Most recent Design Review Board meeting minutes
http://www.cu.edu/sites/default/files/September_2014_DRB_Minutes.pdf
There was a meeting on Wednesday but those details are not up yet.
Sounds like the design is about completed and I would imagine that photo above is the most recent rendering. The facility is going to be absolutely massive. Can't wait till it gets built, I have a feeling the thing is going to be a lot more upscale than any of us previously anticipated. It will be a gorgeous addition to Folsom.
12:00 – 1:45 Athletics Complex Indoor Practice Facility (IPF) Design DevelopmentPresenter(s): Populous; Michael Ray, Jeremy Krug
Description: Design development approval for the Indoor Practice Facility.
Design Review Board Approval Updates:
Grounds: Partial DD approved (north of IPF)
NE Corner Building: DD approved with conditions / resolved some conditions
IPF: DD requested and SD approved with conditions
Team requests a meeting for formal IPF submission with NE Corner building updates.
DRB and team agreed on Tuesday Sept. 30, 2014 at 9 a.m.
Comments prior to presentation.
Don Brandes noted the following site development items:
• The CU staff and consultant team have been making great progress in assembling a
comprehensive DD/site development package. It is premature to request final review of the site
development package until the final grading, drainage, landscape, utility and building
access/egress related issues have been resolved.
• To date, there is only a small section of the pedestrian walk that has been identified not-in-contract
(NIC). It will be important to have a complete set of site improvements that reflect base-bid and
funded site improvements.
• The DD site improvement package should clearly illustrate all project area improvements from the
edge of Boulder Creek to the north, to Colorado Avenue to the south, and to Folsom St. to the
east.
IPF Design Summary by Michael Ray
• Taking a step back, looking at the most appropriate building for the site.
◦ Went back to the diagrammatic sweet spot in May
• Building was doing too much. The goal in terms of the DRB was to simplify.
• Elevation studies led to cleaned up punched window look.
◦ Design is to be masculine• Realized that existing entrances on campus are never really a sandstone arch.
• Since last meeting, have been inspired by ornamental precast concrete arches.
• North Elevation –
◦ Committed to a clear, glazed system on upper portion of window.
• Since it is the north side, direct light may never hit the field.
◦ Translucent, diffused glazed system on the lower portion of window.
◦ Realizing now that the grade change to Boulder Creek combined with trees will screen the
bottom portion of the building from nearly all perspectives.
• South Elevation -
◦ All glazed translucent Kalwall.
• Trying to facilitate North/South ventilation.
• East – West Elevations -
◦ Sandstone pushed to the corners and wrap around to N/S elevations.
◦ Precast mass along center elevation.
◦ Letting wall lines become big swaths.
Design Review Board Comments and Clarifications
Rick Epstein commented that the east elevation needs more than four windows. Suggested additional
empty bay or windows that gang-up. Suggested nine bays that are all the same. The north elevation arch
option 2 seems integrated and simpler. Asked if the arch and the glass join and if the glass is segmented.
The Kalwall team is working on this. Asked if the northeast stairwell was needed. Yes, it goes down to the
garage.
Victor Olgyay noted that a suggestion at the last review was a diffuser under the skylight. This lights the
ceiling, distributes light more evenly, and would be better for the athletes. It is an opportunity for windows
and façade to improve the function inside for football practice.
• Team is looking at cheaper, clear glass with savings going into a diffuser.
• Garage bays can accommodate portable bleachers, similar to the University of Washington – they
can strategically scatter them. Trucks arrive and deliver at the northwest corner bay. The real issue
isn't visitors but athletes waiting between events with nowhere to wait.
Don Brandes: Requested that Populous compose the final “story” for the IPF building, noting that the special
nature of the building in terms of its location, size, use and architectural expression needs to be further
articulated and explained – especially in terms of its energy, sustainability and its visual prominence within
the campus.
Candy Roberts: Wants architecture to speak to an agreed idea of what a successful building is.
Victor Olgyay asked about the parapet detail and if the skylight is translucent, will it light the wall. He noted
that from a distance the scale will feel appropriate. The arch will be a nice prominent feature.
Candy Roberts: Commended team on a tremendous job
http://www.cu.edu/sites/default/files/September_2014_DRB_Minutes.pdf
There was a meeting on Wednesday but those details are not up yet.
Sounds like the design is about completed and I would imagine that photo above is the most recent rendering. The facility is going to be absolutely massive. Can't wait till it gets built, I have a feeling the thing is going to be a lot more upscale than any of us previously anticipated. It will be a gorgeous addition to Folsom.