architectUraL standards - University of Louisiana at Lafayette · 2014-09-05 · Allen Hall, defined a distinct architectural language for the campus’ built environment. This language

E

UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA AT LAFAYETTEM A S T E R P L A N & G U I D I N G P R I N C I P L E S

99CHARRETTE DATE: 10.17.11 FINAL DATE: 05.28.13

U n i v e r s i t y o f L o U i s i a n a a t L a fay e t t e

MASTER PLAN AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

U n i v e r s i t y o f L o U i s i a n a a t L a fay e t t e

MASTER PLAN AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

a r c h i t e c t U r a L s ta n d a r d s

a r c H i t E c t u r a L H i S t o r y

b u i L d i n G t y p o L o G y S t u d y

a r c H i t E c t u r a L t y p o L o G i E S

t y p o L o G y i - v E r n a c u L a r G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i at E

t y p o L o G y i i - i n f o r m a L G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i at E

t y p o L o G y i i i - f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n

t y p o L o G y i v - i n f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n

t y p o L o G y v - u t i L i ta r i a n

E

P r o d u c e d b y A r c h i t e c t s S o u t h w e s t100 Charret te: 10.17.11 F inal Date: 05.28.13

The school which would eventual ly become the Univers i ty of Louis iana at Lafayette was or ig inal ly founded as Southwestern Louis iana Industr ia l Inst i tute, thanks to state leg is lat ion dat ing to 1898. The Univers i ty ’s f i rst pres ident , Dr. Edwin Stephens, constructed the in i t ia l campus on 25 acres of donated land from the Girard fami ly in the year 1900 (often considered the school ’s f i rst year) . When the school opened i ts doors in 1901, i t was composed of 1 bui ld ing: the or ig inal Mart in Hal l . By 1921, the school had outgrown i ts industr ia l ro le , thus dropping that t i t le f rom i ts name. At th is point the school ’s campus was composed of mult ip le bui ld ings, two of which (Foster Hal l and De-Clouet Hal l ) remain in use to th is day. Dur ing the years fo l lowing the trans i t ion to Southwestern Louis iana Inst i tute (SL I ) , Dr. Stephens oversaw the construct ion on many of the iconic bui ld ings around the current day quadrangle. The addit ion of such bui ld ings as Girard Hal l , Lee Hal l , Judice-Rickels Hal l and O.K. A l len Hal l , def ined a d ist inct architectural language for the campus’ bui l t environment. This language took i ts cues f rom Georgian architectural t radit ions.

In 1938, Dr. Stephens ret i red from his ro le as pres ident of SL I . The fo l lowing pres ident , Mr. Lether Edward Frazar, held off ice for less than three years but drast ica l ly changed the phys ica l character of campus. Fol lowing the architectural sty le set forth by h is predecessor, Frazar quick ly expanded the bui l t environment through the construct ion of numerous bui ld ings. Most of these bui ld ings remain operat ional , inc luding Harr is Hal l , Ear l K . Long Gym, Bitt le Hal l , Broussard Hal l , Mouton Hal l , Stephens Memoria l L ibrary, McLaur in Gym, Evangel ine Dorm, Hami l ton Hal l , and Burke-Hawthorne Hal l .

A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D SA

RC

HIT

EC

TU

RA

L H

IST

OR

Y

EARLY BUILT ENVIRONMENT

A R C H I T E C T U R A L H I S T O R Y

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S E a r L y b u i L t

E n v i r o n m E n t

E



The architectural sty le predominant on the SL I campus through the tenures of Stephens and Frazar drew i ts pr imary inf luences f rom the Georgian Col leg iate typology. A thorough knowledge of th is inf luence is cruc ia l to the contextual understanding of a l l the subsequent campus developments.

C lass ica l Georgian architecture developed dur ing the consecut ive re igns of George I – George IV of the House of Hanover in Great Br i ta in, dat ing from 1720 to 1840. Typica l C lass ica l Georgian character ist ics are def ined as:

• Simple, symmetr ica l , box- l ike bui ld ing masses • General ly 1-2 stor ies• A centra l entry usual ly featured an e laborate

entablature and pi lasters , paneled doors and transom windows

• Denti l work was common as embel l i shment for bui ld ing cornices

• Mult i -paned sash windows• Dormers• Hipped or gabled roofs used most often

c L a S S i c a L G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t EWhile the internat ional Georgian Per iod ended in the 1840’s , America exper ienced a Georgian Revival spanning from roughly 1900 to 1940. This form of Georgian architecture was the contemporary sty le dur ing the t ime of the Univers i ty ’s ear l iest growth. The Georgian Revival was just one branch of a larger Colonia l Revival across America. As the Georgian Revival spread across the country, vernacular bui ld ing sty les and e lements began to inf luence the Georgian typology, result ing in regional var iat ions of the hybr id sty le .

At SL I the e lements of Georgian sty le became inf luenced by the ex istence of the Acadian and Creole typologies . This departure from the Class ica l Georgian Col leg iate typology is observable in the re lat ive lack of c lass ic deta i l ing , the Creole sty le roof p i tches, and the loss of e lements which were foreign to the local architectural vernacular. The result ing sty le would best be descr ibed as a Vernacular Creole Georgian Col leg iate.

Whi le lack ing in the level of formal i ty found in C lass ica l Georgian Architecture, th is der ived vers ion of

Vernacular Georgian Col leg iate Revival represents the most formal of the architectural sty les found on the current campus. This or ig inal campus sty le i s presented in depth as Typology 1 of the Architectural Standards. The cont inued use of th is typology in proper locat ions ensures the cont inued presence of rather tradit ional bui l t forms in the more h istor ic areas of the campus master p lan ( ie . Quadrangle) .

v E r n a c u L a r G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E

AR

CH

ITE

CT

UR

AL

HIS

TO

RY

A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D S


>> STEPHENS HALL >> GIRARD HALL

UL Lafayette

P r o d u c e d b y A r c h i t e c t s S o u t h w e s t102

E

Charret te: 10.17.11 F inal Date: 05.28.13


RC

HIT

EC

TU

RA

L H

IST

OR

Y

UL LAFAYETTE


Fol lowing the terms of Pres idents Stephens and Frazar, Mr. Joel Lafayette F letcher became pres ident in 1941. This move marked an overal l sh i f t in the Univers i ty ’s bui ld ing sty le f rom Tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate to one that was strongly inf luenced by the Modernist movement of the t ime. This sh i f t , which cont inued for roughly 30 years , drast ica l ly changed the bui l t environment on UL Lafayette’s campus. Understanding the ideas behind th is des ign ideology best prepares one to respond to i ts results in the contemporary context .

Modernism as seen on UL Lafayette’s campus was the result of changing des ign ideologies in response to two separate aspects of architectural inf luence, technology and soc iety. Engineer ing advancements in both mater ia ls and construct ion dur ing the ear ly 20th century years l iberated des igners f rom the conf ines of t radit ional construct ion methods. This resulted in a renaissance of bui ld ing ideas on a g lobal sca le and histor ica l ly speaking in a very short per iod of t ime.

Coupled with the technologica l advances of the ear ly 1900’s was the g lobal soc ia l turmoi l caused by World War I I . The sense of d is i l lus ionment fo l lowing the conf l icts created a des ire for a g lobal ized sty le that conveyed society ’s exc i tement regarding technology and re jected the need for tradit ional ideals . The result ing sty le focused heavi ly on pur i ty of form as a react ion against the sty l i st ic excesses and romant ic ideal ism of the previous century. Modernist ideas d ictated that there were ‘universa l t ruths’ that could be object ively d iscovered through pure bui l t forms. This search for pure forms was coupled with the idea that bui ld ings were to be funct ional in every detai l . To achieve th is pur i ty, architects shed ornamentat ion from designs, v iewing such detai ls as lav ish and superf luous. This resulted in an outr ight re ject ion of any imitat ion of t radit ional typologies .

u L L a f a y E t t E - m o d E r n i S mThese ideas had been developing throughout the pre-war years in both America and Europe. The German Bauhaus had been exper iment ing with the re lat ionship between technologica l advancement and the language of the result ing craft . Phi l ip Johnson’s 1932 MOMA exhibit , Internat ional Exhib it ion of Modern Architecture, consol idated mult ip le sty l i st ic ideals into one concise movement dubbed the ‘ Internat ional Sty le ’ (more commonly referred to as Modernism). As the war spread, i t drove the Bauhaus and i ts ideas to America where they were to become the predominant sty l i st ic force behind inst i tut ional architecture from the 1930's through the 1970's .

Typica l e lements of UL Lafayette’s Modernist bui ld ings are 1) s impl ic i ty of form, often result ing in rect i l inear bui ld ing masses, 2) minimal bui ld ing ornamentat ion and 3) non-pitched roof forms. These e lements can be seen today in such bui ld ings as B i l leaud, Montgomery, Wharton, Angel le , F letcher and the Conference Center. One addit ional sty l i st ic e lement speci f ic to modernism is what shal l be def ined as a mater ia l i ty of economy. Modernist architects ce lebrated unorthodoxy in mater ia l usage. This resulted in nontradit ional mater ia ls used as façade and inter ior f in ishes. Often inexpensive metals and plast ics ( result ing from the technologica l advancements ment ioned ear l ier) were used as minimal ist mater ia l se lect ions. This was favored by Modernist architects as a further example of their re ject ion of h istor ica l bui ld ing ideologies . This sty l i st ic sh i f t enjoyed a few decades of prol i f ic campus growth as the end of World War I I s ignaled a populat ion boom which was later susta ined local ly due to petroleum development focused on Lafayette and i ts Univers i ty.

Another key aspect of Modernism as studied on UL Lafayette’s campus is i ts lack of respect for urban

and histor ica l contexts . Modernists fe l t no need to create bui ld ings which f i t with in a whole; rather, they v iewed each bui ld ing as i ts own statement toward their ideology. Any attempt to interpret tradit ional sty les was re jected within th is school of thought. On campus, architects were sens it ive enough to consistent ly use red br ick as a univers i ty ident i f ier ; however, most other sty l i st ic e lements of Tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate were abandoned dur ing th is per iod.

Whi le Modernists enjoyed their f reedom from tradit ional architectural typologies , one advantage they d id not possess was generat ions of t r ia l and error to f ine tune their craft . As the f i rst products of th is prol i f ic movement began to age in the publ ic eye a number of def ic iencies became evident. The Modernists ’ penchant for a mater ia l i ty of economy led to substant ia l degradat ion, which occurred at a considerable rate. This degradat ion was a l l the more obvious due to modern architecture’s s imple bui ld ing forms and general lack of deta i l . Making matters worse was the fact that whi le many architects had embraced the minimal ist ideas behind modernism, much of the publ ic d id not share th is v iew of architecture. This i s not iceable in the few modernist homes bui l t and their overal l lack of market des irabi l i ty.

As the f laws of Modernism’s des ign revolut ion were la id bare, ag ing bui ld ings cont inued los ing their essent ia l character. General lack of upkeep and/or upgrading often led Univers i ty maintenance to seek temporary solut ions for bui ld ing issues. These temporary patches many t imes further degraded the character and qual i ty of these bui ld ings.

Whi le cr i t ic isms of the legacy Modernism has left on UL Lafayette’s campus are obvious, the intr ins ic va lue

FJ Gaylor/UL Lafayette


103

E

CHARRETTE DATE: 10.17.11 FINAL DATE: 05.28.13

AR

CH

ITE

CT

UR

AL

HIS

TO

RY



SECTION CONTENT SECTION

The energy cr ises of the 1970's and the o i l bust of the 1980s had dramatic effects on Lafayette and thus the Univers i ty. With Pres ident Rougeau’s campus expansion ending around 1971, a re lat ive lu l l in new construct ion on UL Lafayette’s campus was fe l t for years to come. As Pres ident Authement took over in 1974, a new architectural sty le was emerging as a d irect re ject ion of the tenets of Modernism. Postmodernism, as i t has come to be ca l led, emerged in the late 1970's on the g lobal architecture scene and would eventual ly leave i ts mark on the bui l t environment at UL Lafayette.

Postmodernism developed from the phi losophica l ideas of Ex istent ia l i sm. This ideology va lued re lat iv ism over the universa l t ruth’s mainta ined by Modernism and thus thought the essence of a bui ld ing l ies in the observer ’s contextual interpretat ion of i ts va lue . Whi le Modernism strove to achieve perfect ion through minimal ist forms and funct ion, Postmodernism stated that the attr ibutes which def ine perfect ion are themselves subject ive. This meant that a g lobal izat ion of sty le was inappropr iate due to the fact that a bui ld ing must be judged within i ts speci f ic context , lest you do the publ ic a d isserv ice.

Sty l i st ica l ly, Postmodernism rejected the b land object iv ism inherent to Modernism. This saw the return of h istor ica l sty l i st ic references and thus the re introduct ion of ornamentat ion to the bui ld ing façade. Often t imes, h istor ica l references f rom di fferent architectural sty les could be found within one bui ld ing. The histor ica l references became a source of decorat ive e lements which des igners used freely to br ing l i fe back to the bui ld ing ’s exter ior. These references were thought to communicate a meaning to the publ ic , not as a d irect narrat ive , but rather through contemporary re interpretat ion of those key tradit ional e lements . In reference to UL Lafayette, th is opened the door for the re introduct ion of Georgian Col leg iate e lements back into the bui l t environment.

In the late 1990s, the renovat ion and addit ion to Dupré L ibrary presented i tse l f as the f i rst ‘strong ’ statement of Postmodernist architecture on campus. The new bui ld ing pul led sty l i st ic e lements f rom the or ig inal modernist l ibrary bui ld ing as wel l as paying homage to the tradit ional Judice-Rickels Hal l across the street . This

sens i t iv i ty to the bui ld ing ’s h istor ica l and urban context i s another key e lement of Postmodernism and can be seen in Moody Hal l ’s re interpretat ion of the architecture around the Quadrangle as wel l as the Computer Sc iences Center ’s re interpretat ion of t radit ional Georgian Col leg iate e lements .

The re introduct ion of sens i t iv i ty to context i s a point of part icular importance to th is analys is and master p lan for the Univers i ty. Whi le subject ive, as the Postmodernists would wish, th is aspect of des ign shal l be h ighl ighted as not only des irable but cruc ia l to the future growth of UL Lafayette’s campus. The ideas and methods of the architectural sty les which compose Contemporary Georgian Col leg iate as we def ine i t here may vary, but a h istor ica l and urban contextual izat ion wi l l ensure that addit ions to the bui l t environment contr ibute to a cont iguous campus sty le . This i s part icular ly important within the campus proper speci f ica l ly as bui ld ings wi l l be within a re lat ive proximity to tradit ional examples of Georgian Col leg iate architecture.

No architectural sty le i s without i ts f laws and to th is end Postmodernism is no except ion. Cr i t iques of Postmodernism tend to focus on the re introduct ion of h istor ica l e lements as ornamentat ion. Some feel th is presents a superf ic ia l s incer i ty, or a sk in deep “tradit ion”. This superf ic ia l i ty, i t i s argued, i s no subst i tut ion for real t radit ion (without quotat ion marks) . The use of t radit ional structural e lements as pure ornamentat ion without a structural use (as seen in br ick arches with keystones on a steel l inte l ) i s not an honest bui ld ing use and is cons idered inappropr iate by some cr i t ics .

