Middlesex Community College - Connecticut State Colleges

Transcription

Middlesex Community College
Master Plan Space Program
&
Utilization Study
August 2006
Master Plan Space Program &
Utilization Study
August 2006
One Westinghouse Plaza
Boston, Massachusetts 02136
Tel 617.364.4444 Fax 617.364.4845
Master Plan Space Program & Utilization Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Position & Purpose
This section provides some campus background
and the purpose behind the project.
2.0
Process & Methodology
This section addresses the scope, process, and
methodology for the project.
3.0
People
Section three relates to the people who both
benefit from and provide support for the
institution. Students, faculty, staff, and
community and their use of, and impact on,
facilities are analyzed.
4.0
Programs
Section four reviews the programs – academic, credit-free, student services,
continuing education, and workforce development, with regard to enrollment and
trends.
5.0
Places & Spaces
Section five reflects the physical space and its use. Utilization of instructional space,
departmental areas, gathering spaces, etc. are reviewed both in terms of
quantitative and qualitative data.
6.0
Projections & Proposals
This section contains brief summaries of the analyses and projections from the
previous sections and then addresses recommendations and options for the
campus.
Appendix:
♦ Interview Notes
♦ Space Inventory
♦ Floor Plans
August 2006
Table of Contents
Chapter 1.0:
Position & Purpose
1.0
Position & Purpose
1.1
Position & Background
1.1.1
Campus Background
Middlesex Community College (MxCC) was founded in 1966 and is
located on 38 acres of land at 100 Training Hill Road in
Middletown, Connecticut. The campus is set on a hill, secluded,
but not far, from downtown. The campus consists of four main
buildings: Founders Hall (primarily administrative space), Snow Hall
and Wheaton Hall (primarily academic space), and Chapman
Hall (Learning Center/Library). Chapman is the newest building on
campus, constructed approximately ten years ago, and beginning
to show signs of wear and tear on its interior.
Based on the space inventory generated as part of this study,
there is 123,669 gross square feet (gst) and 82,812 assignable
square feet (asf) at MxCC distributed across four buildings.
Enrollment trends for community colleges as a whole indicate an
increase in the number of students who continue their education,
and more immediate high school graduates (resulting in younger
students who are more likely to attend full-time). MxCC is
experiencing this trend, although the overall capture rate for
MxCC has remained low.
1.1.2
Programs
MxCC awards associates degrees in over 30 major areas across
five divisions and certificates in a number of other areas. These
programs prepare students with employment skills, certificates, or
the credentials to continue their education at baccalaureate
institutions. In Fall 2005, the campus supported 117 full-time faculty
and staff.
While interest in the development of a nursing program at MxCC
has been indicated, the resources necessary to sustain a stand
alone nursing program are not available. As a result, the college is
looking at other allied health programming and science and math
focused areas in the liberal arts that address service area
workforce needs.
1.0 - 1
August 2006
Position & Purpose
In addition, the College plans to expand its reach into the
community. Two examples of this outreach are the Meriden
facility, which serves the needs of local Meriden students and the
surrounding towns, and courses offered at Old Saybrook High
School. Currently students may take up to 50 percent of their
courses at the Meriden Center, but to gain a full degree they must
still attend the Middletown Campus.
1.1.3
Future Goals and Vision
The college’s vision and mission statement reads, in part:
Vision Statement:
Our College and our community are partners in a tradition
shaping the future through education –- one person at a
time.
Mission Statement:
Middlesex believes that a college education should be
available to everyone. It is committed to providing
excellence in teaching as well as personal support in
developing the genius of each student. The educational
goal of the college is to promote understanding, learning,
ethics, and self-discipline by encouraging critical thinking.
Faculty and staff are dedicated to helping students
achieve their academic, professional and career
potentials. This support is continual process that recognizes
student diversity in both background and learning ability.
In many of the meetings, interviews, and conversations held at
MxCC during this process, there were two consistently repeated
phrases: Middlesex is a “diamond in the rough” or the “gem on the
hill”. These phrases were used to express staff pride in the
institution.
The campus has an opportunity to establish and attain a series of
goals. To date there has been the creation and integration of
state-of-the-art technology in some instructional spaces, and the
WebCT has been implemented. With it, MxCC has become the
third largest online student population in the CCC system. It is the
future vision of the campus to create a technology building,
update science labs which are over 20 years old, add additional
“Smart” Boards and internet capability, and provide more
technology in all its academic programs.
1.0 - 2
August 2006
Position & Purpose
1.2
Purpose
Middlesex Community College submitted a Request for Proposal in
2005 seeking “…qualifications from Educational Planners /
Consultants with demonstrable experience evaluating community
college program needs, conducting utilization studies, and
preparing master plan space programs.” Rickes Associates, Inc.
(RA) responded and was engaged by MxCC in August 2005 to
conduct the Master Plan Space Program & Utilization Study for
Middlesex Community College.
This RFP asked three distinct but intertwined questions which were
to be addressed during this process:
1. How is space currently being utilized at MxCC?
a. A review of what space currently exists, aggregated by
department and area.
b. A review of how classrooms and labs are currently
being utilized.
c. An analysis of the needs of credit-free courses, training
program, Business and Industry, etc.
2. What space will MxCC need should particular (yet to be
defined) programs be offered at the institution?
a. A historical review of enrollment and analysis of
projected future expansion based on an analysis of the
statistical draw from MxCC’s service area.
b. A review of current and projected faculty / staff.
c. An occupational outlook review.
3. What are the best mechanisms for addressing these space
needs, both now and into the future?
Each of these questions and items incorporates a subset of various
tasks, some of which are defined below:
♦ Review existing space utilization and operations for
instructional, academic, administrative departments;
♦ Create a workable and maintainable space inventory;
♦ Prove a space analysis of current conditions and assess
future needs;
♦ Project enrollment impact on campus as a whole; and
♦ Address an implementation strategy.
This report represents the compilation of previously reviewed
documentation.
1.0 - 3
August 2006
Position & Purpose
Chapter 2.0:
2.0
2.1
Process
The Rickes Associates Master Plan is built from the inside of the
institution outward and provides data, data analysis, and the
context for decision making by the institution. The RA Plan
develops four major data sets that are the foundation of the Plan’s
recommendations and conclusions:
♦
People: Students, Faculty, Staff, and Community
♦
Programs: Academic, Non-Credit, Student Services, etc.
♦
Places & Spaces: Instructional, Student, Faculty,
Administrative, Community
♦
Projections & Proposals: Enrollment, Programmatic
Changes, Staffing, Space Adequacy, and Sufficiency.
These data sets contain both qualitative and quantitative data
that is analyzed and converted into information the institution can
use to consider options, make decisions, and track conditions.
Each process contains within it a myriad of data which, in the end,
can lead the campus into the future.
The following section provides an overview of the process as a
whole, as well as the relevant methodology applied to the data
analysis. From this, each chapter will take the defined data sets
and present findings and implications for the campus as a whole.
At completion, projections and proposals will be reviewed within
the context of the space program, which has been developed
specifically for Middlesex Community College.
2.1.1
Data Process
A Data Request List was provided to MxCC detailing the
information needed for the Master Plan and Utilization Study. Items
requested included:
♦ Reference Data (course catalog, course scheduling grid
with “standard” time blocks, recent utilization reports, and
any surveys regarding instructional space/use)
2.0 - 1
August 2006
♦ Space Inventory (and appropriately identified space)
♦ Human Resource Data
♦ Detailed Course Data
♦ Existing Space Guidelines, Floor Plans, Surveys, etc.
2.2
Study Components
The components of the study process were as follows:
♦
Review Fall 2005 schedule data;
♦
Review historical enrollment data;
♦
Conduct campus walkthrough with working floor-plans as
provided by TSIG (working in conjunction with and as a
sub-consultant to Rickes Associates);
♦
Conduct interviews and focus group meetings with
pertinent / key personnel including student groups;
♦
Analyze distribution of space across campus both by
Dean/Division and discipline to notate available space as
well as identify fragmentation, where possible;
♦
Analyze current use of general-purpose classrooms and
specialized instructional spaces,
♦
Evaluate efficiency and sufficiency of the existing
instructional space; and
♦
Provide quantitative and qualitative recommendations for
the campus.
The outcome of this process included order-of-magnitude space
recommendations pertaining to instructional spaces as well as
academic, administrative, and support space.
2.3
Methodology
Each section of the report contains a specific portion of the
process in terms of the applied methodology. Expanded
descriptions of the methodology as it pertains to that analysis are
included in those sections and briefly summarized here.
People Analysis
The intent of this review is to analyze enrollment and staff to
determine whether there is sufficient and appropriate space for
current operations, and what space might be needed in the
future. In addition, a summary of the campus interviews is
provided.
2.0 - 2
August 2006
Program Analysis
The intent of this section is to review the programs (academic,
credit free, students services) within the context of enrollment and
past trends to provide a base for the future projection of need for
the campus as a whole.
Places Analysis
Space Inventory Analysis
One critical component of this project was the design and
population of an active and up-to-date space inventory. This
inventory needed to include a space-by-space listing of all rooms,
including a unique room number, associated square footage,
departmental “ownership,” and a space classification code. To
develop the inventory, Rickes Associates, Inc. engaged the
services of TSIG, a New York based firm, to review existing floor
plans (CAD) and update them via field verification. To this, RA
added National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) coding and
ownership classification of space based on pre-defined reporting
lines. This coding provides the basis for the creation of color-coded
floor plans by divisional and departmental lines across the entire
campus as a whole.
Instructional Analysis
The intent of the instructional space utilization analysis is to apply a
standardized methodology to identify the “gap” that may exist
between current and desirable instructional space allocation and
room usage patterns.
As a consequence of this analysis and comprehensive diagnosis,
specific surpluses/deficits can be identified in terms of numbers
and capacities of general-purpose classroom spaces. Where
specialized instructional spaces are concerned, the focus is on
“right-sizing” both the seating capacity and the station size.
Capital and non-capital recommendations are made to align
utilization patterns with standard guidelines and parameters,
based upon Fall 2005 enrollment patterns.
Instructional space comprises general-purpose classrooms and
specialized spaces (e.g., laboratories, painting studios, etc.). These
spaces are designated as 100 (Classrooms) or 200 (Laboratories)
categories, as defined by the National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES) Postsecondary Education Facilities Inventory and
Classification Manual.
2.0 - 3
August 2006
Chapter 3.0:
People
3.0
People
Students, Faculty, Staff, Community
3.1
Overview
This section describes the analysis of student enrollment and
personnel counts to determine whether there is sufficient and
appropriate space for current operations, and what space might be
needed in the future to support the users and providers of the
College — i.e., the students, faculty, and staff. The section also
addresses underlying assumptions that influence projected space
needs. Some of the issues covered in this analysis are patterns and
potential shifts in enrollment, including projections by town, as well as
current status and anticipated changes in faculty and staff to support
projected enrollments. Current data and long-range historic analysis
were provided by the Middlesex Community College Office of
Institutional Research.
3.2
Credit Enrollment Analysis and Demographic Projections
3.2.1
Enrollment Analysis
Historically, enrollment at Middlesex Community College (MxCC) has
reflected the same trends that other institutions of higher education
have experienced in the past two decades. In the early 1980s,
enrollments grew but then leveled off by mid-decade. The highest
recorded enrollment occurred in 1991, with 3,272 students. During the
1990s, however, enrollments began to decline, and by 1997, the
College recorded one of its lowest headcount enrollment in recent
years (2,237). Since then, enrollment has trended upward with some
fluctuations.
For purposes of analyzing the use of space, this report is based on the
most recent data from the past five Fall semesters. Between Fall 2001
and Fall 2005, combined fund enrollment at MxCC has fluctuated. As
Figure 1 shows, actual Fall total headcount enrollment has decreased
by 1.5 percent (34 students) since Fall 2001. In contrast, FTE
production during the same time period increased by 15.1 percent.
