|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 9, 2021 18:59:56 GMT -5
HC is hiring an architect to examine what could be done, and the cost.
Desired features include new locker rooms, student lounges.
Options for more seating, build a mezzanine. Another option is to expand the footprint by building on the road that circles the Hart. Added seating would not be to bring seating to 4,000. For those sorts of games, would play at DCU.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Jun 10, 2021 6:18:32 GMT -5
HC is hiring an architect to examine what could be done, and the cost. Desired features include new locker rooms, student lounges. Options for more seating, build a mezzanine. Another option is to expand the footprint by building on the road that circles the Hart. Added seating would not be to bring seating to 4,000. For those sorts of games, would play at DCU. Haven’t we done this assessment of options to expand the rink previously?
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 10, 2021 6:31:52 GMT -5
The 4,000 HE minimum is going the way of the dodo.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 10, 2021 7:51:51 GMT -5
HC is hiring an architect to examine what could be done, and the cost. Desired features include new locker rooms, student lounges. Options for more seating, build a mezzanine. Another option is to expand the footprint by building on the road that circles the Hart. Added seating would not be to bring seating to 4,000. For those sorts of games, would play at DCU. Haven’t we done this assessment of options to expand the rink previously? I believe this is the first time that an architect is being hired to draw up plans with alternatives, and estimate cost of the alternatives. Clearly, there is no intention of building a new rink, nor is there any intention of having men's hockey play a seasons-full of games at the DCU. Marcus did say if there was an expectation that an opponent would draw a big crowd, that game would be played at the DCU. he said, 'I'm not playing at the DCU on a Thursday night before a thousand fans in a 15,000 seat venue.' Marcus alluded to a need to replace the mechanicals (e.g., cooling) associated with the rink. Some of this may be original. In the context of that, what is the cost trade-off of replacing the mechanicals in-situ, versus moving the ice sheet (with new mechanicals) to facilitate more seating. For the men, the rink is not competitive when compared to peers, and this hampers recruiting. The women have new lockers, so it is the men's part of the facility, on the west side that needs to be upgraded. By moving the road to the west, which he explicitly referenced an an option, HC could expand the building footprint by 25-30 feet. One would know more about the potential scope of any renovation / expansion from the name of the architect. Worcester-based, or a national firm?
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Jun 10, 2021 10:37:48 GMT -5
Coach Riga is fully aware of the deficiencies of our hockey facility starting with the capacity - I wonder if any changes were promised to him in the course of his negotiation for the job - I certainly hope so
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 10, 2021 11:16:45 GMT -5
Coach Riga is fully aware of the deficiencies of our hockey facility starting with the capacity - I wonder if any changes were promised to him in the course of his negotiation for the job - I certainly hope so "We promise to look into it."
|
|
aaa8316
Crusader Century Club
Posts: 147
|
Post by aaa8316 on Jun 10, 2021 16:39:56 GMT -5
Coach Riga is fully aware of the deficiencies of our hockey facility starting with the capacity - I wonder if any changes were promised to him in the course of his negotiation for the job - I certainly hope so "We promise to look into it." Haha. Exactly. We all need to remember we're talking about Holy Cross. Here's hoping something good comes of this architect talk.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Jun 10, 2021 17:12:59 GMT -5
Haven’t we done this assessment of options to expand the rink previously? I believe this is the first time that an architect is being hired to draw up plans with alternatives, and estimate cost of the alternatives. Clearly, there is no intention of building a new rink, nor is there any intention of having men's hockey play a seasons-full of games at the DCU. Marcus did say if there was an expectation that an opponent would draw a big crowd, that game would be played at the DCU. he said, 'I'm not playing at the DCU on a Thursday night before a thousand fans in a 15,000 seat venue.' Marcus alluded to a need to replace the mechanicals (e.g., cooling) associated with the rink. Some of this may be original. In the context of that, what is the cost trade-off of replacing the mechanicals in-situ, versus moving the ice sheet (with new mechanicals) to facilitate more seating. For the men, the rink is not competitive when compared to peers, and this hampers recruiting. The women have new lockers, so it is the men's part of the facility, on the west side that needs to be upgraded. By moving the road to the west, which he explicitly referenced an an option, HC could expand the building footprint by 25-30 feet. One would know more about the potential scope of any renovation / expansion from the name of the architect. Worcester-based, or a national firm? Expanding any footprint means a whole new roof....which means a whole new building.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Jun 10, 2021 17:22:51 GMT -5
Wut?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 10, 2021 18:10:43 GMT -5
Two of the four sides of the rink are fixed; the north and the east. One could expand to the south where the mechanicals for the ice are located by moving them. The expansion being considered is to the west, into the road that loops around the complex. See: goo.gl/maps/4bFBfGA6R1CcrvH98The house marked 144 is on Kendig St., and is owned by Holy Cross. The Holy Cross property line (the old line; its changed in recent years) is generally marked by the row of trees to the left of the road. If HC expanded the footprint to allow for more seating (which is a main reason for doing this), then the walls would need to be built higher, and a new roof installed on top of the higher walls. That is not a new building..