Another potent ia l r i sk in propagat ing the use of Postmodernism as des ign intent i s the r isk of mis interpretat ion by the des igner of t radit ional e lements . This aspect i s h ighly subject ive thus making i t d i ff icu lt to def ine and control . However, re interpret ing tradit ional e lements without a h ighly developed sens it iv i ty to proport ion, sca le and histor ica l des ign intent can result in an innate sense of ‘ fakeness’ and the inappropr iate use of deta i l ing. This can result in a subconsc ious reading of a bui ld ing which communicates a lack of qual i ty as i s often fe l t when v iewing typica l commercia l developments of today.

these bui ld ings possess ex ists on mult ip le levels . The most pragmatic of these values is the sheer economic worth of over hal f the campus. Measured in the b i l l ions of dol lars , Modernism’s construct ions on campus compi le a major component within the Univers i ty fabr ic . Beyond their phys ica l worth, the bui ld ings of th is era possess architectural va lue as icons of 20th century advancements in des ign and construct ion which have changed the g lobal bui l t environment l ike no movement before i t . This inf luence has h istor ica l va lue to UL Lafayette speci f ica l ly as i t has now been the predominant def in ing feature of campus growth for over 70 years . Modernism’s inf luence and Ragin Cajun history cannot be separated in th is Univers i ty ’s phys ica l character. UL Lafayette’s Modernist bui ld ings represent a def in ing architectural typology ex ist ing in i ts own t ime, rather than typologies based on bui ld ing forms which were current in years past . I t i s for these reasons that speci f ic attent ion is paid to the assessment and treatment of these bui ld ings within the master p lan as the Univers i ty moves forward in i ts phys ica l growth.

a f t E r m o d E r n i S m

Moving beyond Modern Architecture’s inf luence on UL Lafayette’s past and future campus growth, the trans i t ion out of Modernism (here def ined around the year 1981) wi l l be ident i f ied as Contemporary Georgian Architecture. This typology is best understood as a gradient between three ident i f iable bui ld ing ideologies . Campus des ign of the past 30 years ranges between compet ing schools of thought in Postmodernism and Neomodernism. The br idging e lement between these often contradictory sty les i s a typology best labeled as Structural Express ionism. Analys is wi l l def ine the gradient between these three typologies . The uni fy ing e lement which t ies these bui ld ings back to the campus are their cont inued interpretat ions of the Tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate Typology previous ly descr ibed. Contemporary Georgian, as the composite typology def ined herein, encompasses a wide range of des ign potent ia ls meant to a l low for dynamic growth whi le mainta in ing a cont iguous campus language.

p o S t m o d E r n i S m

E



RC

HIT

EC

TU

RA

L H

IST

OR

Y

STRUCTURAL EXPRESSIONISM


Another sty l i st ic departure from Modernism establ ished i tse l f in the typology of Structural Express ionism. Sometimes referred to as High-tech architecture due to i ts sty l i st ic tendencies towards an industr ia l aesthet ic , th is des ign language was an attempt by late modernists to combat the minimal emptiness found in Modernism. Rather than throw out the ideologica l tenet that decorat ion without funct ion was inappropr iate, Structural Express ionism celebrated bui ld ing systems to create a v isual complexity as a des ign e lement. Previous ly h idden elements within the bui ld ing , such as structure and mechanica l systems, were not only revealed but art iculated as a point of focus in l ieu of appl ied ornamentat ion.

Whi le reta in ing the honesty of Modernist funct ional i ty, Structural Express ionism provides the observer a new aesthet ic in response to the cr i t iques against minimal ism. This form of des ign pays homage to the art and sc ience of bui ld ing des ign and construct ion by boast ing the technica l aspects of bui ld ings by external iz ing them. This i s not to say that the sty le presents standard or unattract ive construct ion detai ls , rather (as the name impl ies) the art iculat ion of these e lements becomes a true form of express ion.

S t r u c t u r a L E x p r E S S i o n i S m

I M A G E D E S C R I P T I O N :E S T U A R I N E H A B I T A T S A N D C O A S T A L F I S H E R I E S C E N T E R

This typology is extremely important to the analys is of the Univers i ty ’s architectural her i tage and to the coordinat ion of future des ign intent due to the fact that i t i s capable of act ing as a sty l i st ic br idge between Modernism and Postmodernism. Whi le the tenets of Postmodernism are in complete contrast to the ideology behind Modernism, Structural Express ionism’s f lex ib i l i ty a l lows i t to b lend seamless ly with both sty les . This i s no more evident than as seen in the two coasta l research centers located adjacent to one another on the Campus Commons. Whi le an analys is of the Wetlands Research Center would uncover Structural Express ionism with a Postmodernist sens i t iv i ty, the same analys is of the Estuar ine Habitats and Coasta l F isher ies Center would expose the same typologica l e lements with a tendency towards Neomodernism. Despite the contrast ing inf luences within these examples, the two bui ld ings complement each other contr ibut ing to a general sense of commonal i ty. On a larger sca le, the use of Structural Express ionism as a tool for negot iat ing contrast ing sty les could contr ibute to an overal l sense of p lace, a rather des irable result when str iv ing to create a campus with both complexity and s imi lar i ty.

The f inal var iat ion of contemporary architecture as seen within the context of UL Lafayette’s campus is the sty l i st ic var iat ion known as Neomodernism. This ideology bui lds on the ideas of Modernism whi le address ing many of the issues present in h istor ica l cr i t iques of the Modernist sty le . Neomodernism, bui l t on the idea that the Internat ional Sty le was not s imply a sty l i st ic response to taste (not a fad) , holds to the concept that Modernism was a leg i t imate paradigm shi f t in architectural h istory. This ideology mainta ins that truth and perfect ion do indeed ex ist in a universa l form. With c lar i ty of intent which could a lmost be considered spir i tual , Neomodernists v iew the results of Modernism as more than a pos i t ion on ornamentat ion and more as a def in i t ive break from al l bui l t forms which came before i t .

With the h istory of Modernism now at their d isposal , Neomodernists are able to bui ld on the s imi lar i t ies they share with the parent typology. A renewed sense of s impl ic i ty responds to the ec lect ic complexity Postmodernism has p laced at the forefront of contemporary des ign. Neomodernism’s tenets once

n E o m o d E r n i S m

E S t u a r i n E H a b i t a t S a n d c o a S t a L f i S H E r i E S c E n t E r

NEOMODERNISM

FJ Gaylor/UL Lafayette

E



AR

CH

ITE

CT

UR

AL

HIS

TO

RY



again re ject h istor ica l imitat ion and thus create largely m o n o l i t h i c wo r ks . T h i s i s n o t to s ay t h at N e o m o d e r n i s m i s s i m p l y co nt i n u e d M o d e r n i s m . L e s s o n s h ave b e e n l e a r n e d f ro m t h e e a r l y d ays o f M o d e r n i s m .

N e o m o d e r n i s m te n d s to re j e c t t h e m ate r i a l i t y o f e co n o my w h i c h b e ca m e p re va l e nt i n M o d e r n i s t wo r ks . C l o s e r a t te nt i o n to d e ta i l i n g a n d m ate r i a l i t y s t r i ve s to a d d a s e n s e o f p e r m a n e n c e to t h e s e co nte m p o ra r y wo r ks . N e o m o d e r n i s t s a re a l s o l e s s s t r i c t l y b o u n d b y t h e r i g i d p u rs u i t o f o b j e c t i ve p e r fe c t i o n i n t h e b u i l t fo r m . E xa m p l e s o f t h i s n e w i d e o l o g y o n U L L a faye tte ’s ca m p u s a re t h e L I T E C e nte r a n d t h e U n i ve rs i t y A r t M u s e u m . T h e ‘e g g ’ fo r m at t h e L I T E C e nte r a n d t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e b l u e l i g ht i n g at t h e U n i ve rs i t y A r t M u s e u m b o t h re p re s e nt d e v i at i o n f ro m p u re l y f u n c t i o n a l d e s i g n e l e m e nt s . T h i s s p e a ks to a re n e we d u n d e rsta n d i n g t h at b eyo n d f u n c t i o n a l i t y, N e o m o d e r n i s t b u i l d i n g s a l s o s t r i ve to a t ta i n a s e n s e o f va l u e t h ro u g h a e st h e t i c s .

Po s s i b l y t h e m o st i m p o r ta nt fe at u re o f N e o m o d e r n i s m ’s d e v i at i o n s f ro m c l a s s i ca l M o d e r n i s t t h o u g ht i s t h e i nt ro d u c t i o n o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f co ntex t w i t h i n t h e

p a u L a n d L u L u H i L L a r d u n i v E r S i t y a r t m u S E u m

L o u i S i a n a i m m E r S i v E t E c H n o L o G i E S E n t E r p r i S E c E n t E r

b o d y o f wo r k . R at h e r t h a n n e g l e c t h i s to r i ca l a n d u r b a n co ntex t , N e o m o d e r n i s m st r i ve s to i n co r p o rate w i t h i n i t s p a r t i c u l a r t i m e a n d p l a c e . T h i s co ntex t u a l i zat i o n o f te n s t r i ve s fo r a n u n o r t h o d ox a p p ro a c h to re s p o n s i ve n e s s . O n e s u c h exa m p l e i s t h e way t h e U n i ve rs i t y A r t M u s e u m i nte ra c t s w i t h t h e a d j a c e nt , a n d h i g h l y t ra d i t i o n a l , A . H ays To w n B u i l d i n g . D raw i n g i t s i n i t i a l d e s i g n q u e u e s f ro m t h e co l o n n a d e o f t h e 1 9 6 7 h o u s e , t h e s t r u c t u ra l co l u m n s a s we l l a s d e ta i l e d j o i nt s w i t h i n t h e m u s e u m a re a l l a l i g n e d w i t h t h e D o r i c co l u m n s o n t h e o r i g i n a l b u i l d i n g . T h e m u s e u m d e s i g n a l s o p l ays w i t h i d e a s o f t ra n s p a re n c y w i t h i n i t s fa ça d e to i n te nt i o n a l l y f ra m e i d e a l v i e ws o f t h e A . H ays To w n B u i l d i n g . Ref l e c t i ve g l a s s a t te m p t s to b e co m e i nv i s i b l e d u r i n g d ay l i g ht a n d s u n s e t h o u rs , re s p e c t f u l l y re c e d i n g to t h e g ra n d e u r o f t h e p l a ntat i o n s t y l e h o u s e . D u r i n g e ve n i n g h o u rs t h e m u s e u m a n d t ra d i t i o n a l b u i l d i n g s l i g ht u p b l u e a n d w h i te re s p e c t i ve l y s p e a k i n g to t h e co nt ra st c re ate d b e t we e n t ra d i t i o n a l re v i va l a n d N e o m o d e r n i s m .

STRUCTURAL EXPRESSIONISM

NEOMODERNISM


E


A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D SB

UIL

DIN

G T

YP

OL

OG

Y S

TU

DY

- M

AIN

CA

MP

US

B U I L D I N G T Y P O L O G Y S T U D Y - M A I N C A M P U S

Campus analys is has thus far h ighl ighted two major architectural t rends. The f i rst i s an architectural sty le of Georgian Col leg iate bui ld ings, prevalent in the campus proper. The second s igni f icant architectural t rend is a contemporary des ign language which is cont inual ly developing s ince the introduct ion of modernism through the current day.

Through use of th is map the Univers i ty can be v iewed as d iv ided by these two categor ies . The tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate bui ld ings are predominant in the b lock contain ing the quadrangle and the housing b lock a long Univers i ty Avenue. As the campus developed south of St . Mary Boulevard, modern architecture gained more presence and has cont inued to mainta in i ts hold of predominance through the post-modern typologies previous ly descr ibed.

Speci f ica l ly noteworthy in th is map are the few locat ions where a bui ld ing of one typology is located within the context of the other typology ’s predominant areas. These are te l l ing features of the Univers i ty ’s growth and development without the presence of a c lear ly def ined v is ion. One goal of any master p lan should be to address these condit ions in a manner which is appropr iate for the cont inued ex istence of both typologies .

E x i S t i n G b u i L d i n G t y p o L o G y S t u d y

JOHNSTON ST.

REX ST.

UPA DR.

S.CAMPUS DR.

ST.

MA

RY

BLV

D.

UN

IVE

RS

ITY

AV

E.

HEBRARD BLVD.

ST.

JU

LIE

N A

VE

.

E L

EW

IS S

T.

BO

UC

HE

R D

R.

GIRARD PARK

CIRCLE

GIRARD PARK DR.

TU

LAN

E A

VE

.

MC KINLEY ST.

TAFT ST.

GIR

AR

D

PA

RK

LAN

E

TRADITIONAL

NON-TRADITIONAL

UTILITARIAN


107

E


BU

ILD

ING

TY

PO

LO

GY

ST

UD

Y -

MA

IN C

AM

PU

S


B U I L D I N G T Y P O L O G Y S T U D Y - M A I N C A M P U S

These trends c losely corre late with three d ist inct t ime per iods of campus growth. The f i rst of these per iods, spanning from 1900 – 1941, saw most of the tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate construct ion. The second per iod, between 1942 and 1971, saw a few tradit ional bui ld ings go up. However, the per iod was predominant ly marked by bui ld ings whose major inf luences came from the modernist movement of the mid-century. Some elements f rom the tradit ional Georgian sty le were interpreted through the modernist sty le used on campus. S ince 1972, the Univers i ty ’s growth has been one best character ized as Postmodern and Contemporary .


1900 - 1941

1942 - 1971

1972 - PRESENT

JOHNSTON ST.

REX ST.

UPA DR.

S.CAMPUS DR.

ST.

MA

RY

BLV

D.

UN

IVE

RS

ITY

AV

E.

HEBRARD BLVD.

ST.

JU

LIE

N A

VE

.

E L

EW

IS S

T.

BO

UC

HE

R D

R.

GIRARD PARK

CIRCLE

GIRARD PARK DR.

TU

LAN

E A

VE

.

MC KINLEY ST.

TAFT ST.

GIR

AR

D

PA

RK

LAN

E


E


A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D SB

UIL

DIN

G T

YP

OL

OG

Y S

TU

DY

- M

AIN

CA

MP

US B U I L D I N G T Y P O L O G Y S T U D Y - M A I N C A M P U S

Viewing the campus’ organizat ion by ass igning the 5 typologica l c lass i f icat ions, a c luster ing of typologies becomes evident. Part icular ly, groups of typologies 2 and 4 start to appear with speci f ic set p ieces of typologies 1 and 3 nest l ing within these groupings. A lso ev ident are some areas where random assortments of typologies are present without any predominant organizat ion.

t y p E i G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E ( f o r m a L )

t y p E i i G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E ( i n f o r m a L )

t y p E i i i f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n

t y p E i v i n f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n

Girard Hal l , Mart in Hal l , Pres ident ’s Res idence, B i tt le Hal l , Stephens Hal l , McLaur in Gym, Judice-Rickels Hal l , O.K. A l len Hal l , A . Hays Town Bui ld ing , UL Lafayette Foundat ion

Mouton Hal l , Maxim Doucet Hal l , Foster Hal l , F.G. Mouton Hal l , Declouet Hal l , Lee Hal l , Broussard Hal l , Burke-Hawthorne Hal l , Our Lady of Wisdom Chapel , Saucier C l in ic , Randolph Hal l , A lumni Hal l (The Vermi l ion) , Buchanan Hal l , Baker Huger Hal l , Bonin Hal l , Evangel ine Hal l , Harr is Hal l , Hami l ton Hal l , Ear l K . Long Gym

Moody Hal l , Angel le Hal l , A lumni Center, Dupre L ibrary

Ol iv ier Hal l , Corona Hal l , Gui l lory Hal l , V.L . Wharton Hal l , Publ ic Park ing Garage, B i l leaud Hal l , Montgomery Hal l , Conference Center, Madison Hal l , H.L . Gr i ff in Hal l , C .L . Rougeau Hal l , Advanced Computer Technology and Research Hal l , Joel L . F letcher Hal l , Legacy Park, Cajun Vi l lage, UL Lafayette Day-care Center, Paul and Lulu Hi l l iard Univers i ty Art Museum, Student Union

t y p E v u t i L i t a r i a n

Maintenance Fac i l i ty, Centra l Receiv ing

TYPE I

TYPE I I

TYPE I I I

TYPE IV

TYPE V


JOHNSTON ST.

REX ST.

UPA DR.

S.CAMPUS DR.

ST.

MA

RY

BLV

D.

UN

IVE

RS

ITY

AV

E.

HEBRARD BLVD.

ST.

JU

LIE

N A

VE

.

E L

EW

IS S

T.

BO

UC

HE

R D

R.

GIRARD PARK

CIRCLE

GIRARD PARK DR.

TU

LAN

E A

VE

.

MC KINLEY ST.

TAFT ST.