3.0 - 1
August 2006
People
Figure 1:
Trends in Enrollment: Headcount and FTE
Fall 2001 to Fall 2005
3000
2320
2440
2400
2354
2286
1235
1245
1312
1287
Fall 2002
Fall 2003
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
2500
2000
1500
1000
1118
500
0
Fall 2001
Headcount
FTE
As demonstrated in Figure 2, the larger FTE increase is the result of a
significant increase in full-time students (42.7%), moderated by a
decrease in part-time students (-17.4%). Full-time students comprised
26.5 percent of total enrollment in Fall 2001, but by Fall 2005 they
comprised 38.3 percent of the College’s total headcount enrollment.
Figure 2:
Trends in Enrollment: Full-time and Part-time Headcount
2000
1706
1736
1800
1648
1487
1410
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
614
867
876
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
752
704
400
200
Full-time
0
Fall 2001
Fall 2002
Fall 2003
Part-time
The trend toward more full-time students has been noted at
community colleges nationwide.
3.0 - 2
August 2006
People
In addition to changes in the mix of full- and part-time students
attending MxCC, several other characteristics of the student
population have changed. As Figure 3 shows, there has been a shift
in the numbers of students in various enrollment categories between
Fall 2001 and Fall 2005. (It should be noted that in Fall 2001, transfer
students were included in the category “New.” This inflates the
number of new students in Fall 2001, and conversely deflates the
number of “New” students beginning in Fall 2002.)
Figure 3:
Trends in Enrollment: Student Classification
1600
1400
1327
1200
1374
1229
1150
1052
1000
888
820
800
682
687
253
229
154
601
600
400
379
328
200
138
132
318
138
0
Fall 2001
Fall 2002
New
Fall 2003
Transfer
Continuing
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
Readmit
The figure above reveals that between Fall 2001 and Fall 2005, the
number of new students fell by 32.3 percent, and the number of
readmitted students also fell – by 63.6 percent. These declines are
deceptive in that they reflect changes on smaller numbers. However,
in Fall 2001 new students comprised 38.3 percent of the student
population while in Fall 2005 they comprised 27.5 percent.
Readmitted students also comprised a larger percent of the student
population in Fall 2001 (16.3%) than in Fall 2005 (6.3%).
It is also evident from Figure 3 that the percent of continuing students
increased from 45.4 percent of the student population in Fall 2001 to
56.2 percent in Fall 2005. This change may reflect an increase in the
retention rate. Students who have transferred into the College from
another school are on the rise. In Fall 2002 (the first year in which
3.0 - 3
August 2006
People
these students were tracked separately) 132 students transferred into
MxCC. By Fall 2005, that number had more than doubled to 318,
representing an increase of 140.9 percent.
The changes in the student population can also be seen in data on
gender and ethnicity. Figure 4 illustrates the concurrent changes in
the male and female composition of the student population
between Fall 2001 and Fall 2005.
Figure 4:
Trends in Enrollment: Male and Female
1600
1400
1440
1493
1488
1463
947
912
891
1493
1200
1000
880
800
793
600
400
200
0
Fall 2001
Fall 2002
Fall 2003
Male
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
Female
In Fall 2001, the student population was 37.9 percent male. By Fall
2005, that proportion had dropped to 34.7 percent, while female
enrollment began an upward climb.
3.0 - 4
August 2006
People
Additionally, Figure 5 illustrates the changing ethnic patterns in the
student population over the past five years.
Figure 5:
Trends in Enrollment: Ethnicity
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Fall 2001
White
Fall 2002
African Am
Fall 2003
Hispanic
Asian
Fall 2004
Native Am
Fall 2005
Unknown
Although the proportions are clearly skewed in favor of white
students, there is a decrease over time in the number of white
students (-8.2%) and increases in the numbers of non-white students,
except Native Americans.
3.2.2
Service Region
MxCC’s service region is an 18-town cluster, with over half (64.6%) of
the service area enrollment coming from four towns: Cromwell,
Meriden (including South Meriden),
Middletown, and Wallingford. In Fall 2005, the
“capture” rate, or the percentage of total
population in a particular town attending
MxCC, ranged from a low of 0.31 percent
enrolling from Old Saybrook to a high of 1.09
percent enrolling from Middletown.
3.0 - 5
August 2006
People
The overall capture rate from the MxCC service region is 0.67 percent
(based upon Fall 2005 enrollment). The following table summarizes
the data from the capture rate analysis. (Note that the following
areas have been combined: Essex includes Centerbrook and
Ivoryton; Haddam includes Higganum and Haddam Neck; East
Hampton includes Middle Haddam; Meriden includes South Meriden;
and Middlefield includes Rockfall.)
Figure 6:
Capture Rate by Town
City/Town
Service Region
Chester
Clinton
Cromwell
Deep River
Durham
East Haddam
East Hampton
Essex
Haddam
Killingworth
Meriden
Middlefield
Middletown
Old Saybrook
Portland
Rocky Hill
Wallingford
Westbrook
Service Region: 79.7%
Out of Service Region
Madison
New Britain
Newington
Other Connecticut Towns
Out of Service Region: 18.2%
GRAND TOTAL, MxCC
3.0 - 6
Fall 2005
Enrollment
Census
Population
Capture
Rate
23
80
101
29
57
30
63
27
74
26
449
42
472
32
64
53
155
45
1,822
3,656
13,053
12,822
4,684
6,644
23,726
10,206
6514
6828
5,984
58,249
4,184
43,189
10,367
8,891
17,946
43,085
6,297
270,570
0.63%
0.61%
0.79%
0.62%
0.86%
0.70%
0.46%
0.40%
1.08%
0.43%
0.77%
1.00%
1.09%
0.31%
0.72%
0.30%
0.36%
0.71%
0.67%
43
38
22
361
464
2,286
August 2006
People
While the service region is responsible for providing the majority of the
enrollment, other Connecticut towns also contribute – notably,
Madison (43), New Britain (38), and Newington (22) – with many other
towns contributing less than 20 students each.
The average capture rate for the Connecticut Community College
system is 1.2 percent of the service region population, a figure that is
echoed nationally where the typical range is one to two percent.
(However, in some parts of the country, where public higher
education and community colleges fare particularly well, this figure
can be much higher. The Houston Community College System, for
example, has established a potential market penetration rate of
4.7%.)
The MxCC service area has a (2002) census population of 270,570
and a capture rate of 0.67 percent, which is below the Connecticut
Community College System average of 1.2 percent. Only three of the
towns in the service region have capture rates that approach the
System average: Middletown (1.09%), Haddam (1.08%), and
Middlefield (1.00%). The remaining towns have capture rates below
1.0 percent, showing that there is opportunity for increasing the
enrollment through improved capture rates for all of the Middlesex
service area. For example, assuming that the capture rates for all
towns in the service area had been 1.2 percent in Fall 2005, the
headcount enrollment from the service area alone would have been
3,247 as opposed to the actual 1,822. This would represent an
increase of 1,425 students.
Capture Rate Projections by Rate of Increase
It is a straight forward matter to apply future enrollments based on
capture rates and the projected increase in total population in the
College’s service area. The table below illustrates how. By using the
projected town population figures for the year 2014 and the current
capture rate by town, projections of enrollment increases in the
College’s service area can be determined based on population
increases alone. The service area is projected to grow by 42,285
persons by the year 2014 -- from 270,570 to 352,855, or a rate of 15.6
percent.
3.0 - 7
August 2006
People
Figure 7:
Projected Enrollment
Based on Estimated Population and Capture Rates
Town
Chester
Clinton
Cromwell
Deep River
Durham
East Haddam
East Hampton
Essex
Haddam
Killingworth
Meriden
Middlefield
Middletown
Old Saybrook
Portland
Rocky Hill
Wallingford
Westbrook
Total: Service Region
Total: Out of Service Region
Grand Total: Projected
Capture
Rate
0.63%
0.61%
0.79%
0.62%
0.86%
0.70%
0.46%
0.40%
1.08%
0.43%
0.77%
1.00%
1.09%
0.31%
0.72%
0.30%
0.36%
0.71%
0.67%
Projected
Population
2014
4,538
15,448
14,666
5,442
8,216
6,148
15,212
10,211
8,266
7,145
61,267
5,279
50,952
11,576
9,891
22,112
49,266
7,220
312,855
Projected
Enrollment
2014
29
94
116
34
71
43
70
41
89
31
472
53
555
36
71
66
177
51
2,099
536
2,635
Figure 7 suggests that based on the population projections alone, if
the capture rates do not change, the College may have an
additional 277 students from the service area and 72 students from
outside the region, for an increase of 349 students.
3.2.3
Enrollment Projections by Census Growth
& Increased Capture Rates
Based on census projections, the population within the service region
is projected to grow by over 15.6 percent by 2014. It is also possible
that all towns in the service area could simultaneously improve their
capture rates.
3.0 - 8
August 2006
People
Assuming:
♦
projected population growth in all towns;
♦
a theoretical capture rate of 1.2 percent for towns in the
service area (3,754);
♦
increased enrollment from population growth in other towns
of the extended service area, at the service area rate of
growth of 15.6 percent (536);
then the projected headcount enrollment for 2014 would be 4,290.
This represents an overall increase of 2,004 headcount students.
The figure below presents the projected enrollment within the service
region, based on estimated population growth and a uniform target
capture rate.
Figure 8:
Projected Enrollment within the MxCC Service Region
Based on Estimated Population Growth and
Increased Capture Rates
Town
Chester
Clinton
Cromwell
Deep River
Durham
East Haddam
East Hampton
Essex
Haddam
Killingworth
Meriden
Middlefield
Middletown
Old Saybrook
Portland
Rocky Hill
Wallingford
Westbrook
Total: Service Region
Total: Out of Service Region
Grand Total: Projected
3.0 - 9
Capture
Rate
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
Projected
Population
2014
4,538
15,448
14,666
5,442
8,216
6,148
15,212
10,211
8,266
7,145
61,267
5,279
50,952
11,576
9,891
22,112
49,266
7,220
312,855
Projected
Enrollment
2014
54
185
176
65
99
74
183
123
99
86
735
63
611
139
119
265
591
87
3,754
536
4,290
August 2006
People
Enrollment Projections by Rate of Growth
In addition to exploring enrollment scenarios based upon anticipated
growth in the general population as well, as hypothetical adjustments
to the capture rate, another approach is to review the rate of
change in headcount enrollment at the College. The figure below
shows the effect of extending current rates of change in headcount
enrollment to the year 2014. The cumulative impact of the College’s
five-year annual average growth rate of -0.37 percent produces a
decrease in total enrollment by 78 headcount students to 2,208
students.
Figure 9:
Headcount Projections to 2014
Fall
Headcount
3.2.4
2005
(actual)
2,286
2006
2,278
2007
2,270
2008
2,262
2009
2,254
2010
2,246
2011
2,235
2012
2,224
2013
2,216
Enrollment Projections Summary
Figure 10 shows the various enrollment scenarios that have been
calculated, reflecting differing assumptions with regard to capture
rates and annual rate of change. The projected 2014 enrollment
headcount ranges from 2,208 -- assuming an annual enrollment
decrease of 0.37 percent each year -- to 4,290, the result of
population increases combined with improved capture rates.
Figure 10:
Projected Headcount, 2014
Projected
2014
Headcount
Scenario
Difference
from 2005
Increase in Census Population &
Steady-State Capture Rates
2,635
+349
Increase in Census Population &
Increase in Capture Rates
4,290
+2,004
Annual Growth of -0.37%
(5-year annual average.)
2,208
-78
3.0 - 10
August 2006
People
2014
2,208
The wide variations in enrollment projections among these three
scenarios underscore different approaches the College might take as
it plans for the future. With the relatively recent changes in the
student profile and plans to review and update the College’s
curricular offerings, there is need within the College for consensus on
what approach to take.
3.3
Faculty and Staff
The detailed analysis of space needs for each department requires
the collection of data on existing and projected numbers of faculty
and staff. Personnel estimates serve as a critical driver in the process
of estimating space needs. For this reason, it is important to
understand not only how many and what types of staffing currently
exist, but also how many and what types are projected to be added
in the future.