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 10, 2021 19:12:55 GMT -5
Just a thought but perhaps we should have considered doing something like this when say ... we had all the heavy equipment and construction workers on site doing another major project a few feet away.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 10, 2021 20:35:13 GMT -5
Just a thought but perhaps we should have considered doing something like this when say ... we had all the heavy equipment and construction workers on site doing another major project a few feet away. They might have if they had donor gifts to help pay for even part of it. HC's rule of thumb is not to build unless about 2/3rds of the money to pay in the cost is in hand. I think there is some wiggle room in that percentage, and the percentage doesn't apply to buildings such as residence halls, which are 'cash cows'. Fr. Mcf said when they were first developing plans for what would become Luth, that no one was willing to front any of the estimated $12-15M cost of a new rink. Costs have changed obviously. Endicott built a 1,000 seat arena from scratch five years ago for $10 million www.endicott.edu/news-events/news/news-articles/2015/10/10-5bourque
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 10, 2021 21:27:06 GMT -5
So the plan is to hire an architect, get an estimate, fundraise for it, then perhaps build down the line? May end up being penny wise and pound foolish to have waited as material and labor costs escalate. That said, seems odd this is coming up now unless there are donors/sponsors in the wings.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jun 10, 2021 21:50:43 GMT -5
Just a thought but perhaps we should have considered doing something like this when say ... we had all the heavy equipment and construction workers on site doing another major project a few feet away. They might have if they had donor gifts to help pay for even part of it. HC's rule of thumb is not to build unless about 2/3rds of the money to pay in the cost is in hand. I think there is some wiggle room in that percentage, and the percentage doesn't apply to buildings such as residence halls, which are 'cash cows'. Fr. Mcf said when they were first developing plans for what would become Luth, that no one was willing to front any of the estimated $12-15M cost of a new rink. Costs have changed obviously. Endicott built a 1,000 seat arena from scratch five years ago for $10 million www.endicott.edu/news-events/news/news-articles/2015/10/10-5bourquePretty sure they make more money on that rink when compared to Holy Cross in the community. From their site: Everything is kept clean from the glass to the floors. They also have SIX Locker rooms and the offices are nicer. Also includes a hospitality suite, entertaining space, and team meeting room. But they also have three full-time staffers plus a GA just for the Rink. Holy Cross has one full-timer for the rink and a total of three for all their facilities.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 11, 2021 6:37:50 GMT -5
So the plan is to hire an architect, get an estimate, fundraise for it, then perhaps build down the line? May end up being penny wise and pound foolish to have waited as material and labor costs escalate. That said, seems odd this is coming up now unless there are donors/sponsors in the wings. I think the college is in a replacement cycle for mechanicals etc. that were not done in conjunction with Luth. For the rink, the Luth related construction was to build the women's locker rooms (previously the team used the women's locker rooms at the pool) women's coaches' office, and creating handicapped spaces at the rink. (See related ongoing discussion about not spending too much money on Fitton field to avoid spending megabucks to make the field ADA compliant). The men's side was not touched. ADMB has concluded that the men's side needs to be upgraded; e.g., new locker rooms, players lounge, coaches offices?. (I will note that if the men get a lounge, so too will the ladies.) There is no space within the current footprint for such stuff. The solution is to expand the footprint. And if the footprint is being expanded, why not look at how much it would cost to increase the number of seats? I expect that ADMB has the college's okay to spend several hundred thousand dollars for an architect to study and price several alternatives with respect to seating and an expanded footprint. It may be that the college would finance an expanded footprint if done in conjunction with the mechanicals replacement. This may particularly be the case if the new residence hall(s) are privately financed and don't appear on the college's balance sheet.
