executive summary Executive Summary University of Florida, Gymnastics Planning Study Project Description

Transcription

1 executive summary University of Florida, Gymnastics Planning Study Executive Summary Project Description University of Florida s Athletics Association (UAA) has begun studying the possibilities of providing an indoor practice field for the football program on its current practice site located immediately north of McKethan (baseball) Stadium on the University of Florida campus. The current facility has three outdoor practice fields. Two natural turf fields at 100 yards and 70 yards, and one synthetic turf field at 50 yards. In support of the practice fields, a 5500 square foot support building was constructed in 2006 to provide space for a satellite athletic training space, hydration station, toilet, and field maintenance equipment storage. While the practice area and support space have served the program adequately in past years, UAA would like to provide an indoor facility to: Allow practice to continue without interruption of inclement weather. At times, the team needs to seek cover during these events. This disrupts the continuity of the team s training session. Compete with peers to recruit quality student athletes. The facility s lack of a space for indoor training has set the University s program behind the majority of their peers within the SEC conference and the NCAA. This, in turn, puts the football program at a disadvantage in recruiting top student athletes. UAA hired RDG Planning & Design to provide assistance in planning for a new practice facility. Several options were considered. Of these options, UAA selected three that seemed to best fit the football program s needs. Option 1: Provide an inflatable, tensile structure over the current location of the synthetic practice field. This option yields the least cost of construction, while allowing the flexibility of quick and easy take downs. This option would provide an enclosed practice field of 70 yards, including two endzones. Option 2: Provide a more permanent indoor facility utilizing tilt-up precast concrete walls and clearspan steel roof structure over a 70 yard practice field (with endzones). The facility would take advantage of natural cross ventilation with large overhead doors on each side of the field, and provide mechanical ventilation with large exhaust fans should the space need flushed of warm stagnant air. This option allows the current natural turf fields to remain intact. 1

2 executive summary University of Florida, Gymnastics Planning Study Option 3: This option utilizes the same construction principals as option 2, but orients the field in an east-west direction. This field orientation allows less intensive retaining wall construction on the west side of the complex, and allows the track and field throwing area to remain unaltered. The center practice field would need altered to a 40 yard practice field, while an additional short 35 yard drill field adds flexibility to daily workouts. All options consider a pre-engineered metal support building, similar to the existing, located in the northeast corner of the site. They also provide a minimum clearance of 45 feet between the playing field hash marks. Cost Summary Option 1: Indoor practice building - $3.9 million Support building $730,000 Option 2: Indoor practice building - $9.43 million Support building $730,000 Option 3: Indoor practice building - $9.33 million Support building $730,000 Options 2 and 3 are calculated with very similar construction techniques. The conceptual estimate as shown later in this report was based upon option 3. Option 2 budgets an additional $100,000 for additional site work associated with the new practice fields and retaining wall work along the west side of the training complex. A comparison of cost associated with a pre-engineered steel building would yield approximately $500,000 in savings as compared to options 2 and 3. This savings would be contingent upon the amount of enhancements that are made to the pre-engineered system. For instance, brick veneer on the exterior, CMU on the interior of walls for maintenance and durability, build out of columns, etc. would all need to be considered in this potential cost savings. The estimates as shown are construction budgets. Project soft costs are not included within these estimates. This type of project could anticipate 25% 30% of the construction cost for soft costs, including design fees. 2

3 Concept #2 Civil Narrative Cover Location (East & West): The existing synthetic turf field is located 10 feet east of the retaining wall, and 20 feet west of the central practice field. This spacing provides the minimum recommended safety zone adjacent to the field. A cover would need to be structurally located outside of the safety zone, requiring the adjustment of the retaining wall to west. Cover Location (North & South): The west retaining wall curves to the east and terminates at the UF property line. This curve initiates less than 10 feet south of the existing synthetic turf field. The cover location will need to consider the northwest corner and the impact on the retaining wall. Cover Location (Maintenance Shed): The maintenance shed located south of the fields houses all of the maintenance equipment and materials utilized to keep the field in top quality shape. The equipment consists of tractors and similar vehicles which have a variety of attachments. The access space necessary to house the equipment will be a critical component of the roof location. Cover Location (Throwing Area): Immediately west of the retaining wall is the throwing area for the track facility. Any impact to the wall or western expansion will require relocation of these facilities. Retaining Wall Structure: The retaining wall was designed to hold the soils for the field. The addition of a structure will most likely require the retaining wall to be re-engineered and improved to support either a direct loading or loading in the angle of incident. Drainage: The existing synthetic turf field is designed to surface drain to the north, the south, and east, in addition to the underdrain system. The surface drainage is received by swales on the 3 sides, which discharge to surface inlets. Although a covered facility would eliminate the surface drainage from the synthetic turf field, the roof drainage would need to be accommodated. In addition, the east swale serves a portion of the central practice field, dictating that the surface system remains in place. Irrigation: The irrigation system for the entire practice field facility is provided by an 8 main which is supplied by the well system on the east side of the baseball facility. This main traverses the football practice facility north of the maintenance facility, turns south, then proceeds west to serve the track/soccer complex. If the placement of a roof structure will impact this line, relocation will be necessary. Potable Water: It appears that a small potable water service traverses the southwest corner of the practice field area. Verification of this line s existence and use will be necessary. If it is active, then relocation will be necessary. 8

