University of Florida Housing Master Plan Executive Summary

Housing Master Plan Executive Summary University of Florida

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

1

CONTENTS

Goals

3

Process

4

Framework

5

Overview + Summary of Existing Conditions

6

Areas of Critical Need

8

Planning for a Signature UF Experience

10

Undergraduate Housing: Competition

11

Programmatic Priorities

12

Capital Planning to Address Facilities Conditions + Meet Demand

14

New Construction + Alignment with UF Planning

16

New Honors Residential College New Athletics Housing

18 26

Financials + Implementation

30

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

3

4

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Executive Summary

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

1

2

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

HOUSING MASTER PLAN GOALS The Housing Master Plan provides both a road map and a vision for the University of Florida to develop residential facilities. It is grounded in thorough research, influenced by academic scholarship, and rooted in a detailed understanding of the University’s existing facilities and conditions. The recommendations of this plan are intended to create a bold yet realistic vision of how renewed housing facilities at the University of Florida can support a signature UF experience and strengthen its position as a preeminent national university. Here is a summary of the planning goals.

Further context regarding UF’s strategic priorities, and the process through which these goals were identified, is included in an Executive Summary of the plan’s Detailed Market Analysis (Section 2.0).

01

02

03

04

SUPPORT A SIGNATURE UF EXPERIENCE

CONTRIBUTE TO A VIBRANT CAMPUS LIFE

BALANCE FINANCIAL ACCESSIBILITY WITH QUALITY FACILITIES

MAINTAIN STUDENT CHOICE AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

The “UF signature housing experience” should be a

Focusing new and renovated housing in the core

Providing equity in the residential experience

UF housing must continue to be financially

catalyst for enhancing education. By improving both

UF campus will strengthen both the residential

throughout the housing system is a high priority

successful in order to allow for new construction

the condition and the program of the existing housing

experience and the vitality of the campus as a whole.

for the University. So is maintaining its historic

and reinvestment to occur. This will mean care in

program, the University will support students’ social

Undergraduate beds especially should be located

commitment to the high-quality service and

balancing revenue with expenses to accommodate

and academic engagement in a way that is unique

in the campus core in neighborhoods that provide

maintenance of its residence halls. For the

capital projects. Although the University will benefit

to the University of Florida. This means creating

adequate support services and resources. The

implementation of this plan to be successful, the

from expanding its residential population, the

community at every scale of each residence hall

placement and design of student housing should

University will also balance the pricing approach to

inventory must be sized to anticipate UF’s valued

while using the residential experience to connect

contribute to a University-wide effort to establish a

promote equity among residents throughout the

“Choice within a Framework” model, allowing students

students with the support and rich experiences that

powerful sense of place on campus. With thoughtful

housing system while maintaining a high-quality

to choose whether they live on campus or not.

UF has to offer. UF’s housing program should focus on

exterior spaces, strong pedestrian connections and

standard for operations and maintenance.

lower division students, while providing appropriate

sensitive building massing, these buildings will be

offerings responsive to upper division and graduate

woven into the larger UF landscape to strengthen a

student preferences.

vibrant, interconnected campus experience.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

3

HOUSING MASTER PLAN PROCESS

Project Initiation

Guiding Principals Literature Review

4

/

Demand / Market Analysis

Architectural Study

Financial Plan + Analysis

Final Report + Presentation

Student Surveys Demographics Off-Campus Analysis Peer Benchmarking

Programming Facilities Assessment Site Capacity Analysis

System-Wide Financial Plan + Analysis

Clear Plan Forward Decision-Making Document

Meeting 1: Visioning, Interviews

Meeting 2: Literature Review, Goals, Initiate Programming

Meeting 3: Survey Analysis Reconciliation, Program Dev.

Meeting 4: Results of Facilities Assessment, Initial Concept Studies

Meeting 5: Financial + Phasing Scenarios

Meeting 6: Final Presentation

October 2018

November 2018

December 2018

January 2019

February 2019

April + May 2019

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

HOUSING MASTER PLAN FRAMEWORK The Framework

Approach Architectural Study

The overall objective of the student housing master plan and the intent of the

The VMDO / Brailsford & Dunlavey Project Team’s approach to the planning process

The Architectural Study developed a clear vision for the future of the University’s

planning efforts was to determine a 10-year implementation strategy aligned with

aims to inspire, empower, and advance the University of Florida towards realizing

housing stock, identifying how capital renovation and new construction projects can

UF’s strategic objectives that prioritizes capital reinvestment in existing facilities,

strategic objectives related to the on-campus residential experience.

realize the University’s strategic objectives.

Facilities Assessment included a review of UF’s drawings and records of existing

pursues new construction, and supports the financial strength of the housing Project Initiation

building conditions, a walk-through of representative buildings of each housing

Through Project Initiation, the planning team researched existing conditions and

complex, and documentation of the useful life of systems, cost of replacement and

The plan detailed in this report creates a compelling vision for housing at the

clarified the process and goals of the Housing Master Plan.

cost of renovation. The Facilities Assessment documents the existing conditions and

University of Florida. However, it also identifies the financial adjustments, phasing

Conducted a Literature Review, led by Dr. Karen Inkelas, to identify evidence-

issues to address through renovation of each housing complex on the UF campus.

strategy, and architectural considerations needed to achieve this vision.

based design principles that correlate on-campus living and student success.

