are driven by occupancy loads
i. Primarily because of the upper population of the ballrooms , the stair widths have to
accommodate exiting 3000 people out of top of building
i. Close to 8 feet wide now, just within the threshold of not needing a rail down middle,
i. committee is hoping to avoid the railing down the middle
ii. Committee-likes curve
j. Efficiency drain per Kate-ballrooms on 3rd level would be better on 2nd level because of the scale of the
spaces on the third level and traffic to them;
i. Drain on efficiency and increases the gross square footage considerably
ii. Quantity of space on third floor and exit capacity needed for third floor is quite extensive
iii. Susan-if you spread those upper spaces through out the building, can reduce size of stairs
iv. David-many spaces pop up in volumes, the spaces are double height
1. It is a juggling act, to balance the building and mechanical costs with how areas relate
to one another after built
v. Early options had the ballrooms on the second floor; after the committees discussed how they
wanted the building to function throughout the day on a conferencing level it was decided to
move the ballrooms on to the third level
vi. Moving the ballrooms to a lower level at this time would be detrimental to the schedule, the
staircase meets the programmatic needs of how you want the building to function
y.
z.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
vii. Charles-Critical to have bookstore on 1st, but not necessarily textbook, so they put textbook on
2nd; it might be a problem to put textbooks on 3rd, would be sending people from the 1st floor
to third to get and return their textbooks (4 big times a year)
viii. POSSIBLE EFFICIENCY ISSUE
55. EFFICIENCY
a. Definition of efficiencies: ratio between assignable (areas that you are using) vs. gross (services to get
you to that area, corridor, mechanical, restrooms, etc. every other thing that will service the area you are
using)
b. Building as a whole is different than program percentage
c. Note-when Ash and Jeff did assignable, they didn’t include hall lounge space, this could be a huge
potential change to efficiency
d. Jeff-fair to block out the seating areas where they occur, whether along the spine or in hallways and call
it assignable lounge space or pre-function space
e. Rick-we follow FICUM Federal standards so assignable spaces are consistent around the UW system
and consistent around all higher education as long as they follow those classifications, then it is ok to
revisit the assignable space
i. Ash, yes-we will follow Federal FICUM standards
f. Russ-circulation/seating areas, you may come up with a number for lounge space that is 10% higher
than program requirements; may find that rather than one big lounge, have dispersed lounge space and
have a smaller main lounge and corridors
g. Susan-chairs along corridor were to give seat count for eatery because servery area wasn’t large enough
to give a big enough count for seating; remember the chairs aren’t just lounge areas, they are
“eating/lounging spaces”, so to recount them wouldn’t necessarily fix the assignable areas
i. Distinction to make for levels 1, 2 and partially 3
ii. So when we get the finally quantity, it is a determination of which category the count falls into
h. Very large mechanical space, that wasn’t included in the gross count
i. Ash-go through the design and get the building you want, then will make the counts work
56. CABIN
a. Cabin hasn’t changed much, everything around the cabin changed
b. Still have the bar, cabin, portable stage, stair to second floor,
c. Open, circulating stair all the way up; originally stair was right next to the cabin; in the new design they
decided to move the stair from right next to the cabin, over and create a corridor to get in to the
receiving area and make everything work logistically with the stair going all the way up. Under the
stairs becomes part of the cabin.
d. Seating count and square footage stays the same, so maximum occupancy load stays same
e. Still have fireplace
f. When you come back to the receiving area and loading dock, these are the rooms that were there,
electric, teledata, custodial workshop, another electric, another teledata;
i. Added rooms are:
1. Enclosed recycling, to make recycling room, originally was called out as an area
g. Per the review comments, there was a need for lockable vending storage, so she included that space, no
talk about size; per Charles, whatever it can be, they will make it work
h. In reconfiguration have space for housekeeping, not in original program, but seems like a space they
need, per review comments. Have small janitor closets on each floor, this will be their central janitor
closet on 1st floor, small closets on other floors. If custodians need to restock their cart they would come
to first floor “warehouse”, as opposed to large closets on each floor. They will have a slop sink and
some supplies on each floor.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
57. ELECTRICAL YARD / DUMPSTERS
a. Electrical yard and dumpsters, with a stone or brick wall to shield the area
b. Boxes south of the electrical yard, are dumpsters and items in the side yard and loading dock area on the
previous plans
c. Someone coming out of building will need to walk around the wall; agreement to put in door through
for direct access
d. This will be an electrical yard with a transformer, emergency generator. Compressors/refrigeration
system on roof, hiding in mechanical room; grease trap is in same location as previous design
e. Nursing will look out on the dumpsters and electrical yard.
