September 19, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn – Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles Rutherford (ASMSU),
Members Excused: Jacobsen, McCoy, Rimpau, Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Kathy Brewer, Data Information Specialist-Planning Design and Construction, Mark Headley, Studio Forma, Phil Iverson, Project Manager-Planning Design and Construction
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes from the September 5th, 2006 meeting were approved as distributed.
- UFPB EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT - Banziger reported on reviews made by the UFPB Executive Committee.
Temporary Bobcat Plaza Signage - The UFPB Executive committee reviewed a proposal brought by the Bobcat Track and Field Association for placement of a 4 foot by 8-foot sign on skids. The primary function of this signage will be as an aid for the fund raising program announcing the “Future site of the Bobcat Plaza”; project identification will consist of Prugh and Lenon Architects at the time of installation, with a space reserved for addition of the project general contractor in the future. The proposed duration for this signage will be for the duration of the football season and then again in the spring during track and field season and construction. Placement of the proposed signage was approved by the UFPB Executive Committee. Upon reporting to the UFPB Board, it was determined that the following “sunset” clause will be added.
- A. The duration for placement of the proposed signage shall not exceed three athletic program seasons, commencing with the 2006 Football season. This amendment was seconded and passed unanimously.
- MSU - TOMORROW - Walt Banziger and Ferd Johns presented to the Board, the MSU-Tomorrow Production Team’s power point portfolio this summer’s work, as it was previously presented to The MSU-Tomorrow Executive Oversight Committee.
Huge strides have been made in bringing the campus development plan to life for the upcoming public forums in October 2006.by the following Production Team members.
Ferd Johns, AIA, Architect, Professor of Architecture, Design and Production Head
Mike Everts, AIA, Architect, Assistant Professor of Architecture, Design and Production Head
Allison Orr, Graduate Architecture Student, Design Assistant and Graphic Illustrator
Laura Grafel, Graduate Architecture Student, Senior Production Team member
Matt Davis, Graduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
Eric Druse, Graduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
Craig Hadley, Undergraduate Architecture Student, Production Team member
The power point presentation begins with the Analysis of the Existing Campus, which links to graphics showing the historic core of campus, a perspective of the Centennial Mall, Wilson Seating, Campus topography, Campus streams, Bike trails, Transit routes, Green Spaces and views in and out of campus. Master Design Proposals give elements of Plan A and Plan B. There are various key elements depicted, giving viewers the option to pick the best of each providing valuable input for the development of the final Design. Under Design Concepts, the team has developed imagery of such concepts as the proposed continuation of east/west axis through campus, the extension and mirroring of historic green spaces to the north of campus, new tree-lined boulevards at South 7th and 11th and more. This imagery will correlate to the Development Statistics showing what exists, what is proposed and how each change will result in a net gain in space and parking for the campus. A dynamic parking graphic shows how the distribution locations of each proposed parking garage will allow 5 minute walking radius to key academic and administrative buildings on campus. Arial Perspectives have been developed showing how the campus might appear as it develops using the proposed plan. Spatial Quality is a series of renderings depicting walking views of campus as it may develop with possible integration of commercial elements and green spaces. There are also some birds-eye views of areas such as the proposed bridge over 19th. The Design Details give prospective as to the sizes of roadways, setbacks, service areas, and screenings. All of the elements of this portfolio serve to give the viewer a clear vision to the direction for the future of the MSU Campus.The information available from this presentation will be available for viewing on the MSU-Tomorrow website following the October forums.
In discussion, it was noted, the location for Athletics’ enclosed football practice facility is likely to be decided in the very near future. The Planning Committee is to meet with Athletics and the President to workout details.
Discussion on location of the Animal Bio Science Facility indicates a site selection is pending. Mark Headley with Studio Forma will bring further information to the UFPB Board at the October 3rd, 2006 meeting.
September 5, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johns, Johnson, Rutherford (ASMSU)
Members Excused: Jacobsen, Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes from the August 8, 2006 and the August 22, 2006 meetings were approved as distributed.
- UFPB EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT The UFPB Executive Committee had no reviews to report.
- BUCKLE-UP PROPOSAL This item was tabled.
- CHEMISTRY BUILDING - TIMBER HARVEST STOCKPILE Jeff Butler reported on the status of the lumber harvested from trees removed to make way for the Chemistry Research Building. The estimated timber harvest was originally placed at 5 to 6 thousand board feet. In actuality, the amount of lumber salvaged was closer to 15 to 16 thousand board feet. The material has been rough cut into 1 inch, 2 inch and 3 inch slabs, and either kiln dried or air dried. This lumber has now been returned to MSU and is stacked, covered with tin and tarped in an area south of the Facilities Compound in the Faculty Court. The wood is under UFPB control for distribution for future approved projects, such as Student Projects via Bill Clinton, Several Conference Tables, and a Project (yet to be determined) for the MSU President, however, as the quantity of usable material is considerably higher than originally anticipated, a determination on will need to be made to identify need. Jeff Butler will contact the SUB and the Native American Studies to determine if they have any projects for which a portion of the excess materials could be used. He will also determine a time-line for length of storage. UFPB will then determine if the majority of the material will be consumed by the University within a reasonable time, or if a portion should be sold under the property disposal regulations.
- MSU - TOMORROW Walt Banziger reported that the production team is continuing their work. Three-dimensional models of each plan and renderings of key implementation areas are being developed. On September 18th, 2006 at 12:00 noon, the Executive Oversight Committee will meet for a presentation of these new materials. UFPB will see this same presentation on the September 19th, 2006 and then on October 10th and 11th, 2006 the next round of public forum will be held at the SUB. There are several key areas within each model which are still open for discussion. Summer of 2007 will see the final Campus Development Plan brought before the President, the Executive Oversight Committee and the UFPB.
August 22, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Rimpau, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Johns, Johnson, Miles, Thull
Members Excused: Rutherford (ASMSU), Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Pat Simmons - Antenna Technical Committee; Ed Adams, Civil Engineering, Bret Gunnink, Civil Engineering, Rolf Groseth, Office of the President
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes from the August 8, 2006 meeting were not available.
- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT - The Executive Committee had no reviews to report.
- BUILDING NAMING COMMITTEE - Banziger reported that the Building Naming Committee met last week to consider two requests:
- Request to name the Animal Resource Center, the William J. Tietz Animal Resource Center was recommend for approval by the committee. Former President Tietz's expertise was in the area of veterinary/animal sciences which goes well with the building and the building was approved and constructed during his tenure as president. Banziger moved that the Board recommend naming the building the William J. Tietz Animal Resource Center - 2nd by Butler, passed unanimously. The Board also recommended that the "official" name be recorded as the William J. Tietz Animal Resource Center, but that the building sign, phone directory, and other facilities records record the title as the Tietz Animal Resource Center.
- Request to name the Graduate Art Studio, the Terry and Paul Melvin Graduate Art Studio. The Melvin's donated approximately half of the amount of the recent building renovation debt service. McIlhattan moved that the Board recommend naming the building the Terry and Paul Melvin Graduate Art Studio, and that the Naming Committee review the Naming guidelines to address the issue of "official" and "operating" names - 2nd Banziger - passed unanimously. The Board also recommends that the "official" name be recorded as the Terry and Paul Melvin Graduate Art Studio, but that the building sign, phone directory and other facilities records will record the title as the Melvin Graduate Art Studio.
- ANTENNA POLICY CHANGES - Pat Simmons presented revisions to the Antenna Policy. The UFPB is the entity responsible for keeping the policy current and performing the 3 year review. The only significant change occurs in Section 3.3, which specifies the ability to charge an additional amount for additional antenna sectors. Lashaway moved that the Board recommend approval of the revised policy - 2nd by McIlhattan - passed unanimously.
- ANTENNA REQUESTS - Pat Simmons presented two antenna requests:
- Museum of the Rockies - Request was for a 1.2m dish to serve the main museum control center. The frequency will be one that KUSM uses periodically, but the Museum use will be for "receive-only". If there is any transmitting interference when KUSM uses the frequency to transmit, it will be the Museum's problem, not that of KUSM. Since the Museum will not be transmitting, there will be not interference issues with KUSM. The installation was tested with rented equipment and it worked fine. Simmons will continue to work with the Museum to assure that the roof-top installation is as unobtrusive as possible. Bertelsen moved the Board recommend approving the installation - 2nd by York - passed unanimously.
- Football Stadium - The new game broadcaster (Clear Channel Radio)has requested to reuse a small whip antenna on the stadium that was left by the previous broadcaster. Since we expect the broadcaster to continue to work with Pat Simmons to complete their work, and only minor changes might be necessary.
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 1 - CABLE TV CONNECTIONS - SATELLITE DISHES - Simmons noted that two departments desire to have cable TV connections - one in Leon Johnson Hall and one in Huffman. Both locations would be costly to serve by Bresnan Communications and have requested that they be allowed to install ~20" satellite dishes to get reception. Installation might be roof or wall mounted. Simmons wanted to know whether the Board would consider such requests if further developed or not. Consensus of the board was that departments should use the buried/tunnel commercial TV cable whenever economically available but to consider such requests on a case-by-case basis, and to develop some guidelines as we go.
- COBLEIGH COLD CHAMBER - LOCATION - Thompson and Banziger presented a request to relocate an existing cold chamber from inside Cobleigh Hall to the exterior of the east side of the building. It was noted that the initial request was for a temporary, 2-year, relocation, but that they might come back later to request that the location be approval as permanent. It was noted that the UFPB has discussed the possibility of allowing the College of Engineering to construct a permanent fence/screen to enclose an area on the east side of Cobleigh Hall in the past, and it would be to the College's advantage to consider such a long-term solution for these types of needs. Lashaway moved that the Board recommend approval of the proposed "Site B" (see attached site map) and if Site "B" proves impossible for some reason, the group would come back to UFPB (or the UFPB Executive Board) for further consideration - 2nd by McIlhattan - passed unanimously.
- INITIAL PARKING COMMITTEE REPORT - Lashaway reported that the Parking Advisory Committee, a standing Committee of the UFPB, met last week for the first time, with Jo Oudshoorn as Chair. The Committee will be making quarterly reports to the UFPB in the future.
This meeting was adjourned at 5.00 p.m.
August 8, 2006
Members Present: Llewellyn - Chair, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, McIlhattan, Sharrock, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Miles, Thull
Members Excused: Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Yarnell
Members Represented: Bertelsen for Stump, Duffey for Jacobsen, LaCrone for McCoy, Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Mandy Hansen, Financial Aid Officer
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes from the July 25th, 2006 meeting were approved.
- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT - The Executive Committee has reviewed the following items: Melanie Stocks has requested a window installation at the Fieldhouse. In review of this request, the Executive Committee found that this is not in a public area, but the design will aesthetically match the current windows in the building
- MSU - TOMORROW - Banziger and Johns gave a presentation on the continuing advancements on the two build-out scenarios. This same information was presented to the Executive Oversight Committee on Monday, August 7th, 2006.
It was noted that the core region of campus has an adequate number of building sites to likely accommodate any expansion within the next 20 to 30 years. The building sites denoted on the build-outs do not necessarily depict a specific building, or its footprint, but rather should be viewed as place holders which will offer alternatives for future building placement. Likewise, interior campus parking markers are viewed as sites for future surface or garage parking development. Outlying parking lots (when developed) will be serviced by a shuttle system to the interior of campus.
To define the Campus edge the area along College at approximately 14th and 15th would be landscaped and developed as a new campus entry gateway, and a cooperative development with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust for a proposed greenway and bike path along College will also be incorporated. A visitor kiosk and way finding would be developed to make the campus friendlier.
The campus has several strong north-south axes, some which contain natural streams. Stream restoration/beautification is an essential element of future campus development. A strong east-west link will be developed to link campus across Nineteenth. Initially this greenway link will be connected to the west by a crosswalk with a stoplight. A possible bridge over Nineteenth would be developed in the future.
The agricultural lands will remain within the heart of the campus, surrounded by University development that will act as a protective buffer from the possibility of a future "one-time" sale.
The heating plant will remain in its current location, with possible satellite co-generation plants located throughout the campus. Facilities Services will be moved west of Nineteenth, freeing up more of the central campus for future development.
September 18th, 2006 the design team will again meet with the Executive Oversight Committee to present more advanced drawings, along with a computer simulation (aerial view) of campus as it may look in the future) for further review and comment. October 3rd, 2006 this new presentation will be made to UFPB, and culminate in a series of public forums scheduled for October 10th and 11th, 2006.
This meeting was adjourned at 4.12 p.m.
June 13, 2006:
Members Present: Banziger acting-chair, Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Thull
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Garnick, Jacobsen, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Yarnell
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Al Bertelsen, Director - Strand Union Building; Mandy Hansen - CEPAC Alternate; Pat Simmons - Technical Antenna Committee - Chair
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes from the May 30th, 2006 meeting were approved.
- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT - There was no action by the Executive Committee to report at this time.
- GPS BASE STATION - Pat Simmons, presented information on behalf of the Technical Antenna Committee regarding siting for the installation of a federally authorized GPS Base Station.
Land Resources and Civil Engineering in conjunction with Engineering, Inc. and Inland GPS, Inc. wish to install a GPS system that will be an official site for the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) on the MSU Campus. Three sites have been considered by the Technical Antenna Committee for the receiver, and were presented to the UFPB. The favored sites were inside the existing Long Term Storage chain link fence. In discussion, Burns noted that due to storage requirements within this lot, the most suitable site would be on the south side near the gate (Site 2 as detailed in meeting handouts). It was noted that this location would likely afford the most protection for the receiver antenna as well.
Burns made a motion to recommend the installation of a federally authorized GPS base station for use in teaching and research by two MSU departments and also the City of Bozeman and the Gallatin County GIS departments.
The GPS antenna needs to be located where it will have a 360 degree clear view of the horizon and sky, with no obstructions above 10 degrees. This antenna needs to be very stable and due to "sway" factor of tall buildings, a ground site is preferred. The antenna will be mounted to a concrete column with approximately 9 feet of exposed height and an additional buried depth of 7 feet and protected by bollards. The recommended site for the concrete column and GPS Receiver Antenna is within the University Police Long Term Storage area. The column will be located within the chain link fence on the south side, near the gate. The chain link fence will provide security for the antenna and bollards will be placed in front of the column to protect it. Power requirements for the antenna are minimal, similar to that of a digital clock radio. Data will be transmitted via a coax cable connected to MSU's network. The Director of the Montana Water Center has agreed to allow the connections of equipment and power within the mechanical room of one of the Faculty Court buildings.
An additional broadcast antenna will be installed on Leon Johnson Hall. This UHF antenna will require power and connections to the MSU data network and will use an already existing equipment room for the installation. The new UHF Broadcast antenna will replace the existing GPS antenna on the Leon Johnson penthouse, and will utilize existing coax cable into the building. This antenna frequency is licensed by the FCC and estimated to be 461.075 MHz.
The following contingency for the installation is made:
If for whatever reason, sight of the horizon is blocked in the future, it will be the sole responsibility of the owners to move the antennas to more suitable locations at no cost to MSU.Butler seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
- NASA DEMONSTRATION TRAILER AT MUSEUM OF THE ROCKIES - Jeff Holloway, Museum of the Rockies, has let it be known that a NASA Demonstration Trailer will be arriving July 5th and will be placed on MOR property on the southeast corner of Kagy and Seventh until July 12th. It will then be moved to the MOR parking area where it will be available to the public for a one-day event on July 13th, and then leave the University On July 14th. MOR will coordinate with Burns regarding any parking issues which may arise, and with Putzke regarding any traffic control issues.
Lashaway noted that J.B. Bancroft, who has served as Chair to the UFPB Board will be retiring very soon and it was noted that the Board has extreme gratitude for his many years of service.
This meeting was adjourned at 3.55 p.m.
May 30, 2006
Members Present: Banziger, Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Sharrock, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Jacobsen, Yarnell
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Garnick, Johnson, Miles, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU)
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Karen Hedglin, Project Manager; Russ Katherman - Montana State A& E, George Tuthill, MSU - Native American Student Center Building Committee Chairman, Dennis Sun Rhodes - AmerIndian, John Worth - ThinkOne, Bill Hanson - ThinkOne
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes from the May 16th, 2006 meeting were approved.
- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT There was no action by the Executive Committee to report at this time.
- NATIVE AMERICAN STUDENT CENTER - INITIAL CONCEPT In early 2005, the Montana Board of Regents and the State Legislature approved the construction of a Native American Student Center at MSU. The site selected, north of Roberts Hall, between 6th and 7th Avenues, and Roberts Parking Lot and Hannon Hall, was approved July of 2005. The Center will fill a need for a space where American Indian Students can gather for learning, support and cultural interaction. The Center will also serve as an opportunity for cross-cultural learning and sharing with the entire Campus community. A concept design is necessary to launching the fund raising campaign for this project.
The Building Committee reviewed numerous design concepts which have significance to the Native American culture. These included designs based on the Feather, the Tipi, the Turtle, the Drum and the Horse. A melding of the Feather and the Turtle concepts, which emphasizes the cultures oneness with nature through its use of passive solar, natural lighting and ventilation, has been selected by the Building Committee. Orientation on the site will allow the building (the Feather a symbol of Spirit) to arch toward the east to symbolically greet the rising sun. The Turtle (a symbol of Mother Earth and protection) portion of the building will be a place of gathering for the people and will look out into the sculpture garden. The linear design will allow the building to encompass an existing well used foot path with hopes that people will now be drawn through the building to the classrooms or around and through the sculpture garden. The intent is that this building with its multiple entries will not "turning its back" on either the Bozeman or Campus Communities. It is intended to be a place where the Community will be drawn to learn, attend lectures, share in ceremonies, dinners, and enjoy the drums.
A Sculpture garden which will incorporate as many of the existing plantings as possible,will be located on the Southeast and will also be a place of gathering for outdoor activities. The area facing Hannon will be developed into a pleasing patio that connects to the large group study lounge.
In discussion, it was noted that a services area for deliveries will be placed on the 7th Avenue side of the building. Handicapped parking access will be from the existing Roberts parking area or the existing Hamilton Parking. The Board gave their support for the fundraising campaign to begin using the concept as presented. The design team is requested to return after schematics are underway for further approval. A presentation of the initial design concepts will also be made to the Presidents Council.
- PARKING SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Lashaway presented the need for a Parking Advisory Committee to be instituted as a sub-committee to the UFPB. This Committee would have two primary focuses:
- The business advisory activities for which the Committee will act as an advisory to the AVP University Services and the VP for Administration and Finance. The Committee would review and make recommendations regarding: *Establishing and maintaining the Mission Statement and development/planning principles.
*Parking Services business plan - annual review.
*Annual Parking Facilities maintenance plan funding, including annual condition assessment.
*Long-term maintenance/capital replacement plan funding.
*Parking inventory/distribution
*Hardware/software, equipment, staffing, etc.
*Parking permit fee/fine rates as required reconciling with the Parking Services business plan.
*Present annual report to the VP for Administration and Finance and the President's Executive Council, tracking data results and trends.
*Participate in search and selection of candidates for Manager of Parking position.
*Support, advocate and promote Parking Services to campus and community constituents. - Planning, design and maintenance activities, for which the Committee is advisory to the University Facilities Planning Board (UFPB), and shall include:
*Determine, collect, and analyze comparative data (survey users/peers; compare perceptions to actual e.g. rime statistics; demand vs. availability, convenience, etc)
*Advise UFPB regarding:
*Issues that represent potential impacts to Parking Services and parking facilities.
*Advocate support of parking facilities as requiring consideration similar to other existing campus facilities and enterprises in the campus planning processes.
*Service/access drive use/needs.
*ADA parking issues.
*Parking Design Guidelines (including non-motor and alternative vehicles).
*Maintain periodic consultant review as necessary to plan effective parking service.
*Serve as UFPB liaison to campus and community constituents regarding parking issues.
*Meets monthly - reports to UFPB quarterly.
- The business advisory activities for which the Committee will act as an advisory to the AVP University Services and the VP for Administration and Finance. The Committee would review and make recommendations regarding: *Establishing and maintaining the Mission Statement and development/planning principles.
- MSU - TOMORROW Banziger gave an update on the status of the MSU-Tomorrow - A Long Range Campus Development Plan.
Agricultural group follow-up meetings have been underway and very informative. The importance and usage of the lands west of Nineteenth not only to the College of Agriculture, but also to Engineering and Chemistry has been one of the focus issues. Road-trip follow-up meetings with Dean of Agriculture, Jeff Jacobsen are also scheduled.
June 26th through the 30th, a Charrette will be held to further work on the details of the build-out scenarios. The LRCDP Executive Committee will meet June 30th.
May 16, 2006
Members Present: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Butler, Garnick, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johnson, Yarnell
Members Excused: Burns, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Jacobsen,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Susan Byorth, Burns Technology Center; Bill Rea, Burns Technology Center; Michael Stevenson, MSU - Athletics; Bill Mackin, Project Manager; Karen Hedglin, Project Manager; George Thompson, Project Manager; Jon Ford, Manager, Environmental Services; Peter Fields, Director, MSU - Athletics
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, to discuss the following:
- ITEM No. 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Minutes from the May 2nd, 2006 meeting were approved as distributed.