Vision for New Construction identifies the conceptual massing, estimated bed

Reviewed Existing Conditions including the University’s existing planning

capacity, and design potential for new housing needed to realize UF’s objectives.

documents, drawings, and maps, and walked through each housing complex.

This vision is developed in concert with the guidance and priorities established in the

Gathered Stakeholder Input through interviews and focus groups with

University’s other and on-going planning efforts.

system. Together, these initiatives will advance UF towards its “Top Five” ambitions.

The planning process was designed to infuse decision-making with a detailed understanding of: •

The University’s strategic goals and priorities

•

The physical and programmatic condition of the current UF housing inventory

•

Student preferences, responses to existing housing, and sensitivity to rental rates

•

Housing offerings in the off-campus Gainesville marketplace and at peer benchmark institutions

•

Academic research on the influence of residence hall design on student experience and success

•

The state of UF’s finances and capacity to fund capital investment

The design team worked very closely with a Working Group with representation from Housing and Residence Education as well as Planning, Design and Construction throughout the planning process. The team benefitted from executive-level

administrators, students, and staff.

Established Project Goals grounded in the feedback and visioning from University

Financial Plan and Analysis

stakeholders.

Through this phase of the Housing Master Plan, the team analyzed adjustments needed to support the capital investments identified in this plan.

Market Demand Analysis

System-wide Operating & Capital Budget Financial Analysis is rooted in a

Through the Market Demand Analysis, the project team gained a better

housing-specific, system-wide financial model that projects long-term revenues

understanding of current living situations, decision-making patterns, potential

and expenses, as well as debt obligations associated with the University’s housing

interest in on-campus housing, rental rate sensitivity, and preferred amenities.

operation. The model illustrates how facility improvements, University policies, and

Strategic Asset Value (“SAV”) Work Session included key stakeholders and

enrollment changes impact the University’s financial position (both currently and

University administrators to identify the strategic objectives of the planning process.

in the future) with the intention of developing an actionable housing strategy for

Off-campus Market Analysis included both primary and secondary research to

achieving UF’s goals.

understand how current market conditions relate to student housing.

Integration of Implementation Strategy (New Construction / Demolition /

Internet-Based Student Survey identified current patterns, future preferences,

Renovation) analyzed several phasing scenarios in order to determine the optimal

and price sensitivity related to housing.

strategy for proceeding with the identified recommendations, evaluating them for

Survey / Demand Analysis determined demand preferences for housing tested in

their impact on bed count and system financials.

input from UF leadership as well as stakeholder input from across the University

the survey, and students’ willingness to pay for different living arrangements.

system. We are grateful for the hard work and careful thinking contributed by our

Conceptual Programming Strategies for Public Spaces developed

Final Report and Presentation

collaborators at the University of Florida. We hope this plan serves the mission of

recommendations for public spaces to develop in existing and new residence halls.

This report of the UF Housing Master Plan summarizes the planning process’s

Housing and Residence Education and captures a bold vision for how housing can

Benchmarking aligned recommendations with offerings in the off-campus

findings and recommendations, distilling our investigations into high-level

help the University of Florida achieve its brightest future.

Gainesville market and at peer institution campuses.

summaries of the University’s vision and direction forward.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

5

OVERVIEW OF EXISTING CONDITIONS

6

Historic

Beds

Year Constructed

Murphree Hall Thomas Hall Sledd Hall Fletcher Hall Buckman Hall Total (13% U’Grad):

376 179 182 157 137 1031

1939 1906 1929 1939 1906

Mid-Century

Beds

Year Constructed

Trusler Hall Simpson Hall Graham Hall Tolbert Hall East Hall North Hall Riker Hall Weaver Hall Rawlings Hall Broward Hall Mallory Hall Yulee Hall Reid Hall Jennings Hall Beaty Towers Total (13% U’Grad):

201 208 200 253 206 158 199 180 352 680 176 178 172 515 791 4461

1961 1961 1961 1950 1961 1950 1950 1950 1958 1954 1950 1950 1939 1961 1967

Apartment + Suites

Beds

Year Constructed

Lakeside Keys Springs (Suites) Total (17% U’Grad):

548 432 180 1460

2000 1991 1995

Recent

Beds

Year Constructed

Hume Cypress Infinity Total (15% U’Grad):

608 255 320 1183

2002 2015 2015

Grad / Family Housing

Beds

Year Constructed

UVS Maguire Corry Village Diamond Village Tanglewood Continuum Total:

192 344 336 312 305 612 2101

1972 1971 1958 1965 1973 2011

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Target Area for Increased Density

SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS With over 10,000 beds, the student housing system at the University of Florida is robust and diverse. Across the system, the buildings are clean, maintained, and well-cared for. However, with an average age of 45 years, the facilities are aging. Though the University of Florida has invested consistently in these residence halls, full-scale renovation to existing buildings has been the rare exception.

This plan details a specific strategy to prioritize a series of capital projects addressing the condition of existing buildings. The plan prioritizes the facilities with the most significant need on a ten-year horizon. Further, it recommends replacing buildings that either suffer from poor construction or were built on sites that would better serve the campus with an alternate use. However, at its core, this plan also recommends that UF develop a conceptual plan for all of its existing housing stock to be fully renovated on a continuing cycle, preparing the

Historic Era: Buckman Hall (above left), Thomas Hall (above right)

financial and capital planning to address the buildings outside of the ten-year horizon identified by this plan.