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 11, 2021 10:20:40 GMT -5
Well, assume our new president signed off on this. I'm not a fan of spending several hundred thousand dollars for architect estimates unless we are serious about following through.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Jun 11, 2021 10:49:01 GMT -5
Two of the four sides of the rink are fixed; the north and the east. One could expand to the south where the mechanicals for the ice are located by moving them. The expansion being considered is to the west, into the road that loops around the complex. See: goo.gl/maps/4bFBfGA6R1CcrvH98The house marked 144 is on Kendig St., and is owned by Holy Cross. The Holy Cross property line (the old line; its changed in recent years) is generally marked by the row of trees to the left of the road. If HC expanded the footprint to allow for more seating (which is a main reason for doing this), then the walls would need to be built higher, and a new roof installed on top of the higher walls. That is not a new building.. I understand. The existing roof is flat. If you expand out on that West side, the existing support columes on that side would be demolished and new ones erected in the expanded footprint. As you say, a new roof would be higher to accommodate a higher / expanded grandstand ( more seats ) on that West side. Now, it is likely the existing supports on the East side aren't designed to support a new higher / larger / heavier roof. So maybe they get replaced as well. I'm assuming a new roof would look similar to the peaked roof atop the indoor football building. And finally, the walls on the north and south ends would need to be modified ( added on to ) to meld into a higher roof. To this layman, for all intents and purposes that adds up to a new building.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 11, 2021 11:09:44 GMT -5
Well, assume our new president signed off on this. I'm not a fan of spending several hundred thousand dollars for architect estimates unless we are serious about following through. The current president signed off. The college's budget for 2021-22 was signed off on before Vince was named. If the new softball field is in the 2021-22 budget, Fr. B. and the current BoT signed off on that as well. The planned spending for the college's next fiscal year is agreed to by the BoT before the cost of attendance is calculated, and the bills are sent out. Budget decisions that represent future year commitments are also built into a next year's budget. An illustrative example: Year One (2021-22): two men's lacrosse scollies Year Two (2022-23): four men's lacrosse scollies (these two additional scollies would be recruited in 2021-22) Year Three (2023-24): six men's lacrosse scollies (these two additional scollies would be recruited in 2022-23, and so on) Year Four (2024-25): eight men's lacrosse scollies Year Five (2025-26): eight men's lacrosse scollies
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Jun 11, 2021 11:14:31 GMT -5
My guess would be that if anything is done it would be a relatively modest new annex building attached to the existing West wall housing new locker rooms, lounges, offices. The existing walls / roof / seating would be unchanged.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Jun 11, 2021 11:23:15 GMT -5
phreek -
New softball field ?
If there's room, I would hope it would be relocated up top....next to the soccer field maybe ?