In order to address this question, data were collected from various
sources. Human Resources provided a database of current faculty
and staff counts for Fall 2005. Personnel growth was derived from
estimates by the President.
Figure 11 shows the current composition of all full- and part-time staff
(academic and non-academic), including vacant positions at the
College. Adjunct faculty were not included in this analysis, but are
included in the database of staff by department in the appendix.
Figure 11:
Fall 2005 Staff Headcount by Division
21%
6%
It is clear from Figure 11 that
the majority of staff (66%) at
MxCC is employed through
Learning and Student
Development.
7%
66%
Administrative
Learning/Student Development
Continuing Education/Community Services
Finance/Admimistration
3.0 - 11
August 2006
People
Figure 12 shows the relative proportions of full- and part-time staff by
division during Fall 2005.
Figure 12:
Current Full- and Part-time Staff, by Division
Fall 2005
Division
Administrative
Continuing Education/Community Services
Finance/Administration
Learning/Student Development
TOTAL
Current
FT
PT
8
0
7
2
27
1
76
12
118
15
Perhaps the most vital information to be gained from the analysis of
these projected staff increases is that they should be compared to
projected enrollment increases planned by the College. The
President has estimated that staff may grow by as many as 10 people
over the next five to 10 years. The figure below shows how an
additional 10 staff would be assigned using the current proportions.
Figure 13:
Staff Projections, by Division
Division
Administrative
Continuing Education/
Community Services
Finance/Administration
Learning/Student
Development
Total
Current
FT
PT
8
0
7
2
Growth
FT
PT
1
0
1
0
Total
FT
PT
9
0
8
2
27
76
1
12
2
5
0
1
29
81
1
13
118
15
9
1
127
16
It is critical that the College’s facilities master plan, which will take into
account the changes in student enrollment, should also anticipate
appropriate changes in staff.
3.0 - 12
August 2006
People
3.4
Interviews & Focus Groups
As part of the data collection process, RA conducted interviews of
both academic and administrative staff from 30th January 2006
through 1st February. In all, 28 individual staff were scheduled and
interviewed during this three-day period. In addition, two focus
groups provided supplementary information from faculty and student
perspectives. The following is a summary of the campus interviews.
This information, as well as specific concerns dependent on the
department or area, was considered during the creation of the
master plan. While the general theme of these meetings was “we
make do”; the future theme of meetings might be “we make a
difference!”
3.0 - 13
August 2006
People
Date:
Interviewers:
30 January – 1 February 2006
Karen E. Hinton, Monica C. Meyerhoff
RA
Summary of the Campus Interviews
“What we do, we do well…but in some ways we’re not connected [to students’ needs].”
As part of the data collection process for the Master Plan project for Middlesex Community
College (MxCC), Rickes Associates conducted interviews of both academic and administrative
staff from 30th January 2006 (Monday) through 1st February 2006 (Wednesday). In all, 28
individual staff were scheduled and interviewed during the three day period. In addition, two
focus groups provided supplementary information from faculty and students.
The purpose of the interviews was to collect data for the following:
♦ Confirm the location(s) of spaces assigned to each department or office.
♦ Determine the number of people who regularly use the spaces.
♦ Identify current issues with the space and its use.
♦ Explore future plans, either the department’s or the institution’s that would impact the
size or use of the space.
The information from these interviews was used to analyze the sufficiency and adequacy of
current space and to anticipate future space needs. The notes from all interviews and the two
focus groups are included in the Appendix to this report.
The three major areas/themes that developed from the interviews are grouped as follows:
♦ Meeting, office, and gathering space
♦ Instructional space and technology needs
♦ Appearance and presentation of the campus as a whole
I.
Meeting/ Office / Gathering Space
a. Lack of campus-wide small meeting rooms
i. There are too few meeting rooms and a lack of space for private meetings.
ii. Departmental need for meeting space with staff.
iii. Student support offices need for private meetings with students.
b. Lack of private office space
i. Faculty / staff lack private office space in which they can meet with students
and/or have internal, private conversations
ii. Need space for office workers
3.0 - 14
August 2006
People
c. Lack of appropriate gathering space
i. The need for space in which students, faculty, and staff can co-mingle
ii. Lack of private study space for students
iii. The student lounge area is problematic given its location in a mixed-use
building
iv. The shift in the student profile, to younger students, has raised a question
about whether students would stay on campus longer if they had attractive
gathering space.
v. Staff and faculty believe they would benefit from the community-building
aspects of a gathering space such as an employee lounge
vi. Need for auditorium space for campus use and gathering
II.
Instructional Space
a. The need for larger classrooms and smaller classrooms that can be right-sized with
appropriate furniture.
b. Need for wireless access and better technology in all instructional spaces.
c. Instructional Size:
i. Need 40- to 50-seat rooms
ii. Issue of currently sizing courses to room capacity (meaning courses would be
larger if there was appropriate space available).
iii. Many rooms have too many seats
d. Laboratory space is outdated and/or in poor condition.
III. Appearance and Presentation of the Campus
a. The appearance and condition of Founders Hall is of concern to the MxCC
community.
i. Roof leaks are damaging interior spaces. Staff need to cover desks at night
to prevent leakage on papers. [This has been addressed since the time of
the interviews.]
ii. The general appearance of the offices and rooms in Founders does not
present a professional face to students and parents
b. The general age and condition of most buildings and the campus grounds are an
issue.
IV. Other
a. Lack of signage is an issue.
b. Security is lacking.
c. There is a need for storage, especially secure storage, for confidential records and
equipment.
d. There are too few areas for working on projects and assembling mailings and
packets.
3.0 - 15
August 2006
People
3.5
Summary
This chapter presented analysis of the people who are served by the
space at Middlesex Community College. There are a number of
issues that will have an impact on the use of space at the campus,
now and in the future.
With student enrollment changes, the College will be facing a
different type of need for its student spaces. The decline in total
headcount enrollment belies the fact that FTE production has
increased over the past five years. This apparent contradiction is the
result of a shift to a more full-time student population. As this change
resolves itself, the College may see an increased need to provide
spaces most used by full-time students.
Staff and faculty spaces need to be assessed using current national
guidelines to ensure that there is sufficient and appropriate space for
conducting the work of the College. With the apparent changes in
the student population and a possible increase in staff numbers, the
analysis and projection of space must anticipate future space needs
and should be reviewed at appropriate intervals.
Above all, there is a fierce pride by all for the campus and a great
affection and determination to “give it their best.” This is not just a job
for most, but a passion. With the right facilities, space, and support,
MxCC will shine and emerge as a true gem from a diamond in the
rough.
3.0 - 16
August 2006
People
Chapter 4.0:
Programs
4.0
Programs
Occupational Outlook by Academic Program
4.1
Overview
The following table shows the academic and career programs
offered at Middlesex Community College as described in the 20052006 Catalog. In addition to the various training and workforce
development-related programs offered through the Department
of Corporate and Continuing Education, Middlesex also provides
academic programs that transfer to bachelor degree-granting
institutions. Where there are direct occupational links, these
programs were reviewed. The same criterion was used for certain
certificate programs. The programs were analyzed for their
content and compared to employment projections for
corresponding occupations. Where occupational projections for
the South Central regions were not available, projections for the
state are shown and identified by italics.
Table 1:
Comparison of Middlesex Programs and Occupational Projections for
South Central Connecticut, 2002 to 2012
Programs
Accounting (A.S.)
Accounting Assistant (cert.)
Accounting Technical (cert.)
Broadcast Communication (A.S.)
State Occupational Projections
2002-2012
Accountants: 12.9%
Accounting Clerks: -0.4%
Accounting Clerks: -0.4%
News Analysts, Reporters,
Correspondents: 18.3%
Producers, Directors: 35.3%
Broadcast Technicians: 42.9%
Broadcast Communications (cert.)
News Analysts, Reporters,
Correspondents: 18.3%
Producers, Directors: 35.3%
Business Administration (A.A.)
General and Operations
Managers: 13.8%
Customer Service
Management (cert.)
Business Office Technology:
Customer Service
Representatives: 14.3%
Executive Secretaries and
4.0 - 1
Degree or Training
Required
Bachelors degree
Moderate-term OJT
Moderate-term OJT
Work experience
and a bachelors
degree or higher
Associates degree
Work experience
and a bachelors
degree or higher
Associates degree
Work experience
and a bachelors
degree or higher
Moderate-term OJT
Moderate-term OJT
August 2006
Programs
Programs
Executive Tracks (A.A.)
Legal Tracks (A.A.)
2002-2012
Administrative Assistants: -0.2%
Paralegal/Legal Assistant: 7.9%
Legal Secretaries: -1.2%
Degree or Training
Required
Associates degree
Post-secondary
vocational training
Medical Tracks (A.A.)
Medical Secretaries: 8.8%
Post-secondary
vocational training
Business Office Technology: Medical
Insurance/Billing Assistant (cert.)
Billing and Posting Clerks: 2.1%
Moderate-term OJT
Business Office Technology: Business
Office Assistant (cert.)
Word/Information Processing (cert.)
Communications Networking (cert.)
Criminal Justice (A.S.)
Juvenile Justice (cert.)
Early Childhood Education (A.A)
Early Childhood Education (cert.)
Child Development
Association Credential
Engineering Science (A.S.)
Environmental Science (A.S.)
Hazardous Materials
Operations (cert.)
Hazardous Waste Site Worker (cert.)
Environmental Science:
Insurance claims and policy
processing clerks: -0.5%
Secretary, except legal, medical,
and Executive: -9.2%
Word processors/typists: -39.5%
Computer Support Specialist: 17.6%
Computer Specialist, other: 23.0%
Network and Computer Systems
Administrators: 41.9%
Network Systems and Data
Communications Analysts: 41.9%
Correctional Officers, Jailers: 19.5%
Police, Sheriff’s Patrol: 19.2%
Security Guards: 16.6%
Child, Family, School Social
Workers: 17.1%
Preschool teachers: 9.1%
Kindergarten teachers: 13.5%
Elementary teachers: 3.0%
Teacher Assistants: 8.6%
Childcare workers: 4.7%
Electrical, Electronic Engineering
Technicians: 1.7%
Biological Technicians: 18.0%
Chemical Technicians: 10.6%
Life, Physical, Social Science
Technicians, all other: 3.6%
Chemical Equipment Operators and
Tenders: 0.5%
Chemical Plant and System
Operators: 17.9%
Biological Technicians: 18.0%
4.0 - 2
Short-term OJT
Moderate-term OJT
Moderate-term OJT
Associates degree
Bachelors degree
Moderate-term OJT
Long-term OJT
Short-term OJT
Bachelors degree
Bachelors degree
Short-term OJT
Short-term OJT
Short-term OJT
Associates degree
Associates degree
Moderate-term OJT
Associates degree
Long-term OJT
Associates degree
August 2006
Programs
Programs
Biotechnology Track (A.S.)
Fine Arts: Graphic Design Track (A.A.)
Human Services (A.A.)
Substance Abuse Education (cert.)
Information Systems (A.A.)
Information Systems:
Microcomputers (cert.)
Software Developer (cert.)
Marketing (A.S.)
2002-2012
Life, Physical, Social Science
Technicians, all other: 3.6%
Graphic Designers: 11.9%
Social and Human Services
Assistants: 34.2%
Substance Abuse Counselors: 12.3%
Rehabilitation Counselors: 21.7%
Programmers: -1.1%
Systems Analysts: 23.1%
Computer Support Specialist: 17.6%
Computer Specialist, other: 23.0%
Systems Analysts: 23.1%
Software Engineer,
Applications: 18.9%
Software Engineer,
Systems Software: 18.0%
Marketing Manager: 9.7%
Advertising Sales Agent: 17.1%
Advertising/Sales Promotion (cert.)
Multimedia (A.A.)
Multimedia (cert.)
Multimedia Web
Design/Development (cert.)
Dietetic Technician (cert.)
Electric Utility Technology (cert.)