- ITEM No. 2 - EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT. There was no action by the Executive Committee to Report at this time.
- ITEM No. 3 - EPS LOBBY - FINAL MATERIALS. Having previously received approval for the conceptual designs for the EPS Lobby, Bill Rae, Architect for the Burns Technology Center returned with the palette of proposed materials, surfaces and colors for the project.
- ITEM No. 3 - EPS LOBBY - FINAL MATERIALS. Having previously received approval for the conceptual designs for the EPS Lobby, Bill Rae, Architect for the Burns Technology Center returned with the palette of proposed materials, surfaces and colors for the project.
The Lobby is designed to be an inviting refuge and to be a contrast to the brightly lit upper deck and to the hallways radiating off of the Lobby. This area will be furnished with approximately 20 movable chairs designed for ease of laptop use and upholstered in two contrasting grey fabrics. The countertop areas will be a black Corian or similar solid surfacing with recessed monitors. A theatrical feel is evidenced with its cool palette, directing attention to the Donor Wall, with its two plasma screens, and milky panels with contrasting frosted lettering sandwiched within clear glass. The "continuum" sculpture will also contrast well to this environment. The atrium ceiling tile directly above the Lobby will be replaced with black acoustical tile set in black "T" bar. Soffit regions will be painted a grey tone. Railing along the upper deck will be faced with grey translucent panels designed to appear fluid and to filter some of the light spillage. The north brick wall will be faced with panels constructed of perforated metal with a birch tone wood veneer which lends acoustically as well as visually. The current flooring will remain, but the base will be replaced with black rubber base.
In discussion it was noted that the light levels within this region, although considerably lower by contrast than surrounding areas within the building, is expected to be approximately 10 to 12 foot candles. This will be sufficient to meet necessary safety and egress requirements.
Garnick made a motion that the palette of colors, materials and final concept be accepted as presented. Banziger seconded and it passed unanimously.
- ITEM No. 4 - HEDGES - LANDSCAPE. George Thompson, Project Manager, met with Robert Putzke, Administrative Manager-University Police regarding possible safety concerns. Thompson expressed that there were no safety concerns which needed to be addressed at this time. There are currently 6 to 7 street lights in this area, and it was felt that if the need for additional lighting does become a concern, it can be added at a later date.
ADA access will be increased by "breaking" the berm to allow access over a relatively flat area to the basketball court. This berm cut will be a grass surface or a compacted pathway material similar to decomposed granite. The horseshoe pits will be accessible from the current access drive.
Concerns regarding a safety buffer between the Volleyball court and the Horseshoe pits have also been more closely examined. This buffer would include the distance of the 10 foot sand out-of-bounds area for volleyball, 15 feet of grass and an additional 3 foot boundary around the Horseshoe area. It is felt that the total of 28 feet is likely sufficient. It was also noted that the Horseshoe pins will be removable, again lessening the chance of an accidental impalement.
The fine sand specifications for the Volleyball area have not yet been addressed. A suitable material will still need to be chosen
Stump made a motion to accept the schematic design as revised for the Hedges Landscape. Banziger seconded and it was passed unanimously.
- ITEM No. 5 - PROPOSED ATHLETICS PRACTIC FACILITIES - SITING. Peter Fields, Director - MSU Athletics was present to request siting for several proposed improvements/additions to the Athletic Facilities. Athletics wishes to embark upon a $19M fund raising campaign for these improvements as soon as possible. However, an integral part for a successful fund raising campaign will be the ability to inform donors of site locations for these proposed changes to the MSU Campus
Prugh and Lenon, Architects, with the aid of several MSU Architectural students have constructed a build-out of the proposed Athletic Corridor on the South edge of Campus, (between the current Tennis Facility and south to the Track Facilities and West to Eleventh) and was inclusive for all the current structures within that corridor. They also provided additional structural elements depicting the proposed Athletic additions. These mobile pieces can be placed in various configurations within the framework of the existing structures (such as the Fieldhouse and the Stadium) as a visual aid for siting considerations
Athletics has programmed this series of developments into four phases, which encompasses anticipated development over the next 25 to 30 years. These improvements are slated to start with the construction of additional Stadium Skyboxes, the revenue from which will assist with a funding base for additional projects. The phasing of these projects will also allow athletics to open up existing facilities for future uses in a "domino" effect as new are developed (i.e. existing weight room may become a Student Athletic Academic Center). One main component of Phase I of the proposed Athletic Corridor will be the addition of a Multiple Sport In-door Practice Facility. This structure will encompass approximately 90K square feet and be 85 feet in height. An E-W orientation would be best for a building of this height to reduce shadowing. It was noted that indoor practice facilities such as this can be constructed in such a fashion as to be very attractive. Additionally, Athletics will need to maintain three outdoor practice fields which can be rotated to minimize damage to turf.
The idea of an Athletic Corridor, its components, its possible impact on parking and exterior campus green space will be examined more closely in a collaborative effort between the MSU-Tomorrow work team and MSU Athletics, in hopes of providing siting information by early summer of 2006. This would allow MSU Athletics to begin their fund raising campaign yet this summer. A Planning Charrette is scheduled for June 26th through 30th.
- ITEM No. 6 - PARKING SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Due to time constraints, this item was tabled and will be addressed at a later date.
- ITEM No. 7 - HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARD - MONTANA and LINFIELD HALL WINDOWS. Lashaway presented a brief informational synopsis on the award MSU recently received from the Bozeman Historic Preservation Board. This award was issued for the sensitivity shown by MSU in preserving the historic buildings on campus, particularly in the restoration of the windows at Montana and Linfield Halls. This is the third such reward MSU has received.
This meeting was adjourned at 4:53 p.m.
May 2, 2006
Members Present: Burns, Butler, McIlhattan, Miles, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Johns, Johnson, Yarnell
Members Excused: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Garnick, Sharrock, Jacobsen,
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Pat Simmons, Associate Director, ITC, Al Bertelsen, Director, Strand Union Building, Mandy Hansen, Alternate - CEPAC Representative
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm, with Bob Lashaway acting as Chair, to discuss the following:
- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes from the April 18th, 2006 meeting were approved as distributed.
- EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT - There was no action by the Executive Committee to Report at this time.
- TRANSIT SYSTEM - Lashaway presented a draft recommendation for consideration based on information received at the April 18th, 2006 presentation by David Kack on the Bozeman Public Transit System. On 18Apr06, David Kack, president of Galavan, presented status of the Bozeman Public Transit application to the University Facilities Planning Board (UFPB). After review and consideration, the UFPB believes that the University should endorse the proposed transit system in accordance with the recommendations below.
Whereas: ASMSU has executed a Memorandum of Understanding, joining with Galavan, with the intent of combining resources dedicated to operating the Galavan system and the Bobcat transit contract.
Whereas: ASMSU has committed to contributing the annual assessment (approximately $90,000 per year), which formerly paid for Bobcat Transit services, to the new Public Transit organization, in exchange for equal or better transit service for MSU students, which are anticipated to begin by August, 2006.
Whereas: MSU desires to promote alternative modes of transportation to serve the campus and to promote efforts to manage demand for traffic and parking facilities on campus.
Therefore, the UFPB recommends the following to the President:
- MSU should endorse the general concept of an evolving transit system that is intended to serve MSU, Bozeman and surrounding communities.
- Transit entities should continue to work thru the University Facilities Planning Board for review and recommendation of all proposals and negotiations concerning transit services to MSU - e.g., routes, stops, hubs, signage, traffic/parking management, temporary routes to accommodate campus activities, etc.
- Transit entities should negotiate thru the UFPB to formalize an agreement to continue to use the south drive of the Strand Union Building (SUB) as the current campus drop off point and the proposed Bozeman south side transit hub location.
- MSU must reserve the right to renegotiate stop/hub locations in the future to best serve the university and the transit system.
- CHINOOK WIRELESS SYSTEM UPGRADE Pat Simmons, presented findings, on behalf of the Antenna Committee, regarding the Chinook Wireless Antenna Upgrade of existing antennas and equipment on North Hedges. This upgrade will allow Chinook to provide better service to this area. No amendments to the current contract between the user and the owner will be required and no frequency changes will be involved. However, a current copy of Liability Insurance will be required from Chinook Wireless as a crane will be needed for installation and removal of equipment.
Two new equipment cabinets will be installed and the user intends to make the available space in this area more useable for both the user and the owner. The three new proposed antennas will also be smaller. There will be a time span of approximately 30 to 45 days where both the existing and the new equipment will be in place, after which the old cables will be removed and any exterior holes will be repaired. There will be no visual impact to the penthouse on North Hedges from this installation. Any attachments to walls will be made with Transite. Chinook Wireless will also work with OFS-Grounds and Auxiliary Services to ensure protection for sprinklers.
Whereas the Antenna Committee recommends this upgrade, Stump made a motion to recommend acceptance of this proposal to the President. Thull seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
Simmons noted that there are several additional antenna/site camera proposals that will be brought to UFPB in the near future.
- EPS - LOCKER INSTALLATION Butler presented a request from Jon Neuman to purchase and have OFS install a total of thirty (30) lockers in the third floor corridor of the EPS Building. These lockers will be available for rental to serve students. It was noted that placement of lockers in the requested location does not violate any egress or fire regulations. Similar lockers have previously been placed within the EPS Building, First Floor - Area D.
A motion was made by Stump to allow the placement of lockers in the corridor of the Third Floor of the EPS Building, with the following stipulations:
- The lockers will be a new installation, not re-cycled.
- Maintenance and administration of the lockers will be by the department within EPS.
- OFS will install the lockers.
- Colors for the lockers are coordinated with the current color palette within that region of the building.
- Lock styles for the lockers be consistent.
- Removal and restoration of the area and/or finding a "new" owner for the lockers will be the sole responsibility of the Department if the Department moves or decides they no longer have a need for lockers in this area.
- ARCHITECTURE 524 - TREE SCULPTURE - SITE The proposed site for the previously approved Quinn/Doll sculpture will be approximately where the trees were originally located. The students have proposed placing the second "Please take off your shoes" sculpture south of Reid Hall, just off the Romney Oval. These sculptures will be sited for a term of one (1) year. In ensuing discussion, it was noted that the Romney Oval is deemed "sacred". However, as the students had not offered other possible locations, all aspects of this area will be examined. It was also noted that for security reasons, the lighting of the proposed site is of utmost importance. It was recommended that these pieces be labeled with an explanation of the piece. Following discussion, Thull made a motion for siting of "Please Take Your Shoes Off:
- The students will work with OFS to site the sculpture in a well lit location south of Traphagen, for a term not to exceed one (1) year.
