Attachment 8 - DMAFB Design Compatibility Guidelines 2017.pdf

Design Compatibility Guidelines

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

Arizona

AIR COMBAT COMMAND

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

DESIGN COMPATIBILITY

GUIDELINES

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona

TABLE OF CONTENTS

v Preface

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 Scope of this Document

1.2 Base Mission and History

1.3 Davis-Monthan Style

1.4 Design Concepts

1.5 Design Requirements

1.6 Force Protection Design

1.7 Sustainability

1.8 Regional Setting

1.9 Zoning Areas

2.0 Planning

2.1 Building Siting

3.0 Architectural Standards

3.1 ACC Architectural Design Standards

3.2 Height/Massing

3.3 Roofs

3.4 Exterior Walls

3.5 Windows

3.6 Additions, Metal Buildings, Temporary Structures and Storage Buildings

3.7 Miscellaneous

4.0 Civil Engineering Standards

4.1 Streets/Parking

4.2 Site Lighting

4.3 Sidewalks and Curbing

4.4 Landscape Planning

4.5 Planting/Xeriscaping

4.6 Site Elements

4.7 Civil Underground Utilities

5.0 Interior Design Standards

5.1 General

5.2 Interior Design Compatibility Concepts

5.3 General Finishes and Furnishings

6.0 Engineering Standards

6.1 Mechanical Design

6.2 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

6.3 Plumbing Design

6.4 Electrical Design

6.5 Fire Protection

6.6 Miscellaneous

6.7 Submittals and Deliverables

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Appendices

Appendix A Base Zoning Map/Character Areas

Appendix B HVAC Matrix

Appendix C Policy Letters

Appendix D Product Alternatives

Appendix E Davis-Monthan AFB Standard Details for Construction

Appendix F Specification and Performance Guideline – Door Hardware

Appendix G Installation Energy Management

Appendix H Code Research Supplement

Appendix I Reference Sources/UFC’s

Appendix J Mass Notification System-Message/Priority List

Appendix K Requests for Waiver/Change to the DM DCG v

Preface

This 2017 edition of the Davis-Monthan AFB Design Compatibility Guidelines replaces the April 2012 edition in its entirety.

Content which has been changed in this edition from the previous edition is indicated by a black vertical line in the outside margin adjacent to the changed content.

Change Recommendations: All recommendations for change to this guide shall be submitted to the Chief Engineer, 355 CES/CEN, in digital format using the Request for Change to the Davis-Monthan Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG) form located in the documents folder of the 355 CES Engineering Flight SharePoint website. If the requestor is unable to obtain a digital copy of the Request for Change form, a written copy may be submitted using the form located in Appendix K, Requests for Waiver/Change to the DM DCG.

Waiver to DM DCG Requirements: All requests for waiver to the requirements presented according to this guide shall be submitted to the Chief Engineer, 355 CES/CEN, in digital format using the Request for Waiver from Davis-Monthan Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG) Requirements form located in the documents folder of the 355 CES Engineering Flight SharePoint website. If the requestor is unable to obtain a digital copy of the Request for Waiver form, a written copy may be submitted using the form located in Appendix K, Requests for Waiver/Change to the DM DCG.

SECTION 1.0

Executive Summary

SECTION 1.0 Executive Summary

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 1.1

1.1 SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT

The following Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG) outlines a consistent level of quality and style for all facilities at Davis-Monthan AFB. These standards provide a reference for everyone involved in base planning, design, and construction.

Davis-Monthan AFB is located in Pima County, Arizona within the city limits of Tucson in a high altitude, desert environment. Responding to this harsh climate, many buildings on base are influenced by traditional Southwestern desert architecture, using courtyards, thick walls, deeply recessed windows, wide overhangs, trellises, and other shading devices. Existing architectural influences off base are minimal.

The Davis-Monthan style will continue to reflect this Southwest influence: horizontal emphasis in building massing and fenestration, simple, rectangular volumes, low sloped roofs, earth-tone masonry, metal roofing, and use of various traditional and non-traditional shading elements.

All designs must meet but are not limited to the codes referenced in the following sections:

CIVIL, ARCHITECTURAL, INTERIORS AND

ENGINEERIING STANDARDS.

All individuals involved in base planning, design, and construction must use these Design Compatibility Guidelines. The success of any design standard is dependent upon implementation and enforcement. It is the responsibility of each design professional working at Davis-Monthan AFB to adhere to the design framework presented here.

Perhaps more importantly, it is the responsibility of the reviewing agencies and the contracting officer, particularly at the base level, to enforce the guidelines. A collective commitment to understand and abide by the guidelines is necessary to achieve the goals desired.

All associate units at Davis-Monthan AFB are required to comply with the architectural, landscape, exterior signs, and engineering sections of this document.

The Chief Engineer or IMSC Lead Architect for ACC must approve any deviations from standards listed in this document. Waivers to these standards may be requested through the Base Civil Engineer.