i. No screens on top to disguise
1. Discussion to disguise, remember that with dumpsters, there needs to be clearance so
that the garbage trucks can hook on to the dumpsters and lift them to dump into the
trucks
ii. Create wall so that it is tall enough to block that view
iii. Gates/screens on front; street level is more of a concern than 2nd floors. Concern-are there any
windows from the center looking down on the area? Shawn-No, mechanicals, then ball room
storage area and ball room windows are over from the area.
f. Surface of yard needs to be extremely durable, garbage trucks push the dumpsters into the wall
i. Durable CMU masonry with exception of Council Oak Tree area which will be stone
1. possibly use poured concrete for durability
58. Core is similar to original design
59. KITCHEN had to condense one way and grow the other. Didn’t get tighter, it is not less square footage. Layout
will basically remain the same, skinnier east west, but not changed north south
a. Charles-with the kitchen staff there is such high turnover, they are used to working in a variety of
stations and will adapt quickly, no one has a real ownership over one station, it is very free flowing
60. MAIN POINTS-1ST FLOOR
a. Entry corridor, curve main desk so it is softer, corners aren’t so harsh
b. Moving westward, main stair, go with configuration that is curved and a raised first landing. Becomes
more organic, not so rectilinear, seating around bottom. Several levels to make more attractive, no rail
c. Gates to the service yard on south side facing Nursing
d. Opening in wall to allow for easier access to service yard
e. Service yard surface needs to be extremely durable, consider poured concrete
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, SECOND FLOOR, Shawn Plumb, Burt Hill
61. Susan-window view will overlook mechanicals, they will see the top of the electrical, will look down on the
transformers and dumpsters
a. Charles-most people look out rather than down, unless they get up to the window and look down, most
people in room will look out to see lawn
62. Meeting space has large window looking to tree, could be Council Oak meeting room, committee would like a
room honoring the site, and this may be it with the large window looking out to the tree
63. Windows from cabin to tree? Take out first one, maybe frost 2nd window due to concern with alcohol policy
a. Easy enough to take windows out, there are a couple in the stairwell, very easy to frost those. Also to
create a clerestory where people won’t look directly out.
b. Michael-window should look out
64. West end
65. Old plan had stair next to cabin, have now pulled stair over and created a corridor, allowing them to put a
meeting room along the outer wall, which is much nicer than being an enclosed, great room
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
66. NON-TRADITIONAL LOUNGE
a. Moved
b. Idea-At corner, possibly make it a partial height wall, see through panels, sort of see in, but obscured,
break down the corner, while still defining the corner
c. Idea-Counter top height with plugs for laptops
d. Charles-Non-traditional students are more focused and less social than traditional age students.
i. Think of something more in the corner, perhaps a counter with plug-ins for laptops on the
periphery, something that is more secluded and work-oriented, so students can pay bills, do
school work. More of a “library set-up” than a “lounge set-up” but not over the top, while the
core has more activities
e. The core should be more of a social area, with periphery for people that have something to get done, so
they can do that
f. Have refrigerator, small counter with rinse sink (hand sink), counter with microwave, sanitizer
underneath, this would support the non-traditional students nicely
g. Private, quieter space
67. Back of house corridor, so you aren’t entering the restrooms from the main area, come around and go through
ancillary corridor, access the restrooms, janitor closet, av storage, electric/teledata,
68. Access the service elevator from the ancillary corridor- yes, definitely.
a. Charles-too often in current building, things that should happen back of house and unseen happen right
in front of you. As in a hotel, you don’t really want to watch people setting up. Anytime you can hide
functions you should, and have services disappear and while appearing more elegant overall, this should
happen
69. Service elevator is mechanically sound and capable to handle mechanical repair equipment and large items, such
as a grand piano
70. Bathrooms, gender-neutral restrooms
71. They pulled the kitchen south to accommodate the design shift
72. Talk of pulling everything else south to match the line, including the administrative services offices
73. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES OFFICES
a. Originally had main entrance to the suite at one end, which means to get to the offices at the other end,
you would need to pass by all other offices, possibly causing disruption.
b. New design added an additional corridor; entrance would be in the middle and potential daylighting
opportunities would be created. You would have a reception area, then go to administration or event
services
i. Charles-it won’t be chopped up this cleanly
c. Charles-Key in all of this is the payroll person;
i. Friday afternoon about 150 people, many that don’t have direct deposit/bank accounts, come to
get their checks, there is a parade of people that get paid weekly
ii. Payroll services would be close to door to minimize wanderers
d. A long corridor has the potential for,
i. Wasted space
ii. Staff leaving items “out of the way” (racks of tables, etc.), which other people won’t like
e. Option B, turning the offices
i. Committee and users had a very positive response to this option
ii. Would put the entrance in a fairly visible place
1. Would alleviate the corridor as a potential junkyard
2. Entrance and offices wouldn’t be so hard to find
a. Note-it wouldn’t be so difficult for administrative services staff, harder for
workers in the field that have high turnover or people trying to find event
services once a year
f. WAYFINDING is critical in this area
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
g.
h.
i.