- Maintenance (regular or due to vandalism) of the sculpture will be the sole responsibility of the art students and the instructor of the Architecture 524 class.
- The need for maintenance/removal may be stipulated by the UFPB Executive Committee.
- Upon recommendation of the Executive Committee, the sculpture may be authorized for removal by OFS, and all materials will be considered consumed by the project.
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 2 - MSU CLEAN-UP DAY Butler reported that on Friday, May 5th at 2:45 p.m. Facilities Services in its entirety will don their work shirts, be transported to the northern edge of Campus and proceed southward in a "military" style sweep of Campus collecting litter as they go. This exercise is intended to help MSU - Grounds prepare our Campus for Commencement Day. This is the first of what will likely become an annual clean-up event.
This meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.
April 18, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan submits a report:
Members Present: Chair - Bancroft, Banziger, Burns, Butler, Garnick, Johns, Johnson, McIlhattan, Rimpau, Rutherford (ASMSU), Sharrock, Stump, Thull, York
Members Absent: Dooley, Yarnell
Members Excused: Jacobsen
Members Represented: Hansen for Miles; LaCrone for McCoy; Lashaway for Roloff
Guests: Dave Skelton, Bobcat Track and Field Association, Elizabeth Growney, Prugh and Lenon, Dick Prugh, Prugh and Lenon, George Thompson, Project Manager, OFS-PDC, Debra Rosa, CTA LandWorks, Jon Ford, Manger, OFS - Environmental Services, David Kack, Western Transportation Institute, Colleen Lindner, ASMSU, Jeff Holloway, Museum of the Rockies
The University Planning Board met beginning at 3:30 pm to discuss the following:
ITEM No. 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from the April 4th, 2006 meeting were approved as distributed.
ITEM No. 2 - BOBCAT PLAZA
Dave Skelton, Elizabeth Growney and Dick Prugh, Prugh and Lenon, presented the final siting plans for the Bobcat Plaza and the Bobcat Pavilion. This new site plan shows both structures shifted 8 feet north and 5 feet west of their original site. With this new positioning, there will be no impact to the sewer line to the north.
Johnson made a motion to accept the siting for both the Bobcat Plaza and the Bobcat Pavilion as depicted in this new plan, and to allow the Track Club to begin its fund raising campaign as soon as the approval of the President is acquired. The final materials to be used in the construction of these two projects will be presented for approval at a later date. York seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
ITEM No. 3 - EPS Lobby
This item will be presented at a future date.
ITEM No. 4 - HEDGES LANDSCAPE
George Thompson, Project Manager, and Debra Rosa, CTA LandWorks, presented conceptual design and project phasing for the Hedges Landscape project. The first phase of this project will consist of a basketball court with breakaway hoops and an asphalt surface, a sand volleyball court with a stationary net, horseshoe pits bordered by concrete and sand filled and an asphalt tetherball station.
The landscape design shows the area of irrigated sod rimmed by an approximate 3 foot berm to aid in screening the nearby existing loading dock and dumpster. A series of 8 foot trees is planned for placement to the east and south of the courts during this first phase of construction.
In discussion, it was noted that for ADA access, an opening through the berm needed to be considered to allow ready access from the handicapped parking area. It was also noted that as this plan does not call for any added lighting, there may be safety concerns which will need to be addressed. One suggestion put forth would be to remove a portion of the proposed berm to the west and replace it with 3 large trees to screen the loading dock and dumpster. CTA and Thompson will schedule a meeting with Robert Putzke, Director - University Police to discuss safety issues. The sand for the volleyball court will also need to be investigated. Typically the sand used in this type of court is very light weight and is highly mobile in the wind, which may make it necessary to replace/refill the sand on a regular basis. It was suggested that heavier weight large round grained sand be investigated for use. One additional area of concern was the adjacent nature of the horseshoe pits to the volleyball court. This area needs to be investigated further to ensure no in ordinate injury type safety risk exists between the two features. This project will be re-presented after further investigation is complete.
ITEM No. 5 - TRANSIT SYSTEM
David Kack, Western Transportation Institute, and Colleen Lindner, ASMSU, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the status of the Bozeman Public Transit application to the University Facilities Planning Board. ASMSU has executed a Memorandum of Understanding, joining with Galavan, with the intent of combining resources dedicated to operating the Galavan system and the Bobcat transit contract and has committed to contributing the annual assessment (approximately $90,000 per year), which formerly paid for Bobcat Transit services, to the new Public Transit organization, in exchange for equal or better transit service for MSU students, anticipated to begin by August, 2006. The system will provide 14,000 hours of service annually, with 6 days a week, using 5 buses during peak times, and a "flag and ride" system. The proposed routes are planned to serve high priority areas and users. It was noted that evaluation of the working services will likely take 3 years after implementation. Galavan has also received a grant for a future bus barn.
The proposed buses will be yellow, built on an International chassis and likely be equipped to run on a bio-diesel mix. It is planned for each bus to be equipped with a 3-bike rack, mounted on the front, to accommodate a limited number of passengers who have a need to also bring a bike. Each bus will also be equipped with an easy ramping system for patrons with ADA requirements.
Park and Ride options are still being investigated, as well as the need and placement for bus shelters. Ideally the system would like to continue to use the University SUB as a major, but will also investigate other sites east and west of the Centennial Mall. Investigation of any ADA upgrades for these sites will also be pursued.
A motion will be drafted by Lashaway and distributed for comment to the Board recommending that the University endorse the proposed transit system in accordance with the following:
- MSU should endorse the general concept of an evolving transit system that is intended to serve MSU, Bozeman and surrounding communities.
- Transit entities should continue to work thru the University Facilities Planning Board for review and recommendation of all proposals and negotiations concerning transit services to MSU - e.g., routes, stops, hubs, signage, traffic/parking management, temporary routes to accommodate campus activities, etc.
- Transit entities should negotiate thru the UFPB to formalize an agreement to continue to use the south drive of the Strand Union Building (SUB) as the current campus drop off point and the proposed Bozeman south side transit hub location.
- MSU must reserve the right to renegotiate stop/hub locations in the future to best serve the university and the transit system. This item will return for final approval and recommendation to the President
Non - AGENDA ITEM No. 1 - MUSEUM STORAGE UNITS
Jeff Holloway, Museum of the Rockies, was present to request approval to acquire two 26 x 8 x 9 foot storage containers for placement off of the employee parking area. The proposed site for these units will be below grade and render them invisible except for a possible view from South 7th. Placement will allow for an 18 foot fire access to remain between the containers and the building. These are considered to be a temporary storage solution which is necessary as the Museum dismantles one exhibit to allow another to come in. The Museum desires to build permanent storage south of the existing building in the future. It was noted that with the number of requests for storage, MSU needs to investigate the option of building another storage facility.
Lashaway made a motion to approve two metal storage containers for use in this location at the Museum of the Rockies. It was seconded by McIlhattan and passed unanimously.
This meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
March 8, 2006 - from CEPAC Minutes - Sheron McIlhattan reported on the last UFPUB meeting (her notes will be published via the UFPUB link in due course). Topics included the proposed exciting remodel of the EPS lobby, with plasma screens and student study stations; also, the expiration of the pay telephone contract on campus, and the conversion of most of the existing service to campus pay phones.
Long Range Campus Planning - Walt Banziger returned to CEPAC, seeking further input. 1,400 comments had been received via stakeholder meetings in January, and eight guiding principles have been drawn up. Today, Walt asked for those present to comment on physical environment issues. Various views were expressed from the need for service corridors and central delivery points, through the pros and cons of departmental urbanization, maximizing the student experience and public impression, to refurbishing existing buildings and the durability of new construction. Walt requested that CEPAC consider a further meeting to continue discussion of topics which our time constraints disallowed today.
January 24, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The first item discussed was the Duck Pond Renovation. The plan we reviewed a few months ago went out for bid. The bids came back around $750,000. This price is much higher that the architect’s original estimate and not in the scope of a maintenance project for the University. Walt Banziger presented a scaled back plan which will only include safety and maintenance items like putting a new liner in the pond and pumps for aeration. This would include replacing the gravel pathway around the pond. It would eliminate any of the landscaping, lighting, benches, and additional walkways in the original plan. The committee approved the scaled back version.
Tom Stump reported that the bids on the H and PE Complex were opened. The project range was $9.4M to $10.5M with all the extras. The low bid came in at $11.6. This is $2.2M over projections. He reported that the SUB and Theatre renovations came in about $4M over original projections. In total bids are over $6M on the three projects. Because of high costs, they will not move forward on any of the three at this time.
Carlene Nolan-Pederson, Senior Associate Planner, for Ayers Saint Gross was introduced to the committee. She is an MSU graduate and will lead the Stake Holder discussions for the Long Range Campus Development Plan. She showed us her power point that she will present to the stakeholder groups and asked for input. The committee had a few suggestions for her to add to her presentation.
CEPAC members are reminded that the stakeholder meeting for Staff is Wednesday January 25! Noon to 2 PM. Everyone is encouraged to attend. Since the presentation will be the first 15 minutes of each session, you are urged to get there early. If you can’t attend this session, you are welcome to come to any other session; or to attend as many sessions as you can.
January 10, 2006 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The only agenda item was the progress on the Long Range Planning Project. The Work Group has been meeting every Thursday for 2 hours and are making great progress. Items include:
- Developed the 18 month time line
- Decided on the Stakeholder groups
- Setup the Stakeholder meetings
- There will be 2 hour sessions Wednesday January 25 and Thursday January 26 in the SUB Ballrooms
- Each session will be for named stakeholders, but anyone can attend any or all sessions
- Have an excellent start on the web page
- The Web page should be available next week beginning Tuesday February 17.
- A link on the MSU Home Page will be “MSU Tomorrow”
- Have determined the communication plans
- Have determined the project name will be “MSU Tomorrow”
- Communication plans include things like table tent advertising in the SUB and Dorm dining rooms
- Electronic Email to students, staff and faculty
- Individual mailings to students, staff, faculty, alumni
- Have decided on the Stake holder Follow-up Groups
- Will have yet to be determined meetings
- Yet to be written surveys of the stake holder groups.
December 13, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
UFPUB met for their regular meeting December 13 in the OFS conference room. Agenda items included:
A power point presentation by Don McLaughlin, Place Architecture. We had asked him for a pedestrian study to help us decide where future sidewalks should be in the long range campus development. He offered us a history of the original Cass Gilbert Plan for the campus and how it has evolved. He offered some suggestions of how he envisioned the campus in the future. He left a CD of the power point and several printed booklets of this presentation.