The following illustrates procedures for using this document.

1.1.1 Intended Users

Improving the visual environment at Davis- Monthan AFB will require a consistent, determined approach, creative problem solving, and quality design. Two essential ingredients for success are concerned/enlightened clients and sensitive, responsible design professionals. The multiple users of these guidelines will range from independent architects and engineers to Air Force, military, and civilian personnel, including facility managers, responsible for planning, design, and maintenance activities at Davis-Monthan AFB. This document is intended to respond to the diversity of backgrounds and different areas of focus of base personnel and design professionals who will mutually implement the Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG)

1.1.2 Instructions for Use

There is a critical sequence of tasks, or decisions, to be made when the DCG is being used for developing or evaluating design work. The following summarizes this series of tasks:

TASK ONE—Read and understand all of the background information in the DCG. Establish the location of the project to determine into which Character Area it should be placed, if the project is for a new facility. The determination of an appropriate character area is especially important for building design projects. However, this issue should not be ignored for landscape and site elements design projects.

TASK TWO—Review the assets and liabilities contained in the Character Area section for the chosen character area, and develop a thorough understanding of the positive and negative aspects of past improvements within the character area.

TASK THREE—Develop conceptual design responses which are appropriate for the project, and which will visually enhance the stated objectives of

Executive Summary SECTION 1.0

1.2 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ the chosen character area. Check all applicable guidelines throughout the Character Area section and review all the applicable Design Guidelines that are required.

TASK FOUR—Review the extent to which the individual project design contributes to accomplishment of the objectives and desired image for both the character area and the base as a whole.

TASK FIVE—Establish whether or not the basic principles, general concepts, and design guidelines have been followed to the maximum extent possible.

TASK SIX—Review the specific design guidelines, which are applicable to the project, and document compliance of the proposed improvements. Projects, which do not comply with the Design Compatibility Guidelines requirements, must be revised to bring them into compliance.

TASK SEVEN—Compare the project to the applicable Concept Landscape Design to determine if the final visual results follow the intent demonstrated.

TASK EIGHT—Rigorous control should be maintained on the project, both during design and during construction. Questions and interpretations, which are delivered during the construction phase of the project, must stay in compliance with the DCG intent.

TASK NINE—Review applicable codes, UFC’s and regulations (Appendix H, Code Research Supplement).

TASK TEN—Review and familiarize yourself with the Davis-Monthan AFB standard details for construction (Appendix E).

1.1.3 Contractor’s Responsibility

Complete familiarity with the Davis-Monthan AFB Design compatibility requirements defined in this document are the responsibility of the design and/or construction contractor in completing the scope of work. Failure on the part of the contractor to adequately review this document and identify/clarify any requirements herein will not constitute justification of contractor claims for additional services and/or fees. Required research of the DCG is an overhead cost.

1.2 BASE MISSION AND HISTORY

The base is home for the 355th Fighter Wing providing a training facility for A-10 and OA-10 pilots. The Wing also provides command, control, and communication countermeasures in support of tactical forces in war and other worldwide contingencies. The base is further defined into seven character areas: Flight line, AMARG (Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group), Headquarters, Industrial, Medical, Housing, and Town Center Zones. These guidelines take into account the primary function of each area, and also identify base-wide design standards to help create a consistent image for the base as a whole.

Davis-Monthan AFB was Tucson’s second recorded airfield. Constructed in accordance with U.S. Army guidelines, the Army declared the base suitable for military operations in 1925. In 1927 the Tucson landing field was dedicated by Charles Lindberg in honor of two Tucsonans—Lieutenant Samuel H.

Davis and Lieutenant Oscar Monthan—both of whom died in aerial accidents while serving in the U.S. Army. In April of 1941 the 31st Air Base Group became the first unit stationed at the field and on December 3, 1941 the field was officially named Davis-Monthan Field. Davis-Monthan AFB’s two bombardment units shipped out shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor thus entering World War II. For the remainder of the war the primary mission of the base was the training of B-24 and B- 29 bomber crews. After the war Davis-Monthan AFB served as a separation center, processing soldiers for their return to civilian life. The base also served as a storage base for excess bombers and cargo planes. This mission continues today in the form of the Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) Zone.

The U.S. Air Force took control of the installation in 1948 and officially renamed it Davis-Monthan AFB.

During the 1950s the base was primarily home to several B-29 bomber groups. The 1960s brought Titan II missiles and U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, and in 1964 the base began training aircrews for the new F-4 Phantom fighter, the nation’s most advanced fighter of the time.

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 1.3

In 1971, the 355th Tactical Fighter Wing located at Davis-Monthan AFB, began flying A-7 Corsairs and later A10-A Thunderbolts, while the F-4 Phantoms moved to Luke AFB, Arizona. This marked a shift from a strategic to a more tactical mission. In October 1976, the 355th TFW assumed host unit duties as command of the base switched from Strategic Air Command to Tactical Air Command.

