The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(12-09-2015 11:34 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Not to quibble about 40,000 sq ft as compared to something larger, but logic dictates that you can house more different capabilities in the 50% larger 60,000 sq ft than you can in 40,000. If UAB is going to build the smaller facility because it is all they can afford, then it is what it is. Going into the latter years of this decade with perhaps the 5th largest football operations building of the D1 programs in this state does not sound impressive when considering stated program ambitions. "Dream big but think and build small" does not seem to fit Joe Volker's oft quoted admonition.

We aren't recruiting 5 year olds. Bigger isn't always better, and I'm sure Clark knows exactly what he wants and how much space he needs. I can't believe you are going to sit here and argue that having a smaller building is immediately going to be an issue.

(12-07-2015 01:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 12:46 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Has the design of the facilities been established yet or is that a part of what the architects will propose?

No. There is currently no design. There is a concept. A schematic . That is what we have seen. (UAB is showing to media, recruits, and public) The final design could look completely different than what we have been shown. The square footage could also be different based on the program that the design team will ultimately submit.

For example the AD could be thinking the square foot cost is over $325.00 a square foot and the reality is it may cost only $260.00 therefore increasing the size of the facility we could build.

That is just one example how things could change.

Are you perhaps suggesting that our AD has not done his homework.

Most field houses serves dual roles. Not only are they used for administration, they are used for training ,leisure etc..
The one thing those field houses have in common that UAB field house will not have for the forseeable is a playing field attached to a stadium.
I suspect coach is looking to the future with the understanding of our needs when selecting the team to build our facilties .
Coach is a very smart coach, administrator, recruiter, fund raiser and businessman and if we are fortunate enough to keep him,he will be a great AD for us.

(12-09-2015 12:36 PM)CajunBlazer Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 01:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 12:46 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Has the design of the facilities been established yet or is that a part of what the architects will propose?

No. There is currently no design. There is a concept. A schematic . That is what we have seen. (UAB is showing to media, recruits, and public) The final design could look completely different than what we have been shown. The square footage could also be different based on the program that the design team will ultimately submit.

For example the AD could be thinking the square foot cost is over $325.00 a square foot and the reality is it may cost only $260.00 therefore increasing the size of the facility we could build.

That is just one example how things could change.

Are you perhaps suggesting that our AD has not done his homework.

Or is he suggesting that the dollar total per square foot was over fudged to overcome the fact that the AD is lacking in some marbles?

Ingram is dumb as a stump. Between the times he sucked up, the times he was wrong, and the times he flat lied, I trust nothing he says that is not independently verified.

I think that everyone is forgetting that it is Coach Clark who is driving this bus. He laid out to a number of people early on exactly what he needed in terms of facilities to be able to field a competitive program. The money for these facilities was raised to meet his needs; the building is not being designed to fit within a per-ordained budget. (I suspect that the cost of what Coach Clark wants to build has been over estimated on purpose. we'll see.) He is getting exactly what he wants and he is going to approve the the architect and the final design. I suspect he will even approve the construction company.

Like a typical bunch of fans every one is speculating on what our program needs based on comparisons the square footage of similar buildings at other schools without any real knowledge of how those other buildings are used, or more importantly what our program needs. If anyone of us were asked what does the program need in terms of facilities, I'll be willing to bet that most of us wouldn't have a clue.

I suggest that everyone just sit back and take a deep breath. Coach Clark has got this and all will be well.

(12-09-2015 12:36 PM)CajunBlazer Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 01:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(12-07-2015 12:46 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Has the design of the facilities been established yet or is that a part of what the architects will propose?

No. There is currently no design. There is a concept. A schematic . That is what we have seen. (UAB is showing to media, recruits, and public) The final design could look completely different than what we have been shown. The square footage could also be different based on the program that the design team will ultimately submit.

For example the AD could be thinking the square foot cost is over $325.00 a square foot and the reality is it may cost only $260.00 therefore increasing the size of the facility we could build.

That is just one example how things could change.

Are you perhaps suggesting that our AD has not done his homework.

Shocked face

(12-09-2015 03:19 PM)CajunBlazer Wrote:  I think that everyone is forgetting that it is Coach Clark who is driving this bus. He laid out to a number of people early on exactly what he needed in terms of facilities to be able to field a competitive program. The money for these facilities was raised to meet his needs; the building is not being designed to fit within a per-ordained budget. (I suspect that the cost of what Coach Clark wants to build has been over estimated on purpose. we'll see.) He is getting exactly what he wants and he is going to approve the the architect and the final design. I suspect he will even approve the construction company.