Doors would have card lock. Idea is to drive public into areas where there is someone to direct people
so that users suffer no more interruptions than necessary
No windows into offices
i. Charles-he has done his research early on. Discussed politics of who gets a window and who
doesn’t, no windows alleviates this problem, it doesn’t matter which wall you are on, there will
be no windows. The conference room is a shared space with windows. When someone leaves,
there won’t be a struggle over who moves into the office with a window.
Kate-presupposes this isn’t the optimal solution the architects can come up with in regards to the
daylighting requirements necessary to make this a green building
74. 2ND STORY BOOKSTORE
a. Combination part rental (which UW owns and manages through the bookstore) and part purchased
textbook section which Barnes & Nobles runs exclusively for themselves (lease space devoted to other
companies)
b. Idea to enliven corridor, run graphics down corridor, have niches/cubicles that run down the corridor
with round entrances for students to sit and plug their laptop in
c. Kate asked for direct feed feedback from Tim and Michael as to how the students intend to use those;
Green Bay has a lot of soft, cave-like, 1970 type spaces
i. Tim-the look is interesting and engaging in photo, believes that over time the concept will
quickly become dated, Shawn thinks that depends on the finishes
ii. Concept is good, students are always looking for private spaces to tuck away in for a break
1. Question-Is that an activity you want to encourage? Students not associated with
bookstore loitering in the hall. Yes per Charles, they certainly aren’t going to be in the
way or seeing anything they shouldn’t, no problem for them to camp out. Usually
students are so removed from the administrative area, they now have a long hallway
that students get “lost” in; would be nice to see students by the administrative offices
and see something engaging them.
iii. Michael-seems too permanent, lounge/seating should be flexible, seems like additional seating
tossed into the wall
iv. Round design isn’t really seen favorable by the committee
v. Would be better if the idea weren’t so trendy, perhaps a blank alcove, as trends changed could
easily be made more current
vi. David-the corridor may go away, if committee likes the concept it can be applied in other parts
of the building
vii. These are new found seating opportunities because the corridor was there, took an opportunity
to enliven the area
viii. Keep as option
d. Would increase efficiency if moved the wall back and removed the corridor; wouldn’t look different on
outside, the ballroom expanded in size when corridor was added in, to remove the corridor would
increase efficiency
E. PRIME TARGET FOR EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT
f. Michael-efficiency is far lower than anything people who approve this building will accept, can not
concede to complaints, ADDRESS EFFIICENCY
75. SRI SPACE
a. Final decision needs to be made on SRI space
b. Michael-area should be lockable for legal documents, but accessible from one side or another, would
like one giant workspace where 2 or 3 people could work in (would like enclosed workspace for 2-3
people, lockable area for legal documents, photocopier, printer, they will have items they don’t want
general students seeing and using)
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
c.
76.
77.
78.
79.
OFFICE SIZES- STANDARDS
i. Project type 1 office-150 square feet, higher than state requirements, this is something that
makes the building flexible over time, per Kate
ii. 120 square feet is standard
iii. 2 person office is typically 120 square feet so it can be flexible between one and 2 people
iv. 120 square feet for 2 people that don’t need much space
v. 120 square feet for 1 person with closed door space
d. Kate-there shouldn’t be a jump in the type of space people are receiving now
e. Graphic Services shouldn’t be standard space; has 4 people that work in the space, interns are in and
out, no walls, open working space
Rick-the mechanical systems are in place so that regardless of what happens with wind, people won’t be
breathing in exhaust fumes and cooking/grease odors? Ray-placement of the venting, HVAC, etc., hasn’t really
changed, systems are in place to prevent odors/fumes.
VENDING MACHINES, per Charles, can’t go below a certain number of machines because of campus contract
with the vendor, need spaces for 12 machines; more would be ok, not less.