Demonstrators and Product
Promoters: 19.1%
Editors: 17.7%
Writers, Authors: 19.0%
Photographers: 3.6%
Audio and Video Equipment
Technicians: 23.1%
Editors: 17.7%
Writers, Authors: 19.0%
Photographers: 3.6%
Audio and Video Equipment
Technicians: 23.1%
Desk Top Publishers: 17.4
Health Diagnosing and Treating
Practitioners, all other: 19.9%
Electrical and Electronic Repairers,
4.0 - 3
Degree or Training
Required
Bachelors degree
Moderate-term OJT
Masters degree
Bachelors degree
Associates degree
Bachelors degree
Associates degree
Associates degree
Bachelors degree
Bachelors degree
Work experience
and a bachelors
degree or higher
Moderate-term OJT
Moderate-term OJT
Bachelors degree
Long-term OJT
Bachelors degree
Long-term OJT
Bachelors degree
Moderate-term OJT
Bachelors degree
Post-secondary
August 2006
Programs
Programs
Ophthalmic Design and
Dispensing (A.S.)
Radiologic Technology (A.S.)
Pre-Allied Health/Transfer (cert.)
2002-2012
Commercial and Industrial: -1.5%
Electrical Power-Line Repairers and
Installers: -6.3%
Opticians, Dispensing: 5.6%
Degree or Training
Required
vocational training
Radiologic Technologists and
Technicians: 16.6%
Licensed Practical and Licensed
Vocational Nurses: 9.0%
Associates degree
Long-term OJT
Long-term OJT
Post-secondary
vocational training
There are other methods for evaluating the “fit” between the
College’s academic program array and projected workforce
needs. Projection of occupations that will have the most number
of job openings is also a factor in identifying demand, as is those
occupations with large percent increases in employment. The 10
fastest growing occupations statewide by the percent of increase
in number employed, as identified by the Office of Research of
the Connecticut Department of Labor are:
Table 2:
The 10 Fastest Growing Occupations by Percent Increase in
Number Employed, 2002-2012
Job Title
Personal Financial Advisors
Personal and Home Health Care Aides
Medical Assistants
Network Systems and Data Communications Analysts
Radiation Therapists
Physician Assistants
Self-Enrichment Education Teachers
Environmental Engineers
Producers and Directors
Mental Health and Substance Abuse Social Workers
Percent
Increase
by 2010
48.5%
48.5%
46.4%
40.4%
39.6%
38.1%
36.2%
35.9%
35.3%
35.3%
Requires
Associates
Degree or
more
X
X
X
X
From the list above it is clear that the growth in employment
opportunities for several Middlesex programs is projected to
remain favorable. It is also clear that there are opportunities for
Middlesex to build on its current programming.
4.0 - 4
August 2006
Programs
The Department of Labor has also compiled a list of occupations
requiring post-secondary training or an associate’s degree.
Statewide, the top occupations ranked by the number of annual
openings are:
♦ Registered Nurses
♦ Automotive Service Technicians and Mechanics
♦ Hairdressers, Hairstylists, and Cosmetologists
♦ Gaming Dealers
♦ Licensed Practical and Licensed Vocational Nurses
♦ Computer Support Specialists
♦ Fitness Trainers and Aerobics Instructors
♦ Medical Secretaries
♦ Preschool Teachers, Except Special Education
♦ Radiologic Technologists and Technicians
Again, it is clear that much of the academic programming at
Middlesex is well positioned to respond to the need for workers
trained in these occupations.
4.2
Additional Space Related Issues
In addition to the relationship between occupational outlook and
the academic programs at MxCC, there are a number of
institutional plans that will have an impact on the future need for
space on campus.
♦ A number of new curricular changes and revision of some of
the requirements for general education courses initiated by
the faculty at MxCC will likely produce demand for more
flexible instructional space with supporting technology.
♦ The College has committed itself to curricular review that will
result in changes in both course content and pedagogy in a
variety of areas, including science and allied health.
Examples include the desire to respond to the need for
science, engineering, and technology programs, particularly
Biotechnology. In addition, there is the desire to grow Allied
Health to meet the increasing need for more health
professionals.
♦ With the shift in the student population, most especially to
younger students and immediate high school graduates,
there could be a greater need for developmental/remedial
courses to ensure student success. Conversely, more students
4.0 - 5
August 2006
Programs
than ever are graduating from high school with advanced
placement credit to apply to their college programs. This
situation is clear in both national and regional trends, where
the increased need for both advanced course work and
developmental support is the result of the wide range in
student preparedness.
It seems clear that MxCC has the potential to grow its enrollment in
several critical areas, and that anticipating its future curricular
needs requires taking changing market drivers and student
demands into account.
4.0 - 6
August 2006
Programs
Chapter 5.0:
Places & Spaces
5.0
Places & Spaces
Existing Conditions &
Instructional Utilization Analysis
5.1
Overview
This chapter incorporates an overview of existing conditions at
Middlesex Community College (MxCC) as well as the findings from
the instructional utilization analysis conducted as part of the
Master Plan.
5.2
Existing Conditions
Section 5.2 summarizes the types of spaces at Middlesex
Community College. These spaces are grouped by a recognized
space classification system established by the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES) and also aggregated by organizational
area.
5.2.1
Distribution of Current Facilities
As part of this study, Rickes Associates (RA) developed a space
database for MxCC. This inventory included a space-by-space
listing of all rooms including a unique room number, associated
square footage, departmental “ownership,” and space
classification code. Representatives from RA conducted a walkthrough of individual space to understand how rooms were used
and to classify each space accordingly.
There are four main parts to building measurements and existing
conditions review. The definitions below have been extracted from
the Postsecondary Education Facilities Inventory and Classification
Manual (FICM): 2006 Edition.
Assignable Square Footage (ASF): This is the amount of space that
can be assigned to people or programs and generally consists of
offices, storage, and support spaces. For MxCC there is 82,812 asf
in four buildings and 230 identified spaces. ASF is the most
commonly used and applied term for programming space.
5.0 - 1
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Nonassignable Area: This is the amount of space in a building no
assigned directly to people or programs and includes areas such
as circulation, mechanical areas, and building service. MxCC has
25,439 nonassignable area.
Net Usable Area (NUA): This equates to the combination of ASF
and non assignable and thereby defines all space within the
interior walls of the buildings. For MxCC this equates to a net
usable area of 108,251 square feet.
Gross Square Footage (GSF): This is inclusive of all space and is
taken from the outside faces of exterior walls. For MxCC this
equates to 123,669 gsf.
Structural Area: This is the difference between the gross square
footage and the net usable square footage and indicates, in
general, the area between the exterior and interior walls of the
buildings. For MxCC the structural space is 15,418 sf, total
The detailed space database (and associated color-coded CAD
plans) appear in the Appendix to this report. The floor plans are
presented in order by floor and building. There are two color
coded sets. The first indicated distribution by Department while the
second is by Organization. On all plans both assignable square
footage as well as the total net (usable) square footage is
notated.
A summary table displaying the type and amount of square
footage by building and area is provided in this section.
Figure 1:
ASF Distribution by Building
Wheaton Hall
21%
Chapman Hall
37%
Snow Hall
21%
Chapman Hall contains
more than one-third of
all assignable space for
the campus. The
remaining space is
equally distributed
among Founders,
Snow, and Wheaton.
Founders Hall
21%
5.0 - 2
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.2.2
Space by Type
The following table reflects MxCC’s space distribution by NCES
space type. The space type categories are shown, along with
examples for each NCES category.
Figure 2:
Space by NCES Type
Space Type
% of
Total
ASF
Classrooms / 100
(general-purpose instructional spaces)
15,607
19%
Laboratory / 200
(specialized instructional spaces)
13,327
16%
Office / 300
(all academic/administrative and related spaces)
21,291
26%
Study/Library / 400
(traditional Library space and related study spaces)
13,033
16%
857
1%
13,865
17%
Support / 700
(shops, storage, mailroom, media production spaces)
3,431
4%
Unclassified / 000
(inactive spaces not currently used)
CURRENT TOTAL ASF
1,401
2%
82,812
100%
Special Use / 500
(athletic, media, demonstration spaces)
General Use / 600
(dining, bookstore, day care, student activities spaces)
♦
Office space comprises the largest square footage, with
21,291 asf. This category includes academic and
administrative office and related spaces.
♦
Classroom spaces comprise the second largest square
footage with 15,607 asf. This category includes generalpurpose classrooms that are scheduled by the Registrar, or
by a department.
♦
Special Use spaces contribute the least, with 856 square
feet. The only area included in this category for MxCC was
the Ophthalmic Design and Dispensing spaces.
5.0 - 3
August 2006
Places and Spaces
The following chart shows the distribution of space by NCES type.
Figure 3:
Distribution by NCES Type
Support Unidentified
2.0%
4.0%
General Use
16.8%
Classroom
18.8%
Special Use
1.0%
Laboratory
15.8%
Study/Library
15.8%
Office
25.7%
♦
Office space accounts for one-quarter of all assignable
space.
♦
Classroom and Laboratory space, collectively, make up
one-third of the total.
5.0 - 4
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.2.3
Space by Organizational Area
The following table and chart show the total campus-wide
distribution of all academic and administrative space in the four
buildings.
Figure 4:
Space by Organizational Area
Organizational Area
ASF
% of
Total
Executive Offices
1,769
Continuing Education and Community Services
6,919
8%
Finance and Administration
14,434
18%
Learning and Student Development
58,289
72%
Subtotal
81,411
100%
Unassigned
2%
1,401
TOTAL
82,812
♦
Learning and Student Development is assigned the highest
proportion of the square footage, with nearly threequarters of all space.
♦
The Executive Offices are assigned the least amount of
space with two percent.
Figure 5:
ASF Distribution by Organizational Area
Executive
Offices
2%
Continuing
Education and
Community
Services
8%
Finance and
Administration
18%
Learning and
Student
Development
72%
5.0 - 5
August 2006
Places and Spaces
The Division of Learning and Student Development contains the
College’s academic departments. The following chart shows the
distribution of space by academic department. The distribution is
based on the 20,866 square feet that has been assigned to a
specific academic area. Space assigned to academic
departments includes offices and classrooms or laboratories that
are “owned,” or scheduled, by the department.
Figure 6:
ASF Distribution by Academic Department
Social &
Behavioral
Sciences
13%
Business
4%
Mathematics
3%
Humanities &
Fine Arts
31%
Science &
Allied Health
49%
5.2.4
♦
Science & Allied Health occupies nearly half (49%) of the
space assigned to academic departments. A large part of
this space is departmentally-specific labs.
♦
One-third of the space is assigned to Humanities & Fine
Arts, which includes spaces such as art studios and a
darkroom.
Meriden Center
The Meriden Center (MC), located in Meriden, Connecticut, is
maintained as a separate entity, although administrated by the
main campus. Currently there are three full-time staff assigned to
the Center. The future goal for the campus is to become a fullservice satellite campus. The Meriden Center already provides
financial aid and admissions services on a part-time basis with staff
who travel from the main campus to Meriden to provide the
needed services.
5.0 - 6
August 2006
Places and Spaces
The available leased space is divided across the fourth and fifth
floors of one building, and consists of: seven classrooms, two
computer labs, a vending area, a study area, a testing area, a
conference area/faculty office, and administrative office space.
Overall, however, the space is not conducive to instruction and
lacks appropriate space for tutors, study space, and staff.
5.2.5
Summary
There are 82,812 assignable square feet in four buildings on the
Middlesex Community College campus. One-quarter of the space
is used for offices and office-related functions and one-third is used
for direct instructional purposes. From an organizational
perspective, three-quarters is assigned to Learning and Student
Development. This includes academic departments, classrooms,
and the library.
5.3
General-Purpose Utilization Analysis
Section 5.3 provides the utilization findings associated with the 23
general-purpose classroom spaces at Middlesex Community
College. This includes the distribution of existing classrooms, hours
of use, and seat occupancy rates for both day and evening.
5.3.1
Creation of the Data Set
At the outset of this study, pertinent course scheduling data was
collected from the Registrar/Scheduling Office. The starting point
was the Fall 2005 institutional course schedule, which included the
name of the course, meeting days and times, course location, and
the number of students enrolled for all assigned instructional
spaces on the main campus.
