M e e t i n g     N o t e s

Meeting Subject:                                Overview Committee

Location:                                           Henderson Community College

Meeting Date / Time:                         April 19, 2002 / 12:00 - 1:00 p.m.                

Issue Date:                                        May 01, 2002

Participants:    UNLV                                        Consultant Team

                        President Carol C. Harter             Tony Catchot (SmithGroup JJR)

                        Fred Albrecht                              Tim Rorvig (SmithGroup JJR)

                        Ray Alden                                   Steve Troost (SmithGroup JJR)

                        Juanita Fain

                        Tony Flores

                        John Gallagher

                        Tom Hagge

                        Susan Hobbes 

                        Dick Jensen

                        Rebecca Mills 

                        Schyler Richards         

                        Bill Wood                               

Prepared By:                                     SmithGroup JJR

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this meeting was to review the primary analysis conclusions and three alternative framework concepts.  The committee was also asked to identify preferred elements from each alternative that they would like combined into a consensus plan.  The consensus plan will be reviewed in May (campus visit #4).

The following comments were recorded:

·         S. Troost provided an overview of the planning process to-date and the encouraging engagement of the campus community as evidenced at the two recent open houses.

·         T. Rorvig gave a quick overview of the primary analysis conclusions and the three alternative framework concepts.  This was followed with a recap of the consensus direction received from both the Campus Advisory and Community Advisory Committees.

·         The Overview Committee generally agreed with incorporating the following elements into the consensus plan:

·          Alternative B's open space and pedestrian corridors (nodes and linkages)

·          Alternative C's expression of four primary campus entrances with a signature open space at the main Maryland Parkway entrance facilitated by the removal of Maude Frazier Hall

·          Alternative A's development of a central open space quadrangle and north-south pedestrian spine linking with the expanding residential and academic neighborhoods to the south and north, respectively

·          Alternative C's indication of a mixed-use development east of Maryland Parkway across from the campus' main entrance

·          The loop road configuration from Alternative B with the incorporation of a parking deck off each loop

·         Miscellaneous issues raised during the discussion include:

·          Considering studying the realignment of Maryland Parkway to the east in order to capture more land.  This concept was discussed years ago.

·          Acquisition of adjacent parcels to accommodate growth.

·          Need to consider retaining and/or developing more green space throughout campus to balance development density and encourage social/academic interaction.

·          The consultants need to provide a review of the preliminary housing master plan and how it fits in with the direction of the consensus framework plan.  The housing master plan shows multiple food service opportunities on purpose to provide a variety of dining venues for the students.

·          The plan needs to allow achievement of the 35,000 student enrollment goal.  Development potential (in terms of gross square feet) will need to be assessed for the May visit even if in macro terms.

·          The campus should continue to build off its assets like the existing open space malls.

·          More design/planning consideration must be given to the area southwest of the Thomas and Mack Center.

·          The Stan Fulton Building needs to be interwoven into the overall master plan.

Our summarization of this meeting is transcribed as above.  Please notify the writer within five (5) business days of this transcription of any disagreement as the foregoing becomes part of the project record and is the basis upon which we will proceed.

Respectfully submitted by:

SmithGroup JJR

 << Back to Products