GIR

AR

D

PA

RK

LAN

E


109

E


EX

IST

ING

BU

ILD

ING

S -

MA

IN C

AM

PU

S


E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G S - M A I N C A M P U S

1

61

71

56 30

4442

176667

19

20

4060

62

64

65

2

69

70

3

32

4

72

68

73

57

21

54

49

14

59

37

12286335

24

57

6

58

58

58

368

25

9

52

50

10

27

3423

18

46

16

45

26

41

11

1513

2948

43 53

514731

3339

38

1. ADVANCED COMPUTER

TECHNOLOGY & RE-

SEARCH HALL (COMPUTER

SCIENCE)

2. A. HAYS TOWN BUILDING

3. ALETA (ACADIANA LAW

ENFORCEMENT TRAINING

ACADEMY)

4. ALUMNI CENTER

5. ALUMNI HALL (THE VER-

MILION)

6. ANGELLE HALL

7. BAKER-HUGER HALL

8. BANCROFT HALL

9. BANK ONE BUILDING

10. BILLEAUD HALL

11. BITTLE HALL

12. BONIN HALL

13. BROUSSARD HALL

14. BUCHANAN HALL

15. BURKE-HAWTHORNE HALL

16. CAJUN VILLAGE

17. CAFE FLEUR-DE-LIS

18. CENTRAL RECEIVING

19. CONFERENCE CENTER

20. CONTINUING EDUCATION

CENTER

21. CORONNA HALL

22. CREDIT UNION

23. DAY CARE CENTER

24. DECLOUET HALL

25. DENBO HALLL

26. DUPRE LIBRARY

27. EARL K. LONG GYM

28. EVANGELINE HALL

29. F.G. MOUTON HALL

30. FLETCHER HALL

31. FOSTER HALL

32. FRENCH HOUSE

33. GIRARD HALL

34. GRIFFIN HALL

35. GUILLORY HALL

36. HAMILTON HALL

37. HARRIS HALL

38. HAWKINS HOUSE

39. INFORMATION CENTER

40. INTERNATIONAL BUILDING

41. JUDICE-RICKELS HALL

42. KAJUN WASHETERIA

43. LEE HALL

44. LEGACY APARTMENTS

45. MADISON HALL

46. MAINTENANCE FACILITY

47. MARTIN HALL

48. MAXIM D. DOUCET HALL

49. MCLAURIN GYM

50. MONTGOMERY HALL

51. MOODY HALL

52. MOUTON HALL

53. O.K. ALLEN HALL

54. OLIVIER HALL

55. ON THE GEAUX

56. PARKER HALL (PHYSICAL

PLANT)

57. PRESIDENT’S RESIDENCE

58. PUBLIC PARKING

59. RANDOLPH HALL

60. ROTC BUILDING

61. ROUGEOU HALL

62. ROY HOUSE

63. SAUCIER CLINIC

64. SOULIER HOUSE

65. STEPHENS HALL

66. STOKES HALL A

67. STOKES HALL B

68. STUDENT UNION

69. UL LAFAYETTE FOUNDA-

TION

70. UNIVERSITY ART MUSEUM

71. VISUAL ARTS ANNEX

72. WHARTON HALL

73. WISDOM CHAPEL

main campuS & St. Landry corridor ExiStinG buiLdinGS

E LEWIS ST.

UNIVERSITY AVE.

ST. L

ANDRY ST.

ST. MARY BLVD.

BOUCHER DR.

GIR

ARD

PAR

K CIR

CLE

GIR

ARD

PAR

K D

R.

TULANE AVE.

JOHNSTON ST.

HEBRARD BLV

D.

MCKIN

LEY ST.

UPA DR.

S. CAMPUS DR.

ST. JULIEN

AVE.

GIRARD PARK

LANE

TAFT S

T.

REX ST.


E


A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D SE

XIS

TIN

G B

UIL

DIN

GS

- U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y C

OM

MO

NS E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G S - U N I V E R S I T Y C O M M O N S

1. ABDALLA HALL

2. AGRICULTURAL FACILI-

TIES

3. ATHLETIC COMPLEX

4. BLACKHAM COLISEUM

COMPLEX

5. BOURGEOIS HALL

6. CAJUN COURTS/CULOTTA

CENTER

7. CAJUNDOME

8. CAJUN FIELD

9. CAJUN TRACK/SOCCER

FACILITIES

10. CECIL J. PICARD HALL

(CENTER FOR CHILD DE-

VELOPMENT)

11. CREAMERY BUILDING

12. ESTUARINE HABITATS

COASTAL FISHERIES RE-

SEARCH CENTER

13. FRATERNITY ROW

14. HILTON GARDEN INN

15. IRA NELSON HORTICUL-

TURE CENTER

16. LAFAYETTE CONVENTION

CENTER

17. LAFAYETTE ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT AUTHOR-

ITY

18. LAFAYETTE PRIMARY

CARE FACILITY

19. LAMSON RAGIN’ CAJUNS

SOFTBALL PARK

20. LEON MONCLA SR. IN-

DOOR PRACTICE FACILITY

21. LITE (LOUISIANA IMMER-

SIVE TECHNOLOGIES

ENTERPRISE)

22. LOUISIANA ACCELERATOR

CENTER

23. MOORE FIELD

24. NATIONAL WETLANDS

RESEARCH CENTER

25. PRINTING SERVICES

26. SORORITY ROW

27. STUDENT AQUATIC CEN-

TER

28. STUDENT TENNIS COURTS

29. WAGNER HOUSE

30. WHITTINGTON HOUSE

univErSity commonS diStrict ExiStinG buiLdinGS

1

18

17

12

24

1322

26

3

27

20

628

19

716

14

8

23

21

9 5

29

2

25

2

430

15

11

W. CONGRESS S

T.

ERASTE LANDRY RD.

CAJU

ND

OM

E BLVD

SOUVENIR GATE

CO

LISE

UM

RD

.

JOHNSTON ST.

BERTR

AND

DR

.

N. C

OLLEG

E RD

.

E. DEVALCOURT ST


111

E


AR

CH

ITE

CT

UR

AL

TY

PO

LO

GIE

S


A R C H I T E C T U R A L T Y P O L O G I E S

S T E P H E N S H A L L

The a im of the Architectural Standards is to create a source book for the creat ion of future campus bui ld ings. This col lect ion of architectural informat ion is intended to guide the des igns of bui ld ings to ensure the creat ion of a campus which is sty l i st ica l ly cont iguous whi le mainta in ing a r ichness of d ivers i ty. This goal i s obtained through the creat ion of f ive h ierarchica l ‘Bui ld ing Typologies ’. Thusly, the Master P lan wi l l def ine appropr iate locat ions for the use of each typology.

To accompl ish the goal of creat ing a f lex ib le architectural palette which enables var iat ion whi le mainta in ing cont inuity, the architectural regulat ions are structured around a h ierarchy of Bui ld ing Typologies . Each type is intended to a l low del ivery of appropr iate ly des igned bui ld ings at vary ing pr ice points based on intended use and context within the campus fabr ic . These typologies are d iv ided into Typologies I , I I , I I I , IV and V.

General intent establ ishes that Typology I i s the most formal and is based on the campus’ h istor ic va lues. As a result i t i s ant ic ipated that th is wi l l be the most expensive to create. Typology I I fo l lows the same sty l i st ic queues as Typology I but contains less formal e lements to l imit both i ts bui ld ing cost as wel l as i ts architectural s igni f icance. Typology I I I creates a contemporary departure from the tradit ional sty l ings of Types I and I I , whi le st i l l drawing e lements for interpretat ion from the histor ica l typology. Typology I I I i s expected to cost less than Type I but more than Type I I . Typology IV is a sca led down var iat ion of Type I I I and is expected to cost less than Types I I and I I I . Type V bui ld ings are the most ut i l i tar ian; consequent ly they are regulated to very l imited campus areas.


t y p o L o G y vt y p o L o G y i vt y p o L o G y i i it y p o L o G y i it y p o L o G y i


E


General intent , establ ishes that Type I i s the most formal and is based on the main campus’s h istor ic va lues. As a result i t i s ant ic ipated that th is wi l l be the most expensive to create. Type I I i s sty l i st ica l ly a departure from the or ig inal architecture of the base h istor ic architecture seen on the main campus, whi le not inexpensive, wi l l be more affordable than Type I . Type I I I bui ld ings are intended for secondary street f rontages, which assemble us ing less expensive mater ia ls and consequent ly wi l l serve a more ut i l i tar ian funct ion. Type IV bui ld ings are the most ut i l i tar ian; consequent ly they are re legated to very l imited campus areas.


TYPE I

TYPE I I

TYPE I I I TYPE IV

SIGNATURE BUILDING (CIVIC)

EXISTING BUILDING


RC

HIT

EC

TU

RA

L T

YP

OL

OG

IES A R C H I T E C T U R A L T Y P O L O G I E S

Revised: 09.03.14

W. CONGRESS S

T.

UNIVERSITY AVE.

ERASTE LANDRY RD.

CAJU

ND

OM

E BLVD

ST. L

ANDRY ST.

ST. MARY BLVD

.

SOUVENIR GATE

CO

LISE

UM

RD

.

ST. JULIEN

AVE. E LEWIS ST.

REX ST.

BOUCHER DR.

GIR

ARD

PAR

K

CIR

CLE

GIR

ARD

PAR

K D

R.

TULANE AVE.

JOHNSTON ST.

BERTR

AND

DR

.

N. C

OLLEG

E RD

.

HEBRARD BLV

D.. MC

KIN

LEY

ST.

TAFT S

T.

GIRARD PARK LANE

UPA DR.

S. CAMPUS DR.

E. DEVALCOURT ST


113

E


UL Lafayette’s Tradit ional Georgian language is based on the architectural sty le created from 1720-1840 dur ing the consecut ive re igns of George I - George IV of Hanover in UK.

Between 1900 and 1940, a strong architectural language was developed on the UL Lafayette campus based around this architectural sty le , but tampered with local creole context . By 1940 most of the bui ld ings on campus which can st i l l be considered tradit ional had been constructed. These inc lude Old Mart in Hal l (demol ished) , Foster Hal l , DeClouet Hal l , Girard Hal l , Lee Hal l , Buchanan Hal l , Judice-Rickels Hal l , O.K. A l len Hal l , Harr is Hal l , E .K. Long Gym, Bitt le Hal l , Broussard Hal l , Mouton Hal l , Stephens Hal l , McLaur in Gym, Evangel ine Gym, Hami l ton Hal l , Burke-Hawthorne Hal l and Saucier Inf i rmary. As previous ly shown, these bui ld ings are located mainly north of Sa int Mary St . centered around the quadrangle.

A quick analys is of the sty le would present one with a consensus of symmetr ica l red br ick bui ld ings with h ipped roofs , h ip gable or gables and c lass ica l deta i l ing. The symmetry typica l ly focused around a centra l entrance, usual ly created by a st i le and ra i l door emphasized with an e laborate pediment. Bui ld ing fenestrat ions are consistent ly symmetr ica l . Double hung , mult i -pane windows were e i ther rectangular, arched or paladian and never paired. Embel l i shed cornices and dent i l work were often used. Roofs are typica l ly sh ingled and often contain dormers. Bui ld ings of part icular importance were marked with tower e lements .

▫ STRICTLY SYMMETRICAL

▫ CENTRAL ENTRY

▫ PROPORTIONAL ANALYSIS

▫ MAJOR BUILDING ELEMENTS

▫ RED-BRICK

▫ HIPPED ROOFS (SOME WITH DORMERS)

▫ GABLED ROOFS

▫ ELEVATION DIAGRAMS

▫ ROOF DIAGRAMS

▫ MATERIAL ANALYSIS

▫ DOUBLE HUNG, MULTI-PANE WINDOWS

▫ RECTANGULAR, ARCHED AND PALLADIAN

▫ WINDOW DIAGRAMS

▫ HEAD, SILL AND CASEMENT DEFINITIONS

▫ CENTRAL ENTRANCE

▫ ELABORATE PEDIMENT

▫ PEDIMENT DIAGRAMS

▫ DOOR DEFINITIONS

▫ PANELS WITH MUNTINED GLASS

UPPER PANELS

▫ CLASSICAL DETAILING

▫ BRICK DETAILING

▫ CORNICE DETAILS

▫ SCROLL WORK

▫ DECORATIVE ITEMS

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E H i S t o r y

m a S S i n G :

w a L L S & r o o f S :

w i n d o w S :

d o o r S :

d E t a i L S :

TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE


T Y P O L O G Y I - V E R N A C U L A R C R E O L E G E O R G I A N C O L L E G I A T E


E



115

E


GIRARD

JUDICE

STEPHENS

MARTIN

STEPHENS HALL

CL

STEPHENS HALL

OSU LIBRARY CL

OSU LIBRARY

TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE



BOTH TYPOLOGY I AND I I ARE BASED ON TRADI-TIONAL GEORGIAN ARCHITECTURE. THE DEFIN-

ING ELEMENTS BETWEEN THE TWO ARE:

1. LEVEL OF DETAILING

2. OVERALL PRESENCE

3. ECONOMIC IMPACT

TYPOLOGY I IS INTENDED FOR MAJOR SET-PIECES WITHIN THE CAMPUS FABRIC. THESE BUILDINGS SHOULD RECEIVE PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO DETAIL AND ARE GENERALLY THE MOST COSTLY OF THE FIVE TYPOLOGIES TO CONSTRUCT IF ONE IS TO STAY TRUE TO THE RICHNESS OF THE

ORIGINAL GEORGIAN.

T Y P O L O G Y I & I I

Georgian Col leg iate architecture employs str ict symmetry within i ts bui ld ing masses. Focused around a grand centra l entry, the bui ld ing e lements are general ly mirrored hor izontal ly. A symmetr ica l sense of balance is a lso present vert ica l ly within a bui ld ing ’s façade. Most bui ld ings a lso mainta in a general symmetry in P lan.

The most formal Georgian Col leg iate bui ld ings are sometimes treated with a centra l tower e lement. These are c lass ica l ly deta i led and can be quite ornate.

G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E

m a S S i n G

Understanding Georgian Col leg iate architecture at i ts largest and most bas ic sca le means understanding symmetry. This typology orders i ts bui ld ings, both in p lan and e levat ion, by str ict symmetry. This symmetry is a lmost a lways centered on the bui ld ing ’s most prominent entry.

This sect ion focuses on understanding the typology ’s most bas ic ru les of mass ing and proport ion. These are studied in both p lan and e levat ion. Some major bui ld ing e lements , such as towers , are a lso featured here.


E


OSU LIBRARY

STEPHENS HALL

OSU LIBRARY

STEPHENS HALL

1:1.618

GOLDEN

RATIO

3X X

X

X

X

A R C H I T E C T U R A L S TA N D A R D ST

YP

OL

OG

Y I

- V

ER

NA

CU

LA

R C

RE

OL

E G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


Along with symmetry, a strong sense of proport ion is present in tradit ional Georgian des ign. The oldest Georgian homes were proport ioned after two cubes jo ined hor izontal ly. For larger sca les ( i .e . Georgian Col leg iate) the use of the Golden Proport ion, rather than the cube, i s more appropr iate. The proport ions prevalent in the previous examples can be seen here.

p r o p o r t i o n a L a n a L y S i S

m a t E r i a L d E f i n i t i o n

r o o f d E f i n i t i o n S

Exter ior f in ish shal l be at least 85% red br ick and g lass . Red br ick shal l match the ex ist ing type found throughout the campus. Only a smal l port ion shal l cons ist of stone and/or p laster.

GLASS - 15%

BRICK - 71%

WOOD/STUCCO/STONE - 14%

The pr inc ipal roof on a l l f reestanding bui ld ings shal l be a symmetr ica l h ip or gable roof with a s lope between 6:12 and 10:12 (except where a var iance is granted) . Roofs should be shingled to match the ex ist ing type found throughout the campus. Anci l lary Roofs (attached to wal ls or roofs) may be sheds s loped no less than 3:12. Eaves shal l be cont inuous, unless overhanging a balcony or porch. Eaves shal l have an overhang from 12” to 26”.