Progress on the Long Range Campus Development Plan (LRCDP). The Work Group has been meeting every other Thursday from 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM in the OFS Conference Room. The next item they tackle is communication with the campus community. They are working a web page and deciding what email lists they will use. They will appoint a spokesperson who will be in charge of communication. Cathy Conover was unanimously approved to be on the UFPUB committee for this project because of her communication expertise.
Stakeholder meetings are scheduled for January 25, and January 26 to discuss with the campus community this long range plan endeavor. Everyone is urged to attend. Times and locations will be announced at a later date. A list of stakeholders is attached. This is your opportunity to give input on the look and feel for the campus for many years to come. Where will the new buildings go? Where will parking lots be located? Will they be garages or what we have currently? Will we develop neighborhoods for the various colleges and where will they be located? What about green space and trees and walkways?
Renovation plans for the third floor lobby of Leon Johnson Hall were presented. It was agreed that the hall needs improving and the board gave approval to develop a design. LRES PPSP and Cell Biology share admin office in that building along with WAMI. WAMI feels they really have a need to dress up the entrance to their offices since they have numerous off campus visitors to their office. Scott Hedglin, OFS will continue with the design and bring it back to UFPUB for approval.
November 29, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports on today's meeting:
- A site proposal from the USDA building committee for the footprint of the building was submitted for approval. This is further defining the site that was approved last time this was discussed. The footprint of the building is West of the stream that is West of the Plant Growth Center and the Ag BioScience Building. It is L Shaped and does make an anchor for the North West corner of the proposed Ag Complex of buildings. It was suggested the building be moved slightly to the East making the proposed access road through the South 12th Street parking lot a straight line from, I think, Deer Street to Garfield. With the moving to the East, the footprint site was approved.
- Pictures of a proposed storage building for the Wild Trout Lab were submitted. The wild Trout Lab is located on the South East corner of campus near Faculty Housing. Last time, the committee tentatively approved the use of a container unit for storage in that part of campus. Now with photos and a budget, the committee approved the storage unit to be painted a neutral tan color similar to the Lab itself; and to be placed adjacent to the NW corner of the Wild Trout Lab. This type of storage was only approved for this area of campus and any other requests for similar storage units must come before the UFPUB committee. Facilities is considering adopting this as a standard for future storage requests.
- The committee approved the design of a sign for the Alcohol Prevention Services building located in Gopher Court. This sign will set a standard for any other signs in the Single Family Dwellings on the North West Corner of campus. The MSU Marketing Committee was consulted and the MSU logo is on the metal sign.
- Scott Hedglin, Architect for Facilities Services presented a map and a request for a bulletin board to be located across from the Dean of Letters and Science in Wilson Hall. He also submitted some photocopies of bulletin boards from a catalog. Since a recent change in Fire Code regulations are now permitting bulletin boards there is a need for a standard to be set on campus. The location was approved. But it was requested that more visual images be brought to the committee to review before acting on a standard for bulletin boards campus wide.
Duck Pond Reconstruction
Preliminary plans for a remodel of the Duck Pond were reviewed. One major issue is that there is not enough water flowing into the Duck Pond for proper aeration to work. The proposal calls for adding water from Herrick Hall and for developing the Story Well to be more productive. Supplying more water in the Duck Pond for recirculation will keep it cleaner.
There is a proposed flag stone walkway on the West side of the pond and benches for seating to enhance the area.
Gravel edges are planned for the remainder of the area on the perimeter surrounding the pond. Cleaning in summer and snow removal in winter are safety concerns when planning any changes to the pond. Also planting of more trees is proposed. The overall plan was approved. It will come back to us for final approval.
One big issue is the big, very old, willow tree that grows on the north west corner of the pond and hangs over the sidewalk and duck pond. It has three main trunks. One of the trunks was removed sometime ago. Drilling samples were done on the remaining trunks. It was found that one of these big trunks, the one that hangs over the sidewalk, is rotten and could fall anytime. The other is OK, but may not be much longer. The University has an obligation to remove any unsafe tree. So the rotten branch will have to come down. Since there may not be much left, the remaining trunk most likely would be removed as well. Please let us hear your comments concerning taking out this grand old tree.
Leon Johnson Lobby Remodel The plan for remodeling the lobby on the third floor Leon Johnson was presented. Many ideas were discussed. Since none of our Ag representatives and no one from Leon Johnson was present, it was decided that we needed some input from someone more closely associated with the project. That project was tabled until we could get more input.
November 1, 2005- Sheron McIlhattan reports
- Marsh Laboratory new buildings
New proposed facilities at Marsh Lab were on the agenda. The proposal is for two facilities: A remodel of the existing facility for large animal research into a bio secure building for small animal research; and build a new bio secure building for large animal research.There are four levels of security for research of communicable diseases in animals, BSL I, BSL II, BSL III, and BSL IV.
Level II is a secure facility, where access is limited. Researchers are required to wear special clothing in the “dirty room” and shower upon leaving the secure area. Diseases studied are generally limited those where the disease is transmitted by contact between animals and contaminants are not airborne.
A level III facility is a more secure facility where contamination can be airborne. Researchers are required to wear protective clothing and shower when exiting the “dirty rooms” research area.
At this meeting UFPUB approved the location of the proposed facilities. The facility for small animals will be a Level III facility directly North of Marsh lab. The large animal facility will be a Level II facility just West of Marsh lab.
UFPUB had two concerns, but did approve the location of the proposed buildings.
- The committee advised the design team to look further into any restrictions that may exist concerning an unnamed water run off stream located in front of the large animal facility.
- Develop a preliminary plan for future expansion for overall Marsh Lab site. While this may be impossible at this current time, it is never too early to begin to make plans.
- Installation of Antennae on top of Leon Johnson Hall by Western Wireless (formerly CellularOne) and Verizon.
Proposal by Western Wireless to install antennae on top of Leon Johnson Hall was approved.
Proposal by Verizon to move one of its existing antennae on top of Leon Johnson Hall a few feet to allow reception at ground level was also approved. All the antennae will be painted the brick red color of the trim on Leon Johnson Hall to make them blend in with the building.
Meeting adjourned at 5PM.
October 18, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
- Dowling Architects did a preliminary presentation on the materials proposed for the H and PE Fitness Center. Since the floor plan and design have been reviewed on numerous occasions, that was not part of the review today.
Generally, the committee liked the materials and colors presented, except for the brick.
Due to temperature changes, a lighter colored brick was chosen so it would not absorb as much heat as the darker colors. The Architects looked around the campus buildings to find a lighter color and settled on a brick similar to that in Linfield Hall. The other colors were coordinated around that color.
Since brick seems not to hold up under the extreme temperature changes from day to night, very specific specs have been written for brick on this campus. Cecilia Vaniman expressed concerns that this particular brick may not meet those specifications.
The committee voted to approve the materials as presented with one concern. The brick must meet the campus specs for brick.
- Cecilia reported there were 10 proposals on the RFP to hire a Long Range Plan Designer. She is very happy with the results. The committee will meet soon to award points to the propoasals.
- The beginnings of the Long-Range Campus Development Plan was presented. More details to follow.
October 4, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
We met to finalize site issues for the new USDA building for the College of Ag. The Federal USDA-ARS project group is on campus to tie down the exact site location, size, and parameters of the building. This group includes the project people from Washington, DC, Fort Collins, Colorado, the Architect, the Engineers, representatives from the College of Ag on this campus and from Miles City.President Gamble had already directed the project team to a general site West of 11th Street, West of the Plant Growth Center, 5 possible designs scenarios were presented. After reviewing and discussing the pros and cons of the sites and the physical aspects of them, including the existing creek, walkways, and parking lots, the playing field was narrowed to 2 building footprints. It was decided that the USDA Building be located in the NW Corner of the 12th Street Lot, using a strong architectural element to define the corner. Two building sites for the future Ag Academic Building which were in the possible design scenarios were designated as possible choices in close proximity to this building. The location of the Ag Academic building has yet to be decided. This building will now begin to define a College of Ag “neighborhood” for future Ag buildings.
This decision will now go to PEC for final approval.
September 20, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
The topic for this meeting was to review the work of Collaborative Design Architects from Billings on the proposed new Parking Structure to be located on the corner of 8th and Harrison. Most of the Board members were present as well as Jo Oudshoorn from VP Admin and about 10 students.The building is a very long, large building that is 1/4 again as long as Hapner Hall across the street. It will have one underground level and 4 upper levels. A median is proposed down 8th to help regulate traffic flow. The trees along 8th will be saved. Preserving the view of the Bridgers from Montana Hall was taken into consideration. The design is in keeping with other buildings on campus. It will have one elevator with stairs on the south end with stairs in the middle of the building and on the north end. Vehicular entry and exits will be on Harrison to the north and at 8th and Cleveland on the south. There is a problem to be worked out with the service access drive coming from Wilson Hall at that corner. A traffic circle was drawn into the plans, to help with traffic flow, but the details have not been worked out. Access to the garage will probably be through an unmanned arm, or some such electronic device. There is provision for some bicycle storage. No details yet on what or how many bikes.
A power point of the proposed structure was presented. One of the statistical slides showed the following spaces in the new garage.
Lower Level 93
Ground Level 112
Level 2 122
Level 3 123
Level 4 46
Total New 496
But the discussion came when students asked how many new spaces would be provided for students, i.e. “E” spaces. The numbers presented were
Of these 11 are ADAExisting Lot -107
Net Gain 389
It is possible that another 38 spaces could be added to Level 4 bringing the total new spaces to 534.
But Jo and her group couldn’t tell the students exactly how many of these would be “E” spaces. Or what any of the costs to park would be. At this point, our chair Jerry Bancroft explained to everyone that our charge is to review the architectural design, not to look at costs or actual numbers or which kind of spaces will be in the new structure. He referred the students to the Parking Committee that meets every other Monday. Jo was going to let the students know when that meeting will be.
As discussions continued, it was apparent that the above numbers do not include removing the parking from 8th between Harrison and Cleveland. In later discussions, it was revealed that parking will also be removed from 8th between Harrison and College. This is an additional loss of an unknown number of spaces. Our CEPAC rep at these meetings is Sue Martin. We need to continue to point out the fact that the numbers as presented do not include these loss of street parking for two blocks.
Concerns posed by the committee included:
- Since this is a long term structure, the building materials need to have a long life, especially on the crown of the walls on top of the building.
- Do we want to ask for some sort of screen so passersby looking up would not see cars in the building?
- No plans have been made for snow removal (May be dumped over the side, or left to melt!)
- We were told landscaping and sidewalks are part of an upcoming pedestrian review coming up in a few months.