Questions, issues, and caveats regarding the content of the data
were clarified as needed prior to the detailed analysis stage. Some
courses were “eliminated” from the Registrar-supplied course data
for the analysis to avoid double-counting. Other courses were
“merged” to avoid under-reporting enrollments. Issues such as the
following were addressed:
♦ Cross Registration Issues:
The same course may have been listed in more than
one department; in these cases, enrollments were
combined and the course was counted just once.
♦ Cancelled, Zero Enrollment, and Weekend Courses:
Cancelled courses and courses listing zero enrollment
were eliminated from the analysis since they did not
5.0 - 7
August 2006
Places and Spaces
occupy space. Weekend courses were also omitted
from the analysis because the focus was on weekday
course offerings.
♦ Missing Information:
Missing information such as “To Be Announced” (TBA),
enrollment, scheduling times, etc., was clarified. In
some instances it was identified by the institution noted
that complete sets of courses were missing from the
data file. The data file was subsequently updated and
corrected to reflect these missing courses.
♦ Off-Site / No-Space Courses:
Those courses which were held off-site (such as
practica or individual studies) were identified and
extracted from the analysis because they do not drive
a physical space need.
♦ Identification of Non-Scheduled Instructional Space or
Specified Exceptions:
On every campus there are always exceptions to the
classification rules. For MxCC, three specific spaces,
although coded as instructional space, were not
included in the review of schedulable space for various
reasons. These exceptions create a small difference
between the scheduled instructional square footage
and the true square footage of instructional space for
the campus as a whole.
♦ Day and Evening Demarcation:
The demarcation between day and evening classes
was defined as follows:
Day:
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Evening: 5:00 p.m. to 9:45 p.m.
Many of the issues discussed above typically arise during an
instructional space utilization study, although the resolution varies
by institution. An effort was made to understand the campus
culture and scheduling idiosyncrasies prior to adjusting any of the
data elements. This methodology ensured a credible data set for
subsequent analysis.
5.0 - 8
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Once the data were reviewed, scrubbed, and sorted, information
on the 23 identified general-purpose classroom spaces at MxCC
was input into a comprehensive classroom space utilization model
for analysis, relevant to the defined guidelines noted below.
5.3.2
Utilization Guidelines
Using Fall 2005 course enrollment, calculations were made to
compare and contrast internal classroom utilization patterns
against generally accepted guidelines pertaining to station size,
room hour utilization, and seat utilization. These guidelines are not
rigid standards, but rather suggested policy guidelines that can be
applied to help shape an institution's facilities requirements. Below,
the guidelines are defined and the actual measures at MxCC are
presented. Each of the three portions of the utilization will be
reviewed in detail.
♦ Station Size: indicating the average square footage available
per student station or seat.

Guideline: An average of 20 to 25 square feet per seat
is recommended in typical classroom spaces, although
this figure can be lower or higher depending upon total
seating capacity and type of seats. This is seen as a
minimum to ensure that the room can accommodate
sufficient technology and allows flexibility in furniture
arrangement and room configuration.

MxCC Actual:
19.3 sf/seat
♦ Room Hour Utilization Rate: showing to what extent instructional
spaces are used ( i.e., the number of hours each classroom is in
use for regularly scheduled coursework).

Guideline: 67 percent of available hours within the
preferred scheduling window. (Available hours are
typically designated by the institution as being that
block of time within which it is preferable to schedule all
or most all coursework.) The primary reason for the 67
percent figure of this guideline is the various classroom
sizes and amenities. A "match" cannot always be
made between the class size and appropriate
classroom in every time period. The two-thirds utilization
rate allows for this understandable “disparity,” thereby
maximizing potential matches between class needs
and available classrooms. A two-thirds occupancy rate
also allows for the “airing out” of classrooms between
5.0 - 9
August 2006
Places and Spaces
uses, permits access for maintenance, frees up
classroom space for use by special events, and
provides additional scheduling flexibility at the start of a
semester. Available hours are typically designated by
the institution as being that block of time within which it
is preferable to schedule all or most all coursework.

MxCC Actual:
Day:
Evening:
43% of the scheduling window
30% of the scheduling window
♦ Seat Utilization Rate: indicating to what extent classroom seats
are used (i.e., the average percentage of seats filled when a
classroom is scheduled).

Guideline: 67 percent seat fill on average. When a
classroom is occupied, it is suggested that on average,
two-thirds of the available seats are filled. This rate has
been found to maximize the “fit” between classroom
capacities and course sizes. Since it is an average,
lower and higher occupancy rates will exist on a roomby-room basis.

MxCC Actual:
Day:
Evening:
5.3.3
65%
51%
Current Distribution
The following pie chart shows the distribution of general-purpose
classrooms among buildings.
Figure 7:
Distribution of General-Purpose Classrooms by Building
Wheaton
Hall
30%
Chapman
Hall
40%
Snow
Hall
30%
5.0 - 10
August 2006
Places and Spaces
♦ The largest proportion of general-purpose classrooms at
MXCC (40%) is located in Chapman Hall/Learning
Center/Library. Snow and Wheaton Halls each account for
30 percent of the classroom space on campus.
5.3.4
Station Size
There are a total of 23 general-purpose classrooms, comprising
14,285 total assignable square feet of space. This square footage
represents 17 percent of the total assignable square footage on
the campus (82,812 asf), excluding rented space in the Meriden
Center.
Within these 23 classrooms, there are a total of 741 student
stations. These stations represent a combination of movable and
fixed seating. Station sizes range from 15.9 assignable square feet
per station in Snow Hall 521 to 31.1 assignable square feet per
station in Wheaton Hall 306. Across the 23 classrooms, the average
assignable square footage per station is 19.3.
The following table summarizes all general-purpose classrooms by
building. Each row provides statistics for a given building: the total
number of general-purpose classrooms in the building, the total
number of seats currently available across these classrooms, the
total square feet across these classrooms, and the average square
footage per station in the building.
Figure 8:
Summary of General-Purpose Classrooms by Building
Rooms
Seats
ASF
Average
Station Size
(ASF/Seat)
Chapman Hall
9
258
4,895
19.0
Snow Hall
7
255
4,572
17.9
Wheaton Hall
7
228
4,818
21.1
23
741
14,285
19.3
Building
TOTAL, All G-P Classrooms
Total #
Total #
Total
♦ Wheaton Hall has the most generous average station size
of the three buildings, whereas Snow Hall has the tightest
average station size.
5.0 - 11
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.3.5
Classroom Capacity and Course Enrollment
Classroom Capacity
The following figure graphs the number of general-purpose
classrooms in each of seven capacity ranges (e.g., 1-9 seats, 10-19
seats, 20-29 seats, etc.).
Figure 9:
Number of General-Purpose Classrooms by Capacity (n=23)
11
10
8
8
6
3
4
60-69
50-59
40-49
0
30-39
0
20-29
0
1
0
10-19
2
1-9
Number of Classrooms
12
Capacity Ranges
♦ Across the 23 classrooms, capacity ranges from 20 seats to
65 seats.
♦ The mean classroom capacity is 32.2 seats, while the most
common classroom capacities are 24, 25, and 35 seats.
♦ 83 percent of the rooms have a capacity of 39 seats or
fewer.
5.0 - 12
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.3.6
Course Enrollment
The following figure graphs the number of distinct courses in each
of seven course enrollment ranges (e.g., 1-9 students, 10-19
students, 20-29 students, etc.), paralleling the ranges in room
capacities. Both day and evening distributions are provided.
Figure 10:
Number of Distinct Courses by Course Enrollment (Day=117; Evening=47)
66
70
50
40
26
30
21
14
30-39
20-29
10-19
0
4
Course Enrollment Ranges
1
0
0
0 0
60-69
1
50-59
7 7
10
40-49
17
20
1-9
Number of Courses
60
Day course
Eve courses
Day Distribution:
♦ Across the 117 day courses, enrollment ranges from four
students (one course) to 44 students (one course).
♦ The mean enrollment is 22.3 students, while the most
common enrollment size (excluding the two rooms with
zero enrollments) is 23 students, occurring in 17 courses.
♦ 97 percent of the day courses have an enrollment of 39 or
fewer, in comparison to the 83% of the classrooms with 39
or fewer seats.
Evening Distribution:
♦ Across the 47 evening courses, enrollment ranges from six
students (one course) to 41 students (one course).
5.0 - 13
August 2006
Places and Spaces
♦ The mean enrollment is 17.8 students, while the most
common enrollment size is 24 students, occurring in six
courses.
♦ 98 percent of the evening courses have an enrollment of
39 or fewer, which is comparable to the day percentage.
5.3.7
Weekly Room Hour Utilization Rates
Space planning guidelines suggest that classrooms should be
scheduled two-thirds of the available time in the scheduling
window.
Day Hours
In Fall 2005, a total of 363.25 weekly hours of instruction were
offered across 117 courses in 21 of the 23 available generalpurpose classrooms. On average, MxCC has only 43 percent of its
weekly available classroom time (851 hours) in use during the day,
based on a 37-hour week (Monday through Thursday, 8:00 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. and Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.) On a room-by-room
basis, hour use ranges from a low of 19 percent in Wheaton Hall
308 to a high of 72 percent in Snow Hall 505 and 506. This excludes
the two non-scheduled spaces as well as the Friday afternoon
non-scheduled time block.
Evening Hours
Evening hours totaled 137.00 weekly hours of instruction for 47
courses in 16 of the 23 available general-purpose classrooms. On
average, MxCC scheduled 30 percent of its weekly available
classroom time (460 hours) in the evening. This is based on a 20hour week (Monday through Thursday, 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) On
a room-by-room basis, use ranges from a low of 14 percent in
Chapman Hall 605 to a high of 70 percent in Wheaton Hall 306.
Course Distribution by Day and Time
The following table displays the distribution of day courses by day
of the week, or any combination of days. MxCC seems to prefer a
two-day course schedule for day courses. Note that the total
number of courses in Figure 11 will not necessarily match the total
number of distinct courses in Figure 10 as a few courses with
irregular meeting schedules are involved.
5.0 - 14
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 11:
Distribution of Day Courses by Day of the Week
Meeting Day
Day
Courses
% Day
Courses*
Evening
Courses
% Evening
Courses*
Monday (M)
0
0%
9
19%
Tuesday (T)
2
2%
9
19%
Wednesday (W)
1
1%
6
13%
Thursday (R)
1
1%
7
15%
Friday (F)
9
7%
0
0%
MW
51
42%
8
17%
TR
57
47%
8
17%
TOTAL
121
100%
47
100%
*May not add to 100% due to rounding. *
♦ MxCC displays a preference for a two-day schedule for
day courses.
♦ There are no courses on Friday evenings.
While Table 11 showed the distribution of courses, Figure 12 reflects
the distribution of course meetings held on a day-to-day basis.
For example, there are a total of 229 individual day course
meetings scheduled across the week. Of these 229 day course
meetings, 59 (26%) are held on Tuesdays. This includes courses that
are scheduled for Tuesday only, and courses that are scheduled
on a Tuesday and any other day, such as Tuesday/Thursday.
If course offerings were distributed uniformly across a five-day
schedule, one would expect that 20% of all course meetings
would occur on any given day. The intent here is not to imply that
all course offerings should be distributed uniformly across the
weekdays, but to highlight the fact that as offerings increase on
any given day, scheduling flexibility decreases.
5.0 - 15
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 12:
Distribution of Individual Course Meetings by Day of the Week
(Day=229; Evening=63)
22%
Monday
27%
26%
Tuesday
27%
23%
Wednesday
22%
25%
Thursday
24%
4%
Friday
0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Percent of Day Course Meetings
30%
Evening Percent
Day Percent
♦ The 229 individual day course meetings at MxCC range in
distribution across the week, from 4 percent scheduled on
Friday to 26 percent scheduled on Tuesday.
♦ The 63 individual evening course meetings range in
distribution across the week, from 22 percent scheduled on
Wednesday to 27 percent scheduled on Monday and
Tuesday; there are no Friday evening courses scheduled.