In 1981, after about a decade under the 355th TFW, the 836th Air Division assumed host unit responsibility. Their tenure as host unit lasted until 1992 when, due to Air Force downsizing, the 836th was deactivated. In May of 1992 the 355th resumed host duties and was designated the 355th Wing.

One month later, command of the based changed to the newly formed Air Combat Command (ACC) as Tactical Air Command was inactivated. On April 26, 2007 the 355th Wing was designated the 355th Fighter Wing.

In addition to the 355th Fighter Wing, Davis- Monthan AFB is home to multiple tenant units including, Twelfth Air Force Headquarters, the 25th Operational Weather Squadron, AMARG, the 55th Electronic Control Group, and 943rd Rescue Group and the 563rd Rescue Group. Other federal agencies with a presence on the base include the Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Customs Service Air Service, U.S. Corps of Engineers, and a detachment of the Naval Air Systems Command.

1.3 DAVIS-MONTHAN STYLE

The “Davis-Monthan” Response, as endorsed in the following pages, is a clear response to issues of place and function at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Context

The influence of the Sonoran Desert is clearly evident in both climate and architecture at Davis- Monthan AFB. Borrowing from their adobe predecessors, structures adhering to the Davis- Monthan style rely on design to respond to climate.

Thick masonry walls provide thermal mass. Broad overhangs and trellis structures provide shade.

Deep recesses shade window openings, reducing heat gain. Shaded courtyards and ramadas provide attractive outdoor spaces for people to be sheltered from the sun and wind.

1.4 DESIGN CONCEPTS

Aesthetic responses to the landscape also distinguish the Davis-Monthan style. Earth tone masonry surfaces and sloped roofs blend well with the color and character of the desert and mountains. A horizontal emphasis in building massing, fenestration and site walls reflects and reinforces the broad, horizontal character of the landscape.

Whether due to site and climatic response, or deliberate design reference, buildings in the Davis- Monthan style should and do reflect the spirit of traditional Southwestern desert architecture:

Simple, rectangular plan and massing

Earth tone split face or ribbed CMU exterior walls

Deeply recessed window openings

Sloped, standing seam metal roofs with broad, shading overhangs

Horizontal emphasis

Exterior trellis and ramada structures

Xeriscape approach to landscaping

Function

Due to geographic characteristics Davis-Monthan AFB presents an intense working environment.

Efficient function, low maintenance, and economy are, appropriately, high priorities in such an environment. This manifests itself in both building massing and material selection. Structures are primarily simple in form and rectangular in plan.

Roofs are sloped to drain water efficiently. Split face concrete masonry units (CMU) for exterior walls and standing seam metal roofing are durable and practically maintenance free. While functionally and economically desirable, this approach also responds positively to the aesthetic character of the place.

Considerations of function and place extend to site treatment. The Davis-Monthan style relies on a low maintenance, low water, xeriscape approach to landscaping. While not all plant material is native Sonoran Desert flora, the xeriscape approach visually complements the desert landscape and the

1.4 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ architecture without requiring extensive maintenance.

1.5 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

1.5.1 Design Compatibility Guidelines Program

Exterior Architectural Compatibility, Interior Design Compatibility and Site Development (Civil) guidelines for the 355th Wing, Davis-Monthan AFB, in this document are an integral part of the overall Installation and Mission Support Center (IMSC) Facilities Standards program for the installation. These guidelines are based on the directions established in the ACC Commander’s Guide to Facilities Standards, ACC Civil Engineer Architectural and Interior Design Standards.

Comprehensive Planning, and all UFC’s (to include all ACC supplements) briefly summarized in the following paragraphs.

1.5.2 General Plan

The General Plan (GP) refers to the cumulative data sources in the form of documents and graphics that provide comprehensive and wide-ranging information used in base planning and decision making processes. The General Plan structure is comprised of the General Plan, Compliant Plans, Elements and Maps. These are related to the quality of life issues discussed in these Design Compatibility Guidelines.

1.5.3 Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG)

The Design Compatibility Guidelines are essentially a second volume of guidance, with the General Plan being the first volume. It concentrates on issues that directly affect the design, quality of life and the physical and visual conditions and experiences found at Davis-Monthan AFB. These include Building Exteriors, Building Interiors, Site Planning, Signage, Lighting and Site Furnishings (Exterior Amenities). The design compatibility effort establishes and enforces aesthetic guidelines and standards for long-term development of each of these throughout the site. Design compatibility is the responsibility of all military, civilian and contractor personnel working at Davis-Monthan AFB. Successful and beneficial plans at other installations can be traced back to the active participation of those working and/or stationed at that installation. These guidelines are not developed to restrict the creativity of the design process, but to ensure the built environment meets the standards set for the 355th Wing and associate units. A successful Design Compatibility Guidelines document and execution program is dynamic in nature and always changing to meet the challenges of the Air Force mission.