Exposed Gutters and Downspouts shal l be round, square, or ogee. They should be made of copper (not copper-coated) or bronze a luminum. Downspouts shal l be p laced at corners of the bui ld ing least v is ib le f rom the bui ld ing ’s main facade. Splash Blocks shal l be concrete, br ick , or gravel .

No through Roof Penetrat ions for mechanica l or e lectr ica l devices shal l be a l lowed to penetrate the roof at the bui ld ing ’s f rontages. Penetrat ions of these devices at approved locat ions wi l l be of color to match the roof.

PROPORTIONAL ANALYSIS


117

E


THE MOST

DESIRABLE

WINDOW

TREATMENT IS

A COMPLETE

CASEMENT WITH

A CAST STONE

SILL. WOOD AND

MASONRY ARE

ACCEPTABLE

CASEMENT

MATERIALS

TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE



The Rectangular Sash Window is poss ib ly the most common element present within the Georgian Col leg iate typology found on campus. The proper (or improper) use of th is e lement p lays a cruc ia l ro le in the overal l success of a bui ld ing ’s des ign.

Proper window select ion is def ined here. A range of acceptable se lect ions based on appearance, performance and economy are e l ig ib le based on these parameters . Window treatments (head and s i l l condit ions) are a lso a major factor in a bui ld ing ’s des ign. Mult ip le head and s i l l opt ions are shown.

w i n d o w S

r E G u L a r w i n d o w S

Windows shal l be white wood or a luminum, double-hung or s ingle-hung sash windows. Rectangular windows shal l be vert ica l ly proport ioned and may be operable (with acceptance from the Univers i ty) . Windows should not be paired. The window sash shal l be located inter ior to the center l ine of the wal l .

Insulated windows and Low-e windows are encouraged for energy eff ic iency. These windows must st i l l meet a l l other typology des ign requirements .

S p E c i a L t y w i n d o w S

Not a l lowed except by var iance.

S t a i n E d o r t i n t E d G L a S S

Not a l lowed except by var iance.

S H u t t E r S

Shal l be true d iv ided l ight or s imulated div ided ( f ixed on the inter ior and exter ior surfaces) , and shal l create panels of square or vert ica l proport ion. Windows without an exter ior munt in shal l not be a l lowed.

w i n d o w m u n t i n S

Al l windows in masonry construct ion shal l have a s i l l which projects a minimum of 1 inch from the face of a bui ld ing. S i l l s should be constructed of e i ther Cast Stone or Br ick Rowlock.

w i n d o w S i L L

w i n d o w H E a d

Al l windows shal l have one of the presented head condit ions (casement, True Jack Arch with/without Keystone or a Br ick Sold ier Course) . Windows in a Br ick Masonry wal l without a head condit ion are not acceptable.

TYPICALLY TWELVE

OVER TWELVE

SILL TYPICALLY 4”-

6.” OVERLAP THE

OPENING 1/2 THE

HEIGHT OF THE

SILL

t r u E j a c k a r c H w i t H p r o p E r k E y S t o n E

t r u E j a c k a r c H

S o L d i E r c o u r S E

r o w L o c k S i L L ( b r i c k S S L o p E d a w a y f r o m b u i L d i n G )

r E c t a n G u L a r d o u b L E H u n G S a S H w i n d o w

WINDOWS


E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

- V

ER

NA

CU

LA

R C

RE

OL

E G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


w i n d o w SWhile Rectangular Georgian windows may be used more often than their Arched or Pal ladian counterparts , i t i s the latter sty les which hold pos it ions of more care and focus. These windows create strong v isual e lements within a façade and should be used select ively and detai led proper ly.

Arched windows should be double-hung or s ingle-hung sash windows, s imi lar to the Rectangular Windows. Arched windows are commonly larger in sca le than their rectangular counterparts and may exceed twelve over twelve. Proper head and s i l l t reatments are cruc ia l .

Pal ladian Windows are the most detai led and grand of the Georgian windows, thus making them the most restr ict ive. Proper proport ions and detai l ing are def ined here and except ions to these should be minimal or none.

a r c H E d w i n d o w S

Windows shal l be white wood or a luminum, double-hung or s ingle-hung sash windows. Arched windows shal l be vert ica l ly proport ioned and may be operable (with acceptance from the Univers i ty) . Arched windows should be larger in sca le than rectangular windows within the same façade and are usual ly reserved for upper f loors . Windows should not be paired. The window sash should be located inter ior to the center l ine of the wal l .

p a L L a d i a n w i n d o w SPal ladian windows must be correct ly proport ioned and detai led us ing the Class ica l Orders . Windows must inc lude correct p i lasters , fu l l entablatures and a proper ly des igned arch which is integrated with the top sash (not separated by a mul l ion) . The l ights must be consistent ly s ized throughout a l l the sashes. Entablature must inc lude a proper base. Improper ly proport ioned and/or detai led Pal ladian windows and entablatures are not acceptable, thus part icular attent ion must be paid to ensure proper des ign.

S p E c i a L t y w i n d o w S

Insulated windows and Low-e windows are encouraged for energy eff ic iency. These windows must st i l l meet a l l other typology des ign requirements .

w i n d o w S m u n t i n S

Shal l be true d iv ided l ight or s imulated div ided ( f ixed on the inter ior and exter ior surfaces) , and shal l create panels of square or vert ica l proport ion. Windows without an exter ior munt in shal l not be a l lowed.

w i n d o w S i L L

Al l windows in masonry construct ion shal l have a s i l l which projects a minimum of 1 inch from the face of the bui ld ing. S i l l s should be constructed of e i ther Cast Stone or Br ick Rowlock.

S t a i n E d o r t i n t E d G L a S SNot a l lowed except by var iance.

S H u t t E r SNot a l lowed except by var iance.

ARCHED BRICK HEAD

REQUIRED.

FIFTEEN OVER

FIFTEEN

ACCEPTABLE.

CAST STONE OR

BRICK LOWLOCK SILL

REQUIRED.PROPER BASE

MATCHED LIGHTS

ARCH INTEGRATED

WITH TOP SASH.

ORDERS AND

ELEMENTS OF

ARCH CORRECTLY

EMPLOYED.

WINDOWS


119

E


>> BITTLE HALL >> PRESIDENT’S HOUSE >> MARTIN HALL

>> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL >> STEPHENS HALL >> MCLAURIN GYM

The most ident i f iable e lement of Tradit ional Georgian Col leg iate architecture is the entryway. Attent ion to detai l on an entryway can have a s igni f icant impact on the v iewer. Sens it iv i ty to the entryway can be paid in the measure of a port ico (with or without grand sta irway) or a wel l -deta i led door-surround.

E n t r y w a y S

p o r t i c o S

The most formal of entry treatments within the Georgian Col leg iate Typology is the port ico. Port icos shal l be in proport ion to the bui ld ing and must mainta in symmetry. A bui ld ing ’s port ico can e i ther be the sty le of a C lass ic Colonnade extending from the face of the bui ld ing or an Engaged Port ico which extrudes from the bui ld ing façade to create an entry e lement.

A l l port icos must be appropr iately deta i led according to c lass ica l orders of proport ion and ornamentat ion. Mater ia l i ty shal l be s imi lar to ex ist ing port ico examples as seen on campus with a l l non-br ick e lements des igned to be white in color.

I f a port ico is not used, a Door Surround must be present as a minimum demarcat ion of the main entry. These door surrounds come in a var iety of types and present an opportunity for h igh levels of deta i l ing within the bui ld ing ’s exter ior façade.

Acceptable forms of door surrounds are Trabeated Surrounds and Pediment Surrounds. Each of these may be des igned to accommodate a s ingle door, double doors , s ide l ights , t ransoms and arches.

Many resources are avai lable to guide the des igner in the proper proport ioning and detai l ing of these bui ld ing e lements . In th is formal typology, i t i s cruc ia l that c lass ica l ly def ined tenets of des ign detai l ing are used proper ly and not re interpreted into a contemporary language.

Doors can be made of e i ther wood or metal , with g lass i f des ired. Standard doors are Kawneer “350” with a minimum bottom ra i l of 6½“ and s ide and top ra i l s of 3½“.

I f doors are standard Kawneer “350”, they must have a g lass arch or transom and must be encased in a port ico, colonnade, or entryway as expla ined above.

d o o r S u r r o u n d S

d o o r S

d o o r d E t a i L

TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE


T Y P O L O G Y I - V E R N A C U L A R C R E O L E G E O R G I A N C O L L E G I A T EENTRYWAYS


E


>> BITTLE HALL>> MCLAURIN GYM >> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL

>> RANDOLPH HALL>> PRESIDENT’S HOUSE >> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL

>> O.K. ALLEN HALL>> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL


YP

OL

OG

Y I

- V

ER

NA

CU

LA

R C

RE

OL

E G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E

BRICK PATTERN, QUOINS, & MEDALLIONS


Character ist ica l ly, Georgian Col leg iate Architecture is further enhanced by a l ternat ing br ickwork. Some examples of th is are F lemish bond, rowlock, and header courses. Furthermore, a tradit ional d iamond br ick pattern can be ut i l i zed.

Though these patterns are appeal ing , they are most successful when used in tandem with Quoining and Banding.

Used in respectfu l quant i t ies , the detai l ing of br ickwork can be enhanced through des ign e lements such as Medal l ions and Cartouches. These can accentuate the sens it iv i ty of the bui ld ing , and help in sca l ing the bui ld ing to that of man.

Ideal ly, a l l three of these e lements make a successful Georgian Col leg iate bui ld ing , and should be used select ively and proper ly.

b r i c k p a t t E r n , q u o i n S , & m E d a L L i o n S

b r i c k p a t t E r n

Detai l ing method which is dependent upon type of course work ut i l i zed. This can be expressed through a l ternat ing patterns between rows, changing br ick types, and project ing or receding the br icks .

q u o i n Typica l ly a corner detai l in br ickwork. Or ig inates f rom the form a load-bear ing corner would typica l ly take before modern construct ion methods ex isted. These can be expressed in a var iety of ways.

m E d a L L i o n & c a r t o u c H E

Stone or concrete detai l usual ly express ing f lowing patterns of swag , tassels , and f lora. These e lements should be used spar ingly and in proport ion and re lat ion to window and door s izes , locat ions, and distances.

CAST GARLAND

CARTOUCHE

FLEMISH

BOND EVERY 6

COURSES WITH

COMPLIMENTARY

JACK ARCH

DETAILS

SINGLE ROW

PROJECTING

ROWLOCK

COURSES.

HEADER

COURSES EVERY

6TH COURSE

SINGLE

ROWLOCK

STEPPED BACK

THREE

PROJECTING

COURSES

STEPPED BACK

AND ABOVE

BASIC BRICK

QUOINS

SINGLE COURSE

ROWLOCK

ROSETTE

MEDALLION

DIAMOND BRICK

PATTERN

STANDARD

STRETCHER

BRICKWORK

STONE OR

CONCRETE

BANDING

5 COURSE

QUOIN BANDING


121

E


DENTILS

CORBELS

MEDALLIONS

CORBELS

MUTULES

DENTILS

>> MARTIN HALL

>> MOUTON HALL

>> O.K. ALLEN HALL >> E.K. LONG GYM

>> MCLAURIN GYM >> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL

CYMATIUM

MODILLION

BED MOLDING

CYMATIUM

MODILLION

BED MOLDING

CYMATIUM

MODILLION

BED MOLDING

CYMATIUM

MODILLION

BED MOLDING

LARGE DENTIL SMALL DENTIL



Type I i s more detai led than then other Typologies . These detai ls are important in denot ing pr imary standing and g ive the bui ld ing tradit ional Georgian character. These detai ls , as covered, have several ranges and appl icat ions. Speci f ica l ly, cornices should not be p la in in Type I architecture. They should be support ing ro les to the bui ld ing ’s status. To achieve the ideal cornice, the fo l lowing must be inc luded:

c o r n i c E S

c y m a t i u m Piece that f in ishes and meets the sky

m o d i L L i o n Serves as a dr ip to shed water f rom streaking the bui ld ing

b E d m o L d i n G Piece that meets the wal l or supports

d E n t i L S , m u t u L E S , o r c o r b E L S

I f not these, then another addit ional deta i l must be used on cornice

TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE

CORNICES


E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

- V

ER

NA

CU

LA

R C

RE

OL

E G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


WINDOWS, DOORS, AND STOREFRONTS SHALL BE WHITE

WOOD OR ALUMINUM. DOORS SHALL BE ANODIZED ALUMINUM IN

A WHITE, SILVER, GREY, OR BRONZE COLOR. GLASS SHALL BE

NO GREATER THAN 10% REFLECTIVITY.

SHUTTERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE.

SECURITY DOORS AND WINDOW GRILLES ARE NOT

ALLOWED. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE DRB IN ADVANCE.

BAY WINDOWS ARE NOT CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE TO THIS

STYLE.

PIERS AND ARCHES SHALL BE FINISHED WITH PRIMARY

BUILDING MATERIAL I .E. STONE, STUCCO OR BRICK.

RAILINGS SHALL BE MADE OF WOOD, CAST METAL OR

STONE. COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY THE DRB.

METAL ELEMENTS: ALL EXTERIOR METAL BUILDING

ELEMENTS SHALL BE HOT-DIPPED ZINC COATED (GALVANIZED).

WHERE THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE IS OF GREAT

SIGNIFICANCE, ALTERNATE FINISHES MAY BE CONSIDERED.

DRIVEWAYS CAN BE OF CONCRETE, PRE-APPROVED

PALETTE OF BRICK OR CONCRETE PAVERS. PREFERRED

PAVING MATERIAL IS CONCRETE.

PARAPETS SHALL BE CAPPED WITH STONE OR BRICK.

TYPES PROHIBITED: WOOD, VINYL, AND METAL SIDING

AND PREFABRICATED OR MODULAR CONSTRUCTION, AND

PANELIZED BUILDING MATERIAL.

TYPE I: MASONRY BRICK SHALL MATCH BRICK TYPE CURRENTLY FOUND ON

CAMPUS. RED BRICK TO MATCH STEPHENS HALL. IN THE

CASE OF AN ADDITION, MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING.

TYPE I I : STUCCO STUCCO IS ALLOWED OVER WOOD, METAL FRAME OR MASONRY

CONSTRUCTION. STUCCO MUST HAVE A WHITE OR IVORY

FINISH. SWIRL OR OTHER PATTERNS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

SLOPED ROOFS SHALL BE CLAD IN DARK GRAY SHINGLES.

CONCRETE OR CLAY RIDGE TILES ARE REQUIRED.

OWENS CORNING - ONYX BLACK, ESTATE GREY, OR EQUAL.

GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS WHEN USED, SHALL BE

MADE OF COPPER (NOT COPPER-COATED), GALVALUME IN

BRONZE OR ZINC GREY. DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE PLACED AT

THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING LEAST VISIBLE FROM NEARBY

STREETS. SPLASH BLOCKS SHALL BE MADE OF CONCRETE,

BRICK OR GRAVEL.

METAL ROOFS, FLASHING, GUTTERS, AND DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO AGE NATURALLY

(NOT PAINTED OR SEALED). IN COPPER, OR GALVALUME IN

GREY OR BRONZE.

CANVAS AWNINGS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

WINDOWS SHALL BE RECTANGULAR OR ARCHED, VERTICALLY PROPORTIONED AND OPERABLE. WINDOWS SHALL BE DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH WINDOWS. TRANSOMS MAY BE ORIENTED HORIZONTALLY WITH PANES WHICH MATCH OTHER CONFIGURATIONS. MULTIPLE WINDOWS IN THE SAME ROUGH OPENING SHALL BE SEPARATED BY A 4” MINIMUM POST. THE WINDOW SASH SHALL BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE WALL. WINDOW SILLS IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROJECT A MINIMUM OF 1 INCH FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING.

ALL VERTICALLY SUPERIMPOSED OPENINGS SHALL BE ALIGNED AND CENTERED ALONG THE VERTICAL AXIS.

WINDOW MUNTINS ARE ENCOURAGED AND SHALL BE TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT OR FIXED ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SURFACES, AND SHALL CREATE PANELS OF SQUARE OR VERTICAL PROPORTION.

