Minutes - UF-Facilities Planning & Construction - University of Florida

DRAFT
MINUTES
November 6, 2012 at 3:00 PM
University of Florida Land Use Facilities Planning Committee
Facilities, Planning & Construction Conference Room
226 Stadium West
Members Present:
Erik Bredfeldt, Rep-City of Gainesville
Lee Catledge, UF Enterprise Systems
Linda Dixon, Facilities Planning and Construction
Norb Dunkel, Director of Housing
Scott Fox, Transportation & Parking
Creed Greer, Univ. Writing Program & Dial Center for Written & Oral Communication
Brock Hankins, Student
Edward Hart, Legal Information Center
Kevin Heinicka, IFAS Facilities Planning & Operations
Mathew Hersom, Department of Animal Science
David Lewis, Associate Director
Bill Millard, Chair, College of Pharmacy
Jacqueline Miller, Florida Natural History Museum
Robert Miller, Business Affairs
Kenneth Osfield, ADA
Jason Smith, Forest Resources & Conservation
James Sullivan, Building Construction
Saundra TenBroeck, Ag. Animal Sciences
Ray Thomas - Chair, Transportation & Parking Committee
Carol J. Walker, Facilities Planning and Construction
Members Absent:
Amir Abd-Elrahman, Gulf Coast Research Center
Thomas Caswell, LB-Architecture Fine-Arts, Chair of PHBSC
Jeff Chorlog, Physical Plant Division
Megan Forbes, English Language Institute
John Graham, Radiation Oncology
Chip Howard, University Athletic Association
Steve Lachnicht, Rep-Alachua County Commission
Michael Levey, Student
Greg MacDonald, Agronomy
Chad McPherson, Student
P.K. Nair, Forest Resources and Conservation
Joseph Wilson, Computer & Information Science & Eng.
Visitors:
Erik Lewis, Facilities, Planning & Construction
Stephanie Sims, Office of Sustainability
Howie Ferguson, Facilities, Planning & Construction
Brian Ray, College of Business
Graham Wyatt, Robert A.M Stern Architects
Bill Tilson, Architecture, Preservation Committee
Dan Tarczynsh, Shenkal-Shultz
Cathy Roche, Shenkal-Shultz
Anya Grumpt, Robert AM Stern
Tom Chandler, Shenkal-Shultz
Page 1 of 3

The University Land Use Facilities Planning Committee members met in 226 Stadium West. Bill Millard,
Chair, called the Land Use meeting to order at 3:00 PM.
I. Adoption of Agenda & Approval of September 2012 Minutes.
Motion: Sandra TenBroek moved to approve the agenda and minutes as presented.
Second: Norb Dunkel
Motion carried unanimously
Discussion: Bill said that he had been notified that the Solar Decathlon House was moving back to its
originally approved site at Energy Park and that he had felt that it did not warrant another committee review,
since had been previously approved.
II. MAJOR PROJECTS
Heavener Hall Schematic Design Howie Ferguson
Howie introduced himself and Brian Ray from the College of Business and went over the building program and prior
workshops. He said that the building would connect to Bryan Hall and that it was the undergraduate sister to Hough
Hall (Graduate – Business School), with construction starting next summer and finishing by Summer B, 2014.
Howie went over the committee’s role, noting that the project is at schematic design. Howie said that many colleges
now are trying to create a home base for their students. He introduced the project team and handed over the
presentation to the architect Graham Wyatt. Graham went over the campus’ building history showing images of old
maps and photos, noting various design features including the original plan of arcing roads creating mirror images of
each other that was used as the original design concept for building layout. He said Bryan Hall was built in 3 phases
and that each addition varied on its base floor elevation. He went over some of the site issues, including Bryan’s
north stairwell (coming down), major utilities, and the setback lines that match the north sides of Matherly along
University Ave and the bottom of Tigert’s front steps along 13th Street and stated that University Avenue’s setback
was the more important one to maintain. Graham noted that the landscaping in front of Bryan and Gerson largely
obscure any setbacks related to Tigert. He went over how they were going to connect via a walkway to the second
floor to Bryan, where the north stairwell is today. He said that on the southeast side they would not be making a
direct connection to Bryan. Graham went over the courtyard that would be created between the two buildings and
said that his impression of the east end of Bryan was that it had been poorly designed and, in his opinion, left to be
re-worked later. He went over the building façade and entrances saying most people were supportive of the L shaped
design concept. He showed a photo taken from the northeast of the University’s pedestrian entrance on the corner of
University and 13 th noting that Tigert was not visible. He continued that the trees and shrubs hide all of the setbacks
along 13 th street. He went over the buildings massing in relation to adjoining buildings and highlighted the towers
that appear on some buildings in the historic district.
Graham went over the building heights and said that since Bryan had varying ground floor elevations, the plan called
for aligning along the second floor, again pointing to the walkway that would be built between Bryan and Heavener.
He said that most buildings in the district followed a 12 by 12 roof pitch, which Heavener would also include, noting
that the mechanical equipment would be hidden in the roof. He showed more photos of buildings in the district
saying they hoped to include some architectural details similar to the reliefs shown on some of the entrances.
Graham went over the various brick bondings found in the district and said that they were looking at using common
bond, which was more prevalent on some of the historic buildings, but had not been replicated on newer ones, due to
expenses. Graham said that they were taking care of two big items on a lot of people’s list in the removal of the
stairwell on the north side of Bryan and the adjacent utility box.
Ken Osfield asked if the ground floor entrance to the building would be at grade, which Graham answered in the
affirmative. Ray Thomas asked how the building would be serviced. Graham said that the building would mostly be
Page 2 of 3