- Students asked about maintenance costs (again they were told cost is not part of this committee’s charge)
- Lighting should be indirect, but bright enough for safety concerns
I brought up the traffic and access problems at the intersection of Harrison and 8th. Even with the current numbers of vehicles we have now, it is hard to make a left hand turn onto 8th from Harrison when exiting the Linfield lot. If we add another 300 or so cars coming into that intersection, a very real bottle neck is being created. I think 8th from Harrison north belongs to the City. Or maybe it is just the east half that is the City’s. Anyway, they have some jurisdicition over the intersection. Bob Lashaway, Jo Oudshoorn, Paul Burns and others say they have met with the City to discuss the street issues. But the comment was made even though the city was definitely studying the problems, they had no money and improvements were not on the immediate horizon.
The committee voted to approve the preliminary design with requests for continuing review for the following:
- Review detailed elevations
- Review light sources
- Study of service access
- Study of SE Corner on elevator/stair tower
- Overall study of traffic flow at 8th and Cleveland, 8th and Harrison, and possibly punching through Harrison to 11th. Include looking at the proposed traffic circle at 8th and Cleveland and the proposed median continuing from Harrison to Cleveland on 8th.
- To maximize spaces, include the additional spaces on the top level.
The meeting was ready to adjourn around 5:30 when someone asked about the RFP. Pam reported that the time period for receiving questions was up today and the RFP Committee has 2 weeks to respond to the questions.
September 6, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports:
RFP for Long Range Campus Development advisor - It was announced that the RFP that was discussed last time was finalized. It was scheduled to go out on the state’s website this evening before 5 PM. Turnaround is short, there is only a week for bidders to send in their questions; then we have 2 weeks to respond.UFPUB Member at Large - Ralph Johnson, professor in Architecture, was nominated to be Member at Large for UFPUB. This position was created for UFPUB to ask individuals with certain expertise to give advice to the committee as the need arises. Johnson has expertise in long range planning and currently that is the big issue before UFPUB. President Gamble will ultimately make the appointment to this one year position.
SUB Renovation - Cecilia Vaniman gave the committee a final walk through of the SUB renovation after months of review. The committee approved the final elevations on the South. The bid date is set for November 3, with construction to start January 2, 2006. This will be an 18-20 month project.
Campus Design Guidelines - UFPUB was asked to include the goal of integrating research and teaching in the Campus Design Guidelines. As the document is reviewed, it will keep this item in mind.
Announcements:
Fowler Easement - The Fowler Easement agreement has been reached between the College of Agriculture, the City of Bozeman, and Gallatin County. It will go to the Regents for their approval at their September meeting.Chemistry Building - The pre-construction meeting for the new Chemistry Building is scheduled for September 13, with construction to begin shortly thereafter. The final bid was $23M. To reach that amount, moving costs and some research equipment costs were removed. The project should last 24 months with move in to begin the 2nd week of August 2007.
Planning board - Jerry Bancroft suggested facilities develop a planning board to show the campus how future projects will fit in the area where the trees were removed. This will help explain to some angry campus members that removing the trees was not just for the chemistry building, but also for several future projects.
Federal Ag USDA Building - President Gamble approved a location west of 11th for the Federal Ag USDA building-- just west of the existing Plant Bio Science/ PGC Complex.
Ag Animal Bioscience Building - There are ongoing discussions for the location of the new Ag Animal Bioscience Research building. Originally, it was planned that the two buildings be in close proximity. Now the question is where will the College of Ag develop an Ag “academic neighborhood” section of the campus which will include the Ag Animal Bioscience building?
Two proposals are on the board:
- A site just East and North of Linfield Hall. This site would occupy some of the space where the trees were removed.
- Since the USDA Building will be West of 11th, an adjacent site for the Ag Bioscience building is being considered.
The adjourned meeting at 4:45.
August 23, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan reports: we spent the entire meeting going over the important points of an RFP to hire an advisor for Long Range Campus Development. Purchasing Director, Shawna Lanphear led the discussion. In the end a committee was appointed to finalize the RFP.
JULY 13, 2005 - Sheron McIlhattan submits: MINUTES OF THE UNIVERSITY FACILITES PLANNING BOARD
Members Present: Bancroft, Chair, Garnick, Lashaway, Mathenia, Rimpau, Stump, Vaniman, York
Members Absent: Brittingham, Dooley, Jacobsen, McIlhattan, Roloff, Sharrock, Yarnell, ASMSU
Members Represented: LaCrone for McCoy, Burns for Putzke
Members Excused:
Guests: Walt Banziger, Jo Oudshoorn
The University Planning Board met beginning at 9:00 am to discuss the following:
ITEM No. 1 – APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes from April 20, 2005 and June 29, 2005 UFPB meetings were accepted with no changes.
NON- AGENDA ITEM No. 1 – LRBP PROCESS
Lashaway gave a presentation on the LRBP process. This is an inter-campus process where the needs of AES, Billings , Billings COT, Northern and Gt. Falls COT are coordinated with MSU Bozeman. The LRBP process in Montana is political, rather than like a “pipeline” such as the federal system, which usually means approval funding for design gives some assurance of funding for construction in the future. The LRBP is a circular process and means we are always somewhere in the LRBP process wheel.
During the next six weeks, OFS will be gathering information regarding proposed projects to add to the priority list for the 2008-2009 biennium. Great care needs to be given to developing accurate projected cost factors for proposed projects, to ensure that if funding becomes available, it is sufficient to finish the actual project. Bancroft requested that the proposed LRBP list be brought before the UFPB Board, prior to going to the President, to ensure that UFPB stays “in the loop” and is aware of and knowledgeable about what is being recommended. It was agreed that this will be brought before the Board again the second half of October.
It was noted that historically, the MSU campus projects have done quite well in obtaining funding thanks to the great working relationship Lashaway has with the Legislature and the Board of Regents.
The LRBP process handout is attached.
ITEM No. 2 – PARKING GARAGE SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
Jo Oudshoorn presented the advantages and disadvantages of the Lewis and Clark site versus the East Linfield site for a parking garage at the northeast sector of campus. (See attached handout.) The Parking Garage Building Committee recommended the Lewis and Clark site, based upon these considerations. It was noted that the Design Team has been appointed and is currently working on a timeline to have the project ready to present to the Board of Regents by November, bid, and the approximate twelve-month construction in the spring, 2006. Today there are 24 different photos of prototype buildings available for viewing in Ballrooms B and C for those interested in having input on preferences.
A motion to accept the Lewis and Clark (Harrison & Eighth) site was made by Lashaway
with the following contingencies:
1. Available funding should be “stretched” if necessary, in order to maximize the site usage. (e.g. the preference would be for a four level structure [grade, plus 3 additional levels] versus a 3 level structure).
2. Height of the structure should approximate that of surrounding dorms.
3. The structure needs to be designed with a “collegiate” style in mind.
4. The design should try to preserve as many of the old trees in the northeast corner as possible.
The motion was seconded by Stump, put to a vote and passed unanimously.
It was noted that the Green Pedestrian Corridor to the north of Montana Hall will terminate in the region west of the Parking Structure. It had been originally thought that this corridor would maintain a width comparable with the width of Montana Hall for its entire length. After reviewing the anticipated future development, it was proposed that a collaborative design effort be made between the Parking Structure Design Team and Don McLaughlin who is working on the Pedestrian Core Plan to ensure a wider green “node” be maintained at this location. This will somewhat correspond to the Green Node being maintained to the South of Montana Hall as well.
Lashaway made a motion that a viable design proposal to maximize the Green Node be made by the Pedestrian Core Plan Team in collaboration with the Parking Structure Design Team and OFS Planning, while keeping in mind the possible need for future expansion of the Chemistry Research Building and other future building sites. The motion was seconded by Garnick, put to a vote and passed unanimously.
ITEM NO 3 –BANNERS ON CENTENNIAL MALL
In the absence of Julie Kipfer, Vaniman made a presentation on the banners. Samples of both the fabric and the graphics were shown. Three sets of six banners (18 total) are to be made and hung on the south light poles, within the Centennial Mall area prior to Catapaloosa. Vaniman said the light pole manufacturer will be here next week to give a presentation on their recommendations for banner brackets. The banners will be double-sided measuring 2’ by 4’ and will reflect MSU’s brand messages and strengths. The banners will carry a two-year warranty for UV damage. It was noted that the resolution and color were not good on the sample fabric.
A motion was made by Lashaway to accept the size and location for the banners at Centennial Mall, with the contingencies regarding resolution/clarity and color. The Executive Committee will make the final bracket decision following next week’s presentation. The motion was seconded by Mathenia, put to a vote and passed unanimously.
ITEM No. 4 – UFPB MEETING JULY 27th
UFPB will be meeting twice on July 27th. The first meeting will be our regularly scheduled meeting from 9:00 to 10:30 a.m. The second meeting will be held from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. and will be an open forum on the proposed Fowler Lane underground utility easement at the location west of 19th. This will be a meeting where UFPB will represent their constituencies and get information from with the City/County Planners, who will be there to discuss infrastructure and the 2020 Plan. Please make note of this special meeting on your schedules to maximize attendance. UFPB will be meeting to formally make a decision and recommendation at a later time.
NON-AGENDA ITEM No. 2 - MEMBERSHIP
It was noted that UFPB has a new member, as well as several re-appointments. Dick Pohl and Bill Martindale have retired from MSU. John Brittingham, Brenda Mathenia, and Rose Waldon’s terms have expired. The new replacements are:
Sharon McIlhattan - CPAC
Brenda Mathenia - Faculty
Mary Miles – Faculty
Ferd Johns – Architecture Faculty
Also please note that the Meeting schedule for UFPB will be changing to Tuesday afternoons from 3:30 until 5:00 as of the September 7th meeting.
This meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne K. McBee
For Cecilia Vaniman, Secretary
Attachments:
Parking Garage Site Handout
LRBP Process Handout
Pc: Geoffry Gamble, President
Walter Banziger, University Architect
Pamela Barrett, Associate Planner
Al Bertelsen, Director, Strand Union Building
Paul Burns, Parking and Operations Manager, MSU Police
Cathy Conover, Director, Communications and Public Affairs
Joseph Fedock, Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs
Heidi Gagnon, Admin. Officer, Administration & Finance
Diane Heck, Admin. Officer, College of Agriculture
Ferd Johns, Faculty Representative
Linda LaCrone, Assistant to the Vice President for Research
Shari McCoy , Assistant to the President
Mary Miles, Faculty Representative
Charles Nelson, Registrar and Director of Enrollment Services
Diane Ostermiller, Admin. Officer, Grants & Contracts
Blake Rassmussen, ASMSU President
Connie Shelhamer, Department of Agriculture
End of Minutes
Please see attachments, below
MSU– Bozeman Campus – LRBP Process June, 2005
Lashaway
Issue:
Over the past two biennia we established and refined the process to consolidate LRBP requests from all of our affiliated campuses into one consolidated list that goes forward to the OCHE. This inter-campus process is now reasonably routine. Now, it is time to establish a more formal input-gathering process to apply to the development of our own Bozeman campus list.