Of course, the condition of these buildings varies significantly by age: HISTORIC (1906 - 1939): Although dated in construction and lacking in common spaces, these halls are coveted by students for their classical beauty, pleasant outdoor spaces, and centrality to campus. Relative to their age, the Historic buildings have been well-maintained, though this varies between halls.

MID-CENTURY (1950-1967): These buildings represent the largest single component of the University’s housing stock, and occupy the sites closest to core campus. Although the “skeletons” of these buildings are in reasonable

Mid-Century Era: Beaty Towers (above left), Broward Hall (above right)

condition, MEP and roof systems are frequently sub-par, and with some in need of immediate attention. These halls are, as a rule, in need of renovation or replacement.

UNDERGRADUATE SUITES AND APARTMENTS (1991-2000): Though their systems and components are showing their age, these buildings are competing well with off-campus offerings. Renovation beyond the 10-year horizon will be important to maintaining the quality of these buildings and UF’s competitive advantage with them.

RECENT (2002-2015): Consistent with their age, New Construction projects represent some of the University’s best stock both in terms of programming and repair. These halls are in good to excellent physical condition, with younger MEP systems and more modern approaches to building envelope, accessibility, and design.

Recent Construction: Cypress Hall

Apartments + Suites: Keys Apartments

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

7

AREAS OF CRITICAL NEED Overall Freshman Satisfaction by Undergraduate Building BUCKMAN HALL (1906)

100%

Cypress Hall (2015)

100%

Fletcher HALL (1939)

100%

Thomas HALL (1906)

100%

Tolbert HALL (1950)

100%

Hume HALL (2002)

98%

Murphree HALL (1939)

93%

Simpson HALL (1961)

93%

Infinity HALL (2015)

91%

Springs Complex (1995)

90%

Keys Complex (1991)

89%

Lakeside Complex (2000)

89%

Broward Hall (1954)

86%

Prioritizing Mid-Century (1950-1967) + Historic (1906-1939) Buildings

The Mid-Century buildings also lack the kind and quality of common spaces that

Mallory HALL (1950)

83%

The Mid-Century buildings represent over half of the University’s undergraduate

can support a rich student life. Although the buildings have a generous amount

Weaver HALL (1950)

82%

housing stock. Although students living in these buildings indicate that their

of space outside the residential areas, over time, much of that space has been

East HALL (1961)

81%

satisfaction with the location (in the heart of the campus core) is very high, their

taken over for non-residential uses. The amount of space devoted to service

North HALL (1950)

80%

satisfaction with the buildings themselves is the lowest in the UF system.

functions (maintenance shops, non-res life offices, storage, MEP, etc) far exceeds

Riker HALL (1950)

80%

Yulee HALL (1950)

space for residential uses will improve the efficiency of and residential experience

78%

buildings. This is not surprising given that the buildings lack the building-wide

in these buildings. Also, although the amount of residential common space

Graham HALL (1961)

77%

ventilation systems needed to control moisture and humidity. An assessment of

sometimes approaches the benchmark, the location, configuration, and design is

Beaty HALL (1967)

71%

the MEP/FP systems of these buildings by Moses and Associates revealed that

of poor quality and should be improved to support students’ social and academic

71%

although partial renovations have occurred in these buildings, 13 of the 19 distinct

experiences in these buildings.

Sledd HALL (1929)

8

that of benchmark buildings of the same purpose and typology. Re-purposing this In focus groups, students report concerns with the indoor air quality of these

Reid HALL (1950)

64%

Jennings HALL (1961)

63%

Rawlings HALL (1958)

63%

Trusler HALL (1961)

54%

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Mid-Century buildings and wings still have most of their original systems intact. With an average age of 62 years, many building systems are rated as between D and F,

Although the historic buildings have seen more capital investment over the years

meaning that the systems on the whole are beyond their useful life and are seeing

than those from the mid-century era, this plan recommends renovating Sledd and

issues that need immediate attention. In fact, many of these buildings still rely on

Fletcher in the ten-year horizon - given the current performance of their MEP/FP

window units for air conditioning, which are both noisy and unattractive.

systems and the low student satisfaction at Sledd. Maintaining a watchful eye on

MEP/FP Grades by Undergraduate Building A B C D E F

Expected Life Remaining

Performance Issues

A

>10 Years

None

B

>10 Years

Minor

C

<10 Years

None

Infinity HALL (2015)

D

<10 Years

Minor

BUCKMAN HALL (1906)

E

At end of expected life

Major

F

At end of expected life

Major, Immediate

Cypress Hall (2015)

Thomas HALL (1906) Hume HALL (2002) Murphree HALL (1939) Tolbert HALL (1950) Keys Complex (1991) Lakeside Complex (2000) Broward Hall (1954) Weaver HALL (1950) North HALL (1950) Simpson HALL (1961)

the condition of the other three historic buildings moving forward will be important.

Although there are issues with the systems and spaces in the Mid-Century and

With a distinctive collegiate Gothic style and important historic significance to the

Historic buildings, the quality of their construction of both eras is excellent. With

Springs Complex (1995)

campus as a whole, these buildings are essential elements of the character and

solid masonry exterior walls and cast-in-place concrete structures, these buildings

Mallory HALL (1950)

history of the UF campus. Maintaining their systems, spaces and architecture serves

were constructed to last. Due to the expense of these construction systems, few

East HALL (1961)

not only the buildings’ residents, but the vitality of the campus as a whole.

contemporary residence halls are constructed of these assemblies. However, their life-span and durability are proven. Therefore, planning to renovate these buildings

While the University’s historic residence halls are beautiful examples of early 20th

is, in essence, planning to make the most of a solid and significant investment that

Century architecture and shape beautiful outdoor spaces, the nature of the original

the University has already made in long-standing structures.