TERRACE
a. By wrapping stone around on the first floor, allows them to have a terrace on the south side.
b. Terrace on north overlooks grass and Putnam, terrace on the south is where the sun will be, however it
overlooks the parking lot
c. Jeff-terrace is extensive and this is a cost item to review
COST NOTES
a. Greater uniformity of footprint between floors will help with efficiency and structural pile construction
b. Because building is becoming more regular, this will help keep costs down
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, THIRD FLOOR, Shawn Plumb, Burt Hill
80. Shifting of stairs help widen the Alumni Room, west end, stair to cabin, fireplace
81. BALLROOMS
a. Split ballroom on southwest side
b. Charles-Could potentially be setting up one area while the other is in use, isn’t a real back of house
with this design, storage room is only accessible through the ballroom; if there were a back of house,
could access storage and set up one space while the other is in use
c. Jeff-Seems like there isn’t a lot of back of house space compared with other buildings that have been
built in the system, is this because of the alcove in big ballroom
d. ALCOVE
i. Depending how issues are addressed, the alcove is probably more valuable as a store rooms
than alcove
ii. Purpose of alcove was for the stage
iii. Western Alcove doesn’t work as stage, wings have an obstructed view, opening is now 28 feet,
could eliminate wing walls and make it larger, paint, hang scrim so stage area is more defined,
would force sight line forward on stage
e. Charles- must have back of house, there needs to be door to keep back of house out of the way
f. Seats, 500 in large ballroom, 288 in smaller, must have the 500, anything over the 288 is gravy
g. Beth-during the Cabaret show, how would performers enter from the side
h. Michael-this is the largest performance venue on campus
82. RESTROOMS
a. Adjusted restrooms, made women’s lounge nicer, provided counter top areas for makeup/baby changing
b. Note-Need male/female restroom for baby changing
c. “Makeup space” put on EFFICIENCY LIST, space that is expendable
i. Not necessarily “makeup” space, lounge area for people that need to sit down
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
83. REVIEW FOR EFFICIENCY-Fainting couches, and extra space…a luxury that they will choose to not afford
per Kate
84. Jeff-is the exit code met on the eastern end, only one exit for more than 50 people? If they eliminate door, should
be fine. Architect will review
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, MECHANICAL AREA, FOURTH FLOOR, Shawn Plumb, Burt Hill
85. The mechanical spaces are now enclosed. This increases efficiency ratio negatively.
86. There may be portions that don’t need to be enclosed which will result in cost savings. Being enclosed inflates
the gross square footage and ratio.
87. Roof top exhaust units are needed for kitchen units
88. Refrigeration system on roof is fairly large
89. EFFICENCY REVIEW-Review what is enclosed on 4th floor
EXTERIOR, Ray Maggi, Burt Hill
90. Changes to south east corner of building - carried stone around space
91. Regularize finishes, brought some metal panel back
92. Different colored glass is proposed, with differing levels of transparency in the glass coloring (this is different
than spandrel, which is opaque)
93. Added a level of detailing with shades, 3 colors proposed for building
a. 2 colors of glass for banding effect, one has a little tint for color and one is ultra clear, no greenish tint
i. IMPORTANT-Will need to talk about the glass
1. This current design requires a special window washing system
2. Bird biologists on campus are very concerned, the birds are used to being able to
swoop in to Putnam park; also there are a lot of trees and grass that will reflect on the
glass and further confuse birds (landscape issue)
LANDSCAPE AND CIVIL
94. Sheet c300
95. What is happening around the oak tree
a. Have established the 50 feet around the radius of the tree
96. A civil perspective
a. Floodplain requirements, west end adjacent to the oak tree are:
i. 779 contour line, 15 feet from face of building, per code, they have to maintain this elevation
around the building envelope
ii. Soil needs to be added to maintain this elevation
b. Elevation around tree: an existing 778 contour line, so need to transition about 2 feet from the 779 line,
which is about 15 feet from face of building
97. Can do:
a. Transition at 3:1 (steep) usually try to keep 4:1 (which is mowable)
98. Closest dimensions:
a. Construction considerations require a 30 foot radius around tree. Lisa will check in state protection
specification for information regarding a 13” - 15” diameter tree
b. Tree ring measurements, drip ring to canopy is about 10-12’ toward that dimension, so they are going
twice that dimension from the canopy
c. General rule of thumb, if you are 1-1/2 times the drip ring away from the tree, should be safe
i. Lisa will verify requirements
99. Kate-squared off wall not desirable; smooth slope is desirable
a. Clarification-squared off line on drawing is northwest corner of electrical yard
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
100. Kate-why aren’t we maintaining the finish floor minus 6 and then dropping off more steeply toward the building
a. 779 is 15 feet from the building envelope, so line follows building envelope, per code, plan sheet shows
minimum
b. Slope intercept is at 77, where slope of 779 would meet existing grade at a 3:1 pitch over a 6 foot area
c. 28.5 is closest point
101. Shane-Instead of 3:1, put in retaining wall, arched seat wall that would drop grade immediately from 779 to
existing grade and create nice amenity where people can sit and look at the tree
102. Root survey
a. Options have to keep the 779 elevation, so fill needs to be placed in the 50 ft. radius. For the 30 ft.