Proposed Process
· Objective: To present to the President’s Executive Council, a draft list of proposed LRBP projects that has been recommended by OFS Planning and informed with input from UFPB and UPBAC/Deans.
· Schedule: (Primary schedule objective is to meet the August deadline noted in the LRBP Instruction Packet sent out to all campuses).
o 13Jun05 – PEC Discuss Proposed Bozeman Campus LRBP Process
o 29Jun05 – Draft LRBP List prepared by OFS
o 30Jun05 – OFS Discuss Proposed Bozeman Campus LRBP Process and draft LRBP List with OFS Advisory Committee
o 13Jul05 – UFPB review/discuss Draft LRBP List
o Jul/Aug – Other constituent groups
§ UPBAC – Main intent would be to gain input from the Deans; however, UPBAC is not scheduled to meet before fall, so unless a special meeting is convened trying to use UPBAC may not be a viable option.
§ Deans Council – This group is apparently scheduled to meet on 26Jul05, 09Aug05 and 23Aug05 – so we could get on their agenda, which would meet our 26Aug05 inter-campus deadline.
o 26Aug05 – MSU Bozeman LRBP List ready to begin overall campus consolidation process
o (Note: Fac Council, CEPAC and Professional Council are not included above since each has representation on one or more of the groups already proposed for input. It may be appropriate for OFS to meet with each council this fall [and each odd year during the LRBP info gathering process] to inform them of the LRBP process to increase their awareness of the process itself and their various representatives’ obligations. IF we desire to include any of these groups as an active participant in the campus process, we could consider how to incorporate that into the cycle for the 2009 session since we do not have time to structure it for this cycle.)
MONTANASTATEUNIVERSITY
2008-09 LRBP
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
June, 2005 > MSU-Bozeman distributes MSU-LRBP Instruction Packet to Affiliated
Campuses
August 26, 2005 > Preliminary LRBP Project lists due at MSU-Bozeman (see attached sample)
September, 2005 > MSU-Bozeman LRBP team visits each campus to tour/discuss proposed LRBP
projects
October, 2005 > Campuses make final revisions to their top priority project scopes and cost
estimates
November, 2005 > MSU-Bozeman LRBP team presents proposed MSU Consolidated Project
Priority List to President Gamble for consideration
December, 2005 > President Gamble and LRBP team present draft MSU Consolidated Project
Priority List to Chancellors for discussion in Bozeman
January, 2006 > Finalize MSU LRBP Consolidated Project Priority List
February, 2006 > Transmit MSU LRBP Project Priority List to OCHE
> OCHE submits Project Priority Lists to A/E Division
March, 2006 > Deadline for data entry of final MSU Capital Project data into SABHRS/MBARS
System
March, 2006 > MSU-Bozeman produces MSU Consolidated LRBP document
April, 2006 > Transmit MSU LRBP document to OCHE
> MSU LRBP team, UM LRBP team, and OCHE LRBP representative meet in Helena to develop consolidated MUS LRBP Project Priority List
> Campus tours of LRBP top priority projects by A/E Division representatives
June, 2006 >> OCHE transmits electronic MUS LRBP Priority List to A/E Division via
SABHRS/MBARS
July, 2006 > BOR approves MUS LRBP Project Priority List at regular meeting
> OCHE transmits any changes in the MUS LRBP Project Priority List to A/E Division for consolidation, with other state agency LRBP projects, into the Capital Construction Program
Late October, 2006 > Statutory date for Governor to approve Capital Construction Program
November, 2006 > A/E Division publish Capital Construction Program document, and distribute to
Legislative Committees
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
LRBP PROJECT PRIORITY RANKING GUIDELINES
The following list is a general hierarchy of priority ranking rationale. Project priorities should be justified using these guiding principles. Consideration should be given for projects that address elements from several of the categories as well as projects that continue or complete phased work that has been previously authorized or funded.
1. Health and Life/Safety
Projects that improve or eliminate conditions that present an immediate threat to health or life/safety, where it has been determined that there exists no possibility for operational changes to remedy the situation, and the necessary remedial action is beyond the resources of the institution.
2. Major Maintenance of Building/Utility Systems
Projects that correct a problem that, if left uncorrected, increases the potential for serious or continued damage to buildings, building components, or infrastructure systems, and would negatively impact the institution’s ability to deliver its programs.
3. Code Compliance
Projects which involve improvements to comply with state or federal regulations or institutional standards. Condition requiring corrective action does not present an immediate threat to life/safety, i.e., requires an event (earthquake, fire, etc.) before the problem is manifest. Examples: Seismic problems, fire code problems, ADA , etc.
4. Operational Efficiency/Savings
5. Adaptive Renovation
Projects which facilitate better utilization of an existing facility or the adaptation of an existing facility to changing or expanding program requirements.
6. New Construction
Construction of any new facility, either free standing or addition, generally in response to program expansion.
Authority Only
Projects for which no state funds are being requested and only authority to spend non-state funds for construction is needed. Authority-Only projects are usually not prioritized in the capital program publication of the LRBP, but are listed at the end of the proposed capital construction program. Includes projects that improve or upgrade operating systems or reduce overall facilities liabilities which will result in demonstrated operational cost-savings that help offset the capital investment. Examples: Energy conservation, demolition of existing facilities, etc.
MONTANA STATE UNIVERISTY
LRBP PROJECT EVALUATION PRINCIPLES
The following principles will guide MSU in the process of evaluating projects submitted for consideration through the Long Range Building Program, and will be used to inform the process of consolidating MSU’s individual affiliated campus project lists for submittal to the office of the Commissioner of Higher Education and the Board of Regents.
1. Decisions will be informed by relevant comparative and historical campus data, e.g., faculty/staff/student FTE, square feet, Facilities Condition Inventory, historical and projected enrollment, space utilization, etc.
2. Requests for new facilities or major renovations/additions to existing facilities will consider previous approvals for planning and/or design. Marginal supplemental assistance required to complete previously appropriated projects will also be considered.
3. LRBP maintenance requests should reflect the relative scale of each campus’ facilities assets and budgets.
4. We cannot defer the maintenance of critical campus (or building system) infrastructure components beyond useful life.
5. Decisions will be informed by data regarding the distribution of LRBP funds in previous Legislative Sessions.
6. New and adaptive renovation proposals should be based on documented program need, e.g., growth, changing technology, space, facilities condition, etc.
7. Current campus priorities will be expected to reflect priorities from previous years.
8. Campus priorities are expected to reflect their approved campus strategic plans.
9. Decisions will be informed by the general hierarchy of project types, as shown in the preceding MSU LRBP Project Priority Ranking Guidelines.
10. Priorities for new construction and adaptive renovation will encompass associated deferred maintenance or life safety enhancements as much as possible.
PRELIMINARY PRIORITIZED LIST -
LONG RANGE BUILDING PROGRAM -
MSU BOZEMAN - 2008-09
Priority
Project Title
Estimate
1
Gaines - Renovation
$20,000,000
2
Herrick - Fire Alarm
$180,000
3
Campus - Water/Sewer Upgrade
$750,000
4
Campus - Roof Replacements
$1,500,000
5
Cobleigh - Replace Elevator
$160,000
6
Campus - Code/Deferred Maintenance
$4,000,000
7
Wilson - Planter Brick Remediation
$250,000
8
Leon Johnson - Replace Brick - North Side
$4,700,000
9
Electrical - Primary Upgrade
$1,500,000
10
Montana - Adaptive Renovation
$20,500,000
11
Irrigation - Reservoir Expansion
$5,000,000
12
Reid - ADA Upgrades (Elevator and Restrooms)
$650,000
13
Campus - Classrooms Renovation
14
Campus - Recommission Various Buildings
$300,000
15
Hamilton - Stabilization/Adaptive Redesign
16
Sherrick Hall - Basement - Asbestos Remediation/Fire Sprinklers
$250,000
17
Romney - Fire Alarm
$180,000
18
Heating Plant - Fluid Cooling Loop
$200,000
19
Chemical Storage and Handling Facility
$70,000
20
ROTC Field Building
$800,000
21
Campus - Vehicular Access - Phase I
$1,500,000
22
Reid Hall - Replace HVAC/Add Cooling
$3,500,000
23
Campus - Central HVAC Control System
$500,000
24
Cobleigh - ADA Upgrades
25
Renne - Library Expansion - Phase I
$4,000,000
26
Reid - Fire Alarm System Replacement
$180,000
27
Renne Library Expansion - Phase II
$15,000,000
28
Haynes - Upgrade Heating and Ventilation
$350,000
29
Cooley - Adaptive Renovation
$12,500,000
30
Visual Communications - ADA Renovation
$250,000
31
Campus - Install Building Fire Sprinkler Systems
$3,000,000
32
Leon Johnson - HVAC - Deferred Maintenance
$1,000,000
33
Cooley - Fluid Cooling Loop
$200,000
34
McCall - Install Process Cooling Loop
$150,000
35
Irrigation - System Pump Replacement
$90,000
36
Culbertson - South Egress or Fire Suppression System
$500,000
37
Traphagen - Renovation
$5,000,000
38
Campus - Space Utilization Study
$350,000
39
Haynes - Seal Brick and Replace Windows
$570,000
40
Roberts - Electrical System Repair
$500,000
41
Hamilton - Renovation
$7,500,000
42
Traphagen - Repoint Masonry
$500,000
43
Reid - Secondary Electrical Upgrade
$100,000
44
Linfield - Renovation
$17,000,000
45
Romney - Renovation - Planning
46
Culbertson - Replace Windows
$180,000
47
Herrick - Renovation
48
Howard - ADA Upgrades
49
Culbertson - ADA Upgrades - (Entry, Elevator, Restrooms)
50
Reid - Fire Sprinkler Design/Estimate
$45,000
51
Campus - Street Replacement
$450,000
P:LRBP/2008-09/Preliminary Projects List June 2005 6/28/05 pjb
To: University Facilities Planning Board
From: MSU Parking Expansion and Improvement Taskforce
Re: Proposed Site for Parking Garage
UFPB gave approval for the Parking Expansion and Improvement Taskforce to consider two sites for the proposed parking garage; the Lewis and Clark lot or the East Linfield lot.