Like a typical bunch of fans every one is speculating on what our program needs based on comparisons the square footage of similar buildings at other schools without any real knowledge of how those other buildings are used, or more importantly what our program needs. If anyone of us were asked what does the program need in terms of facilities, I'll be willing to bet that most of us wouldn't have a clue.

I suggest that everyone just sit back and take a deep breath. Coach Clark has got this and all will be well.

My admitted lack of expertise in football ops buildings is why I asked about the reported 40,000 sq ft size back in post #26. Then other such buildings at other schools were brought up in subsequent posts that are 50% or so larger, so I wondered IF we might be aiming too low. It still seems logical to me that one can put more "football ops" facilities in a 50% larger building so I asked those with building experience to suggest perspective. Asking questions is not tantamount to making accusations. To borrow your phrase, we just want to move from clueless to knowledge. Remember this is the first time in UAB history that we are looking at building ANYTHING NEW for football since it began.

The biggest part of the football facility arms race actually seems to be the weight room, not necessarily the total square footage.

Bump. Any word on a decision having been made?

They are going through the selection process right now. They will narrow the design team list to a final five and then interview them. After that process they will select a design team to begin a program with budgetary numbers, schedule, and the first set of schematics. The final design could possibly look nothing like the initial drawings the recruits are shown. On the other hand it cold be similar. we simply wont know until after the team is selected and they put an initial plan together.

When can we expect to see shovels in the ground?

Southern Miss is in the process of getting a $1.6 million upgrade to their facilities.

Nutrition Center, Weight Room Upgrade, etc.

(12-16-2015 11:13 AM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Southern Miss is in the process of getting a $1.6 million upgrade to their facilities.

Nutrition Center, Weight Room Upgrade, etc.

AKA the Zach Woodfin Retention Center.

Hard to say. You could do a ground breaking tomorrow but I don't suspect any real construction until fall at the earliest. The complex has to be designed and that takes time. Everyone forgets nothing has been drawn to put out to bid yet.


Here is an example of a school small project about a million athletic facility (HS)

Overall Design / Bid / Build of Facility
Schematic Design 50 days
Design Review 15 days
Design Development 20 days
Review 15 days
Construction Documents 80 days
Document Review 15 days
Advertise for Bidders 20 days
Bid Opening 1 day
Contracts 15 days
Notice to proceed 1 Day

This project took 232 days before construction began.

Construction took 190 days.

then install owners FFE 15 days

Overall total of days 437 for a small HS Football building.

About one third of the size we are going to build.

I would estimate of you streamline the design process you could get it in bid in six months. Actual construction 10-18 months. Let's also remember that the Annex part of the Ullman building will have to be torn down as part of this project so that would have to be factored in.

What I showed above is a representation of a time line. What we do may or may not mirror that. The point I am trying to get across is it doesn't happen overnight. it takes time to weave a design together.

(12-16-2015 11:13 AM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Nutrition Center

In my day, we used to just call these cafeterias.

Also keep in mind that the board has to approve the various stages, so even when it goes out to bid and that process is done, the board has to approve the bid, and they don't have meetings every week.

(12-16-2015 11:25 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Hard to say. You could do a ground breaking tomorrow but I don't suspect any real construction until fall at the earliest. The complex has to be designed and that takes time. Everyone forgets nothing has been drawn to put out to bid yet.


Here is an example of a school small project about a million athletic facility (HS)

Overall Design / Bid / Build of Facility
Schematic Design 50 days
Design Review 15 days
Design Development 20 days
Review 15 days
Construction Documents 80 days
Document Review 15 days
Advertise for Bidders 20 days
Bid Opening 1 day
Contracts 15 days
Notice to proceed 1 Day

This project took 232 days before construction began.

Construction took 190 days.

then install owners FFE 15 days

Overall total of days 437 for a small HS Football building.

About one third of the size we are going to build.

I would estimate of you streamline the design process you could get it in bid in six months. Actual construction 10-18 months. Let's also remember that the Annex part of the Ullman building will have to be torn down as part of this project so that would have to be factored in.

What I showed above is a representation of a time line. What we do may or may not mirror that. The point I am trying to get across is it doesn't happen overnight. it takes time to weave a design together.

Could a design build be an option?

Mercer 43,000 sq feet

(12-16-2015 12:37 PM)panama Wrote:  Mercer 43,000 sq feet

I would think a similar, traditional design would be less costly than the design we've seen...