radius, could do a root survey to see where roots truly extend to
103. Kate-Placement of fill of less than a foot over a tree of this height at this distance, should consider no net change
up to one foot, not an impact; Lisa and Shane-for an oak tree, would disagree
104. Kate-This is more of a knoll, no walls would be preferential to a site wall; Lisa will discuss with Shane
105. ROADS - Rick
a. Campus discussions have included talk of closing down the road north of nursing
b. Nursing is becoming more isolated, an island surrounded by asphalt
c. This could be an opportunity, since the truck turn in is fairly close to Putnam drive, go ahead and
discontinue it to Putnam drive, improve Putnam over to Garfield, this would tie Putnam into the parking
area from the back side
i. Would eliminate need for road on north side
ii. Potential opportunity-trash area, instead of trying to get a truck in and out, could provide a wall
and more coverage of the trash area from Nursing
iii. Nursing would be more integrated in the green space
d. This would require the elevations meet the emergency road requirements
e. This project’s original scope included raising the road by 12 inches and improving it, cost shouldn’t be
much different,
i. Russ-in this concept the road is twice as long, would be a large cost variance
106. SITE DESIGN needs to be brought to the level of building design, per Kate
a. Western edge has no constraints in terms of the tree
b. The eastern end, isolated peninsula of parking, drop off zone and crossing of students across 4 lanes of
traffic rather than fewer haven’t been shown as alternatives yet.
c. Would be beneficial to have a side bar with Lisa Geer, KSD and Rettler and bring back to group so there
is more conceptual level interaction occurring.
d. Lisa, Rick, Shane, Butch, Ray and Kate and Jeff via telephone adjourn to Charles’s office
107.
Note-parking still needs to be addressed
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
Afternoon Meeting
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Scope, schedule and budget
A meeting will be scheduled for the first or second week of February to review volume 2 comments. From
campus Rick and Terry will need to be involved.
Russ-Schedule
Design document submission will be the next official milestone; should be ready for April BOR review.
Tentative schedule at this point
a. April-BOR review and SBC approval (5 months behind original agency submittal schedule)
b. Completion of construction documents August 2010
c. Bid date of October 2010 (2 months behind original agency submittal schedule)
d. Break ground in November 2010 (1 month behind original agency submittal schedule)
i. Start with piles, no benefit to advancing foundation, already know they are raising the site
rather than excavating, should work as long as possible into winter; won’t be able to get in the
ground during summer.
e. Substantial completion in August 2012 (gain time, originally scheduled for October 2012)
f. Completion of sitework on old site Spring 2013
i. Completion of sitework on old site, demolition over winter and do terracescaping, wait until
spring to do final landscaping, lay sod, etc.
g. 24 month construction timeframe was generous, more than actually needed to build this building.
Campus users were hoping to move in, settle down, do soft opening before students arrive.
Russ-this is an aggressive timeline, but doable. As a new governor is being elected, are trying to avoid any
extreme happening such as a building moratorium.
David-Would be nice to take advantage of the competitive market and bid this summer, market may escalate
quickly. Russ-get it bid before winter and hopefully lock prices.
Ash-can always bid and lock in the contract, order items and wait until spring for construction.
Kate-DSF and campus UW System would like to make an earnest effort to get shovels in ground by November.
a. David-if everyone is at the table making decisions together, it goes a long way to moving forward
Terry-Plans need to go back to city for review; won’t rule out that work needs to be done on site issues which
precludes city review in February, believes March would be earliest to submit.
Beth and Rick-Spoke with neighborhood, 3rd ward.
Per Kate and Ash-Dennis Johnson from Ayres said the EIS content is suitable; do not require another meeting
before BOR.
Rick-Spoke with Daryl Tufty, City Planner, regarding the temporary paved parking lot project, he recommended
that project is submitted at the same time as the Davies, would help smooth review process, even though the
parking is a separate project.
Ash-Schedule and completion date is +/- as contractors may speed up this August completion timeframe. An
exact date is not possible to provide at this time.
a. Many decisions and meetings need to happen quickly, such as specific meetings for finishes, hardware,
etc.
b. Largest remaining variable is the third and fourth floors.
SUSTAINABILITY/LEED CERTIFICATION
a. If the project could afford it, the University would like it. At the last meeting the student government
was against it due to the cost.
b. The last potential date they can say LEED or not, is when it is needed for inclusion in the BOR/SBC
submittal
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
17. Next meeting
a. With design team and steering committee-should be a face to face, put the revised design with costs on
the table and choose options, make the decisions. List of VE items that will need to be addressed, like a
shopping list, in essence, what do you want to buy for this building.
b. #1 - Tighten up the efficiency as much as possible.