Riker HALL (1950) Yulee HALL (1950) Graham HALL (1961)

plan organization severely limits the amount interior social and residence life space

Reid HALL (1950)

these halls can host. Floor lounges are placed with less regularity than newer halls,

Jennings HALL (1961)

and they are overall smaller, fewer, and less well-equipped. Beyond a handful of staff

Fletcher HALL (1939)

and faculty apartments, there is very little residence life program at all. As a rule, these halls lack lobbies and large-scale gathering spaces, meeting rooms, academic space, or residence life offices, except as provided by Murphree Commons. These deficiencies no doubt affect resident experience.

Sledd HALL (1929) Trusler HALL (1961) Beaty HALL (1967) Rawlings HALL (1958)

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

9

PLANNING FOR A SIGNATURE UF EXPERIENCE One of the primary goals of this study is to support a signature residential experience that serves as a catalyst for enhancing education. The Literature Review included in this document identifies that creating a blend of common spaces that encourage students to invest in their social and academic experiences is an important element to supporting learning and development. As UF plans to invest in capital improvements to its housing system, thoughtfully developing common spaces throughout these buildings will be an important factor in achieving the university’s strategic objectives and enhancing the student experience.

Social Lounge

This includes the composition of the typical floor (bathrooms, floor lounges and

Rehearsal + Performance Room

studies), the building (spaces shared by all residents, such as rec rooms, group studies, classrooms, or staff apartments), and the neighborhood (spaces which will attract even non-residents, such as performance halls, maker spaces, dining, wellness, or great halls). Allowing the space needed for neighborhood amenities, often tied to Living Learning Communities, will be critical for creating a strong, engaged on-campus community. This in turn is central to the University’s greater goals: increased academic performance and standing, and bolstering demand for oncampus housing among upperclassmen.

The work of creating a signature student experience is hand-in-hand with the work of Social Lounge

Social Lounge with Kitchen

Student Bedroom

designing the spaces where UF’s students will live, play, and learn.

Group Study

Recreation Room

10

/

Active Learning Classroom

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Great Hall

Learning Commons

UNDERGRADUATE HOUSING: COMPETITION Creating welcoming, attractive, and diverse common spaces throughout these residence halls is becoming an increasingly important factor in UF’s competitive position. Housing in both the Gainesville market and on the campuses of the benchmark institutions studied for this plan includes a significant investment in these kinds of amenity spaces.

In the Gainesville marketplace, newer student housing developments like The Standard and The Nook are emphasizing the quality of their amenity spaces in their outreach to students. These spaces include places for social connection (arcade, game room, internet cafe), places for academic pursuit (computer lab), and places to support health and wellness (fitness center, outdoor pool).

Meanwhile, a benchmarking exercise with six of UF’s peer institutions revealed that they are all investing heavily in their residential buildings. Among UF’s Top Five peers (University of Virginia - #3, University of Michigan - #4, and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - #5), all are undertaking a comprehensive renovation

University of Michigan / Couzen & Alice Lloyd Halls Renovations

The Standard / Gainesville, Florida

University of North Carolina / Morrison Hall Renovation

The Nook / Gainesville, Florida

campaign of their existing housing. On these peer campuses, the dull kinds of spaces prevalent in UF’s older housing stock are being transformed into the inviting and attractive spaces seen on this page.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

11

PROGRAMMATIC PRIORITIES Crafting recommendations for renovation or new construction strategies means meeting the University’s needs, and those of its over 10,000 on-campus residents.

As discussed in the Literature Review, how students are grouped and housed has a huge impact on their social and academic wellbeing. Building density and height, as well as the size of communities (as determined by RA ratios) are crucial in setting students up for success. Creating tight-knit, dynamic Living Learning Communities is equally important, increasing student engagement. These decisions create community at every scale: the floor, the hall, and the neighborhood.

VMDO’s Ideal Program, shown here, distills a close analysis of these factors into a conceptual strategy for a 500-bed residence hall with traditional beds and wet-

O IN IES T ENIT MONS M A M L NTIA R CO POTENEIGHBO IN A

E CLUD

core bathrooms. This program captures UF’s goals for clustering student rooms, and distributing diverse common spaces throughout its residence halls to create community at every scale of the building. It serves as a starting point for developing programs tailored to the specific needs of future capital renovation and new construction projects. On the whole, this ideal program allows for roughly 300 GSF per bed, with 6000 ASF of building capacity, and 6000 ASF of neighborhood capacity.

A careful analysis of an existing Mid-Century building (Rawlings Hall, shown here) and an existing Historic building (Fletcher Hall, included in the Design Strategy section of this report) reveals that it is possible to achieve UF’s programmatic vision through renovation as well as new construction. Although this will require reconfiguring existing spaces, these existing buildings can enjoy the quality of interior spaces and program on par with new construction.