The Davis-Monthan AFB, Design Compatibility Guidelines consists of architectural (exterior) compatibility, civil, mechanical, electrical, landscape and interior design guidelines to be used as a “road map” to achieve the desired objectives.

For the purpose of assigning similar characteristics to individual facilities, “Character Areas” were developed as part of the guidelines. Character Area refers to the exterior features of a particular facility.

In an effort to simplify the overall understanding of the plan, the familiar functional area names and/or zones were incorporated as Character Areas. Site development (Civil), Mechanical, and Electrical concepts are similar throughout the installation and apply to all facilities.

1.5.4 Required Design Compatibility Guidelines

Approval and Coordination

It should be noted that Air Combat Command (ACC) is the major command organization, with the 355th Wing as the direct caretaker of Davis- Monthan AFB. All requirements established by this chain of command for Design Compatibility Guidelines (DCG) shall be coordinated into all of Davis-Monthan AFB’s efforts made by personnel assigned to the installation to modify the built environment. All work shall be coordinated through the office of the Chief Engineer for approval or wavier if justified. The Chief Engineer, as directed by the Wing Commander, shall be the final determination authority over the approval of all waiver requests or conflicts with the established guidelines.

All associate units, formerly known as Tenants, physically located in and/or on Davis-Monthan AFB real property assets, must have a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on file with the Chief Engineer that specifically states all “exterior” design compatibility guidelines will be adopted and fully adhered to prior to the approval of any work.

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 1.5

Absence of such document does not imply that these design compatibility guidelines are not applicable.

Request for Chief Engineer’s waiver shall include description of waiver justification and impact on the project if not approved. Allow 15 working days for response. Any DCG requirement in direct conflict with any applicable code (federal, state, and/or city) shall be brought to the attention of the Chief Engineer for resolution.

1.5.5 Building Code and Code Analysis

As a minimum, each project shall be designed to meet all federal, state, and county code and/or ordinance requirements. Projects not meeting minimum code requirements will be returned to the designer of record for correction at not cost to the government.

Every project drawing set shall include at least one

(1) “G” sheet with a code plan and complete code analysis.

1.5.6 Brand Name References

General Provisions include by reference DFARS 211.270-1. Clause 52.236-5, Materials and Workmanship. This clause states reference in the specification to equipment, materials, articles, or patented process by trade name, make, or catalog number, shall be regarded as establishing a standard of quality and shall not be construed as limiting competition. Any contractor may, at its option, use any equipment, material, article, or process that, in the judgment of the Contracting Officer, is equal to that named in the guidelines, unless otherwise specifically provided in this document (refer to Appendix C for the policy letter addressing specific brand name requirements). This statement shall apply to all references made in these Design Compatibility Guidelines to equipment, material, articles, and/or process.

1.6 FORCE PROTECTION DESIGN

An important design influence is the issue of security. As with all military installations, force protection design must address security needs as they relate to the built environment. Several key issues must be addressed:

Integrate security engineering with other design requirements

Determine levels of protection required

Assess what design constraints affect the design solution

Establish a consistent design procedure and design strategy.

The objective of Force Protection Design or the security engineering process is to define security needs and design protective systems. The planning phase of this process establishes required design criteria. These criteria describe assets within a facility, the threat to the assets, the level to which assets are to be protected, and constraints in the protective system design. Including security requirements with project criteria allows security to be addressed at the start of the project, and to be integrated into the total design. Important aspects of this overall process are discussed in the UFC 4-010- 01, DOD Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings.

Accommodating the need for security within the greater project design process should be of prime concern and must be integrated into the total project design.

Ideally, incorporating appropriate standoff distances is the most effective and desirable tool in facility site design.

Permanent, passive barriers that visually enhance and complement the design of a facility are preferable to temporary, tacked-on, out of context elements. Integrating landscape planning, site furnishings and site elements such as fences, courtyards, screen walls, ditches, berms, bollards, planters, and retaining walls can be effective protective measures. Some of these site elements can also easily be designed to match the main facility and produce one overall design theme through the consistent use and application of forms, materials and colors.

Vehicle and traffic obstacles such as the Jersey Barriers, concrete curbs, cylinders, tetrahedrons, King Tut Block, heavy equipment tires and 55-gallon drums are visual liabilities and are not allowed under any circumstances.

1.6 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ

1.7 SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability or "Green" Architecture is responsible stewardship of our natural, human and financial resources through a practical and balanced approach. Sustainable development requires changes to the facility delivery process to ensure the "best fit" of the built environment to the natural environment. Sustainability integrates environmentally responsible practices into the process of facility delivery from the very beginning.

These sustainable practices are an investment in the future. Through conservation, improved maintainability, recycling, reduction, and reuse of waste, and other actions and innovations, we can meet today's needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own.