LARGE SERVICE DOORS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY IN SERVICE AREAS INDICATED BY PLAN.

SHUTTERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO THIS STYLE.

THERE MAY BE NO MORE THAN ONE CIRCULAR WINDOW ON ANY PRINCIPAL ELEVATION.

RECTANGULAR WINDOWS SHALL BE OPERABLE ENCASEMENT OR SINGLE HUNG. CIRCULAR WINDOWS MAY BE FIXED.

ARCADES AND BREEZEWAYS SHOULD HAVE VERTICALLY

PROPORTIONED ARCHED OPENINGS.

COLONNADES SHALL HAVE SOLIDITY, RHYTHM, AND HUMAN

SCALE.

RAILINGS SHALL HAVE TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS. WOOD TOP

RAILS SHALL BE EASED AND BOTTOM RAILS SHALL HAVE A

VERTICAL SECTION. TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS SHALL BE

CENTERED ON THE BOARDS OR PICKETS. THE OPENINGS

BETWEEN THE MEMBERS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 1” AND A

MAXIMUM OF 4”.

BALCONIES SHALL BE STRUCTURALLY SUPPORTED BY

BRACKETS, TAPERED BEAMS, OR COLUMNS.

DRIVEWAYS CONSTRUCTED OF MATERIAL OTHER THAN

CONCRETE SHALL ALLOW THE PUBLIC CONCRETE SIDEWALK

TO RUN CONTINUOUSLY WITHOUT DISRUPTION THROUGH

THIS AREA OF THE DRIVEWAY.

FENCES AS DEFINED IN THIS CODE ARE NOT ALLOWED.

BUILDING WALLS MAY BE BUILT OF NO MORE THAN TWO

MATERIALS AND SHALL ONLY CHANGE MATERIAL ALONG A

HORIZONTAL LINE, I .E. BRICK CHANGES WHICH OCCUR IN

A VERTICAL LINE MUST OCCUR ONLY AT AN OFFSET OF NO

LESS THAN 12”, WITH THE HEAVIER MATERIAL BELOW THE

LIGHT. WALLS OF A SINGLE BUILDING MUST BE BUILT IN A

CONSISTENT CONFIGURATION.

GARDEN WALLS SHALL GENERALLY BE CONSTRUCTED OF

THE SAME MATERIAL AS THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE PRIMARY

BUILDING. MASONRY PIERS WITH WOOD PICKETS MAY

REPLACE SOLID MASONRY WALLS. MASONRY WALLS SHALL

BE MADE OF BRICK WHILE GATES SHALL BE STEEL. WALLS

MAY BE PERFORATED.

STUCCO OR PLASTER COATING MAY BE APPLIED TO CONCRETE

BLOCK, POURED CONCRETE, OR BRICK. STUCCO SHALL BE

STEEL TROWELED OR A SACK WASH OVER BRICK IS ALLOWED.

TRIM SHALL NOT EXCEED 6” IN WIDTH AT CORNERS AND 4”

IN WIDTH AROUND OPENINGS, EXCEPT AT THE FRONT DOOR.

PRINCIPAL ROOF: THE PRINCIPAL ROOF ON ALL

FREESTANDING BUILDINGS SHALL BE A SYMMETRICAL HIP OR

GABLE ROOF WITH A SLOPE BETWEEN 6:12 AND 10:12 (EXCEPT

WHERE A VARIANCE IS GRANTED).

ANCILLARY ROOFS (ATTACHED TO WALLS OR ROOFS) MAY

BE SHEDS SLOPED NO LESS THAN 3:12.

EAVES SHALL BE CONTINUOUS, UNLESS OVERHANGING

A BALCONY OR PORCH. EAVES SHALL HAVE AN OVERHANG

FROM 12” TO 26”. OVERHANGING EAVES MAY HAVE EXPOSED

RAFTERS.

EXPOSED GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE

ROUND, SQUARE, OR OGEE.

NO THROUGH ROOF PENETRATION FOR MECHANICAL OR

ELECTRICAL DEVICES SHALL BE ALLOWED TO PENETRATE

THE ROOF AT THE BUILDING’S FRONTAGE’S. PENETRATIONS

OF THESE DEVICES AT APPROVED LOCATIONS WILL BE OF

COLOR TO MATCH THE ROOF.

w i n d o w S a n d d o o r Sr o o f S / a w n i n G S / c a n o p i E Sb u i L d i n G E L E m E n t Sb u i L d i n G w a L L S

ma

tE

ria

LS

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


123

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

I -

VE

RN

AC

UL

AR

CR

EO

LE

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE



(RESERVED)TRIM (BALCONY AND PORCH POSTS, RAILS, WINDOW TRIM,

RAFTER TAILS, ETC.) SHALL BE PAINTED OR STAINED TO

COMPLIMENT THE OVERALL VALUE OF THE BUILDING. AN

ACCENT COLOR FOR ITEMS SUCH AS THE ENTRY DOOR,

PICKETS & TRIM MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL FROM

THE UL LAFAYETTE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.

GARAGE APRONS SHALL BE OF SQUARE OR RECTANGULAR

PREVIOUS CONCRETE PAVERS, BRICK OR CONCRETE. PAVERS

MUST CONTRAST DRASTICALLY WITH THE STREET SURFACE

COLOR.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL FROM THE UL LAFAYETTE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: BRICK, MORTAR COLORS, AND PATTERNS, FENCE DESIGNS

AND EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE PERMITTED ONLY IN REAR YARDS AND WHERE NOT EASILY VISIBLE FROM STREET OR PATHS. HANDICAP RAMPS, HVAC EQUIPMENT

(“SILENT” MODELS PREFERRED), UTILITY METERS, AND

GARBAGE COLLECTION EQUIPMENT.

BUILDING WALLS SHALL BE ONE COLOR PER MATERIAL

USED. THE BUILDING EXTERIOR FINISH SHALL BE AT LEAST

85% RED BRICK AND GLASS. RED BRICK SHALL MATCH THE

EXISTING TYPE THROUGHOUT THE CAMPUS. ONLY A SMALL

PORTION SHALL CONSIST OF STONE AND/OR PLASTER.

TRIM (BALCONY AND PORCH POSTS, RAILS, WINDOW TRIM,

RAFTER TAILS, ETC) SHALL BE PAINTED TO COMPLIMENT THE

COLUMNS AND OVERALL VALUE OF THE BUILDING. AN ACCENT

COLOR, FOR ITEMS SUCH AS THE FRONT DOOR, PICKETS,

TRIM, AND SHUTTERS, MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

FROM THE UL LAFAYETTE DRB. WALLS AND FENCES SHALL BE

IN A RANGE OF COLORS APPROVED FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE

MATERIALS. OTHER COLORS MAY BE ADDED TO THE LIST

AFTER CONSULTATION WITH THE DRB. FINAL COLOR PALETTE

SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SELECTIONS MADE BY

THE UL LAFAYETTE DRB. ALL PAINT SELECTIONS SHALL BE

“PREMIUM GRADE” OR BETTER.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: METAL

FINISHES IN ANY COLOR OTHER THAN THOSE INDICATED IN

THIS DOCUMENT OR AS APPROVED BY THE DRB.

SLIDING DOORS AND WINDOWS SHALL NOT BE USED.

SNAP-IN MUNTINS SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE

EXTERIOR.

STAINED OR TINTED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED EXCEPT

BY VARIANCE.

BALCONIES NOT VISIBLY SUPPORTED ON POSTS OR

BRACKETS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

CURVED, SCALLOPED, AND/OR BACK LIT AWNINGS, OR BACK LIT SIGNS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

BUILDING ADDRESSES SHALL BE POSTED AS REQUIRED BY

LOCAL REQUIREMENTS ON THE MAIN BUILDING.

THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: PANELIZED WALL MATERIALS, STUCCO COVERED - FOAM

MOLDINGS NO LOWER THAN SECOND FLOOR, WINDOW AIR-

CONDITIONING UNITS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR FLUORESCENT

LIGHTS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR FLOOD LIGHTS, ABOVE GROUND

POOLS, ANTENNAS, FLAGS AND FLAGPOLES (EXCEPT OFFICIAL

FLAGS AS APPROVED BY UL LAFAYETTE DRB), DIRECT VENT

FIREPLACES, EXTERNAL ALARM SYSTEMS, AND SKYLIGHTS.

VARIANCES TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REGULATIONS MAY BE

GRANTED ON THE BASIS OF ARCHITECTURAL MERIT.

THESE REGULATIONS WILL BE UPDATED PERIODICALLY, AND

ALL SUBSEQUENT CHANGES WILL APPLY TO ALL BUILDINGS

WHICH HAVE YET TO COMPLETE THE SCHEMATIC DESIGN

PHASE.

WOOD WHICH IS NOT FINISHED WITH A PAINT OR STAIN ARE

NOT ALLOWED.

TRIM EXCEEDING 6” IN WIDTH AND TRIM OF LUMBER WORSE

THAN GRADE B ARE NOT ALLOWED.

EXCESSIVELY COMPLICATED ROOFS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

am

En

itiE

Sn

ot

ES



E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

- V

ER

NA

CU

LA

R C

RE

OL

E G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


THE MAIN ENTRIES ON FACADES WITH STREET OR PUBLIC FRONTAGE SHOULD PREFERABLY HAVE A PORTICO, AND AT A MINIMUM, HAVE AN AEDICULE.

PORTICOS: PORTICOS SHALL BE IN PROPORTION TO THE BUILDING AND MUST MAINTAIN SYMMETRY. A BUILDING’S PORTICO CAN EITHER BE THE STYLE OF A CLASSIC COLONNADE EXTENDING FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING OR AN ENGAGED PORTICO WHICH EXTRUDES FROM THE BUILDING FAÇADE TO CREATE AN ENTRY ELEMENT.

ALL PORTICOS MUST BE APPROPRIATELY DETAILED ACCORDING TO CLASSICAL ORDERS OF PROPORTION AND ORNAMENTATION. MATERIALITY SHALL BE SIMILAR TO EXISTING PORTICO EXAMPLES AS SEEN ON CAMPUS WITH ALL NON-BRICK ELEMENTS DESIGNED TO BE WHITE IN COLOR.

CASINGS IF A PORTICO IS NOT USED, A DOOR SURROUND MUST BE PRESENT AS A MINIMUM DEMARCATION OF THE MAIN ENTRY. ACCEPTABLE FORMS OF DOOR SURROUNDS ARE TRABEATED SURROUNDS AND PEDIMENT SURROUNDS. EACH OF THESE MAY BE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A SINGLE DOOR, DOUBLE DOORS, SIDE LIGHTS, TRANSOMS, AND ARCHES.

PALLADIAN WINDOWS: PALLADIAN WINDOWS CONSIST

OF THREE LITES SET SIDE-BY-SIDE, THE OUTER TWO OF

WHICH ARE SIMPLE RECTANGLES WHILE THE MIDDLE ONE

SPORTS A SEMICIRCULAR TOP WHICH SPRINGS FROM THE

LEVEL OF THE OTHER TWO LITE’S UPPER LIMIT. PALLADIAN

WINDOWS MUST BE CORRECTLY PROPORTIONED AND

DETAILED USING THE CLASSICAL ORDERS. WINDOWS MUST

INCLUDE CORRECT PILASTERS, FULL ENTABLATURES AND A

PROPERLY DESIGNED ARCH WHICH IS INTEGRATED WITH THE

TOP SASH (NOT SEPARATED BY A MULLION). THE LITES MUST

BE CONSISTENTLY SIZED THROUGHOUT ALL THE SASHES.

ENTABLATURE MUST INCLUDE A PROPER BASE. IMPROPERLY

PROPORTIONED AND/OR DETAILED PALLADIAN WINDOWS AND

ENTABLATURES ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE, THUS PARTICULAR

ATTENTION MUST BE PAID TO ENSURE PROPER DESIGN.

RECTANGULAR WINDOWS: WINDOWS SHALL BE WHITE

WOOD OR ALUMINUM, DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH

WINDOWS. RECTANGULAR WINDOWS SHALL BE VERTICALLY

PROPORTIONED AND MAY BE OPERABLE (WITH ACCEPTANCE

FROM THE UNIVERSITY). WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE PAIRED.

THE WINDOW SASH SHALL BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE

CENTERLINE OF THE WALL.

ARCHED WINDOWS: WINDOWS SHALL BE WHITE WOOD OR

ALUMINUM, DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH WINDOWS.

ARCHED WINDOWS SHALL BE VERTICALLY PROPORTIONED

AND MAY BE OPERABLE (WITH ACCEPTANCE FROM THE

UNIVERSITY). ARCHED WINDOWS SHOULD BE LARGER IN

SCALE THAN RECTANGULAR WINDOWS WITHIN THE SAME

FAÇADE AND ARE USUALLY RESERVED FOR UPPER FLOORS.

WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE PAIRED. THE WINDOW SASH

SHOULD BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE

WALL.

EXTERIOR DOORS: DOORS CAN BE MADE OF EITHER WOOD

OR METAL, WITH GLASS IF DESIRED. STANDARD DOORS ARE

KAWNEER “350” WITH A MINIMUM BOTTOM RAIL OF 6 ½ “AND

SIDE AND TOP RAILS OF 3 ½ “.

INTERIOR DOORS: INTERIOR DOORS SHOULD GENERALLY

BE 1 3/4” SOLID WOOD DOORS OR INSULATED, RAISED PANEL,

METAL DOORS. PARTICLE CORE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

SLIDING WOOD DOORS SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL DOORS

SHALL BE AT LEAST 36” WIDE. ALL DOOR FRAMES SHALL BE

METAL.

ALL CLASSROOM DOORS, STAIRWELL DOORS, AND CORRIDOR

DOORS SHALL HAVE VISION PANELS (5”X20”) .

WINDOW MUNTINS SHALL BE TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT OR

SIMULATED DIVIDED (FIXED ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR

SURFACES), AND SHALL CREATE PANELS OF SQUARE OR

VERTICAL PROPORTION. WINDOWS WITHOUT AN EXTERIOR

MUNTIN SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED.

OPERABLE WINDOWS: FACILITY MANAGEMENT MUST

APPROVE OPERABLE WINDOWS.

WINDOW SILL: ALL WINDOWS IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION

SHALL HAVE A SILL WHICH PROJECTS A MINIMUM OF 1

INCH FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. SILLS SHOULD BE

CONSTRUCTED OF EITHER CAST STONE OR BRICK ROWLOCK.

WINDOW HEAD: ALL WINDOWS SHALL HAVE 1 OF THE

PRESENTED HEAD CONDITIONS (CASEMENT, TRUE JACK ARCH

WITH/WITHOUT KEYSTONE OR A BRICK SOLDIER COURSE).

WINDOWS IN A BRICK MASONRY WALL WITHOUT A HEAD

CONDITION ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.

GLASS: WINDOWS SHALL BE ENERGY EFFICIENT, BRONZE

TINTED, INSULATED GLASS WITH LOW ‘E’ COATING TO

IMPROVE THERMAL PERFORMANCE

SPECIAL GLAZING FOR IMPACT RESISTANCE (LEXAN) AND

SOUND ABATEMENT (LAMINATED GLASS) SHALL BE SPECIFIED

AS NEEDED.

SHUTTERS NOT ALLOWED EXCEPT BY VARIANCE.

E n t r y w a y Sd o o r Sw i n d o w Sw i n d o w S

St

yL

ES

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


125

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

II

- IN

FO

RM

AL

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE


T Y P O L O G Y I I - I N F O R M A L G E O R G I A N C O L L E G I A T E

UL Lafayette’s Informal Georgian Col leg iate architecture is focused on mainta in ing the detai l ing of Tradit ional Georgian architecture as speci f ied in Type I . This can be d i ff icu lt when working on a smal ler budget , but i s appropr iate to the funct ions of l iner bui ld ings, which offer support ing context for key architectural p ieces of Type I c lass i f icat ion.

