Not sure where to put this, so I’ll do it here. This is from the Tuesday night Indoor/Outdoor Recreation DAG. I assume David Christopher has already sent something similar to the architects…
Bowling Concerns:
1) “Visibility” is not as important as “awareness”. Specifically, not enough people know about bowling at current Union South. Indoor bowling advertisements not sufficient, outdoor bowling advertisement (physical signs) prohibited by current policy. Being able to see bowling from outside first floor does not particularly excite bowling Bob as much as it excites architects.
2) Auxiliary functions (food, pool, table tennis) CRUCIAL to whether bowling survives. There are 8 lanes. Often there will be more people wanting to bowl than there are lanes… these people need something to do. Putting pool/table tennis in pub, and put at other side of buildings is extremely detrimental. An underground tunnel connecting both is insufficient.
3) Complaints about current bowling is lack of ceiling height (not regulation), claustrophobic layout, smelly carpets, lack of space behind counter.
4) Great things about current bowling is ability for counter to watch over all parts of area, ability of people at bowling lanes to have line of sight to counter (so they can wave to friends who’s turn it is to bowl), mural
5) The rationale for having more than 8 lanes is that a number of lanes are already committed to bowling leagues. Having more lanes allows late night reservation of lanes by large groups.
6) One of the most profitable(?) and popular bowling events is glow-in-the-dark bowling. There is concern that too much physical integration with 1st floor and outside will cause spillage of light and sound.
7) Would like architects to explore reconfiguring level L1 (and rotating bowling) so that it is connected to pub, e.g. pub dance floor would be a mezzanine that connects to bowling on L1/L2 and to bar on Main. Bowling alley can be connected to mezzanine, pub, parking lot, and Orchard. Bowling is very pro-synergy (as opposed to decentralized activation of the building)
Climbing Wall:
1) Concerns that people leaving pub will climb it.
2) Concerns that if connected to bowling will cause a sound connection to Main level. In regards to walling off climbing wall in plexiglass or other material, members pointed out echo effect and rappelling down top-rope courses.
Dancing (sorry, floor numbers may be wrong, I don’t have diagrams in front of me):
1) Would like 3 rooms on north side of 3rd floor merged via removable walls (as currently drawn). Someone asked if the two rooms on the sides of this room (there are 5 rooms total in a row) are necessary.
2) Would like to see the bottom 3 rooms of 2nd floor right side merged via removable walls so it can serve as a wedding reception, a la Tripp commons. There are 4 rooms in a row there and currently drawn the bottom two can be merged. Even better than merging 3 rooms is merging all 4 rooms.
3) Current division of Badger Hall shows two large rooms and 4 small rooms. Members proposed putting a large stage in center so that, upon division, each of the two large rooms has a “corner stage”.
Theater:
Below the theater is a M/W restroom and below that is another room. Someone suggested changing the M/W to a blackbox, and putting the M/W where the room is.
First floor NW:
Seems like a lot of empty space in new NW. There’s more hallway space there than Retail1 + Retail2 combined. Members suggested putting more there, e.g. bicycle station or whatever.
Here’s an interesting NY Times article on a new bike rental program in Washington DC that utilizes ten bike rental stations scattered around the city to allow users to rent bikes for up to three hours. Paris, France and Barcelona, Spain recently implemented similar programs.
Might Union South someday be such a rental location in Madison?
Welcome to the official blog of the Wisconsin Union Building Project. This site was developed to involve more participants in the design process by both sharing information and gathering additional input.
Design Committee Schedule
The Design Committee will be meeting on July 24th and August 7th. Check back soon for locations and the fall schedule.
Broader opportunities for involvement will be announced in the near future.
April 18, 2008 at 12:46 am
Not sure where to put this, so I’ll do it here. This is from the Tuesday night Indoor/Outdoor Recreation DAG. I assume David Christopher has already sent something similar to the architects…
Bowling Concerns:
Bowling is very pro-synergy (as opposed to decentralized activation of the building)
1) “Visibility” is not as important as “awareness”. Specifically, not enough people know about bowling at current Union South. Indoor bowling advertisements not sufficient, outdoor bowling advertisement (physical signs) prohibited by current policy. Being able to see bowling from outside first floor does not particularly excite bowling Bob as much as it excites architects.
2) Auxiliary functions (food, pool, table tennis) CRUCIAL to whether bowling survives. There are 8 lanes. Often there will be more people wanting to bowl than there are lanes… these people need something to do. Putting pool/table tennis in pub, and put at other side of buildings is extremely detrimental. An underground tunnel connecting both is insufficient.
3) Complaints about current bowling is lack of ceiling height (not regulation), claustrophobic layout, smelly carpets, lack of space behind counter.
4) Great things about current bowling is ability for counter to watch over all parts of area, ability of people at bowling lanes to have line of sight to counter (so they can wave to friends who’s turn it is to bowl), mural
5) The rationale for having more than 8 lanes is that a number of lanes are already committed to bowling leagues. Having more lanes allows late night reservation of lanes by large groups.
6) One of the most profitable(?) and popular bowling events is glow-in-the-dark bowling. There is concern that too much physical integration with 1st floor and outside will cause spillage of light and sound.
7) Would like architects to explore reconfiguring level L1 (and rotating bowling) so that it is connected to pub, e.g. pub dance floor would be a mezzanine that connects to bowling on L1/L2 and to bar on Main. Bowling alley can be connected to mezzanine, pub, parking lot, and Orchard.
Climbing Wall:
1) Concerns that people leaving pub will climb it.
2) Concerns that if connected to bowling will cause a sound connection to Main level. In regards to walling off climbing wall in plexiglass or other material, members pointed out echo effect and rappelling down top-rope courses.
Dancing (sorry, floor numbers may be wrong, I don’t have diagrams in front of me):
1) Would like 3 rooms on north side of 3rd floor merged via removable walls (as currently drawn). Someone asked if the two rooms on the sides of this room (there are 5 rooms total in a row) are necessary.
2) Would like to see the bottom 3 rooms of 2nd floor right side merged via removable walls so it can serve as a wedding reception, a la Tripp commons. There are 4 rooms in a row there and currently drawn the bottom two can be merged. Even better than merging 3 rooms is merging all 4 rooms.
3) Current division of Badger Hall shows two large rooms and 4 small rooms. Members proposed putting a large stage in center so that, upon division, each of the two large rooms has a “corner stage”.
Theater:
Below the theater is a M/W restroom and below that is another room. Someone suggested changing the M/W to a blackbox, and putting the M/W where the room is.
First floor NW:
Seems like a lot of empty space in new NW. There’s more hallway space there than Retail1 + Retail2 combined. Members suggested putting more there, e.g. bicycle station or whatever.
April 28, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Here’s an interesting NY Times article on a new bike rental program in Washington DC that utilizes ten bike rental stations scattered around the city to allow users to rent bikes for up to three hours. Paris, France and Barcelona, Spain recently implemented similar programs.
Might Union South someday be such a rental location in Madison?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/us/27bikes.html?em&ex=1209528000&en=e96dfe185ff29d7d&ei=5087%0A