UA Athletics Delegates Study on Facilities Master Plan

Every coach at the University of Arkansas could rattle off a wish list of facility upgrades and improvements. Basketball would like a practice facility; baseball sees a need for expanded indoor training space and those who oversee the student side of the Razorbacks’ student-athletes long for larger, more modern areas to conduct study hall.

Athletic department staffers in Barnhill wouldn’t mind an upgrade on the track lighting and other decades-old features in their offices. Nobody would complain if parking options were expanded.

Who gets what first? Who pays for it all? Where on the already-cramped UA campus would new construction fit?

There are no easy answers, which is why the athletic department has earmarked between $250,000 and $500,000 for an analysis of current and future facilities. Commissioning the study is the first step in what could eventually be tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades.

Athletic Director Jeff Long and his staff are working with the UA facilities department and three architecture firms to develop an athletics facilities master plan. Sometime over the next month, UA officials will meet with lead firm Populous Inc. of Kansas City, Modus Studio of Fayetteville and Polk Stanley Wilcox Architects of Little Rock to begin assessing current facilities and the potential for future projects.

“Our goal is to look down the road, five, 10, 15, 20 years at our existing facilities and forecast, create a map of where we may need to go in the future,” said Matt Trantham, senior associate athletic director for internal operations. “I couldn’t tell you right now where we are going to start.”

That’s why a master plan is seen as so crucial to the growth and development. In addition to a strategy for improving 15 existing facilities, analysis is being done on future projects like an academic center and dining area for athletes and a video production studio.

Anybody that has been to the Fayetteville campus knows land is scarce. Since 2000 the university has spent an estimated $800 million on new construction or facility renovation, said Mike Johnson, UA associate vice chancellor for facilities. Included in that total were major projects like Bud Walton Arena, a renovated Reynolds Razorback Stadium and other sports facilities that take up a nearly 25 percent strip of campus identified as the “Athletic Valley.”

Long and the athletic department view further development of the “Athletic Valley” as the key to climbing the mountain of competition that is the Southeastern Conference and NCAA.

“We don’t have bulldozers and backhoes out right now,” Johnson said. “There is still a lot of planning.”

 

‘In His Head’

Master planning is nothing new to the UA campus. The first outline was developed in 1925 and a number of plans have followed since.

Significant follow-up was done in 1998 and there has been a recent boom in on-campus planning the last five years. Guides for expansion and improvement include the development of a “Campus Transportation Plan” (2005), a “Signage and Wayfinding Master Plan” (2005), the “University Housing Strategic Plan” (2006) and a “Growth Plan” (2007). A “Campus Preservation Master Plan” was developed last year.

Athletics is embarking on its first attempt at a master plan in conjunction with the university at large. That’s not to say previous athletic director Frank Broyles didn’t have a plan or vision for facilities. Broyles operated more independently, though his thoughts were communicated to UA officials when needed.

“This is the first master plan of this nature that athletics has done. Coach Broyles was doing master planning, but it was in his head,” said Jay Huneycutt, director of planning and capital programming for facilities management at the UA. “[Broyles] had a vision for what he wanted to accomplish, but not quite like what we’re doing now.”

Arkansas’ athletic department is following a growing trend of its peers in the SEC and nationally. South Carolina, which joined Arkansas in the SEC in 1993, is the most recent and comprehensive example, recently putting a plan in place that will ultimately result in an estimated $200 million for facilities enhancement.

Timetables for master plans vary. Each building will be examined inside and out, top to bottom. Time will differ from building to building. A recent study of Mullins Library, for example, took nine months.

There is no timetable set for the athletic department study. Athletic department officials have communicated to facilities management they want the planning process to be quick, but prudent.

“It could very well be a three-month process,” Huneycutt said.

First, representatives from Populous, Modus Studious and Polk Stanley Wilcox will tour what’s in place. Analysis will include everything from graphics and signage to seating capacity to heating and cooling units and other parts of each building’s infrastructure. Each firm has some degree of experience in athletic facilities and master planning for athletics.

Previous master planning experience for athletic facilities includes Rutgers University, University of Washington, Arizona State University, University of Central Florida and Indiana University.

Populous’ previous master planning experience for athletic facilities includes Rutgers University, University of Washington, Arizona State University, University of Central Florida and Indiana University. Baum Stadium was designed by HOK, a firm now operating as part of Populous.

Representatives from each firm said the university forbid them from speaking for this story. Ryan Sickman of Populous communicated via e-mail that the UA would have to “green light” any comments from the architects, but he did offer a statement on behalf of the three firms:”We are excited to be involved with the University of Arkansas and look forward to a successful project that will help guide Arkansas Athletics well into the future.”

 

Questions Raised

Athletic department officials were granted authorization to search for architects on Nov. 10. RFQs from eight firms were received and five were interviewed with final approval being granted on Jan. 20.

Board approval did not come without questions. Board member John Tyson of Fayetteville, according to an account in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, expressed concern over the price tag associated with building projects that are intended solely for athletic department use.

Specifically, Tyson questioned the $10-$20 million estimate attached to a student-athlete dining and study hall that would accommodate no more than 500 people. Similar price estimates are being looked at for a basketball practice facility and football facilities upgrades.

“I think athletics are important, but there are a lot of other folks who need help around study hall,” Tyson is quoted as telling Long, who went on to question the athletic department’s previous commitment to academics.

Long told the board that funding for the plan – estimated between $250,000 and $500,000 – will come from the athletic department’s television revenue. Funding for any subsequent projects is expected to come from either capital fundraising or bonds.

Capital fundraising for the project will fall primarily on the shoulders of Long and his athletic department staff, including Associate Athletic Director Chris Wyrick and new fund-raising hire John Erck. Sources told ArkansasSports360.com that Arkansas’ athletic department has been in the planning stages of a major capital fund raising campaign for more than a year without any signs of an imminent launch.

“The reality is we don’t know [the cost],” Trantham said. “Until you engage an architecture team that knows a lot more than we do … and you’re putting it to pencil and paper and estimating what these costs will be, we don’t have a clue.”

Keeping costs down is one expected benefit to developing a master plan. Like any project, time spent planning on the front end can result in a better and cheaper final product. Front-end planning is the best plan of attack, said Johnson, who has a decade of experience in facilities management at the UA.

“Most change orders I’ve encountered came because of a lack of planning on the front end,” Johnson said. “Many construction problems could have been avoided if the right amount of work was done before the project started. That’s what we’re trying to do here.

“We want to spend scarce resources the smartest and best way possible.”