Though the effect and budget of Type I I come second to those of Type I , the execut ion of deta i ls should be considerate, wel l des igned, and correct . The fo l lowing pages provide analyses which serve as proper detai l ing and des ign methods. Though the fo l lowing pages are considered to be standard for Type I I , i t i s not to say that Type I I deta i ls are restr icted, dependent upon focal des ign moments in the des ign’s facade.

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S G E o r G i a n c o L L E G i a t E H i S t o r y ▫ NOT ALWAYS SYMMETRICAL

▫ ENTRY ALWAYS CENTRAL

▫ FORMS USUALLY GUIDED BY

ADJACENT SET PIECES

▫ PROPORTIONAL ANALYSIS

▫ MAJOR BUILDING ELEMENTS

▫ RED-BRICK

▫ HIPPED ROOFS (SOME WITH

DORMERS)

▫ ELEVATION DIAGRAMS

▫ ROOF DIAGRAMS

▫ MATERIAL ANALYSIS

▫ DOUBLE HUNG, MULTI-PANE

WINDOWS ▫ MOSTLY RECTANGULAR ▫ ARCHED AND PALLADIAN

▫ RESERVED FOR FOCAL POINTS

▫ CENTRAL ENTRANCE OR

SYMMETRICAL MULTIPLES

▫ LESS ELABORATE THAN TYPE I

▫ CLASSICAL DETAILING

▫ NO TOWERS

▫ BRICK DETAILING

▫ CORNICE DETAILS

▫ DECORATIVE ITEMS

m a S S i n G :


w i n d o w S :

d o o r S :

d E t a i L S :


E


>> DARDEN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA >> ALPHA PHI, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

CL

HAMILTON

MOUTON

FOSTER

BURKE-HAWTHORNE

• TYPICALLY LINER BUILDINGS RATHER THAN SET PIECES

• LESS COSTLY• SAME ELEMENTS AND MATERIALITY AS TYPE

I , BUT NOT EXECUTED IN A TRADITIONAL MANNER

• GENERALLY, NO TOWER OR CUPOLA• DETAILS ARE EITHER LEFT OUT OR ONLY

USED FOR FOCAL POINTS

T Y P O L O G Y I I

m a S S i n GInformal Georgian Col leg iate bui ld ings, because they are l iner bui ld ings, typica l ly involve a less str ict enforcement or formal overal l symmetry. Though symmetry of form is not necessary, an impl ied ax is must be appropr iated through the use of a c lear ly def ined f ront entrance. This i s pr imar i ly guided by the doorway, and secondar i ly engaged through dist inct ly Georgian detai l ing.

Exter ior f in ish shal l be at least 85% red br ick and g lass . Red br ick shal l match the ex ist ing type found throughout the campus. Only a smal l port ion shal l cons ist of stone and/or p laster.


The pr inc ipal roof on a l l f reestanding bui ld ings shal l be a symmetr ica l h ip or gable roof with a s lope between 6:12 and 10:12 (except where a var iance is granted) . Roofs should be shingled to match the ex ist ing type found throughout the campus. Anci l lary Roofs (attached to wal ls or roofs) may be sheds s loped no less than 3:12. Eaves shal l be cont inuous, unless overhanging a balcony or porch. Eaves shal l have an overhang from 12” to 26”.

Exposed Gutters and Down spouts shal l be round, square, or ogee. They should be made of copper (not copper-coated) or bronze a luminum. Downspouts shal l be p laced at corners of the bui ld ing least v is ib le f rom the bui ld ing ’s main facade. Splash Blocks shal l be concrete, br ick , or gravel .

No through Roof Penetrat ions for mechanica l or e lectr ica l devices shal l be a l lowed to penetrate the roof at the bui ld ing ’s f rontages. Penetrat ions of these devices at approved locat ions wi l l be of color to match the roof.

r o o f d E f i n i t i o n S


YP

OL

OG

Y I

I -

INF

OR

MA

L G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E



127

E


>> HARRIS HALL

>> GIRARD HALL>> LEE HALL >> DECLOUET HALL

>> BURKE-HAWTHORNE HALL

Type I I des igns should make an effort to provide detai ls which e levate th is bas ic window. I t i s strongly encouraged that these guidel ines be fo l lowed. The major i ty of Type I I windows are:

▫ 9 over 9 ▫ Double hung ▫ Sash Window ▫ Wood Frame ▫ Wood Mul l ions

w i n d o w S

SELECTIVE USE OF TRADITIONAL ELEMENTS, SUCH AS WITH THIS PALLADIAN

WINDOW, AIDS IN FORMALIZING AN OTHERWISE SIMPLE FACADE. 6 ON 6 WINDOWS ARE USED HERE. THE BUILDING’S SCALAR IMPACT IS ADDRESSED

WITH LARGER WINDOWS AT THE BACK ENTRANCE, CONNECTED GAZEBO.

STONE CARTOUCHES ABOVE AND RECESSED BRICK DETAILING BELOW

WINDOWS MAKE THEM MORE EXPRESSIVE AND COHESIVE ELEMENTS.BASIC 9 ON 9 WINDOW IS EXPANDED TO A

LARGER DESIGN, LINED UP WITH THE DOORWAY

BELOW. IT ALSO MATCHES THE EXISTING

WINDOW PATTERN.

TRIPLE GANGED, THE BASIC

WINDOW CAN MAKE A STRONGER

STATEMENT WHEN IN MULTIPLES.

TY

PO

LO

GY

II

- IN

FO

RM

AL

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE


T Y P O L O G Y I I - I N F O R M A L G E O R G I A N C O L L E G I A T EWINDOWS


E


>> GIRARD HALL

>> HAMILTON HALL

>> GIRARD HALL

>> E.K. LONG GYM

>> BUCHANAN HALL >> BURKE-HAWTHORNE HALL >> LEE HALL

USING A TASTEFUL

SINGLE DOOR

ENTRYWAY TOPPED

WITH A FANLIGHT,

THIS BUILDING FINDS

BALANCE OF DESIGN

ELEMENTS THROUGH

ITS MODEST AWNING

AND BASIC PEDIMENT.

THESE ELEMENTS

COMBINED MAKE FOR A

WELL COMPOSED MAIN

ENTRANCE.

A SIMPLE FORMAL

PEDIMENT IS MADE

COHESIVE THROUGH

TRYING IT IN WITH

PLAIN RECTANGULAR

CARTOUCHES ABOVE

TOP LEVEL WINDOWS.

STONE CAPS, MATCHING

THE MATERIAL OF THE

PEDIMENT, ALSO AID IN

COHESION.

TASTEFUL FRENCH DOORS WITH TRANSOM AND A CLASSIC PORTICO, THIS ENTRYWAY PROPORTIONALLY TIES TO THE WINDOW WIDTH ABOVE, AND VISUALLY TIES TO THE ADJACENT WINDOWS. BANDING AT MIDPOINT AND BASE OF THE BUILDING MATCH UP TO MEET THE ENTRANCE, FURTHERING THE BEAUTY OF THIS FACADE’S COMPOSITION.

Type I I general ly emphasizes the des ign of the front facade whi le being supported by s impler detai l ing of the other facades. Part icular ly, the entryway remains prominent, but not d isconnectedly e laborate. The proport ions of the entryways in the case of Type I I are a l igned with the other e lements of the bui ld ing on e i ther shape or sca le . Doors can be s imple as long as the overal l entryway is express ive.

In whatever way the budget i s d iv ided to mainta in tradit ional Georgian effect , qual i ty should take precedent over quant i ty. Tasteful architecture can be achieved on a budget i f the proport ions and construct ion methods are correct .

d o o r S & E n t r y w a y S

A FORMAL PEDIMENT

DOOR CASING IS

VISUALLY TIED TO THE

FACADE THROUGH THE

USE OF BANDING AND

A STAIRWAY. THE DOOR

LITES ARE SIMILAR

TO THOSE OF THE

WINDOWS, CREATING

VARIATION IN SCALE,

BUT COHESION IN

RHYTHM.

A GRANDLY SCALED, YET

SIMPLY ENGAGED PORTICO

CAN ASSIST IN BRINGING

FORTH A LEVEL OF

HIERARCHY EVEN WHEN

THE DOORS THEMSELVES

ARE QUIETLY MODERN.

REPETITION OF THE

DOORWAY ALSO IMBUES

A SENSE OF IMPORTANCE

WITH THIS MAIN ENTRY.

THROUGH INTERPRETING

A TRADITIONAL

PEDIMENT IN A

CONTEMPORARY

WAY, THIS ENTRYWAY

MAINTAINS ITS

COHESION THROUGH

MANAGING THE

ALIGNMENT OF THE

DOORWAY WITH

WINDOWS ABOVE, WHICH

ARE TRADITIONAL.

WITH MODEST BRICK

ARCH ENTRY, WOODEN

BARREL VAULT CASING,

AND MODERN DOORS,

THIS ENTRANCE

IS ELEGANT AND

WELL BUDGETED.

COMPLIMENTARY ARCHED

WINDOWS TO EACH SIDE

AND A BALCONY AND TALL

WINDOW ON TOP LEAD

THE EYES UPWARDS TO A

TRADITIONAL AND WELL

DETAILED PEDIMENT.


YP

OL

OG

Y I

I -

INF

OR

MA

L G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E



129

E


CYMATIUM

CORONABED MOLDING

CYMATIUM

CORONA

BED

MOLDING

CYMATIUM

CORONA

BED

MOLDING

CYMATIUM

BED MOLDING

CYMATIUM

MODILLION

BED

MOLDING

CORONA

>> BITTLE HALL >> HARRIS HALL

>> JUDICE-RICKELS HALL >> BUCHANAN HALL

TY

PO

LO

GY

II

- IN

FO

RM

AL

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE



Type I I i s not set p iece architecture. I ts ro le i s that of l iner bui ld ings. I t i s typica l ly of the budget and idea set involv ing less deta i l ing. I t can, however, st i l l provide a r ich sense of Georgian architecture, provided there are other e lements which help the bui ld ing to stand as a complete idea. One detai l ing should not be sacr i f iced for the use of another, but i f used in proper measure can be express ive.

Type I I cornices must have at least :

- Cyma- Corona or Modi l l ion- Bed Molding

Because these cornices are minimal in nature, there must be compl imentary br ick detai l ing or molding beneath. I f neither of these detai ls are ut i l i zed, addit ional deta i ls should be considered.

c o r n i c E S

CORNICE WITH

MOLDING. CORNICE

DETAIL REPEATED

IN PEDIMENT ABOVE

BALCONY, FOR

FORMAL FACADE.

CORNICE WITH

MOLDING PLACED

BENEATH TIES BACK

INTO THE STONE

SILLS, MATCHING

THE BUILDING’S

EXPRESSION.

FACE BRICK

PROJECTED OUT

1” EVERY OTHER

BRICK PLACED ATOP

CORNICE TO ADD

CHARACTER.

BRICKS STEP UP AND

BACK LEADING THE

EYE DOWNWARD TO

QUOINING DRAWING

THE EYE AWAY FROM

SIMPLE CORNICES.


E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

I -

INF

OR

MA

L G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


WINDOWS SHALL BE RECTANGULAR OR ARCHED, VERTICALLY PROPORTIONED AND OPERABLE. WINDOWS SHALL BE DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH WINDOWS. TRANSOMS MAY BE ORIENTED HORIZONTALLY WITH PANES WHICH MATCH OTHER CONFIGURATIONS. MULTIPLE WINDOWS IN THE SAME ROUGH OPENING SHALL BE SEPARATED BY A 4” MINIMUM POST. THE WINDOW SASH SHALL BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE WALL. WINDOW SILLS IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROJECT A MINIMUM OF 1 INCH FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING.

ALL VERTICALLY SUPERIMPOSED OPENINGS SHALL BE ALIGNED AND CENTERED ALONG THE VERTICAL AXIS.

WINDOW MUNTINS ARE ENCOURAGED AND SHALL BE TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT OR FIXED ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SURFACES, AND SHALL CREATE PANELS OF SQUARE OR VERTICAL PROPORTION.

LARGE SERVICE DOORS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY IN SERVICE AREAS INDICATED BY PLAN.

SHUTTERS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

THERE MAY BE NO MORE THAN ONE CIRCULAR WINDOW ON ANY PRINCIPAL ELEVATION.

RECTANGULAR WINDOWS SHALL BE OPERABLE ENCASEMENT OR SINGLE HUNG. CIRCULAR WINDOWS MAY BE FIXED.


PROPORTIONED ARCHED OPENINGS.

COLONNADES SHALL HAVE SOLIDITY, RHYTHM, AND HUMAN

SCALE.

RAILINGS SHALL HAVE TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS. WOOD TOP

RAILS SHALL BE EASED AND BOTTOM RAILS SHALL HAVE A

VERTICAL SECTION. TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS SHALL BE

CENTERED ON THE BOARDS OR PICKETS. THE OPENINGS

BETWEEN THE MEMBERS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 1” AND A

MAXIMUM OF 4”.

















BUILDING. MASONRY PIERS WITH WOOD PICKETS MAY

REPLACE SOLID MASONRY WALLS. MASONRY WALLS SHALL

BE MADE OF BRICK WHILE GATES SHALL BE STEEL. WALLS

MAY BE PERFORATED.




TRIM SHALL NOT EXCEED 6” IN WIDTH AT CORNERS AND 4”

IN WIDTH AROUND OPENINGS, EXCEPT AT THE FRONT DOOR.


ma

tE

ria

LS

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S

WINDOWS, DOORS, AND STOREFRONTS SHALL BE WHITE

WOOD OR ALUMINUM. DOORS SHALL BE ANODIZED ALUMINUM IN

A WHITE, SILVER, GREY, OR BRONZE COLOR. GLASS SHALL BE

NO GREATER THAN 10% REFLECTIVITY.

SHUTTERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE.


ALLOWED. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE DRB IN ADVANCE.


STYLE.

PIERS AND ARCHES SHALL BE FINISHED WITH PRIMARY

BUILDING MATERIAL I .E. STONE, STUCCO OR BRICK.

RAILINGS SHALL BE MADE OF WOOD, CAST METAL OR

STONE. COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY THE DRB.

METAL ELEMENTS: ALL EXTERIOR METAL BUILDING

ELEMENTS SHALL BE HOT-DIPPED ZINC COATED (GALVANIZED).

WHERE THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE IS OF GREAT

SIGNIFICANCE, ALTERNATE FINISHES MAY BE CONSIDERED.




PARAPETS SHALL BE CAPPED WITH STONE OR BRICK.

TYPES PROHIBITED: WOOD, VINYL, AND METAL SIDING

AND PREFABRICATED OR MODULAR CONSTRUCTION, AND

PANELIZED BUILDING MATERIAL.

TYPE I: MASONRY BRICK SHALL MATCH BRICK TYPE CURRENTLY FOUND ON

CAMPUS. RED BRICK TO MATCH STEPHENS HALL. IN THE

CASE OF AN ADDITION, MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING.

TYPE I I : STUCCO STUCCO IS ALLOWED OVER WOOD, METAL FRAME OR MASONRY



SLOPED ROOFS SHALL BE CLAD IN DARK GRAY SHINGLES.

CONCRETE OR CLAY RIDGE TILES ARE REQUIRED.

OWENS CORNING - ONYX BLACK, ESTATE GREY, OR EQUAL.


MADE OF COPPER (NOT COPPER-COATED), GALVALUME IN

BRONZE OR ZINC GREY. DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE PLACED AT

THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING LEAST VISIBLE FROM NEARBY

STREETS. SPLASH BLOCKS SHALL BE MADE OF CONCRETE,

BRICK OR GRAVEL.

METAL ROOFS, FLASHING, GUTTERS, AND DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO AGE NATURALLY

(NOT PAINTED OR SEALED). IN COPPER, OR GALVALUME IN

GREY OR BRONZE.

CANVAS AWNINGS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

PRINCIPAL ROOF: THE PRINCIPAL ROOF ON ALL

FREESTANDING BUILDINGS SHALL BE A SYMMETRICAL HIP OR

GABLE ROOF WITH A SLOPE BETWEEN 6:12 AND 10:12 (EXCEPT

WHERE A VARIANCE IS GRANTED).