served by smaller vehicles and does not have large delivery needs. Creed Greer asked about where dumpsters would
be placed. Howie said that he will be coordinating with Dale Morris from PPD on waste handling, but that the
intension was to use the Smathers dumpsters to handle it and noted that the building will not be adding students and
staff, just moving them. Bob Miller asked about the type of roof for the covered/elevated walkways connecting to
Bryan. Graham said it would be flat with parapets. Bill Millard asked about elevators. Graham said that they would
have liked to include two, but that the one they are including is fairly typical in a building of this size and that
modern elevators are more reliable. Ken said that the relatively new Gerson Hall had issue with theirs. Howie agreed
that there had been issues initially, but that they had been resolved. Creed said that there was a faculty member in
Rolfs who can’t get to their office when the elevator isn’t working. Ken pointed out that the business faculty had the
most faculty that use wheel chairs. Bill asked to see the floor plans for the 2 nd and 3 rd floors. Graham showed that
and said that the second floor was primarily classrooms and the third floor was primarily offices. Mathew Hersom
asked about the number of daily student use for the building. Graham said that on the 2 nd floor it would be a couple
of hundred a day.
Erik Bredfeldt asked to see the build-to lines and setbacks. Linda Dixon went over the build-to line, stating that the
changes would require a Future Land Use Amendment from Green Space Buffer to Academic along 13 th Street for
the +/- 10 foot intrusion into the Buffer land use. She continued that the lines were drawn to respect historical
setbacks established by Tigert and Fine Arts. Creed said that the existing setback/boundary line in the plan appeared
misleading, since it is drawn at the bottom of the steps of Tigert and not the building’s edge. Bill Millard said that
based on that interpretation it would really be a 20 foot intrusion. Stephanie Sims said that she was concerned about
the plan to increase the width of the sidewalk along 13 th in lieu of having one along the east side of the building since
that stretch of 13 th is a bit hostile to walk along. Howie said that the sidewalks would be part of the Gateway Design
to be covered at a future date and Graham said that a sidewalk along the east side of the building may be needed.
Carol Walker said that David Conner was the landscape architect and is working on 10-12 iterations of how to
address this important space. Kevin Heinicka said that they should also consider how they will maintain the roof of
the building, since the clay tiles are known to mold and said that they may want to be able to get a lift around the
perimeter.
Bill Tilson said that he was representing the Preservation Committee and that he agreed with Graham that the
setback line along University was the important one to respect and that the one along 13 th was more arbitrary. Creed
said that he disagreed and that the current setback is obscured by the trees that will be more noticeable once
construction begins (trees removed). Graham countered that he thinks that having buildings set closer to the street
adds to Tigert’s prominence and that Tigert’s grand steps are rarely built anymore, due to the need to comply with
ADA. He continued that he feels that Gerson’s east end should also be obscured by an additional building or
addition. Norb Dunkel said that he agreed with Graham and that it would add to Tigert’s prominence. Erik Bredfelt
asked about Heavener’s height. Graham said it would be in line with Matherly’s.
Motion: Saundra TenBroek moved to approve the project as presented.
Second: Norb Dunkel
Motion Carried with Lee Catledge, Norb Dunkel, Brock Hankins, Edward Heart, Mathew Hersom,
David Lewis, Jacqueline Miller, Robert Miller, James Sullivan, and Sandra TenBroeck voting in
support of the motion. Creed Greer and Ray Thomas voted against the motion. Jason Smith left the
meeting before the vote.
III. OTHER BUSINESS
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 4:15 PM.
Page 3 of 3