The overall goal is not merely to produce environmental demonstration projects, but to become environmentally responsible in the delivery of all Air Force facilities. Sustainability goals include the following:

To use resources efficiently and to minimize raw material consumption, including energy, water, land, and materials, both during the construction process and throughout the life of the facility

To maximize resource reuse, while maintaining financial stewardship

To move away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy sources

To create a healthy working environment for all who use the facility

To build facilities of long-term value

To protect and, where appropriate, to restore the natural environment

Emphasis on sustainable design has become very important. The Air Force has reevaluated construction practices and created policies such as “Affirmative Procurement” which emphasize sustainability principles and concepts to be incorporated into the design of all projects. Davis- Monthan AFB is committed to the implementation of sustainable and integrated designs responding to the specific climatic conditions of the Sonoran Desert.

Some aspects of sustainable design are not new.

Attention has been given in the past to energy conservation and efficiency, water conservation, recycling, reduced use of ozone depleting substances, and avoidance of the use of certain harmful substances such as asbestos, lead based paints, and PCBs. The critical key is an integral design approach, where evaluation of any building element, material, or system, is not viewed solely on the basis of its own isolated merits and cost, but is designed and appraised as an integrated part of the entire facility. Under an integrated design approach, specific materials or systems within the facility may have higher first costs, but these are balanced by lower first costs for other components of the design.

The goal is to design a facility for which overall quality is higher, life-cycle costs are lower, and sustainability concepts and principles are incorporated to the greatest extent possible.

All new construction and major renovations must comply with the Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings.

Detailed guidance and technical resources for sustainable design is contained on the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE) website.

1.7.1 Recycling and Post-Consumer Sustainable

Concepts

Emphasis on sustainable design has resulted in the implementation of policies and construction practices that emphasize sustainability principles and concepts that should be incorporated in the design of all projects. The Air Force is committed to the implementation of sustainable and integrated design that responds to the climatic conditions of the environment. Practicing the sustainable design philosophy involves reducing energy usage by some basic methods:

Using environmentally responsible materials and recycling demolition waste materials

Selecting materials and products based on their life-cycle environmental impacts

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 1.7

Increasing the use of products, such as benches, bollards, playground equipment, athletic suites and carpeting, composed at least partially of recycled materials.

It is also important to select building materials based on maintainability and operability. Examples include selecting durable finishes that do not require painting, like integral color concrete masonry units;

choosing floor coverings which are easily cleaned without harsh chemicals; or specifying long-lasting, low maintenance roofing materials such as metal or concrete tile.

Some of the basic recommendations for promoting sustainable development involve simple steps during construction, such as reducing and recycling construction waste and reviewing material content to limit environmental harm (no CFCs or toxins).

The “Buy Recycled Program” has been implemented across the Air Force and projects must attempt to meet or exceed the EPA Recommended Material Advisory Notice (RMAN) recycled-content recommendations unless the item meets the exemption criteria:

Is not cost effective

Does not meet technical performance requirements

Is not available competitively from two or more sources

Is not available in a timely manner

The Air Force requires contractors to recycle and/or reuse and salvage as much material as possible in the demolition process. Demolition activities should be planned to allow for selective removal and sorting of materials.

Materials

Society's consumption of virgin and synthetic material resources such as timber, minerals, metals, plastics, glass, and concrete increasingly depletes the basic elements of the ecosystem and produces waste and pollution.

Using material resources much more efficiently to prevent resource depletion, waste, and pollution is a critical component of sustainability. This can be done by recovering the maximum amount of materials from the waste stream and by fostering a robust economy for secondary (recovered) materials. All goods and services should be designed to require much less virgin material.

Develop policies and create strategies that promote and support materials conservation, recovery and efficiency in homes, businesses and institutions.

Environmentally preferable building materials lessen impacts on the natural environment and improve indoor air quality throughout their life cycle. Content of the materials, the environmental impacts relating to the production process, energy required for transportation, impacts relating to ongoing maintenance procedures, life cycle costs, longevity, and ultimate disposal or reuse of the materials are some additional issues to consider.

Some examples where the utilization of sustainable materials may be considered include structural fiberboard, laminated paperwork, floor and ceiling tiles, patio blocks, cement/concrete containing granulated blast furnace slag, latex paint, channelizers, cement and concrete containing coal fly ash, parking stops and shower/restroom dividers.

Inherent maintainability, such as materials with integral finish that do not require applied finish after installation, often conserves resources. Thoughtful design can anticipate future reuse or recycling after the material's or products useful life within the facility. Reduce the amount of waste generated during construction and consider using the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service for disposal.

Energy

A primary objective in initiating a sustainable design philosophy is to reduce energy usage.

Methods for reducing energy usage include the following:

Increasing energy conservation and efficiency

Increasing the use of renewable resources

Improving the efficiency in resource and materials utilization, especially water resources

Minimizing solar heat gain with passive solar design, radiant barriers, and integrated landscape features

1.8 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ

Maximizing the rate of cooling through the use of energy efficient utility systems and alternative energy

Providing natural ventilation through operable windows and convection systems

Optimizing insulation and facility glazing

Providing usable spaces for semi-outdoor activities to further reduce indoor energy demands

Considering thermal mass and the reflective qualities of exterior building colors

Using environmentally responsible materials and recycling demolition waste materials.