Figure 13 displays the number of classrooms in use by day and
time, as determined by the number of courses scheduled in each
half-hour time block across the week. This figure graphically
depicts the peaks and valleys of the schedule from 8:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. Analysis of the percent of hours per classroom (day and
evening) is provided at the end of this chapter.
5.0 - 16
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 13:
Distribution of Classrooms by Day and Time
The peak is
9:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Evening begins
at 5:00 p.m.
22
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
♦ The earliest courses begin at 8:00 a.m. with upwards of nine
courses in session.
♦ The day peak is 9:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. when 16 rooms are in
simultaneous use (70%).
♦ The evening peak is 7:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m. on Monday and
Tuesday when 10-11 rooms are in simultaneous use (48%).
5.3.8
Scheduling Time Blocks
MxCC has 12 standard scheduling blocks, beginning at 8:00 a.m.
and running to 9:45 p.m., consistent across the week. The reality is
that exceptions exist in the form of non-standard time blocks. A
copy of the course scheduling grid submitted by MxCC and a
summary of the time blocks actually scheduled is provided at the
end of this chapter.
5.0 - 17
August 2006
Places and Spaces
9:30-10:00
9:00-9:30
8:30-9:00
8:00-8:30
7:30-8:00
7:00-7:30
6:30-7:00
6:00-6:30
5:30-6:00
5:00-5:30
4:30-5:00
4:00-4:30
3:30-4:00
3:00-3:30
2:30-3:00
2:00-2:30
1:30-2:00
1:00-1:30
12:30-1:00
12:00-12:30
11:30-12:00
11:00-11:30
10:30-11:00
10:00-10:30
9:00-9:30
9:30-10:00
8:30-9:00
8:00-8:30
7:30-8:00
0
7:00-7:30
20
Day Time Blocks
As noted previously, day scheduling time has been categorized as
falling between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Examination of the day
time blocks, based on start and end times, reveals the use of 15
distinct time blocks. Of these, only seven are defined as standard,
leaving a total of eight non-standard blocks. It should also be
noted that three defined standard blocks, 12:00 p.m. – 2:45 p.m.,
12:30 p.m. – 1:10 p.m., and 2:50 p.m. - 4:10 p.m. were not
scheduled.
Evening Time Blocks
The evening schedule has six distinct time blocks, of which two are
considered standard, leaving a balance of four non-standard
times.
While standardized time blocks maximize the number of
schedulable hours, it is not unusual to have “exceptions” either for
pedagogical or even personal reasons. A large number of
exceptions, however, reduces scheduling efficiencies and can
create confusion and cause time conflicts for students.
5.3.9
Seat Occupancy Rates
The planning guideline for seat occupancy suggests that on
average, two-thirds of the seats (67%) should be filled when a
classroom is scheduled.
Day Occupancy
MxCC fills 65 percent of all available seats, on average, when a
classroom is in use during the day. This is just below the target of 67
percent. There are some individual rooms that may be either
above or below this average, ranging from a low of 44 percent in
Chapman Hall 605 to a high of 90 percent in Chapman Hall 630. At
a more detailed level, there are individual courses that significantly
exceed the capacity of a room.
Evening Occupancy
Evening courses fill 51 percent of the available seats, on average,
when a classroom is in use. This is below the target of 67 percent,
although there are rooms that are above or below this average.
Seat fill ranges from a low of 32 percent in Chapman Hall 605 and
Snow Hall 308 to a high of 100 percent in Chapman Hall 630.
5.0 - 18
August 2006
Places and Spaces
A high fill rate means that there is less flexibility in classroom space,
while a low fill rate suggests inefficient use of the space. A
spreadsheet, located in the Appendix, summarizes the pertinent
details associated with overall classroom utilization patterns on a
room-by-room basis. It displays both the percentage of room hours
scheduled and the percentage of seats occupied.
5.3.10
Current Classroom Needs
There are three key variables in the space utilization equation, as
noted previously: square feet per station, weekly hours of use, and
seat occupancy. A change in any one of these variables has an
effect on one or both of the remaining variables. The inherent
assumptions associated with these three variables also influence
instructional space demand.
In this section, projections are made under the assumptions that 67
percent of the weekly scheduling window is actively scheduled,
and 67 percent of the seats in a room are filled when an individual
room is scheduled. The result is a recommendation suggesting
number of rooms by capacity and the associated square foot
requirements. The table below compares projected classroom
capacities to current capacities.
Figure 14:
Current and Projected Number of Classrooms
By Classroom Capacity
Capacity
Ranges
Current # of
Classrooms
Projected # of
Classrooms
0
0
10-19
0
2
20-29
11
2
30-39
8
8
40-49
3
1
50-59
0
1
60-69
1
0
70-79
0
0
1-9
80-89
0
1
TOTAL
23
15
♦ The greatest demand is for classrooms in the 30-39 seat
range; this demand is met by the current number of
classrooms.
5.0 - 19
August 2006
Places and Spaces
♦ There is an increased need for classrooms in the 10-19 seat
range.
♦ Currently, there is an excess of classrooms in the 20-29 seat
range.
The following table summarizes actual and recommended target
measures based on current enrollment:
Figure 15:
Actual and Recommended Target Measures,
Based on Current Enrollment
Target Measure
Fall 2005
Day Actual
Fall 2005
Evening Actual
Recommended
Square Feet/Seat
19.3
19.3
22.0
Weekly Room Hour Utilization
Rate
43%
30%
67%
Seat Occupancy Rate
65%
51%
67%
741
741
601
23
23
15 day
10 evening
14,285
14,285
13,222
Number of Stations
Available
Available for Scheduling
Assignable Square Footage
In contrast to the 23 existing classrooms, the recommendation is for
15 classrooms, which will accommodate peak day needs. The
projected square footage need, however, is for 13,222 assignable
square feet, or just 1,000 assignable square feet less than the
amount of space currently allocated to Registrar scheduled
classrooms. The recommendation is for appropriately sized
classrooms that have a larger square-foot-per-seat allowance.
These projections assume the following:
♦ Classroom spaces are of sufficient quality to ensure
adequate and equitable use;
♦ The current scheduling window is retained;
♦ A reasonable distribution of classes occurs over the course
of a day and a week, rather than clustering on particular
days or within time blocks; and
♦ There is an appropriate relationship between classroom size
and course size, implying that a reasonable effort is made
to match course enrollment with room capacity.
5.0 - 20
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Of course, any enrollment growth will have a direct impact on
future classroom recommendations, ranging from the number of
classrooms required to their capacities. Section sizes may also
change with enrollment, necessitating larger or smaller
instructional spaces compared to what currently exists.
5.0 - 21
August 2006
Places and Spaces
INSERT DAY AND EVENING APPENDIX PIECE
DAY 3 pages
Evening 2
DAY 1
5.0 - 22
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Day 2
5.0 - 23
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Day 3
5.0 - 24
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Eve 1
5.0 - 25
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Eve 2
5.0 - 26
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 16:
Distribution of Courses by Time Blocks
Start Time
End Time
Course
Count
DAY
8:00:00 AM
9:20:00 AM
17
8:20:00 AM
9:20:00 AM
2
9:00:00 AM
10:50:00 AM
3
11:45:00 AM
7
9:30:00 AM
10:50:00 AM
29
11:00:00 AM
12:20:00 PM
28
12:30:00 PM
1:50:00 PM
12
3:30:00 PM
3
1:00:00 PM
2:20:00 PM
1
1:20:00 PM
2:40:00 PM
9
3:10:00 PM
2
3:00:00 PM
1
3:20:00 PM
5
4:30:00 PM
1
4:30:00 PM
1
2:00:00 PM
2:30:00 PM
EVENING
5:00:00 PM
6:50:00 PM
5
5:30:00 PM
6:50:00 PM
8
6:00:00 PM
9:30:00 PM
1
7:00:00 PM
8:00:00 PM
1
8:20:00 PM
3
9:45:00 PM
29
TOTAL COURSES
168
Yellow is indicative of standardized time blocks as defined by MxCC.
5.0 - 27
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.4
Specialized-Instructional Utilization Analysis
Specialized instructional space (SIS) refers to what is generally
known as a class laboratory. As defined by the National Center for
Education Statistics, a class laboratory is:
A room used primarily for formally or regularly scheduled
classes that require special purpose equipment or a specific
room configuration for student participation, experimentation,
observation, or practice in an academic discipline. It is often
designed for or furnished with equipment to serve the needs of
a particular discipline. This special equipment normally limits or
precludes the room’s use by other disciplines. Examples
include biology, chemistry, physics labs, music rooms,
language laboratories, etc.
These spaces were identified and codified during the
development of the space inventory. This section presents the
findings associated with the specialized instructional spaces.
Because the number of spaces is minimal, 11 identified spaces, a
summary of findings is adequate and provided below.
5.4.1
Findings
There are 11 specialized instructional spaces, covering 9,589 total
assignable square feet. This square footage represents 12 percent
of the total assignable square footage for the campus as a whole.
Within these 11 rooms, there are a total of 254 student stations.
♦
The spaces are primarily distributed between Wheaton and
Snow Hall with only one identified room in Chapman.
♦
Seat counts in individual rooms ranged from 12 to 30
stations. The mean room capacity is 23.1 stations while the
most common room capacity is 30 stations.
♦
Course enrollment ranged from 9 students to 28 students.
The mean enrollment was 19.6 students while the most
common enrollment was 21 students.
♦
There were no courses scheduled on Friday.
The spaces are identified in the following table by building, space
type, number of courses, and weekly scheduled hours for both
day and evening. From this information, spaces can be reviewed
at an individual level by the institution to identify any areas that
are overscheduled and present pressing issues for the campus.
5.0 - 28
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 17:
Identification, Space Type, Courses, and Weekly Hours of Use
for Specialized Instructional Spaces
Space
Type
# of
Courses
DAY
Weekly
Hours
DAY
# of
Courses
EVE
Weekly
Hours
EVE
TOTAL
Weekly
Hours
Scheduled
Computer
Laboratory
0
0
0
0
0.00
0
0
0
0
0.00
Instructional
Space
Chapman Hall
629
Subtotal,
Chapman
Snow Hall
408
Art
Studio
0
0
2
5.5
5.50
Snow Hall
409
Drawing/Paint
Studio
3
9
0
0
9.00
Snow Hall
410
2-dimensional
Art Studio
4
12
1
2.75
14.75
Snow Hall
413A
MAC
Laboratory
4
12
2
5.50
17.50
Snow Hall
413B
MAC
Laboratory
2
6
3
8.25
14.25
13
39
6
16.50
55.50
Subtotal,
Snow Hall
Wheaton Hall
206
Biology
Laboratory
2
6
0
0
6
Wheaton Hall
210
Biology
Laboratory
4
24
2
12
36
Wheaton Hall
213
Physical/Earth
Laboratory
5
18
3
11.75
29.75
Wheaton Hall
221
Chemistry
Laboratory
1
3
1
2.75
5.75
Wheaton Hall
305A
Computer
Laboratory
4
12
3
8.75
20.75
Subtotal,
Wheaton Hall
16
63
9
35.25
98.25
TOTAL, All SIS
16
102
15
51.75
153.75
Specialized instructional spaces, such as those identified above,
fall within a different set of guidelines, dependent on the type of
space. For example, guidelines suggest that specialized spaces
range from 30 sf/station to 150 sf/station and beyond.
5.0 - 29
August 2006
Places and Spaces
For seat fill and hours occupied, however, there is a general
guideline which can be applied. With general purpose classrooms,
the optimum is to fill two-thirds of the seats and hours available for
scheduling. Because specialized space is more capital intensive,
the goal is to fill 80 percent of the seats 50 percent of the time. The
80 percent fill rate is used to maximize capital investment, while
the 50 percent of scheduled time allows for open use, which is
particularly needed in practice or studio space.
Day
MxCC fills, on average, 76 percent of all available seats. Although
this is just below the target of 80 percent, there are some
specialized spaces that range from a low of 69 percent fill (Snow
Hall 409) to a high of 96 percent fill (Wheaton Hall 206). Individually,
some courses fill only 41 percent of the seats while others fill 109
percent of the seats.