12

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Benchmark Comparison

Existing plan of the first floor of Rawlings

Proposed renovation of the first floor of Rawlings

Existing plan of the ground floor of Rawlings

Proposed renovation of the ground floor of Rawlings

Rawlings Existing

Rawlings Renovation

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

13

CAPITAL PLANNING TO ADDRESS FACILITIES CONDITION + MEET DEMAND Capital re-investment in the Mid-Century and Historic residence

Although addressing the condition of existing facilities is a cost-effective

halls will have a significant impact on the quality of the on-campus

top priority of this plan, new construction will also be required to create

undergraduate experience. This plan recommends prioritizing the

the extra capacity needed to allow for renovation without a loss of

renovation of Beaty Towers, Yulee, Mallory, and Reid Halls, Fletcher

beds. New construction will also allow the University to capture the

Hall and Sledd Hall and replacing Rawlings Hall, Simpson Hall and

unmet student demand for housing identified in the student survey.

Trusler Hall. Addressing these buildings as a top priority will address

Undergraduate demand projections indicate that there is demand for

the undergraduate housing system’s most pressing MEP/FP concerns,

8,953 beds, which exceeds UF’s current inventory by 810 beds.

Historic

Current Bed Count

Proposed Bed Count (by 2030)

Murphree Hall Thomas Hall Sledd Hall Fletcher Hall Buckman Hall Total:

376 179 182 157 137 1031

376 179 182 157 137 1031 (32% Renovated by 2030)

Mid-Century

Current Bed Count

Proposed Bed Count (by 2030)

201 208 200 253 206 158 199 180 352 680 176 178 172 515 791 4461

----200 253 206 158 199 180 --680 176 178 172 515 791 3700 (35% Renovated by 2030)

costs for both renovation and new construction, using actual sample

At the end of the projected ten-year plan, the University will have

Trusler Hall Simpson Hall Graham Hall Tolbert Hall East Hall North Hall Riker Hall Weaver Hall Rawlings Hall Broward Hall Mallory Hall Yulee Hall Reid Hall Jennings Hall Beaty Towers Total (13% U’Grad):

renovation schemes and recent housing construction projects. These

expanded its housing stock from 8,953 to 9,282 beds for undergraduates.

Apartment + Suites

Current Bed Count

Proposed Bed Count (by 2030)

costs were carefully reviewed by UF Planning, Design and Construction

By exceeding demand, UF will have inventory to support continued

Total:

1460

1460

for applicability and to determine expected total project costs. This

reinvestment within its existing facilities beyond the 10-year planning

Recent

Current Bed Count

Proposed Bed Count (by 2030)

complete analysis revealed that the renovation cost per bed of Mid-

period. And the overall condition of undergraduate student housing

Total

1183

1183

Century halls can be accomplished at approximately 65% that of new

will be improved, as over 38% of UF’s beds will be in new or renovated

Proposed New Construction

construction, and Historic at approximately 60% on average.

buildings.

set the University on a path towards a long-term goal of addressing its most critical housing stock, and free two key campus sites for other

Two new construction projects will also allow the University to develop

uses.

housing options designed specifically for two distinct populations of students: Honors College members and student athletes. By expanding

By pursuing the renovation of the seven halls identified in this plan,

housing offered to these students with purpose-built housing, the

UF stands to save significantly over choosing to replace them. VMDO

University is likely to expand the total demand predicted in the student

worked with MEP/FS engineers of Moses and Associates and cost

survey.

estimators with CPPI construction to estimate total construction

Grand Total

Full-Time Undergraduate Demand by Class for New On-Campus Housing Fall ‘18 Enrollment

Fall ‘18 Residents

Existing Capture Rate

Demand

Demand Capture Rate

FT Freshman

6,769

5,467

81%

5,273

78%

FT Sophomores + Returning Freshman

7,813

1,410

18%

1,884

24%

FT Junior + Seniors

16,922

1,002

6%

1,796

11%

FT Subtotal

24,735

2,412

10%

3,680

15%

Overall Total

31,504

7,879

25%

8,953

28%

Full-Time Enrollment Classification

Existing Bed Count

8,143

Surplus / Deficit

810

14

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

East Neighborhood West Neighborhood

New or Renovated in 10-Year Plan

1400 500

8143

9282 3556 (38%)

Historic 1 2

2 4

3 4

1

5

Murphree Hall Thomas Hall Sledd Hall Fletcher Hall Buckman Hall

5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

11 9

17 18 19 16 10

22 23

20

Lakeside Keys Springs (Suites)

Recent 24

3

12

Apartment + Suites 21

Mid-Century

25

Trusler Hall Simpson Hall Graham Hall Tolbert Hall East Hall North Hall Riker Hall Weaver Hall Rawlings Hall Broward Hall Mallory Hall Yulee Hall Reid Hall Jennings Hall Beaty Towers

26

Hume Cypress Infinity

Grad / Family Housing 27 28 29 30 31 32

UVS Maguire Corry Village Diamond Village Tanglewood Continuum

15

13

17

8

18

6

19

20

7

Demolish 24

Renovate by 2030 Renovate after 2030 New Construction

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

15

NEW CONSTRUCTION + ALIGNMENT WITH UF PLANNING L A K E A L I C E WAT E R S H E D D I A G R A M

The sites for the two new construction projects identified in this plan balance the University’s planning objectives for P R I N Cand I P L Ecampus 4 density connectivity with the programmatic adjacencies required for the distinct uses of each new building.