c. #2 - Priority-add alternates
d. #3 - Priority-Value Engineering
18. Ray-recap of 1st floor
a. Information desk
i. 4 computer stations
ii. Curved front area, lose corners/right angles
b. Main monumental stair, curve, make more monumental, lower landing being a platform
c. Back corner at service area, add gates at enclosure that faces nursing to screen from nursing as well as
opening for ease of access
d. Add window back to west wall of cabin area
e. Back wall by cabin, cabin shading, ability to black out windows
f. Reconfiguration of bank, increase countertops in service area, add counter seating at lost and found area
where they count money
19. Ray-recap of 2nd floor
a. Western side, south of cabin, reconfigured area to have a larger meeting area
b. Non-traditional lounge, rectangular in east west direction, south of that was mechanical room for nontraditional lounge
i. Additional counter space perhaps in corner, private seating, keep kitchenette, refrigerator
(campus owns a full-size fridge that will move), microwave, sink; keep private feel
c. East west corridor that sits on the north side of the administration area. Seating areas go away, intent is
to enclose corridor.
d. East of corridor is a vending space (3 machines in that area)
e. Along corridor on 2nd floor on northern (?) side; larger meeting area, mechanical room for nontraditional lounge, keep kitchenette
f. Workroom storage area, lockable cabinets
g. Cabin area
i. Still have bar area
ii. Reduce size of bar, curve and simplify for bid
iii. Separate green room under stair as well as separate room storage
iv. Balcony, seating along edge with higher Café tables for people farther back to create tiered
seating
v. Pipe lighting grid for clip on lights
h. Moving north, deleted corridor space
i. SRI (student organization suite)
i. Only want a standard office size per Tim
ii. SRI budget is now half of last year per Michael
iii. Perhaps one office the organizations could apply for each year
iv. Have 3 meeting rooms and one open meeting area
v. Michael and Tim will send an email to Beth at end of meeting with decision on office spaces
j. Terraces-Didn’t have south or east terrace before, cost saving to not have occupancy on roof,
VE ISSUE to revisit
k. CONSENSUS TO REMOVE CORRIDOR AND NOT SWITCH ORIENTATION OF OFFICES
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
l.
DISHROOM DISCUSSION
i. Question with dishroom-is the University making a switch to china? Will it sit empty? Be used
for storage? Needs to be some dishwasher in the kitchen.
ii. Charles-doesn’t think we will ever go to china, not feasible. Maybe in 25 years when someone
else remodels. Don’t need a pass through.
iii. Beth-what about Delaney?
iv. Charles-won’t have 800 plates coming through for dinner. Plates and serving pieces will come
back to Delaney in tubs as they do now.
v. Rick-we don’t know what future holds. This facility has to allow for maximum capacity;
equipment should be plumbed and vented, in the event we need to place a dishwasher in there,
we have the dishroom, let’s prepare it. Need to examine whole food service program, need to
look at if it makes sense to have a dishroom on the 3rd floor. Dishroom has the possibility of
creating leaks to floor below (Charles agrees)
vi. Rick-need to examine food service when Porter Khouw comes to town (February 5) no dishdrop pass doors necessary now, but the skeletons should be installed. At a future date they may
go with dishware.
vii. In the “dish-drop area” can now have recycling, garbage, etc.
viii. Rick-does it make sense to look at a pulper?
ix. Charles-“trash folks” need to be involved in that discussion. We are a test site for composting,
not many people doing it at this level, perhaps the hospital or school district? Biggest volume
commercial composter in the area. Don’t know if pulping would be an option at this time,
make sure we don’t buy a piece of equipment that can’t be returned.
20. Ray-recap of 3rd floor
a. South wall will move further north, because corridor being removed
b. Compress alcove, remainder will become storage
c. Catering kitchen could move
d. Remove medium ballroom
e. Add storage to ballrooms and access to storage through back of house
f. Catering kitchen
g. Large meeting room is 2,000 sf? Adjacent to and connects with Alumni Room.
h. Does it make sense to open and create flexible alumni room space?
i. Clearly define back of house doors.
j. Susan-can you remove corridor, egress through adjacent space, check code
k. One alcove in women’s bathroom lactation room
l. Look at women’s lounge at entrance, shuffle to help square footage
i. Beth notes-it is not a fainting room
m. Need second exit to stairwell from student government room for fire escape
n. Identify corridors as assignable space
i. Charles-the servery wasn’t able to accommodate enough seats, be careful with assignments,
don’t short servery and overdo lounge
21. BALLROOM
a. Rick-this is a deep cut.
b. Charles-makes no sense to have a huge ballroom with little or no storage; and this is what we will have
if we eliminate a significant amount of storage on 4th
c. Charles-Operationally, the amount of time they absolutely must have 2 ballrooms is low, they need to be
more creative, such as, they may need to clear out food service when more space is needed
d. Rick-doesn’t have what is needed for the Viennese Ball; don’t have the area to subdivide in to four
meeting rooms of equal size.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
By removing a ballroom, you significantly impact flexibility of the building, we don’t want to take a
step back, there are 2 ballrooms in current building.