In terms of hours occupied, assuming the standard week for the
specialized instructional space is comparable to the classrooms at
37 hours per week, then 18.5 hours should be the maximum time
scheduled for these spaces. As can be seen clearly from the table
above, MxCC currently only has two spaces with heavy use,
Wheaton Hall 210 and 213, at 24 and 18 hours, respectively.
Evening
During evening hours, MxCC fills, on average, 83 percent of all
available seats. This is just above the 80 percent target. These
rooms range from 50 percent seat fill in Wheaton 305A to 103
percent in Snow 408. Individually, some courses fill only 50 percent
of the seats while others fill upwards of 106 percent of the seats.
Assuming the standard week for the specialized instructional
space is comparable to that of classrooms at 20 hours per week,
then10.0 hours should be the maximum time scheduled for these
spaces. Again, Wheaton Hall 210 and 213 at 12 and 11.7 hours,
respectively, demonstrate relatively high evening use.
5.0 - 30
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.5
Summary
Regardless of day or evening, general-purpose or specialized
instructional spaces, a high seat fill rate means there is less
flexibility, while a low fill rate suggests inefficient use of the space.
In terms of hours, the more heavily a space is used, the less
possibility there is for the space to be cleaned, maintained, or
used for students and faculty meetings or after-class discussion. For
specialized instructional space, heavily scheduled rooms mean
less time is available for set-up, break-down, and individual study in
the space.
5.6
Outreach Community Programs
One of the overarching goals for community colleges is the
outreach programs. Community colleges need the ability to
provide services and training, either in-house or on site. MxCC
offers a variety of options for learning outside traditional oncampus study such as: Distance Education, Weekend College,
Continuing Education (CE), Workforce Training, and a Center for
Business and Industry Services (B&I).
Of these various programs, Continuing Education and Community
Services have components which are located on the campus
proper, and as such require appropriate space. These courses are
generally scheduled after the main credit-bearing schedule is set
and often fill academic space as it is available. It is a rarity for a
community college to have the ability to provide large or
appropriate spaces to be dedicated to CE or B&I for use. More
often, space is shared with events management.
Middlesex Community College supplied information for Fall 2005
for both Continuing Education and Community Service courses,
noting the time and days scheduled. This information was
compiled into an Excel document and cross-walked with generalinstructional space to identify what/how much activity occurred in
formally scheduled space. This methodology allowed for a true
analysis of space use.
5.6.1
Instructional Findings
Continuing Education/Community Service courses (CE/CS) were
scheduled in 32 identified spaces on campus in Fall 2005. Of these
32 spaces, 22 are identified as general-purpose classrooms. An
additional nine are specialized instructional space and one is non5.0 - 31
August 2006
Places and Spaces
instructional. A total of weekly hours was calculated for each room
by day and evening. As CE/CS courses are generally not a full
semester class, the assumption used is that a course scheduled in
space is calculated or considered to run the entire semester. This
allows a one-to-one comparison with credit-bearing courses and
the integration of the data into the instructional analysis for a total
view of possible weekly hours for which a room is scheduled.
General-Purpose Classrooms
The following table denotes the distribution of CE/CS hours by
assigned rooms as they impact the 23 general-purpose
classrooms.
Figure 18:
Day and Evening Use with CE/CS Hours
General-Purpose Instructional Space
Building
Room
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall Total
Snow Hall
Snow Hall Total
Wheaton Hall
Wheaton Hall Total
Grand Total
605
606
607
610
613
630
631
802
803
415
504
505
506
507
509
521
204
205
306
308
309
311
312
Credit
Courses
Weekly
Hours
12.00
12.00
15.00
14.75
23.75
16.00
17.00
110.50
15.00
15.00
26.75
26.75
23.75
20.75
20.75
148.75
12.00
15.00
12.00
7.00
22.00
15.00
21.00
104.00
363.25
DAY
Continuing
Education
Weekly
Hours
9.00
2.75
2.75
14.50
0.00
0.00
14.50
5.0 - 32
TOTAL
21.00
12.00
17.75
14.75
23.75
16.00
17.00
2.75
125.00
15.00
15.00
26.75
26.75
23.75
20.75
20.75
148.75
12.00
15.00
12.00
7.00
22.00
15.00
21.00
104.00
377.75
Credit
Courses
Weekly
Hours
2.75
EVENING
Continuing
Education
Weekly
Hours
14.25
5.50
11.25
14.00
11.25
4.00
6.75
6.75
8.50
12.00
8.50
5.75
8.25
11.25
61.00
8.25
5.50
14.00
9.50
12.50
13.00
6.75
69.50
137.25
17.00
11.25
84.50
0.00
8.50
8.50
93.00
TOTAL
17.00
5.50
11.25
14.00
11.25
4.00
17.00
11.25
91.25
6.75
8.50
12.00
8.50
5.75
8.25
11.25
61.00
8.25
13.75
14.00
9.50
12.50
13.00
6.75
77.75
230.00
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Findings, Day
A total of 14.50 hours of CE/CS courses were scheduled across the
Fall 2005 semester in general-purpose classrooms during the day.
When distributed accordingly by room, the overall impact on the
spaces was minimal and did not significantly elevate the
classroom use.
Note that there are clearly periods during a semester that
classrooms are available, given that these courses are not
necessarily scheduled for a full-semester.
Findings, Evenings
Evenings show higher use, which is to be expected. A total of 93
hours of CE/CS meetings were scheduled across the Fall 2005
semester in general-purpose classrooms. The overall impact on
spaces, as with the day schedule, was minimal. Although the hours
of CE/CS courses, in many cases, exceeded the recommended 67
percent use (or 13 hours per space), in only two cases (Chapman
605 and Wheaton 205) did it directly affect a scheduled classroom
space.
Summary
Overall, a total of 107.5 hours of offerings were scheduled during
Fall 2005 in identified general-purpose classroom spaces.
Specialized Instructional Spaces
The following table denotes the distribution of CE/CS hours by
assigned rooms as they impact the eleven specialized instructional
spaces.
5.0 - 33
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Figure 19:
Day and Evening Use with CE/CS Hours
Specialized Instructional Space
Building
Room
Chapman Hall
629
Chapman Hall Total
Snow Hall
408
409
410
413A
413B
Snow Hall Total
Wheaton Hall
206
210
213
221
305A
Wheaton Hall Total
Grand Total
Credit
Courses
Weekly
Hours
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.00
12.00
12.00
6.00
39.00
6.00
24.00
18.00
3.00
12.00
63.00
102.00
DAY
Continuing
Education
Weekly
Hours
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
00.0
TOTAL
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.00
12.00
12.00
6.00
39.00
6.00
24.00
18.00
3.00
12.00
63.00
102.00
Credit
Courses
Weekly
Hours
0.00
0.00
5.50
0.00
2.75
5.50
8.25
22.00
0.00
12.00
11.75
2.75
8.75
35.25
57.25
EVENING
Continuing
Education
Weekly
Hours
8.50
8.50
0.00
0.00
2.75
5.50
0.00
8.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.75
TOTAL
8.50
8.50
5.50
0.00
5.50
11.00
8.25
30.25
0.00
12.00
11.75
2.75
8.75
35.25
74.00
Findings, Day
There was no defined impact on specialized spaces for the day.
Findings, Evenings
Evenings show a total 16.75 hours of CE/CS meetings scheduled in
the specialized instructional spaces. The overall impact on spaces
was negligible. At only one point did the addition of the CE/CS
courses result in an “overscheduled” room, Snow Hall 413A, when
more than 50 percent of the scheduling window was scheduled.
For Wheaton 210 and 213, the hours scheduled also exceeded the
suggested 10 hours per week, but this was exclusively for credit
courses.
Summary
Overall, a total of only 16.75 hours of offerings were scheduled in
identified SIS and impact was minimal.
5.0 - 34
August 2006
Places and Spaces
5.6.2
Meriden Center
Under the umbrella of Continuing Education, the Meriden Center
(MC) offers numerous courses in leased space in downtown
Meriden, Connecticut. A mini-analysis was conducted based on
the number of courses and weekly hours for day and evening
currently assigned to seven classrooms and two computer lab
spaces on-site.
Findings, Day
The Meriden Center offers 19 day courses which comprise a total
of 57 hours during the week between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
1:20 p.m. Monday through Thursday. This equates to a need for
five appropriately sized and mediated instructional spaces.
Findings, Evening
The Meriden Center caters to evening students and offers 35
evening courses. These courses comprise 101.25 hours during the
week, between the hours of 5:30 p.m. and 9:45 p.m. Monday
through Thursday. This equates to a need for nine appropriately
sized and mediated instructional spaces--or four more than is
needed during the day.
Summary
Evening defines instructional space requirements for the Meriden
Center with a need for nine instructional spaces. While these
spaces currently exist in some form (seven classrooms and two
computer labs) the issue lies in the size and design of the spaces.
Currently there is concern expressed by staff that spaces are too
large for the course sizes.
Of course, any enrollment growth will have a direct impact on
future classroom recommendations, ranging from the number of
classrooms required to their capacities. Section sizes may also
change with enrollment, necessitating larger or smaller
instructional spaces compared to what currently exists.
5.0 - 35
August 2006
Places and Spaces
Chapter 6.0:
6.0
6.1
Overview
This chapter summarizes the space recommendations for
Middlesex Community College (MxCC), building on the findings
presented in the prior chapters and summarized by organizational
area.
6.2
Summary of Needs
At present, MxCC has 82,812 asf in 230 spaces on campus. With a
current FTE of 1,287 students, there is 64.3 asf/FTE at present for the
campus. The estimated current need of 109,102, presented in this
chapter, will increase that figure to 84.8 asf/FTE. When ten-year
growth projections are taken into consideration, a total of 113,286
asf will be needed. Since there will be a projected 1,325 FTE in ten
years, this is the equivalent of 85.5 asf/FTE.
Although this ratio is below the typical Connecticut Community
College average of 95 asf/FTE, it does appear adequate to
support the institution. If the 95 asf multiplier is applied, it would
generate a need for a total of 125,875 asf to support 1,325 FTE.
Current and projected personnel numbers and program offerings,
however, do not appear to require additional space of this
magnitude. Should program offerings or personnel projections
change significantly, it would impact the square footage
recommendation.
A summary of space needs by organizational area appears on the
following page, followed by a more detailed review. An order-ofmagnitude space program is provided at the end of this chapter.
6.0 - 1
August 2006
Figure 1:
Space Program Summary by Organization
SUMMARY
Organization
Current
(Actual) Space
Current
Need
Change From
Current
Projected
Need
Change From
Current
% Change Current
% Change
Projected
Executive Office
1,770
3,000
1,230
3,200
1,430
69.5%
80.8%
Continuing Education &
Community Services
6,236
7,350
1,114
7,550
1,314
17.9%
21.1%
Finance & Administration
13,072
18,300
5,228
18,700
5,628
40.0%
43.1%
Learning & Student
Development
31,400
51,730
20,330
52,730
21,330
64.7%
67.9%
Instructional: Classroom
15,606
13,222
-2,384
15,606
0
-15.3%
0.0%
Instructional: Laboratory
13,327
15,500
2,173
15,500
2,173
16.3%
16.3%
82,812
109,102
26,290
113,286
30,474
31.7%
36.8%
1,287
1,287
1,325
64.3
84.8
85.5
Unassigned
1,401
Total ASF
FTE
ASF/FTE
6.3
Space Needs by Area
Space planning guidelines can be both “macro” and “micro” in
nature, depending upon the type of space under consideration
and/or the type of programming being completed. For MxCC,
projections were based at the “macro” level; classroom, offices,
and support space needs were determined based on enrollment
projections, associated growth in faculty, staffing patterns, and
program changes.
The following section identifies the changes by Organizational
Area. Within each Organization the associated Departments/Units
are identified.
6.0 - 2
August 2006
Administrative Services: Executive Office
The Executive Offices consist of:
Office of the President, Marketing & Public Relations,
Institutional Advancement, and Institutional Research.