EAVES SHALL BE CONTINUOUS, UNLESS OVERHANGING

A BALCONY OR PORCH. EAVES SHALL HAVE AN OVERHANG

FROM 12” TO 26”. OVERHANGING EAVES MAY HAVE EXPOSED

RAFTERS.


ROUND, SQUARE, OR OGEE.







131

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

II

- IN

FO

RM

AL

GE

OR

GIA

N C

OL

LE

GIA

TE





COMPLIMENT THE OVERALL VALUE OF THE BUILDING. AN

ACCENT COLOR FOR ITEMS SUCH AS THE ENTRY DOOR,

PICKETS & TRIM MAY BE USED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL FROM

THE UL LAFAYETTE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.


PREVIOUS CONCRETE PAVERS, BRICK OR CONCRETE. PAVERS


COLOR.



THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE PERMITTED ONLY IN REAR YARDS AND WHERE NOT EASILY VISIBLE FROM STREET OR PATHS: HANDICAP RAMPS, HVAC EQUIPMENT

(“SILENT” MODELS PREFERRED), UTILITY METERS, AND

GARBAGE COLLECTION EQUIPMENT.





















SLIDING DOORS AND WINDOWS SHALL NOT BE USED.

SNAP-IN MUNTINS SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE

EXTERIOR.

STAINED OR TINTED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED EXCEPT

BY VARIANCE.

BALCONIES NOT VISIBLY SUPPORTED ON POSTS OR

BRACKETS ARE NOT ALLOWED.




THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: PANELIZED WALL MATERIALS, STUCCO COVERED - FOAM

MOLDINGS NO LOWER THAN SECOND FLOOR, WINDOW AIR-

CONDITIONING UNITS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR FLUORESCENT

LIGHTS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR FLOOD LIGHTS, ABOVE GROUND

POOLS, ANTENNAS, FLAGS AND FLAGPOLES (EXCEPT OFFICIAL

FLAGS AS APPROVED BY UL LAFAYETTE DRB), DIRECT VENT

FIREPLACES, EXTERNAL ALARM SYSTEMS, AND SKYLIGHTS.






PHASE.

WOOD WHICH IS NOT FINISHED WITH A PAINT OR STAIN ARE

NOT ALLOWED.

TRIM EXCEEDING 6” IN WIDTH AND TRIM OF LUMBER WORSE

THAN GRADE B ARE NOT ALLOWED.


am

En

itiE

Sn

ot

ES



E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

I -

INF

OR

MA

L G

EO

RG

IAN

CO

LL

EG

IAT

E


THE MAIN ENTRIES ON FACADES WITH STREET OR PUBLIC

FRONTAGE SHOULD PREFERABLY HAVE A PORTICO, AND AT

MINIMUM, HAVE AN AEDICULE.

PORTICOS : PORTICOS SHALL BE IN PROPORTION TO THE

BUILDING AND MUST MAINTAIN SYMMETRY. A BUILDING’S

PORTICO CAN EITHER BE THE STYLE OF A CLASSIC COLONNADE

EXTENDING FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING OR AN ENGAGED

PORTICO WHICH EXTRUDES FROM THE BUILDING FAÇADE TO

CREATE AN ENTRY ELEMENT.

ALL PORTICOS MUST BE APPROPRIATELY DETAILED ACCORDING

TO CLASSICAL ORDERS OF PROPORTION AND ORNAMENTATION.

MATERIALITY SHALL BE SIMILAR TO EXISTING PORTICO

EXAMPLES AS SEEN ON CAMPUS WITH ALL NON-BRICK

ELEMENTS DESIGNED TO BE WHITE IN COLOR.

CASINGS : IF A PORTICO IS NOT USED, A DOOR SURROUND

MUST BE PRESENT AS A MINIMUM DEMARCATION OF THE

MAIN ENTRY. ACCEPTABLE FORMS OF DOOR SURROUNDS ARE

TRABEATED SURROUNDS AND PEDIMENT SURROUNDS. EACH OF

THESE MAY BE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A SINGLE DOOR,

DOUBLE DOORS, SIDE LIGHTS, TRANSOMS AND ARCHES.

PALLADIAN WINDOWS : PALLADIAN WINDOWS CONSIST OF

THREE LIGHTS SET SIDE-BY-SIDE, THE OUTER TWO OF WHICH

ARE SIMPLE RECTANGLES WHILE THE MIDDLE ONE SPORTS

A SEMICIRCULAR TOP WHICH SPRINGS FROM THE LEVEL OF

THE OTHER TWO LIGHTS’ UPPER LIMIT. PALLADIAN WINDOWS

MUST BE CORRECTLY PROPORTIONED AND DETAILED

USING THE CLASSICAL ORDERS. WINDOWS MUST INCLUDE

CORRECT PILASTERS, FULL ENTABLATURES AND A PROPERLY

DESIGNED ARCH WHICH IS INTEGRATED WITH THE TOP

SASH (NOT SEPARATED BY A MULLION). THE LIGHTS MUST

BE CONSISTENTLY SIZED THROUGHOUT ALL THE SASHES.

ENTABLATURE MUST INCLUDE A PROPER BASE. IMPROPERLY

PROPORTIONED AND/OR

DETAILED PALLADIAN WINDOWS AND ENTABLATURES ARE

NOT ACCEPTABLE, THUS PARTICULAR ATTENTION MUST BE

PAID TO ENSURE PROPER DESIGN.

RECTANGULAR WINDOWS: WINDOWS SHALL BE WHITE

WOOD OR ALUMINUM, DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH

WINDOWS. RECTANGULAR WINDOWS SHALL BE VERTICALLY

PROPORTIONED AND MAY BE OPERABLE (WITH ACCEPTANCE

FROM THE UNIVERSITY). WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE PAIRED.

THE WINDOW SASH SHALL BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE

CENTERLINE OF THE WALL.

ARCHED WINDOWS: WINDOWS SHALL BE WHITE WOOD OR

ALUMINUM, DOUBLE-HUNG OR SINGLE-HUNG SASH WINDOWS.

ARCHED WINDOWS SHALL BE VERTICALLY PROPORTIONED

AND MAY BE OPERABLE (WITH ACCEPTANCE FROM THE

UNIVERSITY). ARCHED WINDOWS SHOULD BE LARGER IN

SCALE THAN RECTANGULAR WINDOWS WITHIN THE SAME

FAÇADE AND ARE USUALLY RESERVED FOR UPPER FLOORS.

WINDOWS SHOULD NOT BE PAIRED. THE WINDOW SASH

SHOULD BE LOCATED INTERIOR TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE

WALL.

EXTERIOR DOORS : DOORS CAN BE MADE OF EITHER WOOD

OR METAL, WITH GLASS IF DESIRED. STANDARD DOORS ARE

KAWNEER “350” WITH A MINIMUM BOTTOM RAIL OF 6 ½ “AND

SIDE AND TOP RAILS OF 3 ½ “.

INTERIOR DOORS : INTERIOR DOORS SHOULD GENERALLY

BE 1 3/4” SOLID WOOD DOORS OR INSULATED, RAISED PANEL,

METAL DOORS. PARTICLE CORE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

SLIDING WOOD DOORS SHALL NOT BE USED. ALL DOORS

SHALL BE AT LEAST 36” WIDE. ALL DOOR FRAMES SHALL BE

METAL.

ALL CLASSROOM DOORS, STAIRWELL DOORS, AND CORRIDOR

DOORS SHALL HAVE VISION PANELS (5”X20”) .

WINDOW MUNTINS SHALL BE TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT OR

SIMULATED DIVIDED (FIXED ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR

SURFACES), AND SHALL CREATE PANELS OF SQUARE OR

VERTICAL PROPORTION. WINDOWS WITHOUT AN EXTERIOR

MUNTIN SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED.

OPERABLE WINDOWS : FACILITY MANAGEMENT MUST

APPROVE OPERABLE WINDOWS.

WINDOW SILL : ALL WINDOWS IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION

SHALL HAVE A SILL WHICH PROJECTS A MINIMUM OF 1

INCH FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. SILLS SHOULD BE

CONSTRUCTED OF EITHER CAST STONE OR BRICK ROWLOCK.

WINDOW HEAD: ALL WINDOWS SHALL HAVE 1 OF THE

PRESENTED HEAD CONDITIONS (CASEMENT, TRUE JACK ARCH

WITH/WITHOUT KEYSTONE OR A BRICK SOLDIER COURSE).

WINDOWS IN A BRICK MASONRY WALL WITHOUT A HEAD

CONDITION ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.

GLASS WINDOWS SHALL BE ENERGY EFFICIENT, BRONZE

TINTED, INSULATED GLASS WITH LOW ‘E’ COATING TO

IMPROVE THERMAL PERFORMANCE

SPECIAL GLAZING FOR IMPACT RESISTANCE (LEXAN) AND

SOUND ABATEMENT (LAMINATED GLASS) SHALL BE SPECIFIED

AS NEEDED.

SHUTTERS NOT ALLOWED EXCEPT BY VARIANCE.

E n t r y w a y Sd o o r Sw i n d o w Sw i n d o w S

St

yL

ES

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


133

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

III

- F

OR

MA

L C

ON

TE

MP

OR

AR

Y G

EO

RG

IAN


T Y P O L O G Y I I I - F O R M A L C O N T E M P O R A R Y G E O R G I A N

Type I I I i s sty l i st ica l ly a departure from the tradit ional Georgian architecture of the or ig inal quadrangle port ion of campus. I t i s however intended to ut i l i ze s imi lar architectural techniques of f loor p late a l ignment, sca le , and mater ia l palette and di ffer in i ts art iculat ion of assembly. I t i s intended, that the architecture generated by th is assembly be sty l i st ica l ly progress ive whi le st i l l reg ional ly and environmental ly sens i t ive. An analys is of the contemporary des ign sty les present on campus may be found in the beginning of the architectural standards. The des ign sty le of Type I I I bui ld ings should bui ld on that h istory of progress ive des ign. I t i s further ant ic ipated, that the cost to develop th is type, whi le not inexpensive, wi l l be more cost affordable than Type I .

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n H i S t o r y ▫ NOT ALWAYS SYMMETRICAL

▫ ENTRY SHOULD BE CENTRAL OR CO-

ORDINATED TO CONFORM TO AXIS

OF AN ASSEMBLY OF BUILDINGS.

▫ RED BRICK

▫ PITCHED OR FLAT ROOFS

▫ FIXED

▫ RECTANGULAR OR SQUARE

▫ SOLID GLASS OR FRAMED GLASS

▫ TRADITIONALLY BASED BUT NOT

NECASSARILY LITERAL

▫ SIMPLIFIED TRADITIONAL

m a S S i n G :


w i n d o w S :

d o o r S :

d E t a i L S :

t y p E i i i b u i L d i n G S

MOODY HALL, UNIVERSITY UNION, ANGELLE HALL, PAUL AND LULU HILLARD UNIVERSITY ART MUSEUM, ALUMNI

CENTER, EDITH GARLAND DUPRE LIBRARY


E


>> DURHAM PERFORMING ARTS CENTER


YP

OL

OG

Y I

II -

FO

RM

AL

CO

NT

EM

PO

RA

RY

GE

OR

GIA

N

PRECEDENTS


D U R H A M P E R F O R M I N G A R T S C E N T E RM I C H E L E - L I T V I N D I N I N G H A L L U N I V E R S I T Y O F I L L I N O I S

T Y P O L O G Y I I I - P R E C E D E N T S• Used for non-tradit ional setpiece bui ld ings within the Campus• More prevalent within campus commons than within Campus Proper• Used as an upgrade to modernist bui ld ings on Campus which need remodel• Intended as the br idge between tradit ional and contemporary forms on Campus• Character ized by a contemporary interpretat ion of t radit ional Georgian e lements - Mater ia l i ty - Proport ions• Exposed structural e lements acceptable when proper ly art iculated within the des ign intent• Signi f icant ly h igher percentage of g laz ing /bui ld ing mass than tradit ional typology• Prevalent use of storefront/curta in wal l g laz ing

M I L L S P R I N G S A C A D E M Y U P P E R S C H O O L


135

E


LITE CENTER

EDITH GARLAND DUPRE LIBRARY

DUPRE ANGELLE UNION MUSEUM

TY

PO

LO

GY

III

- F

OR

MA

L C

ON

TE

MP

OR

AR

Y G

EO

RG

IAN



• TYPICALLY LINER BUILDINGS RATHER THAN SET PIECES

• LESS COSTLY• SAME ELEMENTS AND MATERIALITY AS TYPE

I , BUT NOT EXECUTED IN A TRADITIONAL MANNER

• GENERALLY, NO TOWER OR CUPOLA• DETAILS ARE EITHER LEFT OUT OR ONLY

USED FOR FOCAL POINTS

T Y P O L O G Y I I I

m a S S i n G & p r o p o r t i o nUnl ike tradit ional Georgian Architecture, the contemporary bui l t forms on campus do not adhere to a formal methodology regarding the organizat ion of bui ld ing masses. Symmetry is not str ict ly appl ied e i ther in p lan or e levat ion. E lements of sca le and proport ion should be drawn from the nearby campus bui ld ings to ensure a v isual cohesiveness within the campus at large.

Analyz ing contemporary architectural mass ing poses quite a chal lenge as there is no def in i t ive ru les by which contemporary form can be ident i f ied. Unl ike i ts t radit ional counterpart , Contemporary Georgian does not organize around str ict symmetry.

This sect ion focuses on understanding the typology ’s most bas ic ru les of mass ing and proport ion. These are studied in both p lan and e levat ion.

Exter ior f in ish shal l be at least 85% red br ick and g lass . Red br ick shal l match the ex ist ing type found throughout the campus. As compared to the tradit ional typologies , Type I I I should contain a larger proport ion of g lass . Only a smal l port ion shal l cons ist of stone and/or p laster. For th is typology, metal can be ut i l i zed as an accent mater ia l .



E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

II -

FO

RM

AL

CO

NT

EM

PO

RA

RY

GE

OR

GIA

N

WINDOWS & ENTRYWAYS


The contemporary nature of th is typology demands a new set of ru les for the sty l i st ic deta i ls which def ine i ts appearance. Tradit ional window and door detai ls have been replaced with g laz ing systems such as storefront and curta in wal l systems.

w i n d o w S & E n t r y w a y S

S t o r E f r o n t G u i d E L i n E S

S TO R E F R O N T G U I D E L I N E S shal l encourage the express ion of each bui ld ing ’s ident i ty. Such express ions shal l have a strong urban character.

A S TO R E F R O N T B U F F E R Z O N E of two feet wide wi l l be a l lowed past the bui ld ing p lane. This space can be occupied by the structure’s extrus ions or doors that open outward. Other s i te i tems such as p lanters or benches may occupy th is area but should not obstruct pedestr ian f low.

S TO R E F R O N T C H A R A C T E R shal l ref lect the Contemporary Georgian her i tage being developed throughout the campus’ most recent ly constructed bui ld ings.

S TO R E F R O N T E N T R Y A N D D O O R des ign and placement are a fundamental part of each storefront . They shal l introduce the occupant to the bui ld ing exper ience within. P lacement shal l be in d irect connect ion to the street s idewalk. Recessed doors are acceptable to inc lude in storefront des ign. Glass should not be more than 10% ref lect ive.

S TO R E F R O N T L I G H T I N G adds personal i ty and safety to publ ic streets and walkways. As part of a campus, proper l ight ing is key to a safe environment in the evenings. Storefront facades, outdoor spaces, and recessed doorways shal l be l i t . F ixtures should be located in a way that they i l luminate the adjacent s i te and not the windows themselves to avoid g lare. A lso, they should inc lude specia l after hour l ight ing on the front of the store to contr ibute to pedestr ian l ight ing to ensure le isure walk ing.

S T O R E F R O N T W I N D O W S

A R C H I T E C T U R A L C L A D W I N D O W S

E N T R Y W A Y S

D O O R S


137

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

III

- F

OR

MA

L C

ON

TE

MP

OR

AR

Y G

EO

RG

IAN



WINDOWS, DOORS, AND STOREFRONTS SHALL BE

ANODIZED ALUMINUM. DOORS SHALL BE ANODIZED ALUMINUM

IN A SILVER, GREY, OR BRONZE COLOR. GLASS SHALL BE NO

GREATER THAN 10% REFLECTIVITY.