Successful energy-efficient design requires a high degree of coordination and collaboration among architects, engineers, and interior designers.

'Energy Star' products or products in the top 25% of energy efficiency are recommended by the Department of Energy Management Program (FEMP), when it is life cycle cost effective.

1.7.2 Energy Management Design

In the design process, a major consideration must be energy conservation and compliance to realize Air Force energy management strategies. A building’s energy requirements should be addressed in the following sequence:

Minimize impact of the building functional requirements

Minimize loads (lightings, HVAC, etc.)

Improve the efficiency of the distribution and conversion systems

Integrate the building subsystems into an efficient whole

Minimize impacts of functional requirements by identifying major areas that offer energy efficiency opportunities based on the building’s functional use, human occupancy requirements, and site requirements.

All designers, whether in-house or contracted, have an obligation to incorporate energy efficient design into their projects. This is not to limit the creative design process but in fact to encourage solutions that fulfill the user requirements and at the same time acknowledge limited resources. Seek active participation from all members of the design team.

This philosophy must be applied consistently throughout the building envelope design, major building systems design, and the individual product selection process to be effective. Consider building attributes such as building function, form, orientation, window to wall ratio and HVAC system types early in the design process. The Air Force is required under 10 CFR 435/ASHRE 90.1 to meet performance standards for new commercial and multi-family high rise residential buildings. In summary, the standard is mandatory for new federal facilities except residential buildings less than three stories.

Within each of the seven categories there are basic requirements, which must be met. Most basic requirements do not affect the size, shape or physical appearance of the building. These DCG do not intend to discuss in detail all the basic requirements but bring to the designer’s attention their existence. It is incumbent upon the designer to obtain a copy of the standards and implement them.

Energy management in industry has forged ahead of what the Air Force generally understands to be available for energy saving products. Many of these products are appropriate for use in Air Force facilities and can save tremendous amounts of energy. Designers should be careful though in their research and application of these products. The Air Force is generally not a good client for experimenting with new products that are not time-tested. Keep in mind that taxpayer’s money is what funds these construction projects.

1.8 REGIONAL SETTING

1.8.1 Geographic

Davis-Monthan AFB is located on 10,589-acres in Pima County within the city limits of Tucson, the Pima County seat. The base is easily accessible via Interstate routes 10 and 19. Interstate 10, the major east-west artery serving Tucson, passes just west of Davis-Monthan AFB while Interstate 19 is the major link between Tucson and the Mexican border.

A major north-south thoroughfare for the city, Kolb Road cuts through the installation, with a single access point to the controlled AMARG Zone at Irvington Road.

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 1.9

1.8.2 Climate

Davis-Monthan AFB’s desert environment, combined with its high altitude (2,550 to 2,900-feet above sea level) creates an ideal environment for flight functions and aircraft storage, as well as for outdoor recreational activities. Mild year-round, the region averages more than 300 days of sunshine and only 12-inches of rainfall annually. The most concentrated rain occurs in the months of July and August in the form of afternoon thunderstorms. The two months average about 15 days of showers. In summer, the average low temperature is 73 F and the average high is 98 F. Winter lows average 41 F with a high of 65 F. The area averages 138 days with temperatures in excess of 90 F and 19 days with temperatures below 32 F.

Prevailing Winds (Typically 6-8 knots)

0900 - 1100 hours Southeast 1100 - 1700 hours Northwest 1700 - 2300 hours Southeast Table 1.1A

Maximum sun angles range from approximately 81 F in summer to 33 F in winter. Because of the high summer temperature range, the limited natural shade and the high percentage of sunny days, solar control is a high priority on any project designed for Davis- Monthan AFB.

1.8.3 Geological

The Tucson area is situated on a high valley floor in the midst of five mountain ranges - the Santa Catalinas, the Santa Ritas, the Sierritas, the Rincons and the Tucson Mountains. Davis-Monthan AFB is situated in this valley floor near the center of the Tucson Basin. Surface soils on the base consist of silts, clays, sands and gravels. Subsurface soils consist largely of clays, rocks and caliche type soils, typically rock-like in nature. While an ideal surface for outdoor aircraft storage, the caliche is problematic for building construction. Difficulty in excavation and potentially uneven foundation support conditions can result in increased construction costs.

Vegetation native to Davis-Monthan AFB consists of grasses, cactus and scrub indigenous to the Sonoran Desert. Vegetation in developed portions of the base is largely imported non-native flora, artificially irrigated.

While not inhospitable, Davis-Monthan AFB exists in a desert environment. Conditions are harsh in both geologic and climatic terms. Site-specific design is mandatory. It is imperative that design and construction professionals working in this environment recognize and respond to the specific conditions that exist at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Contractors from outside the regional shall familiar themselves with all unique requirements of the Sonoran environment. Site adapted projects from other regions or standard plans from design guides will be modified appropriately or they will be rejected.