Initial planning moves at each of these sites embrace the University’s priorities identified in the Landscape Master Plan,

Celebrate the Ecological Setting of the Campus, Embracing Sustainable Goals and LID Practices

outlined in the Strategic Development Plan, and established in early presentations of the Campus Framework Plan, all of which emphasize campus connectivity, enhancing natural systems, strategic programming and place-making. As each of these projects is developed, it will be important for each to continue to refine the design approach to fully realize the spirit of these planning priorities.

East Neighborhood Site: New Honors College

The proposal to site UF’s expanded Honors College on the area south of Broward and Yulee-Mallory-Reid derives from several factors. First, the site is near to core campus; the expansion of this area as a pedestrian academic district is central to elevating student experience. Sites need to be developed with an eye to the enhancement of UF’s “traditional” campus over sprawl. Secondly, the site is also significant visually, establishing an important frontage along Museum Road and visibility from 13thofStreet.

Finally, the selection of this site works in concert with other University efforts: the creation of a The University Florida campus is a place of great beauty and ecological new recreation center and dining hall.natural Combined with the design strategy out altered here for the new Honors College, these diversity.

Although some of the communities on site havelaid been amenities willthe create an entirely new neighborhood over time, native landscape ecology is tofor bestudents. admired and should be

celebrated. Conservation areas should remain managed and protected and the landscape of the built environment should become a reflection of the West Neighborhood Site: Student-Athlete Housing native systems of North Central Florida. Embracing the campus ecology must In the second proposed site, across from Hume Hall, the University finds an opportunity to house its athletes in a state-ofbe a part of University’s educational mission, including the stewardship of its

Exhibit taken from “GreenHeart”, graduate landscape architecture students entry in the 2017 Campus RainWorks EPA Challenge and published in the Landscape Master Plan (July 2018).

the-art facility. Blended into a community with 51% non-athletes, UF’s student athletes will enjoy a convenient location in

own environment, reflected by embracing sustainable principles of design, encouraging access to natural areas of the campus, and restoring UF’s native

a precinct of campus which offers close proximity to athletic facilities and student amenities. The site’s location at Museum Road and Gale Lemerand Drive positions the new hall to continue an intentional, visionary expansion of UF’s core academic

landscape communities.

campus, focusing on pedestrian experiences of the landscape and architecture, as outlined in the Campus Framework Plan.

Exhibit taken from “GreenHeart”, graduate landscape architecture students entry in the 2017 Campus RainWorks EPA Challenge.

R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S : The natural areas, woods, creeks, ravines, and ponds on campus should be protected, stabilized, managed, and enhanced as native habitats for flora and fauna Remnant natural areas of the campus have been variously affected by clearing and development, erosion and sedimentation, suppression of natural wildfire, and colonization of nuisance and exotic species. Ensuring the protection, stabilization, management, and enhancement of the remaining natural areas of the campus will increase their ecological value rsi tpresence y of Floriof danative H ou si n g M ast er P lanto managing 1and 6 encourage / Uni ve the wildlife.

In addition existing natural areas of the campus, the manicured edges of Dairy Pond

The campus landscape should reflect the original campus watersheds and water courses

The water courses, ponds, lakes, and flow ways of the campus have been altered as part of campus development. To the greatest extent practicable, these areas should be restored, enhanced, and preserved for their use by wildlife and the enjoyment of the UF community. Such Areas of focused development, from the Strategic Development Plan by Elkus Manfredi and Dumont Janks restoration will provide for managed access for passive recreation and the opportunity to educate about the ecology of North Florida, as well as assure that the quality of surface waters entering Lake 89 9 Alice

improved.

9 Where possible 8 9 of9 underground

are the daylighting 9 9 9 9 9 drainage 9 9 systems should ! 9be encouraged. # Where 9 the recreation of ope

012345467

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

17

NEW HONORS RESIDENTIAL COLLEGE 1

Rinker Hall (Existing Academic)

2

New Rec Facility

3

Broward Hall

4

Dining Hall

5

New Yulee / Mallory / Reid Commons

6

Yulee / Mallory / Reid Hall

7

Great Lawn

8

Commons

9

Pavilion

10

Honors Residential College

11

Bridge

12

Yulee Preserve

13

Outdoor Classroom

14

Museum Road

5

4

1

6 3

2

7

11

12

9 10 13

8

14

Aerial view of existing site at Broward Area

18

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Aerial view of Honors Residential College concept design for Broward Area

EAST NEIGHBORHOOD SITE: 1400-Bed Honors Residential College

The concept design for the new Honors Residential College emphasizes a few key elements. First is the creation of meaningful, recognizable outdoor spaces. Cloistered or public spaces can be enjoyed. The new Great Lawn reinforces connections along existing campus paths and preserves existing Heritage Trees. The Pavilion space associated with the Honors Courtyard creates a sense of community and identity, its expression less public than that of the general population outdoor spaces to the west. Yulee Pit (reconceived as the Yulee Preserve), meanwhile, is reimagined as a space for learning and teaching-the Outdoor Classroom. This approach is combined with environmentally responsive design such as shading, covered bridges and walkways, and vegetative roofs.

A second factor is accessible site configuration, ensuring a universal experience. VMDO also studied a reconfigured approach to service entries, keeping them out of the pedestrian-focused interior of the block. Third, massing and materiality (stepped top levels, glassy corners) reduce the imposing quality of five-and-six-story buildings.