Just my opinion but current location has always seemed a lousy set-up.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 11, 2021 11:31:41 GMT -5
Two of the four sides of the rink are fixed; the north and the east. One could expand to the south where the mechanicals for the ice are located by moving them. The expansion being considered is to the west, into the road that loops around the complex. See: goo.gl/maps/4bFBfGA6R1CcrvH98The house marked 144 is on Kendig St., and is owned by Holy Cross. The Holy Cross property line (the old line; its changed in recent years) is generally marked by the row of trees to the left of the road. If HC expanded the footprint to allow for more seating (which is a main reason for doing this), then the walls would need to be built higher, and a new roof installed on top of the higher walls. That is not a new building.. I understand. The existing roof is flat. If you expand out on that West side, the existing support columes on that side would be demolished and new ones erected in the expanded footprint. As you say, a new roof would be higher to accommodate a higher / expanded grandstand ( more seats ) on that West side. Now, it is likely the existing supports on the East side aren't designed to support a new higher / larger / heavier roof. So maybe they get replaced as well. I'm assuming a new roof would look similar to the peaked roof atop the indoor football building. And finally, the walls on the north and south ends would need to be modified ( added on to ) to meld into a higher roof. To this layman, for all intents and purposes that adds up to a new building. If you have ever watched This Old House -- which you should as it is hosted by a HC alum -- if the builder took a single story Cape Cod house, added a new family room on one side, and created a new room(s) in a previously unfinished attic by building dormers, that is not considered a new house. Rather, it is considered to be an existing house that was remodeled and added to.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2021 11:45:00 GMT -5
phreek - New softball field ? If there's room, I would hope it would be relocated up top....next to the soccer field maybe ? Just my opinion but current location has always seemed a lousy set-up. We have had this discussion before regarding location. There is not sufficient room next to the Soccer Stadium for a softball field. Also, the location you are suggesting is used by the football team for a grass field practice site. A new softball stadium is well overdue, and is necessary to meet Title IX compliance issues. Designed properly for the topography of the lower campus, it could be a very nice facility allowing surround seating around both the first and third base sides, along with berm seating for right field. The new new facility cannot just be a new field, it will have to provide to the women’s team a top notch place to play with dugouts, bathrooms, seating, game day locker rooms for home and visiting teams, and umpires, and possible concession space. While the new stadium will not be as elaborate as the new Clemson Stadium, and will not require all of the facilities found at Clemson, hopefully the stadium on the lower campus will have a similar design. If it is worth doing, it should be done right. www.dpr.com/projects/new-clemson-softball-stadiumwww.flosoftball.com/articles/6343909-top-10-college-softball-stadiums-voted-by-fansAt a bare minimum, the new HC softball facility should have a time least the same as the U Hartford stadium opened 15 years ago. www.hartfordhawks.com/sports/2008/3/28/144571185.aspx?id=125
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Jun 11, 2021 12:06:38 GMT -5
I understand. The existing roof is flat. If you expand out on that West side, the existing support columes on that side would be demolished and new ones erected in the expanded footprint. As you say, a new roof would be higher to accommodate a higher / expanded grandstand ( more seats ) on that West side. Now, it is likely the existing supports on the East side aren't designed to support a new higher / larger / heavier roof. So maybe they get replaced as well. I'm assuming a new roof would look similar to the peaked roof atop the indoor football building. And finally, the walls on the north and south ends would need to be modified ( added on to ) to meld into a higher roof. To this layman, for all intents and purposes that adds up to a new building. If you have ever watched This Old House -- which you should as it is hosted by a HC alum -- if the builder took a single story Cape Cod house, added a new family room on one side, and created a new room(s) in a previously unfinished attic by building dormers, that is not considered a new house. Rather, it is considered to be an existing house that was remodeled and added to. Which guy is the alum? Just curious. Starting a project on Cape Cod this year that kind of fits in your description. Bought the house 12 years ago; have stayed above water by renting it seasonally; now time to migrate there. The additions made by previous owners generally fall in the "why the hell did they do that" category which we hope to rectify.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jun 11, 2021 12:12:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jun 11, 2021 12:13:38 GMT -5
phreek - New softball field ? If there's room, I would hope it would be relocated up top....next to the soccer field maybe ? Just my opinion but current location has always seemed a lousy set-up. These are the following future facilities projects voiced by ADMB. The ranking appears to be the construction sequence over a multi-year period. 1-3 appear to be scheduled for the next five years. 1.) New softball field. Probably not at the top of the hill. See #2. 2.) 'New' fields for soccer and lacrosse. Still on top of the hill, but with more spectator seating and fan amenities. 3.) Renovation and potential expansion of the rink. 4.) Replacement of the field hockey field and track x.) Lights for Fitton Field ADNP had an indoor track on his list. I don't know if it is still on an ADMB list. ADNP also had locker rooms for tennis on his list. And as the golf simulator in The Jo is for varsity golf, that was on an ADNP list.
|
|