After due consideration the Parking Taskforce recommends that, if approval is given for the parking garage, that it is sited in the current location of the Lewis and Clark parking lot.
Advantages
Lewis & Clark
East Linfield
Already under asphalt
Already under asphalt
Gradient presents possible construction cost savings.
Better access and more student parking to Johnston, Hapner, Hannon and Atkinson.
Reduces potential traffic flow to 11th
Does not hamper other campus construction plans for the NW quadrant.
Minimizes conflict with Chem building.
Disadvantages
Lewis & Clark
East Linfield
Large building in view of the dorms
Large building in view of the dorms
Impact on traffic flow
Impact on traffic flow
Scheduling and staging: although not insurmountable they would impact on the building management capabilities for the Chemistry building.
Impact on the line fo trees between the two Linnfield lots
Underground utilities
Recommendation.
It is therefore recommended that any approved structure be located on the Lewis & Clark site.
The University Facilities Planning Board met on Wednesday, April 6, 2005 and discussed the following items:
- Approval of Minutes: Minutes from December 15, 2004; Januar 22, 2005; and February 23, 2005 were approved.
- Meeting times: The majority of members indicated that Tuesdays from 3:30-5:00 worked as a meeting time for the board to meet in lieu of Wednesday morning. Beginning Fall Semester 2005 the University Facilities Planning Board will meet the first and third Tuesdays of each month from 3:30-5:00.
- Herrick Hall: Deb Redburn, Development Officer for EHHD, prsented information about the renovation of the Bertha Clow Lounge in Herick Hall. There will be a dedication on May 6th from 10:00-11:30 a.m.
- Walt Banziger, facilities services, presented a design for the upgrading and renovation of the main lobby in Roberts Hall.
- Duck Pond Renovation: Cecilia Vaniman, facilities, updated the board on the duck pond renovation. Kerin and Associated in collaboration with Urbani and Associates have been hired to provide initial engineering and concept designs for the rehabilitiation of the docu pond area.
- Ghetty Grant: Facilities Services is applying for a Heritage Property Grant from the John Paul Ghetty Foundation for the evaluation of the MSU Historical District and potential listings on the National Trust for Historic Places.
- Animal Bioscience Building: (Informational item) Site selection will begin soon for the ARS Animal Bioscience Facility to be constructed at MSU.
February 23, 2005 - Rose Waldon reports:
The Planning Board met Feb. 23rd beginning at 9:00 am to discuss the following:
ITEM NO 1. – OPPORTUNITIES TO ENRICH STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCE BY IMPROVING THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT OF A CAMPUS
Banziger and Barrett discussed highlights of the Webcast held on February 17, 2005. The program was presented by Michael Flusche, Associate Vice Chancellor of Syracuse University and sponsored by the Society of College and University Planners. Five concepts were presented as a basis to discover opportunities to improve the physical environment of a campus:- A university should present itself physically as a learning community: students feel welcome, safe, and a vital part of a larger whole;
- The college should visibly convey its distinguishing character, history, and values through its built environment;
- The college built environment should be educationally and personally enriching to all who are on campus;
- The college environment should promote sound ecological and physiological wellbeing;
- The college should adopt managerial and administrative practices that encourage students to achieve a balanced sense of ownership of and responsibility for the campus.
ITEM NO 2. – CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREA FOR THE BLACK BOX THEATRE
Barrett reported that the Black Box Theatre will be ready to go out for bid in March 2005. The area west of McCall Hall has been identified for staging. OFS Landscape and Grounds has looked at the area and there are some bushes in that area that will be removed. This item is brought before UFPB for information purposes only.ITEM NO. 3 – H and PE STAGING
Banziger provided information regarding the H and PE renovation and possible staging areas. Two possible locations are the parking/service area south of the H and PE pool and the area north and east of the Fieldhouse. The staging area would be situated to allow for parking during events being held at the Fieldhouse. Care will also be taken to insure that no mature trees are damaged by staging.ITEM NO. 4. – STRAND UNION CONSTRUCTION STAGING
The field east of the H and PE Center is one area under consideration for construction staging for the SUB renovation. Alternative areas will be considered and will be presented if/when they are determined.ITEM NO. 5. – PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE (NON-AGENDA ITEM)
Wankel reported that during a presentation to the Student Senate regarding the proposed parking structure, concerns about safety and security, who will receive parking passes, and funding for the structure were raised. Banziger reported that proposed plans are to build a 3-4 story structure with open sides and architectural features to fit in with the campus. A design consultant will be selected and high priority will be given to safety, security and lighting in the design of the structure. Funding for the structure will be obtained mainly from parking user fees. Putzke advised that these, as well as many additional issues, will be addressed at the Public Forum being held today. Students are encouraged to actively participate in this early stage of the planning process.The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 am.
January 26, 2005 - Rose Waldon reports:
The Planning Board met, beginning at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the following:- Minutes of the November 17th, 2004 meeting were reviewed with one correction made on "Members Present".
- SUB RENOVATION-STUDENT FACILITIES ENHANCEMENT PROJECT: Facilities Services presented the latest design for the South entrance into the SUB, showing an exterior which would be similar to the original North entrance by using window formations and metal bars, MSU medalion and similar brick/cement exterior. The design was accepted at this time, and will be reviewed as the project moves forward.
- PARKING STRUCTURE: Jo Oudshoorn, from the VP A and F office, presented the latest "possible" locations for a new parking structure. With the additional of the new Chemistry Building, and other buildings located in the area of Linfield Hall, they are now at the possibility/cost of putting parking structure in the Linfield/E.Linfield lots. This structure would be larger than the structure proposed for the Lewis and Clark lot. There is a public forum tentitively scheduled for February 23 - 24.
- NATIVE AMERICAN RESOURCE CENTER: Cecilia Vaniman reported that the BOR has given the okay for the Native American Resource Center. The Legislature is being asked for approval of funding for Operations and Managment dollars. Site selection for the building will begin next month.
- UFPB MEETING TIMES: Members were asked to make sure they have their schedules in to Sharon Morrison a.s.a.p. so we can decide on a new meeting time.
December 15, 2004- Items discussed are as follows:
- Montana Hall Reroof. Walt Banziger, University Architect, presented selected materials being considered for the reroofing of Montana Hall. The project is in the design phase and is expected to be under construction this coming summer. The UFPB approved the selected color and roofing materials.
- Signage for the "Bracken Center". Architectural Services presented the proposed design for the signage for the Bracken Center located in Reid Hall. The naming of the center and the financial donation were negotiated prior to adoption of the Building Naming Policy, and this was presented to the committee for design, location and materials review.
- Renaming of the Agbioscience Building. Jeff Jacobsen, Dean of the College of Agriculture, has requested that the name of the AgBioScience Building be changed to PlantBio Science Building. This was presented and discussed as an informational item.
- Horizion Issues. Future issues to be brought before the UFPB include:
- Parking and Service Drives;
- Design development of the SUB, Black Box, Chemistry Building, Duck Pond Reconstruction.
- FEMA Tier 1 Seismic Study
- Antenna requests
December 1, 2004:
- A and E Architects presented a proposed layout of the SUB renovation project. If everything goes as planned it is hoped that the SUB renovation will begin Summer 2005 with all phases completed by Summer 2007.
- Discussion regarding the UFPB Role and Scope Statement continued.
- Discussion on changing the day of the week and time of future meetings, allowing more participation by faculty and ASMSU student rep.
September 30, 2004 CAMPUS BUILDING SIGNS. Vaniman reminded the group of the campus standard exterior building sign, and of the trial exception in format that was made to identify the Huffman Building as an emergency command post. A proposal has been submitted to list the contents of a building under the building name on the sign. Discussion ensued as to the methodology of determining which building contents are listed on an exterior building sign, as there is only room for hanging placards per sign that could possibly contain six names. Bancroft noted the Copeland Gallery within Haynes Hall as an example of an interior building space needing exterior recognition. Many ideas, including putting different names on either side of a sign, designing a companion sign, constructing Mall kiosks, and interior building directories were discussed. It was decided that OFS Planning will further investigate the idea of having electronic building directories, and that OFS Planning will poll a few building supervisors to get a feel for the caliber of the building naming issue. The poll will ask these supervisors what they would want shown if we installed new building entry directories, and whether they could limit the choices to six.
ITEM NO. 2 – EXTERIOR SIGNAGE FOR BUILDING OCCUPANTS. Several departments have requested additional exterior signage at entrances to their departments. Vaniman presented photos of the ITC canopy as an example of one such sign that has been approved by UFPB. Currently, the Counseling Center is requesting permission to repaint their existing sign on Swingle. This sign is not consistent in design or quality with the campus standards and it is recommended that it be replaced. Criteria for sign installation and sign appearance were then discussed. It was determined that an entity having a separate entry could have a separate sign that would exist in addition to the monument-style building name sign. Vaniman stated she would bring back specific recommendations for the Counseling Center.
It was suggested that since a Student Health monument-type sign exists at Swingle, the plywood one over the door be removed. It was also recommended that the School of Architecture remove their paper sign from the building entry. Bancroft will address this issue with the building users.
PLANNING FOR MASTER PLANNING. Bancroft and Barrett reported on the first meeting of the master planning subcommittee. They presented a preliminary “Path of Critical Thinking”, based on exploration of each goal listed in the university’s five-year plan. This plan would not speak to the administrative or operating plans for the university; it would only address the physical implications that are raised from this exploration. It was noted that university-wide consensus would be needed on suggestions/solutions that are raised in response to this exploration. Key decisions will need to be made at different stages in the master planning process, stakeholders will need to be represented in this process, and consultants will be required to advise at different stages of this undertaking. Lashaway expects the project to take two years from startup to finished document, and that two additional people are needed in OFS Planning to take over other duties (like construction projects), so that Vaniman and Barrett can concentrate on this master plan effort. Discussion began on related issues such as the shelf life of any proposed master plan, who the working groups and stakeholders should represent, and the degree specificity desired in the final document.
CHEMISTRY RESEARCH BUILDING. The architects presented the Schematic Design of the building for review, comment and a recommendation to the President. The presentation included plans and elevations, as well as more developed site concept. This project is on a fast track for design and construction.
REYNOLDS RECITAL HALL ENTRANCE. A new design for the entrance/marquee into the Recital Hall was presented for discussion and a recommendation. This project will set a standard for other such projects in the future.
AG BIO-PGC BICYCLE PARKING PAD. Vaniman presented drawings for a new bicycle pad to be located east of the Plant Growth Center and south of Ag BioScience Building. - Dowling Architects did a preliminary presentation on the materials proposed for the H and PE Fitness Center. Since the floor plan and design have been reviewed on numerous occasions, that was not part of the review today.