This site design anticipates the construction of a new Recreation Facility at the site of existing Rawlings Hall. This concept is included to ensure that the site design aligns with UF’s larger planning priorities. It is included as a placeholder,noting the space that would be needed to locate the Recreation Facility on this site if the University chooses to develop such a building here. However, the team did not evaluate alternate sites for this building as part of this planning effort. The University may choose to an alternate location moving forward. Similarly, planning for the capital investment in a new Recreation Facility was not evaluated as part of this planning effort.

Schematic view of Honors Residential College concept design for Broward Area

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

19

NEW HONORS RESIDENTIAL COLLEGE CONCEPTUAL PROGRAM Planning for a new Honors Residential College is rooted in the Ideal Program recommended for the undergraduate housing system generally. The program anticipates the blend of social and academic space that is needed to strengthen community and foster connections throughout the building. As the home for the Honors Residential College, the square footage per bed is larger than the typical baseline. Whereas the baseline program is 310 sf/bed, the Honors Residential College is programmed at 335 sf/bed.

This additional square footage accommodates an Honors Commons that serves not only the residents of the complex, but also the

398,000 GSF Residential 1400 Beds – Primarily Doubles, with some Suites for Upper Division Students

non-residential members of the Honors Program, which currently numbers upwards of 3,000 students and is likely to expand in the future.

Small + Medium Group Study at each Floor

The Honors Commons is intended to serve a vibrant and diverse set of social and academic experiences within the Honors

Social Hub with Kitchen at each Floor

community. Creating these spaces will allow for gatherings of the Honors Community in academically-focused discussion at multiple scales. Blending the social with the academic will foster an engaged community whose academically-focused

27,000 GSF Social and Learning Space At each Wing: Social + Recreation Lounge

experiences blend into the kinds of social connections that support student success. As this program is refined and the project design is developed, the UF will have the capacity to consider how this Commons can evolve, perhaps including music practice rooms, wall space for art and display, teaching kitchen, yoga / meditation space, and support for commuting students.

Small + Medium Group Study

The additional size of the Honors Residential College also allows for some diversity in the residential unit type. Though the majority

2 Staff Apartments

of the beds for this building will serve first year students with traditional housing (shared doubles) and wet core bathrooms, the program also anticipates some housing for upper division students. This is accommodated by providing suites (with four singles

50,000 GSF Honors Commons Learning Commons Great Hall (200 Person Capacity) Library / Study Honors College Offices 8 Large Meeting Rooms 6 Small Meeting Rooms 10 Small and Medium Group Study Rooms

20

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

and two baths) for approximately 15% of the residents, with an additional 2% as RAs in single bedrooms..

Great Hall: Lounge Set-up

Great Hall: Lecture Set-up

Great Hall: Exterior

Active Learning Classroom

Group Study

Recreation Lounge

Learning Commons

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

21

NEW HONORS RESIDENTIAL COLLEGE CONCEPTUAL VISION

View of the Honors Residential College from Museum Road, featuring corner lounges, sky bridge, pedestrian plaza, exterior balcony with shading, window shading devices, and active learning classroom at the ground level.

22

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

View of the Honors Residential College from the Pavilion, showcasing the Innovation Commons linking the public courtyard to the Great Lawn through transparency.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

23

NEW HONORS RESIDENTIAL COLLEGE CONCEPTUAL VISION

View of the Honors Residential College from the Pavilion and lawn area. Note the triple-height glazing at the lounges, and the commons area below.

24

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

View from Museum Road showing active learning classroom to the right and residence life offices and arrival area to the left. Honors courtyard with outdoor pavilion is in the center.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

25

NEW ATHLETICS HOUSING WEST NEIGHBORHOOD SITE: 500-Bed Housing for Undergraduates and Student Athletes

Although this residence hall is noted as a home for UF’s student-athletes, to comply with NCAA regulations, a minimum of 51% its residents will be non-athletes. The program of this building is rooted in the ideal program described in this Executive Summary, with traditional double beds sharing wet-core bathrooms and generous public space throughout.

Programmatically, the building will include a rich blend of social and academic spaces, creating opportunities for all residents to connect as a community. However, it will also provide public spaces designed to serve the specific needs of student-athletes.

significant; the proposal shown here offers new and immersive landscapes as well as recognizable architecture, and will create a new gravity to the

MUSEUM RD

Aerial view of existing site at Hume Area

26

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

Aerial view of the new housing concept design across from Hume Hall

GALE LEMERAND DR

The visual impact of establishing an edge along Museum Road is also

district, as well as an expanded residential experience for residents of Hume Hall, across the road. At a later point, the hall may be expanded to create a quad or courtyard to the north and to embrace the natural features of a wooded ravine north of the site.

With the concept design for new athletics housing, a new frontage along Museum is established for the University, creating a sense of cohesion and identity. Integration of a generous setback and public outdoor area for gathering and relaxation lessens the massing of the new architecture while opening the connection to Hume Hall. This new landscape can take advantage of native Floridian ecology and present both meadow and lawn-like aspects. The creation of a Great Room (pink) looking back toward core campus creates a sense of place and neighborhood identity, while playing on existing University architectural language around portals, porches, and shading. Glazed connectors between the two building bars allow greater resident community building.

Finally, the new hall can offer important connections back to core campus via Simpson / Trusler and Graham, as well as reconfiguration of awkward service paths adjacent to the site.