f. Rick-programming is the last place to cut.
g. Kate-press the heck out of the efficiency before looking at programming
h. Rick-take cutting the ballroom off the table as an option, Beth and Charles agree
i. Charles-cutting the ballroom is the last option, best to see a sketch now of what can be moved, design
team will come back with multiple options; committee doesn’t want to wait, wants to save the program
they laid out, need to decide sooner rather than later
22. RUSS-STORAGE AND ISSUES
a. Take alcove off large ballroom
b. Take storage room in corner of small ballroom, pull it out and remove alcove, gives storage room access
outside of ballroom
c. VERBAL CONSENSUS TO REMOVING ALCOVES IN BALLROOMS
23. BOOKSTORE
a. Susan-passing information from a discussion on campus - Why are we using so much storage real estate
in the books area , is there any way to not store rental books , this is only used a couple times each year.
i. Tim-what about the online option
ii. Charles-Rental place pays $40,000 a year in revenue, cost savings wouldn’t begin to touch this
stream of revenue
iii. Modifications to the bookstore storage would change the way UWEC handles its textbooks
iv. The logistics would include: storing books offsite, extra staff, transportation, security, etc.
v. Ash-high density storage?
b. Charles-surprised at how many people go in and rent books for classes they are not in.
c. Beth-look at high density storage for next week’s meeting;
d. Charles-still have purchase space spread over two-stories; do you want to put the bookstore on one
floor?
i. Russ-too big of design change
ii. Ash-is high-density even an option
e. Charles-need to talk to IRR committee, if they force students to do online only; tremendously impacts
the way they do business
f. Michael-possibility of locating high demand textbooks out front
24. Ray-recap of 4th floor
a. Move as much storage down to other floors; reduces square footage on roof
b. Look at what is enclosed, open mechanicals
c. Now have 3,000 square feet on 4th floor
d. Russ-With alcove changes, and addition of mezzanine, we are getting close to storage need of 3,000sf
e. 4th floor was access for A/V and mechanicals, this access will remain, the corridor, freight elevator and
stair will still go up to fourth.
f. It is a cost saving not to have occupancy on roof-no extra pavers helps with cost.
g. Jeff-NOTE - no outdoor air packaged units, positively pressured exhaust in bldg, everyone is in
agreement
h. Rick-17 packaged exhaust hoods, etc., people will see an unattractive roof if they are not enclosed
i. Lisa-Easier to hide with light colored ballast; a white epdm system is not satisfactory and maintainable.
The roofing specialist for DSF would prefer to do something else, perhaps a black epdm with ballast for
exposed roofs.
e.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
25. COSTS/ASSIGNABLE SF
a. Rick-when will they get an idea of reductions on 4th floor.
b. Ash-the A/E team needs to tweak, compress and agree on what is assignable vs. not assignable; this will
happen between Russ, Rick and design team.
c. Rick-When the time gets closer, has a list of items they feel weren’t captured, omissions on cost
estimates.
d. Michael-there is a different square footage on each cost estimate.
e. There will be a better estimate on kitchen equipment by February 5. Sodexo will price out the list. They
will suggest items that can replace the “Bentley” items. There may be tables and chairs included that are
currently owned by University and not needed.
f. Charles-there are some pricing issues and inventory issues, chairs that were purchased with the intent of
moving and older furniture that won’t move.
26. Ray-recap of Elevations
a. Cabins have stone on lower portion
b. Still have same number of gable spaces north elevation
c. By the stairs, darker brick, and champagne metal panel
d. Tried to create one ribbon of window, includes glass, spandrel and metal panel
e. Two different shades of glass, light green and ultra-clear
f. You will see pieces of materials from all corners of building
27. Discussion on wall system costs
a. Difference between engineered curtain wall vs. linear ribbon windows
i. Wall system vs. window inserted into a wall
ii. Engineered curtain wall is much pricier per sf than a window inserted into a wall
b. Storefront systems can only go so high without reinforcement
c. Kate- important to get good windows in north side for daylighting
d. Verticality is less important than interior programming and horizontal expression
e. Curtain wall continues to sill of second floor, not 40-60 feet, it would be smaller sections but taller than
what could be done with punched windows
f. Kate-get high value for choices “Big bang for the buck”
g. Structure the decision making process so everyone is informed (instruct on the various building
components).
h. Terry –there is too much glass on the north side, we are trying to be energy efficient, and perhaps some
other wall systems would be better, something with higher r-value. Amount of high glass is excessive.
i. Appearance is one thing, but achieving sustainability is more important, even if not pursuing LEED
certification.
j. What is the difference between spandrel and glass? There is insulation behind it; it is just like a wall.
k. Amount of glass seems excessively high.
i. Be as energy efficient as possible.
ii. Lisa-don’t forget about the glass vs. birds concern.