1.9 ZONING AREAS

Davis-Monthan AFB can be described and categorized by seven distinct character areas. These areas are illustrated on the Base Zoning Map in Appendix A and are further described below.

Flight Line Zone

The Flight Line Zone at Davis-Monthan AFB includes areas directly related to the daily operation and functions of the 355th Wing and the 12th Air Force. This area includes, but is not limited to, runways, aircraft hangars, maintenance and storage facilities, and some office functions. This character area is primarily comprised of large scale, utilization buildings which are surrounded by pavement and parking areas. There is typically little attention to landscaping and other site amenities in this area.

Noise is a major concern in this area due to its inclusion of the aircraft functions. This area is bounded to the west and south by the main runway and adjacent tarmacs, the north by Sunglow Road, and to the east by Phoenix Avenue.

Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) Zone

The AMARG Zone is unique to Davis Monthan AFB. Occupying over 2,600-acres, AMARG Zone is home to over 5,000 stored aircraft. AMARG

1.10 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ

Zone is a major industrial center providing storage, regeneration, reclamation, and disposal capabilities for a wide range of aircraft and aerospace items.

This area occupies the north/central portion of the base.

Headquarters Zone

The Headquarters Zone of Davis-Monthan AFB includes areas that are directly related to the daily operations and functions of the 12th Air Force. It also includes administrative spaces, public service facilities, and commercial buildings to support this function. This area is immediately adjacent to the main gate bounded by Golf Links Road to the north, Sunglow Road to the west, Arizola Street to the south, and family housing to the east.

Industrial Zone

The Industrial Zone sits adjacent to the Flight Line Zone. Buildings are typically pre-engineered structures with metal panel/masonry walls and standing seam metal roofs. Most buildings are one story in nature and house functions supporting the ongoing maintenance of flight operations and aircraft. This area is bounded to the north by Ironwood Street, to the east by Fifth Street, the south by Madera Street, and by First Street to the west.

Medical Zone

The Medical Zone is primarily centered around the clinic and supporting facilities located at the intersection of Picacho and Wilmot Streets. The facilities provide clinical services for those stationed at Davis-Monthan AFB and surrounding areas.

Housing Zone

The Family Housing Zone includes areas designated primarily for single family housing for accompanied personnel. The Family Housing Zone occupies the area bounded by the golf course to the south, Golf Links and Wilmot Roads to the North and East, and Eleventh Street, roughly, to the west.

Town Center Zone

The Town Center Zone includes commercial activities, indoor recreation, club facilities, and community services. Also included in this area are dormitories and administrative services related to a wide range of base functions. This area is divided into two parcels, one bordered by Arizola to the north, Craycroft to the east, Fifth Street to the west, and Ironwood to the south. The second parcel is bordered by Madera to the north, Craycroft to the east, and Yuma Street borders the western and southern boundaries.

Throughout the base, structures exist that do not fit the zoning categories as described herein.

Administrative support functions serving specific hangar buildings are located in the Town Center Zone. Likewise, dormitories are located in the Town Center Zone rather than in the Family Housing Zone. Complete adherence to the zones is impossible in an environment as functionally complex as Davis-Monthan AFB. Care must be taken in these cases to ensure that architectural compatibility is maintained within specific zones despite varying building functions.

Positive base-wide aesthetic trends have emerged in recent construction. Examples are uniform exterior masonry colors, consistent standing seam metal roof and consistent palettes for landscaping. Crossing all character areas, these aesthetic characteristics help create a harmonious, consistent image for the entire base. Continuations of these trends in future development will further reinforce the image of the base as a cohesive whole. Functional requirements will, however, lead to architectural treatments that are zone-specific. Aircraft hangars are required to be large and industrial in character and merit little, if any landscape treatment. In contrast, a child development center should be small in scale and friendly in characters. Only by recognizing the architectural impact that the various functions have on buildings, and continuing to group buildings with similar mission and functional requirements, can functional and aesthetic conflict be minimized and visual cohesiveness maximized.

SECTION 2.0

Planning

SECTION 2.0 Planning

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 2.1

2.1 BUILDING SITING

2.1.1 Existing

Building siting at Davis-Monthan AFB is at present, primarily function driven. While compatible groupings of buildings have traditionally been located in proximity to one another (flight line structures, dormitories, etc.), concern with site aesthetics, green space development and pedestrian friendly design has been the exception rather than the rule.

Newer structures on the base exhibit a more campus-like approach to site design. Visual shielding of parking and utilities, enhanced pedestrian environments, and climate- and topography-appropriate design are evident even in the Flight Line and AMARG Zones. The landscaped plaza on the flight line side of the Base Operations Facility represents a good example of aesthetic and pedestrian response in a mission environment.

