Transcript Site Selection for Hancher, Voxman, Clapp Replacement

AGENDA – PUBLIC FORUM
July 9, 2009
1. Welcome and background
Rod Lehnertz
2. Flood Task Force Update
Gregg Oden
3. Site Selection Studies
Joe Hibbard
4. Public Discussion
5. 8:30 Closing
Site Selection
for
Hancher, Voxman, Clapp
Replacement Facilities
Public Forum
July 9, 2009
Alternative Sites for HVC
Replacement Facilities
HVC Building Program Requirements Used in the
Site Selection Process
•
Existing HVC Building:
296,924 gsf
•
Proposed Base Program for HVC Replacement
315,675 gsf
•
Proposed Base Program Plus Possible Upgrades
418,881 gsf
HVC Parking Program Requirements Used in the
Site Selection Process
•
Existing HVC area parking serving HVC and Theatre Building
1018 spaces
•
Proposed HVC and Theatre Building parking
1300 spaces
Site Selection Assumptions
•
The HVC building program requirement for site testing purposes will be
418,881 gsf, and parking demand will be 1300 spaces
•
Hancher, Voxman and Clapp should be located together as a single complex on
a single site
•
The School of Music should be within reasonable walking distance of the
undergraduate classroom core of the campus
•
Project should be a model for sustainable design strategies
Site Selection Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
LAND
CIRCULATION
Ownership status
Site size
Site shape
Expansion potential
Utilities availability
Topography, flood exposure
Proximity to related programs
Existing use and possible displacements
Competition for future University uses
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Vehicular access and traffic impacts
Parking availability; event and daily use
Service access
CAMBUS access
Pedestrian access
SENSORY ENVIRONMENT
15. Appropriateness of architectural scale
and massing
16. Views and visual impacts
17. Open space impacts
18. Image and character
19. Symbolic associations – historical and
cultural values
20. Potential for creation of quality outdoor
spaces
21. Solar exposure, shadow and
microclimate impacts
Site Selection Criteria - critical factors
LAND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Ownership status
Site size
Site shape
Expansion potential
Utilities availability
Topography, flood exposure
Proximity to related programs
Existing use and possible displacements
Competition for future University uses
CIRCULATION
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Vehicular access and traffic impacts
Parking availability; event and daily use
Service access
CAMBUS access
Pedestrian access
SENSORY ENVIRONMENT
15. Appropriateness of architectural scale
and massing
16. Views and visual impacts
17. Open space impacts
18. Image and character
19. Symbolic associations – historical and
cultural values
20. Potential for creation of quality outdoor
spaces
21. Solar exposure, shadow and
microclimate impacts
Evaluation of
Alternative Sites for HVC
Replacement Facilities
Sites with Critical Flaws
Site 2: lack of proximate
parking
Site 3: inadequate size; flood
exposure; inadequate parking
Site 4: flood exposure at
Ralston Creek 100 yr
floodplain; inadequate
parking
Site 5: inadequate size
Site 7: inadequate parking;
flood exposure
Site 8: inadequate parking;
utilities not available
Viable Site Options
Park Road
Clinton Street
West site
Burlington Street
East site
Site 1, West Site Option
Preliminary West Site Evaluation
ADVANTAGES
ISSUES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Site is owned by University
Adequate land area
Above 500 year flood plus two feet
elevation
Land available for possible
geothermal well fields
Site is served by CAMBUS
Prominent visibility of Hancher
from Dubuque St. and Park Rd.
Continues the historic association
of HVC with the Arts Campus and
Iowa River
•
•
•
•
Distance from the undergraduate
classroom core, student services,
and related Arts Campus facilities
Functional and visual impacts on
Levitt Center
Will require building new parking
spaces to make up for those
displaced by new buildings
Parking will be distant from the
Hancher front door because of site
shape constraints
Impacts on river park green space
Site 6, East Site Option
Preliminary East Site Evaluation
ADVANTAGES
ISSUES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Close to undergraduate classroom
core, student services and support
functions in downtown
Facilitates a pedestrian oriented
campus
Adequate land area
Above 500 year flood plus 2 feet
elevation
Least cost scenario for utilities
Tangible contribution to vibrancy
of the east campus and downtown
Served by City transit and CAMBUS
•
•
Requires acquisition of land
Distant from other arts programs
located on the Arts Campus
May require parking coordination
with City ramps, or increase of
University parking supply on Lot 11
Displacement of the Engineering
Research Building
Studio Arts Facility Site Selection
Program Requirement:
86,000 gsf to 116,873 gsf
Adjacency Need: Close
proximity to Art Building
West
Viable Sites for Studio Arts Facility
River Street
Art Building West
end