28. Highlights from side meeting with CIVIL/LANDSCAPE
a. This presents one site solution, no others have been looked at
b. Orientation of parking hasn’t been addressed to optimize parking
c. Pedestrians cross quite a bit of traffic, to reduce that would be desirable
d. Option for pedestrians to go through or around building, to east
e. Distance between oak and building, 25’ minimum root zone
f. No need for retaining wall
g. Can they put utilities where the roots aren’t-no, compaction is an issue
h. Need to see circulation fire route north of Nursing and south, exploring cost difference, and pros and
cons
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
i.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Rick-Improve Putnam drive to this point, city would be happy, parks may not be; it is a potential hotspot
for pleasure drivers and friends of Putnam
j. Show delineation of park on every drawing
k. Engage Ken Saiki Design and Rettler more fully with site development options, they have expertise
l. Need stormwater treatment options that can be evaluated, it is now at crossroads of pedestrian
thoroughfare, there could be better options, too rectilinear and small, can it be linked to Little Niagara
m. Road alignment with Nursing, north door of Nursing can remain more dominant per Kate, because of
truck turnaround won’t explore options of southeast door, per rick that discussion has more to do with
drylands access.
n. Geothermal should not encroach future development
o. Large culvert as is should be fine
p. South of creek current hydrant that could be used
q. Site drawing, lots of transformers shown near Catalpa, should be an alert so can be properly sited
r. Above ground transformers or objects need to be clearly marked
s. Ash-had to get confirmation that the building committee is on board with the overall design
configuration, now is time to get site people on board with fleshing out their options
PARKING
a. Parking, will lose 125 permanent spaces with this current layout, as they change the site layout, this
number may change
b. Parking group is concerned with these numbers; they buy their permits this summer for fall
c. Kate-Someone needs to sketch the rectangle for north of Schneider-will add 104 new to existing 29
BUDGET
a. Beth-Budget issue, no more than 48.8 million total for everything-can we do this building? YES, per
Russ
b. Ash-The kitchen is a high number and the furniture is an unknown number. These numbers need to be
pinned down.
c. Rick-Any finishes needs to be in line with a campus such as this, needs to coincide with sustainability
standards and be durable, should look good and blend with campus, this includes other items, such as
kitchen items and furniture.
d. Can’t have expensive imported cedar and stone, but can have beautiful, sustainable and affordable local
wood and stone. This is a large order, A/E needs to bring options to the table and help committee realize
cost decision of each option.
Finalized floor plans, site plan, rendering what the building looks like is needed for BOR/SBC; interior finishes
are not needed as much at this point.
Site options are critical need ASAP.
4 week time frame to accomplish this is critical.
Shane, Buck, Lisa, Kalscheur can meet if needed to discuss site options-Rick needs to be involved as well, he
won’t be in town until the 16th.
Minimum number of efficiency to take before BOR, 60 is doable, 65 is nice but harder to accomplish.
What is needed now (at a minimum)
a. Costing and prioritization of any possible tradeoffs that are there, everyone needs confidence that it will
come in at 48.8M, site plan, plan before building was shifted, current design, rendering, elevations, floor
plans, diagrams, etc.
b. In the design report summary, there was a middle budget column that needs to go away.
c. These are the minimum documentation in the slimmest form for the deciding bodies.
d. The design report needs to support this in full for the professionals that carry this forward to the
legislature -with rigorous underpinnings and a full design report with all of its appendices.
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com
UWEC New Student Union
Steering Committee and Design Team Meeting
January 28, 2010
37. At the next meeting, cost decisions need to be made.
38. Everything must be done in 4 weeks.
39. Kate-Peer review-this project never went through a peer review the first time, it went through an informal peer
review, Terry was there; campus/system wasn’t invited per Kate.
40. For peer review need
a. Plans, elevations, site plans, energy modeling, know the sustainability, daylighting, etc. These items are
presented to the team, peers meet and get back to design team with review comments.
41. Design team will decide next meeting date and email an agenda to participants.
42. Next step is for design team to regroup and rehash design.
43. Next meeting on February 5th with Food Service consultants.
The above information is the interpretation of the meeting activities and comments; and should be reviewed by
all attendees. Please comment on any discrepancies and inform the writer as soon as possible of any changes
required. Date issued: February 8, 2010.
BRAY ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, INC.
Ashraf Sadek/tb
Cc:
All Present
212 East Washington Avenue | Suite 101 | Madison, Wisconsin 53703 | Phone 608.441.2575 | Fax 608.441.2580
www.brayarch.com