While the activities in Headquarters and Housing lend themselves more naturally to the “campus” character desired, the same site design guidelines can—and should—be applied to projects in the Flight Line Zone and AMARG Zone. While functional site design factors will be given top priority at Davis-Monthan, pedestrian response and connectivity with neighboring buildings should also be a driving factor on all new projects.

2.1.2 General Considerations

Avoid small sites that cause problems for neighboring buildings and unnecessarily drive up costs.

Site buildings with a common function (such as dormitories) in proximity to each other. In addition to sharing common infrastructure, the massing, scale, materials, and details can be used to link the buildings aesthetically.

Provide enough space around a complex for expansion. Assume 10% for expansion whenever other supporting data is not available.

When existing traffic patterns will be altered by new construction, provide adequate traffic alternatives to coincide with the construction of the project.

2.1A Paved paths, landscaping, and lighting encourage pedestrian circulation between buildings in a functional complex.

Planning SECTION 2.0

2. 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 2

Locate buildings in a manner that provides easy, direct pedestrian access among buildings in a complex. Only encourage driving when walking cannot be accommodated.

Do not use sites that force building functions into uneconomical shapes such as curves, diagonals, or long rectangles.

Use sites that allow open landscape space around buildings to separate them from the pavement.

Prevent an overcrowded appearance.

Buildings shall be sited to establish a minimum of 5% ground slope away from the building for a minimum of 10-feet. Establish floor elevations at a minimum of 6-inches above any surrounding terrain within 10-feet of the building. Site buildings to capitalize on existing topography when possible.

Use existing or natural grades and contours to develop positive drainage away from buildings, thereby avoiding excessive cut and fill.

In areas where grading or contours are altered, provide adequate erosion control measures consistent with monsoon and flash flood rainfall amounts and rates of the region.

Minimum building setback from streets and roads shall meet AT/FP requirements in accordance with UFC 4-010-01. Building setbacks should vary no more than 10% from the average setback of adjacent buildings. Setback distance in the family housing area should be consistent with individual housing groups. Building setbacks shall include all components of the building including mechanical yards, screen walls, porches, etc.

2.1B Tight site allows no landscape space around building and should be avoided.

2.1C Site buildings to provide landscape space between building and paving to not only meet AT/FP requirements but also enhance the aesthetic quality of the built environment.

SECTION 3.0

Architectural Standards

SECTION 3.0 Architectural Standards

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 3. 1

3.1 ACC ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS

3.1.1 Policy Statement

The special character of defense installations dictates compatibility over personal style. The limited size and function of Air Combat Command (ACC) bases cannot accept the diverse opinions of the many design professionals without becoming cluttered and unsettled. In this context ‘good design’ is defined as design that contributes to the overall harmony of the base rather than design that attracts individual attention. Good examples of where ACC design goals should lead are college campuses and corporate office parks.

The designer of record shall prepare all permit paperwork and submit to the appropriate agency or require the permits to be obtained by the contractor as necessary for the type of permit.

3.1.2 Goals

Monotony is not the goal; every building does not need to be the same, but some common architectural element or theme should tie all buildings together.

Responsible design will achieve this goal.

The following goals have guided the above ACC policy and should also guide all levels of design at Davis-Monthan AFB:

Low Maintenance – Use permanent low maintenance exteriors that are compatible with ACC bases and their natural and man-made environments.

Environmental – Design facilities in ways to enhance environmental quality and minimize consumption of natural resources.

Labor – Reduce labor-intensive maintenance procedures.

Accessibility – The site and interiors of all facilities shall be designed for accessibility in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) and the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS).

3.1A A masonry base can visually connect building wings of different height or scale.

3.1B Inappropriate building form for new construction.

Eliminate old and/or outdated facilities whenever possible.

An exemption can only be issued by Air Staff for facilities specifically designed for military personnel occupancy and use.

Facilities of this nature will not be afforded any contract services or civil service personnel and should be provided as an absolute final option.

This exemption does not comply with the condition of military personnel with “temporary disabilities” due to physical injuries. Facilities designed under this condition will create a situation of long-term work-arounds during this condition until adequate facility modification can be executed.

Architectural Standards SECTION 3.0

3. 2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 2

AT/FP Requirements – Renovations exceeding 50% of plant replacement value (PRV) require compliance with UFC-4-010-01 DOD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings.

Renovation, sustainment, modernization, and/or maintenance of any existing facility shall not exceed 75% of the plant replacement value without prior Air Staff approval and notification of Congress.

Request for Chief Engineer’s waiver from DCG requirements shall include description of requirement to be waivered, justification, and impact on project if not approved (refer to Appendix K for Waiver Request Form).

Allow a minimum of 15 working days for response in project schedule.

2017 Design Compatibility Guidelines—Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ 3. 3

3.2 HEIGHT/MASSING

3.2.1 General Standards

Building heights at Davis-Monthan AFB will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Specific program needs may define or restrict the number of stories or height. In general, except for dormitories, building heights at Davis-Monthan AFB are limited to two stories above grade.