Schematic view of Athletics Residence Hall concept design for Hume Area

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

27

NEW ATHLETICS HOUSING

View from Museum Road showing the Great Hall at the ground level, and glazed corner lounges on both bars. The facade panels also provide partial shading to the windows.

28

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

View from Museum Road showing the entry plaza at the ground level, and the glazed connector bridges beyond.

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

29

FINANCIALS + IMPLEMENTATION Cost Breakdown: Honors College: $175mm - $205mm Athletics / General Housing: $60mm - $70mm Renovation: $175mm - $210mm

UF’s recent financial performance has been trending negatively in recent years,

To fully implement the extent of this Plan, optimizing the financial performance

largely due to limitations on rental rate increases. The University has produced

of existing halls remaining online provides stability and is required for approvals.

positive cash flow within its housing system for many years, which has positively

A major renovation campaign to the identified residence halls will apply financial

contributed towards UF’s ability to deliver robust residential services and maintain its

pressure on the existing housing system due to their pre-renovation financial

aging inventory. However, in recent years, UF has been challenged, both by internal

performance. For internal and external approvals, continuing to meet financial

and State leadership, to continue meeting its financial performance while not

performance metrics for the overall housing system is critical, as it operates as a

•

Demolish Trusler, Simpson, Rawlings: $4mm

increasing rental rates. During this same time period, UF’s operating expenses have

standalone auxiliary. Although it is recommended that all capital investments –

•

Renovation (Beaty E-W, Y-M-R, Fletcher, Sledd): $165mm - $200mm

continued increasing, which has created a negative outlook for the housing financial

new construction and renovation – are implemented in a way that the projects are

system. If the current operating paradigm continues, by academic year 2021-2022

financially self-sustainable, the existing system will experience a significant reduction

the housing system will not break even after debt service, let alone have the ability to

in performance through this Plan.

Total 10-Year Investment (Undergrad Only): $404mm - $479mm

contribute to the fund for capital re-investment.

To offset anticipated financial losses, UF will need to implement a multi-year rental With a priority to renovate some of UF’s Mid-Century communities, the financial

rate increase throughout the housing system. Brailsford & Dunlavey’s financial

performance of these halls was a focal point for the analysis conducted in this plan.

analysis revealed that UF is able to exceed the minimum system-wide financial

Comparatively, due to the scale of these halls (many are UF’s largest residential

performance of 1.20x debt-coverage through the implementation rental rate

communities) and limited debt service (these halls average 62 years old), they are

increases of either:

some of the largest positive financial contributors in the housing system. Therefore, Proposed Rate Increase 0%

System Impact Existing system project to operate at a deficit immediately upon opening the new project (Year 3 of Plan)

taking these communities offline, either for renovation or demolition, creates unique

3.5% annually from Fall 2021 through Fall 2031; or,

challenges for the housing system to maintain strong financial performance.

4.5% annually from Fall 2021 through fall 2025.

The halls targeted for renovation are those that positively contribute significant

3.5%

4.5%

Longer duration of smaller rental rate increase (11 years), positions system for 1.20x DCR (BOG approval guidelines)

Shorter duration of higher rate increase (5 years, positions system for 1.20x DCR (BOG approval guidelines)

cash flow to the overall housing system. By phasing renovations, UF will be able

In pursuing rental rate increases, however, the University must remain aware of their

to incrementally absorb the financial impact, and create a sustainable long-term

competitive position within the SUS. Currently, UF’s average rental rate across the

outlook for the system. Depending on UF’s ability to meet the targeted future

system is among the lowest in the SUS, especially for freshman housing. Pursuing

financial performance, the University may elect to re-order the halls or change the

the rental rate increases as previously mentioned would shift UF’s position within

speed in which renovations occur, which is possible by phasing.

the SUS towards the higher end of the spectrum. As such, UF must continue to proactively monitor its competitive position while implementing rental rate

Through all capital investments, each project’s financial performance must positively contribute towards the health of the housing system beginning in the first year of operation. Each project must generate positive cash flow to offset financial losses that will occur when pursuing renovations to the identified residence halls. By doing so, the University will have the needed capacity to pursue the full extent of the 10-year implementation strategy identified herein. In addition, UF will set itself up for a longer-term capacity to plan for capital-scale renovations needed beyond the 10-year plan.

30

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan

increases.

Fall 2021

Fall 2022

Fall 2023

Fall 2024

Fall 2025

Fall 2026

Fall 2027

Fall 2028

Fall 2029

Fall 2030

Fall 2031

New Project - East Neighborhood Honors College (1,400 Beds) New Project - West Neighborhood Site Athletics / Gen. (500 Beds) Demolish Rawlings (352 Beds) Renovate Beaty East (374 Beds) Renovate Beaty West (417 Beds) Renovate Yulee / Reid (350 Beds) Renovate Mallory (Incl. Commons) (176 Beds) Renovate Fletcher (157 Beds) Renovate Sledd (182 Beds) Demolish Trusler (201 Beds) Demolish Simpson (208 Beds) Total Undergraduate Beds

8,143

8,143

9,317

9,274

9,341

9,691

9,515

9,534

9,509

9,490

9,282

Total Undergraduate Demand

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

8,953

Excess Inventory / Excess Demand

-810

-810

364

321

388

738

552

581

556

537

329

Un i ve rsi ty of F lori da H o usi ng Mast e r Plan

\

31

HOUSING MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

32

/

Uni ve rsi t y of Flori da H ou si n g M ast er P lan