4 Architectural Narrative concept #2 The football practice building will cover a 70 yard, synthetic turf field (310 x 200 ). This includes end zones at each end of the field and 20-0 of buffer space between the field and the walls. Tilt-up precast concrete walls on all sides of the building will provide construction efficiency and a durable final surface. Steel clear-span trusses on concrete columns support a hipped type roof. The clearances of these trusses are to be a minimum of 45-0 above the playing field hash marks. The roof form allows the perimeter of the building to be shorter than a gabled end wall, therefore reducing the perception of its large scale. The roof will be TPO or standing seam metal panels on steel (perforated) roof deck. The perforated roof deck will provide acoustical control. The clerestory glazing system at around the upper portion of the walls will be aluminum storefront system. This will provide natural light into the space, and the glass can be translucent to minimize glare if desired. All surfaces on the interior of this large volume will be painted a light neutral color (off-white or light gray) to maintain a consistent visual backdrop. The lighting within the space will be indirect, and located as close to the perimeter of the space as possible, so as not to conflict with visually tracking a kicked or thrown football. A total of 20, 20-0 wide aircraft hanger style overhead doors on north and south sides (10 each side), are positioned to provide cross ventilation when all doors are open. Eight of these doors are of transparent construction to allow for views when the doors are closed. A 5500sf storage/support building, similar to the current support building, will be a preengineered steel building with 4-0 brick base. This will store field maintenance equipment, as well as provide a satellite training space with a toilet and hydration service space. Structural Narrative Applicable Codes and Standards: Design Requirements Manual, The National Institutes Of Health Florida Building Code, 2010 Edition (effective March 15, 2012) Minimum Design Loads For Building And Other Structures, ASCE-7 Concrete Codes: - Building Code Requirements For Structural Concrete (ACI ) - Specifications for Structural Concrete for Buildings (ACI 301). - Latest Edition of the CRSI Manual of Standard Practice with All Supplements. Structural Steel Codes: - AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, March 9, AISC Code Of Standard Practice For Steel Buildings And Bridges, Adopted Effective March 18,

5 Masonry Construction: - ACI /ASCE 5-05/TMS Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures. - ACI /ASCE 6-05/TMS Specifications for Masonry Structures. Steel Deck: - North American Specification For The Design Of Cold Formed Steel Structural Members, Including 2004 Supplement (NAS-01) - SDI Design Manual for Composite Decks, Form Decks and Roof Decks. Structural Systems: Foundation and Ground Floor The reports on soil testing have not been authorized or performed at this time; however, experience on the site indicates the possibility of either pile supported or spread footing support of the columns and bearing walls, depending on final soil test results. It is certain that there is clay on site and that unacceptable soil will need to be dealt with. In the case of spread footings, the clay would need to be over-excavated a minimum of 4-0 and then replaced with acceptable, properly compacted soil. Assumed Foundation Sizes, utilizing spread footings, is as follows: - At each column: 11 x 11 x Below Tilt Wall Panels (end walls and when outside of column footings): 5 x 1.25 Continuous footing Pile foundations, if required, will be considerably more expensive but at this point the assumption includes only the spread footing option. The area below any slab on grade and beneath the landscaping walls will require over-excavation of at least 4-0 when the presence of unacceptable soil is determined and then will be backfilled with acceptable material. Surface and groundwater control will be required during foundation and site preparations. Wherever there as a ground floor system other than turf, it will be a concrete slab supported on the replaced compacted fill over a 10 mil vapor retarder. The majority of this floor system will be a 6 concrete slab due to vehicle traffic. Structural Wall System The proposed wall system for both Concept 2 and Concept 3 is 12 thick, tilt-up concrete wall panels. These panels should be assumed to incorporate a moderate amount of reinforcing except at the integral columns noted below. For support of the roof trusses, the initial design utilizes an integral column (or bolster) at every-other truss, approximately 30 on center. This column is incorporated at each side of a panel to panel joint and is assumed at this point in time to be a minimum of a 12 x 12 bolster on each end of each wall panel. Structural Roof System The roof deck system will be 3½, 18 gauge acoustical deck by Epic Metals (ER3.5A). Refer to Architectural information for the required finish. The deck spans between trusses and supplemental framing for maximum span of 15. The main framing for this Concept is either of 2 options. Both options will be developed to provide a system creating a traditional hipped roof as well as clearances of 40 at the exterior wall and 60 at 10

6 the center of the truss Option 1 utilizes a parallel chord, straight sloped truss-frame system, 10 minimum depth of the main truss. Initial estimates of weight per lineal foot of the truss system plus miscellaneous framing and connections, is 240 PLF. Option 2 utilizes a solid shape plate girder frame and preliminary estimates of the weight for this, including miscellaneous framing and connections, is PLF. The main framing for this Concept is a parallel chord curved truss system, 10 minimum depth of the main truss and clearances of 40 at the exterior wall and 60 at the center of the truss. Initial estimates of weight per lineal foot of the truss system plus miscellaneous framing and connections, is 200 PLF. 11

7 Conceptual Image SuPPOrt BuIlDINg INDOOr PrACtICe BuIlDINg existing PArkINg ramp MCkethAN StADIuM O CONNell CeNter SIte Plan aerial ImaGe - view From nw 12

8 Conceptual - Image aerial ImaGe - view From Se 13