ALLOWED.


STYLE.

RAILINGS SHALL BE MADE OF METAL.

METAL ELEMENTS SHALL BE NATURAL COLORED

GALVANIZED STEEL, ANODIZED OR ESP ALUMINUM, OR

MARINE-GRADE ALUMINUM.




RAILINGS SHALL BE FABRICATED OF GALVANIZED METAL, OR

SS CABLE.

TYPES PROHIBITED: WOOD, VINYL.

TYPE I: MASONRYRED BRICK SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING TYPE THROUGHOUT

THE CAMPUS.

TYPE I I : METAL PANELMANUFACTURED WALL PANELS WITH SOLID CORE

CONSTRUCTION, FINISHED IN FLUOROPOLYMER, SILICONIZED

POLYESTER, ACRYLIC OR TRANSLUCENT PANELS OF GLASS

FIBER REINFORCED POLYESTER.

TYPE I I I : STUCCOSTUCCO IS ALLOWED OVER WOOD, METAL FRAME OR MASONRY



SLOPED ROOFS SHALL BE CLAD IN GALVANIZED STEEL,

MANUFACTURED ROOF PANELS, OR BUILT UP ASPHALT.


MADE OF GALVANIZED STEEL, ANODIZED, OR ALUMINUM.

DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE CORNER OF THE

BUILDING LEAST VISIBLE FROM NEARBY STREETS. SPLASH

BLOCKS SHALL BE MADE OF CONCRETE, BRICK OR GRAVEL.

FLASHING, GUTTERS, AND DOWNSPOUTS SHALL BE


CANVAS AWNINGS ARE NOT ALLOWED. CANOPIES WHEN

USED SHALL BE MADE OF METAL OR GLASS.

FLAT ROOFS SHALL BE MADE OF MATERIAL CONSISTENT

WITH THE DESIGN OF THE ROOF.

WINDOWS SHALL BE RECTANGULAR, VERTICALLY

PROPORTIONED AND NOT REQUIRED TO BE OPERABLE.

TRANSOMS MAY BE ORIENTED HORIZONTALLY WITH PANES

WHICH MATCH OTHER CONFIGURATIONS. MULTIPLE WINDOWS

IN THE SAME ROUGH OPENING MAY HAVE BUTT GLAZING. THE

WINDOW SASH MAY BE LOCATED NEAR THE OUTER WALL PLANE.

WINDOW SILLS IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION MAY NOT PROJECT

FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. SPANDREL GLASS MAY BE

USED.

WINDOW MUNTINS ARE ENCOURAGED AND SHALL BE TRUE

DIVIDED LIGHT OR FIXED ON THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR

SURFACES, AND SHALL CREATE PANELS OF SQUARE OR

VERTICAL PROPORTION.

GARAGE DOORS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY IN SERVICE AREAS

INDICATED BY PLAN.


PROPORTIONED OPENINGS, ARCHED OR FLAT.

COLONNADES SHALL HAVE SOLIDITY, RHYTHM,

CONNECTIONS, AND HUMAN SCALE.

RAILINGS SHALL HAVE TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS. TOP AND

BOTTOM RAILS SHALL BE CENTERED ON THE BOARDS OR

PICKETS. THE OPENINGS BETWEEN THE MEMBERS SHALL

BE A MINIMUM OF 1” AND A MAXIMUM OF 4”. RAILS MAY BE

VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLY PROPORTION.

















BUILDING. MASONRY PIERS WITH STEEL PICKETS MAY

REPLACE SOLID MASONRY WALLS. MASONRY WALLS SHALL BE

MADE OF STUCCO OR BRICK WHILE GATES SHALL BE STEEL.

WALLS MAY BE PERFORATED.




FLAT ROOFS SHALL ALIGN WITH THE CORNICE LINES/

PARAPETS.




ROUND OR SQUARE.







ma

tE

ria

LS

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

II -

FO

RM

AL

CO

NT

EM

PO

RA

RY

GE

OR

GIA

N




COMPLIMENT THE OVERALL VALUE OF THE BUILDING.


PERVIOUS CONCRETE PAVERS, BRICK OR CONCRETE. PAVERS


COLOR.




(“SILENT” MODELS PREFERRED), UTILITY METERS.





















SLIDING DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

SNAP-IN MUNTINS SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.

STAINED OR TINTED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED.


BALCONIES MAY BE CANTILEVERED OR SUPPORTED ON

POSTS.

CURVED, SCALLOPED, AND/OR BACK LIT AWNING, OR BACK LIT SIGNS ARE NOT ALLOWED.



THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: STUCCO COVERED - FOAM MOLDINGS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR

FLUORESCENT LIGHTS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR FLOOD LIGHTS,

ABOVE GROUND POOLS, ANTENNAS, FLAGS AND FLAGPOLES

(EXCEPT OFFICIAL FLAGS OF COUNTRIES AS APPROVED

BY UL LAFAYETTE DRB, STATES, COUNTIES AND CITIES,

DIRECT VENT FIREPLACES, EXTERNAL ALARM SYSTEMS, AND

SKYLIGHTS.


GRANTED ON THE BASIS OF ARCHITECTURAL MERIT. THESE

REGULATIONS WILL BE UPDATED PERIODICALLY, AND ALL

SUBSEQUENT CHANGES WILL APPLY TO ALL BUILDINGS WHICH

HAVE YET TO COMPLETE THE SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE.

WOOD WHICH IS NOT FINISHED WITH A PAINT OR STAIN IS

NOT ALLOWED.


am

En

itiE

Sn

ot

ES



139

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

IV

- I

NF

OR

MA

L C

ON

TE

MP

OR

AR

Y G

EO

RG

IAN


T Y P O L O G Y I V - I N F O R M A L C O N T E M P O R A R Y G E O R G I A N

While Type I I I i s sty l i st ica l ly a departure from the tradit ional Georgian architecture of the or ig inal quadrangle,Type IV is sty l i st ica l ly a departure from the or ig inal architecture of the h istor ic quad. I t i s however intended to ut i l i ze s imi lar architectural techniques of f loor p late a l ignment, sca le , and mater ia l palette and di ffer in i ts art iculat ion of assembly. I t i s intended, that the architecture generated by th is assembly be sty l i st ica l ly progress ive whi le st i l l reg ional ly and environmental ly sens i t ive. I t i s further ant ic ipated, that the cost to develop th is type, whi le not inexpensive, wi l l be more cost affordable than Type I .

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S i n f o r m a L c o n t E m p o r a r y G E o r G i a n

t y p E i v b u i L d i n G S

OLIVIER HALL, CORONA HALL, GUILLORY HALL, V.L. WHARTON HALL, BILLEAUD HALL, MONTGOMERY HALL, CONFERENCE

CENTER, MADISON HALL, H.L. GRIFFIN HALL, C.L. ROUGEAU, ADVANCED COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY & RESEARCH HALL,

FLETCHER HALL, LEGACY PARK, CAJUN VILLAGE.

▫ NOT ALWAYS SYMMETRICAL

▫ ENTRY SHOULD BE CENTRAL OR CO-

ORDINATED TO CONFORM TO AXIS

OF AN ASSEMBLY OF BUILDINGS.

▫ RED BRICK

▫ PITCHED OR FLAT ROOFS

▫ METAL PANELS

▫ FIXED

▫ RECTANGULAR OR SQUARE

▫ SOLID GLASS OR FRAMED GLASS

▫ TRADITIONALLY BASED BUT NOT

NECASSARILY LITERAL

▫ SIMPLIFIED TRADITIONAL

m a S S i n G :


w i n d o w S :

d o o r S :

d E t a i L S :

E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

V -

IN

FO

RM

AL

CO

NT

EM

PO

RA

RY

GE

OR

GIA

N

PRECEDENTS


M O T O R O L A C U D E S I G N C E N T E RN A T I O N A L W E T L A N D S R E S E A R C H C E N T E R

C E N T R A L C O N T R A C O S T A S A N I T A R Y D I S T R I C T W A T E R L A B O R A T O R Y

E



TY

PO

LO

GY

IV

- I

NF

OR

MA

L C

ON

TE

MP

OR

AR

Y G

EO

RG

IAN









ALLOWED.

BAY WINDOWS ARE NOT ALLOWED.








RAILINGS SHALL BE FABRICATED OF GALVANIZED, METAL,

OR SS CABLE.

TYPES PROHIBITED: WOOD, VINYL.

TYPE I: MASONRYRED BRICK SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING TYPE THROUGHOUT

THE CAMPUS.

TYPE I I : METAL PANELMANUFACTURED WALL PANELS WITH SOLID CORE

CONSTRUCTION,

FINISHED IN FLUOROPOLYMER, SILICONIZED POLYESTER,

ACRYLIC OR TRANSLUCENT PANELS OF GLASS FIBER

REINFORCED POLYESTER.

TYPE I I I : STUCCOSTUCCO IS ALLOWED OVER WOOD, METAL FRAME OR MASONRY
























USED.





GARAGE DOORS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY IN SERVICE AREAS

INDICATED BY PLAN.

































FLAT ROOFS SHALL ALIGN WITH THE CORNICE LINES /

PARAPETS.




ROUND OR SQUARE.







ma

tE

ria

LS

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


E



YP

OL

OG

Y I

V -

IN

FO

RM

AL

CO

NT

EM

PO

RA

RY

GE

OR

GIA

N








COLOR.


























POSTS.

CURVED, SCALLOPED, AND/OR BACK LIT AWNING, OR BACK LIT SIGNS ARE NOT ALLOWED.



THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: STUCCO COVERED - FOAM MOLDINGS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR



(EXCEPT OFFICIAL FLAGS OF COUNTRIES AS APPROVED

BY UL LAFAYETTE DRB, STATES, COUNTIES AND CITIES,

DIRECT VENT FIREPLACES, EXTERNAL ALARM SYSTEMS, AND

SKYLIGHTS.


GRANTED ON THE BASIS OF ARCHITECTURAL MERIT. THESE

REGULATIONS WILL BE UPDATED PERIODICALLY, AND ALL

SUBSEQUENT CHANGES WILL APPLY TO ALL BUILDINGS WHICH

HAVE YET TO COMPLETE THE SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE.


NOT ALLOWED.


am

En

itiE

Sn

ot

ES

w i n d o w S a n d d o o r Sr o o f S / a w n i n G S / c a n o p i E Sb u i L d i n G E L E m E n t Sb u i L d i n G w a L L S(RESERVED)



STAINED OR TINTED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED.



143

E


TY

PO

LO

GY

V -

UT

ILIT

AR

IAN


T Y P O L O G Y V - U T I L I T A R I A N

Typology V is the most ut i l i tar ian bui ld ing type to be a l lowed in the code. When used on the campus proper, Type V is intended for bui ld ings which are industr ia l in nature. Examples of th is would be the phys ica l p lant and auto maintenance fac i l i t ies . When used within the research park, Type V bui ld ings are intended to market starter companies who current ly operate out of warehouses outs ide of the campus environment. I t i s intended that as the campus matures, these bui ld ings wi l l be replaced with one of the more s igni f icant types (Type I - Type IV) . These bui ld ings are re legated to the C streets .

u L L a f a y E t t E ’ S u t i L i t a r i a n H i S t o r y ▫ SERVICE BUILDINGS - NORMALLY

PRE-ENGINEERED BUILDING.

▫ SANDSTONE OR BUFF ▫ STUCCO ▫ BRICK ▫ CONCRETE ▫ METAL SIDING ▫ METAL PANELS ▫ STANDING SEAM METAL OR

MANUFACTURED PANELS

▫ CLEAR ANODIZED ALUMINUM STORE-FRONT

▫ CLEAR OR BRONZE TINTED GLASS (NON-REFLECTIVE)

▫ TRANSLUCENT PANELS

▫ METAL - ANODIZED OR PRE-FIN-ISHED

▫ ANODIZED OR PRE-FINISHED

GUTTERS AND FLASHING

m a S S i n G :


w i n d o w S :

d o o r S :

d E t a i L S :

E



YP

OL

OG

Y V

- U

TIL

ITA

RIA

N

PRECEDENTS


N A T I O N A L W E T L A N D S R E S E A R C H C E N T E RP A R K I N G D E C K

T Y P O L O G Y V - P R E C E D E N T S

Metal research and maintenance bui ld ings and park ing decks are a l l examples of Typology V. These ut i l i tar ian structures are necessary for the day to day needs of a Univers i ty.

E



TY

PO

LO

GY

V -

UT

ILIT

AR

IAN







SHUTTERS ARE NOT ALLOWED


ALLOWED.

BAY WINDOWS ARE NOT ALLOWED.








RAILINGS SHALL BE FABRICATED OF GALV. METAL, OR SS

CABLE.

TYPES PROHIBITED: VINYL SIDING

TYPE I: METAL SIDING / PANELIZED BUILDING MATERIAL

SIDING / PANEL COLOR AND STYLE TO BE APPROVED BY UL

LAFAYETTE DRB.

TYPE I I : MASONRYRED BRICK SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING TYPE THROUGHOUT

THE CAMPUS.

TYPE I I I : STUCCO

STUCCO OR EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISH SYSTEMS

ARE ALLOWED OVER WOOD, METAL FRAME OR MASONRY

CONSTRUCTION. STUCCO MUST HAVE A SMOOTH, TROWEL

APPLIED AND SAND FINISH OR LIGHTLY TEXTURED FINISH.

SWIRL OR OTHER HEAVILY TEXTURED PATTERNS ARE

DISCOURAGED.

TYPE IV: METAL BUILDING SYSTEMMETAL BUILDING SYSTEM AS APPROVED BY UL LAFAYETTE

DRB.






















USED.





GARAGE DOORS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY IN SERVICE

AREAS INDICATED BY PLAN.

















BUILDING WALLS MAY BE BUILT OF NO MORE THAN THREE

MATERIALS.










FLAT ROOFS SHALL ALIGN WITH THE CORNICE LINES /

PARAPETS.




ROUND OR SQUARE.



THE ROOF AT THE BUILDING’S FRONTAGE’S). PENETRATIONS




ma

tE

ria

LS

co

nf

iGu

ra

tio

n a

nd

tE

cH

niq

uE

S


E



YP

OL

OG

Y V

- U

TIL

ITA

RIA

N








COLOR.





BUILDING WALL TYPES. TRIM (BALCONY AND PORCH POSTS,

RAILS, WINDOW TRIM, RAFTER TAILS, ETC) SHALL BE PAINTED

TO COMPLIMENT THE COLUMNS AND OVERALL VALUE OF THE

BUILDING. AN ACCENT COLOR, FOR ITEMS SUCH AS THE

FRONT DOOR, PICKETS, TRIM, AND SHUTTERS, MAY BE USED

SUBJECT TO APPROVAL FROM THE UL LAFAYETTE DRB. WALLS

AND FENCES SHALL BE IN A RANGE OF COLORS APPROVED

FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE MATERIALS. OTHER COLORS MAY BE

ADDED TO THE LIST AFTER CONSULTATION WITH THE DRB.

FINAL COLOR PALETTE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

SELECTIONS MADE BY THE UL LAFAYETTE DRB. ALL PAINT

SELECTIONS SHALL BE “PREMIUM GRADE” OR BETTER.






STAINED OR TINTED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED



POSTS.




THE FOLLOWING SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED: QUOINS,

STUCCO COVERED - FOAM MOLDINGS, EXPOSED EXTERIOR



(EXCEPT OFFICIAL FLAGS OF COUNTRIES AS APPROVED BY

UL LAFAYETTE DRB, STATES, COUNTIES AND CITIES, DIRECT

VENT FIREPLACES,

EXTERNAL ALARM SYSTEMS, AND SKYLIGHTS.






PHASE.


NOT ALLOWED.


am

En

itiE

Sn

ot

ES


Documents

architectUraL standards - University of Louisiana at Lafayette · 2014-09-05 · Allen Hall, defined a distinct architectural language for the campus’ built environment. This language