Currently this includes a total of 1,770 assignable square feet in six
identified spaces. The recommendation is to expand the space to
3,000 asf for current needs and then to 3,200 asf for future needs to
support the addition of one person and the appropriate working
and meeting space. Overall, additional space is recommended to
support: reception, conference, storage, and workroom areas.
Continuing Education
Continuing Education (CE) consists of five distinct
departments/units distributed across 26 identified spaces:
Director’s Office; Allied Health; Business & Industry;
and Humanity & Arts. In addition, the Meriden Center
also falls under this organization.
CE is situated on the main campus supports four full-time and one
part-time staff, and consists of 6,236 asf. Projected space is
recommended at 7,350 asf with a ten-year horizon of 7,550 asf for
a projected staff of five full-time and one part-time. Areas of
change include additional space for reception, conference room,
and storage.
The Meriden Center
The projection for Meriden is for a minimum of 600 asf to meet the
office needs of the three current staff for the campus. As noted in
the instructional summary, there are currently enough instructional
spaces, although the spaces are considered too large. Obviously,
should Meriden become a degree-offering satellite campus of
MxCC, a space program of pertinent needs for instructional,
offices, and, most importantly, student support spaces will need to
be created.
Finance & Administration currently encompasses 13,072 asf for 27
full-time and one part-time staff distributed in five
departments/units across 42 spaces:
Dean’s Office, Building & Grounds, Business Office,
Human Resources & Labor Relations, and Information
Technology.
6.0 - 3
August 2006
The current need to support the existing staff is 18,300 asf, or 5,228
asf more than currently exists. The ten-year projection shows a
modest increase to 18,700 with the addition of two full-time staff in
the Dean’s Office. The increase also accounts for storage (3,000
for B&G), larger offices, security space, a sick room, etc. Also
included is space for a 200-seat auditorium for campus use as a
whole.
Learning & Student Development
The current square footage assigned to Learning and Student
Development is 31,400 asf for 75 full-time and 13 part-time staff
and faculty distributed across 13 departments/units and 144
spaces:
Dean’s Office, Academic Support Services, Admissions
& Records (Registrar), Business Division, Career
Development & Student Counseling, Child
Development, Educational Technology, Financial Aid,
Humanity & Arts, Library Services, Mathematics, Science
& Health, Social Sciences.
The recommendation is to increase space to 51,730 asf to meet
current need, and 52,730 asf for the projected 80 full-time and 13
part-time staff in ten years. This allows for additional reception and
conference space as well as storage and workroom areas. An
allowance for potential program addition/expansion was made.
In this organization, the most significant need, and what is lacking
now, is academic support services space, such as study areas,
club offices, learning and math labs, a wellness center, etc. These
areas are of particular importance due to the shift in the type of
student attending campus. Students are now younger and more
likely to attend full-time and also tend to seek such services.
Instructional Space
Instructional space was analyzed and projected separately from
the organizational area to which it belongs. Schedulable
classrooms and related support spaces occupy 14,285 asf with an
additional three rooms, or 1,321 asf available for a total possible
instructional space of 15,606 assignable square feet. For these
spaces, the current need is estimated at 13,222 asf, or 2,384 asf less
than is now available. However, as enrollment grows, additional
classroom space will be required. The current asf will be more than
adequate to support that future growth, so the amount of space
has been held constant.
6.0 - 4
August 2006
Specialized instructional space (SIS) was also analyzed and
projected separately. Currently, SIS space equates to 13,327 asf.
Based on analysis and the observed intense use of two spaces
(Biology and a Physical Science Lab) the current need is estimated
at 15,000 asf or 2,173 asf more than currently exists. This number
was carried forward into the ten-year projection.
6.4
Summary
The following chart shows current and projected space by
organizational unit. For comparative purposes, instructional space
has been extracted from the organizational unit totals and is
shown as a separate category.
Figure 2:
Current and Projected Space by Organizational Unit
60,000
Current
(Actual)
Space
Square Feet
50,000
Current
Space
Need
40,000
10-Year
Space
Need
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Executive Office Cont. Educ. &
Comm. Svcs.
Finance &
Administration
6.0 - 5
Learning &
Student Dev.
Classroom
Laboratory
August 2006
Conclusion
Currently, MxCC demonstrates a need for 109,102 assignable
square feet, which is 32 percent more than the space currently
occupied. A ten-year projection of 113,286 square feet is
suggested for MxCC, which equates to an increase of 37 percent
from existing space at the ten-year mark.
Figure 3:
Current and Projected Space Needs
150,000
109,102
100,000
113,286
82,812
Current
Space
Need
0
10-Year
Space
Need
50,000
Current
(Actual)
Space
Square Feet
6.5
The space needs prepared and presented in this document are
grounded in the enrollment and personnel projections provided
and vetted by Middlesex Community College, as well as from
interviews and meetings. The information presented in this
planning document should provide MxCC with an objective
assessment of current and projected space needs. This assumes
that the enrollment and staffing projections develop as
anticipated.
This plan presents findings, conclusions, and recommendations
that are meant to inform the ongoing planning process. It suggests
and quantifies the space required to promote and support an
interactive community of learners. These findings also take into
consideration MxCC’s vision for outreach in the future. With this
information, as well as those issues raised regarding qualitative
issues, MxCC can move confidently toward the future.
6.0 - 6
August 2006
Department/Area
Order-of-Magnitude Space Program
Executive
Current (Actual)
Space Excluding
Instructional
Current Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
Projected Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
President
968
1,650
682
1,850
882
Marketing & Public Relations
802
750
-52
750
-52
Institutional Advancement**
0
400
400
400
400
Institutional Research
0
200
200
200
200
1,770
3,000
1,230
3,200
1,430
Subtotal, Executive
*Personnel projections were determined by division, rather than by departmental area.
Projected staff increases have been captured in the President's area for the purposes of this exercise.
**Current space shared with Marketing & Public Relations
Rickes Associates
August 2006
Department/Area
Director's Office
Continuing Education
Current (Actual) Current Need
Space Excluding
Excluding
Instructional
Instructional
Change
From
Current
Projected Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
5,771
6,250
479
6,450
679
Allied Health
215
100
-115
100
-115
Business & Industry
118
1,000
882
1,000
882
Humanity & Arts
132
0
-132
0
-132
0
0
0
0
0
6,236
7,350
1,114
7,550
1,314
Meriden Center
Subtotal, Continuing Education
Projected staff increases have been captured in the Director's area for the purposes of this exercise.
Rickes Associates
August 2006
Department/Area
Current (Actual) Current Need
Space Excluding
Excluding
Instructional
Instructional
Change
From
Current
Projected Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
Dean's Office
4,009
4,750
741
5,150
1,141
Building & Grounds
5,095
8,550
3,455
8,550
3,455
Business Office
1,408
2,000
592
2,000
592
330
400
70
400
70
2,230
2,600
370
2,600
370
13,072
18,300
5,228
18,700
5,628
Human Resources & Labor Relations
Information Technology
Subtotal, Finance & Administration
Projected staff increases have been captured in the Dean's area for the purposes of this exercise.
Rickes Associates
August 2006
Department/Area
Dean's Office
Current (Actual)
Space Excluding
Instructional
Current Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
Projected Need
Excluding
Instructional
Change
From
Current
905
4,550
3,645
5,550
4,645
Academic Support Services
4,780
14,700
9,920
14,700
9,920
Admissions & Records (Registrar)
2,072
2,750
678
2,750
678
Business Division
907
1,680
773
1,680
773
Career Development & Student
Counseling
748
1,500
752
1,500
752
1,167
1,850
683
1,850
683
Educational Technology
147
480
333
480
333
Financial Aid
327
1,400
1,073
1,400
1,073
Humanity & Arts
2,448
3,380
932
3,380
932
Library Services
12,462
14,000
1,538
14,000
1,538
662
1,580
918
1,580
918
Science & Health
3,106
1,780
-1,326
1,780
-1,326
Social Sciences
1,669
2,080
411
2,080
411
31,400
51,730
20,330
52,730
21,330
Child Development
Mathematics
Subtotal, Learning & Student
Development
Projected staff increases have been captured in the Dean's area for the purposes of this exercise.
Rickes Associates
August 2006
Classrooms*
Department
Continuing Education &
Community Services
Instructional Space
Current (Actual)
Space
Current
Need
Laboratories*
Projected
Need
Current (Actual)
Space
1,361
221
1,401
5,713
Humanity & Arts
Registrar (General)
4,048
13,522
1,072
Social Sciences
TOTAL
Projected
Need*
683
Health & Science
Current
Need*
912
15,606
13,222
15,606
13,327
15,500
15,500
* Classroom space was projected as a bottom-line figure, rather than by individual department. Projected classrooms are assumed to be included in a general
classroom "pool," with no classrooms being "owned" by a particular department (although they may have priority scheduling assignment). Laboratory space was held
constant, as labs were not projected in the Instructional Space Utilization Analysis.
Rickes Associates
August 2006
Appendix
Appendix:
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
8:30 – 9:30 a.m
President’s Conference Room
Interviewees:
Department:
Frank Samuels, Dean
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Identified Staff/Offices
a. Dean and Administrative Assistant: (one office)
b. Assistant Dean (one office)
c. 3 work students who are in the office one at a time
II.
Current Issues
a. The Dean’s office lacks storage, some of which needs to be secure for
files. Prefers storage be adjacent or in the space proper.
b. Would like a small separate space for an assistant to work.
III.
Space Needs / Anticipated Changes
Instructional
a. Current instructional space is inadequate; room size currently drives
course size in some instances.
b. Need more large classrooms.
i.
Currently only 1 – 2 spaces with 45 or more seats.
ii.
Social sciences requires larger classrooms.
c. Classrooms need to allow for flexibility in class sizes; current
classrooms have too many stations for their size.
d. Labs are too small (12 stations) for lectures of 24. When break out
lecture to two labs, possible that faculty only teaches one of the labs.
Would like labs of 16-20 stations.
e. Too many seats in the classrooms.
Programs
a. There are some new programs being proposed that face space
constraints.
i.
Manufacturing
ii.
Biochemistry
iii.
Computing labs with a newer, more efficient configuration.
b. All new programs are required to have 1 dedicated f/t faculty.
Currently the College uses existing faculty to meet this requirement.
c. Student Services
i.
Testing and Counseling are not integrated or whole.
ii.
Looking for one-stop student services, front office functions
only.
d. Child Development has requirements, which currently cannot be met.
1 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
e. Social Science space is too tight.
f. Fine Arts
i.
Photography room is too small
ii.
There is no working kiln; would prefer to dispose of the
existing one as no future plan defined to offer ceramics
iii.
Could do more with Music if there was correctly sized
specialized space
g. Broadcast Communications cannot do radio programming; need
appropriate room.
h. Remedial Education could be overwhelmed if they offered it to all who
are in need.
i. Humanities space is not adequate.
Faculty and Staff
a. Faculty would like individual offices for privacy to counsel students.
b. There is no faculty gathering space or lounge for developing a sense of
community. Most stay in their offices.
Other
a. The Learning Center was re-located to Chapman Library and
encompasses four offices. Need additional space, particularly if they
were to offer competency courses.
b. In general, there are too few conference rooms and no dedicated art
gallery (currently part of a conference room in Chapman).
c. Students gather in the student lounge and game room, neither is
adequate.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Current location for the Dean’s offices is good. Would like to keep the
administrative functions together as they interact on a daily basis.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Would like more parking. At peak times people park on the grass.
b. Would like to fix the tennis courts and provide more outdoor facilities.
c. Interested in a one-stop front piece; close and accessible to
administrative area.
d. Interested in Academic wholeness but not intermingled departments.
VI.
Other Comments
a. There have been more immediate high school graduates in recent
years, but there are no facilities for programming for younger students
to keep them on campus.
b. The Meriden Center is inadequate. There is no space for a library or
counseling, and the parking is an issue. They would really like space
they can control.
c. Shoreline is in a high school and there is also a room in City Hall.
2 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
9:45 – 10:15 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Adrienne Maslin, Associate Dean
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Shares administrative assistant with Dean Sykes
b. Sometimes houses one student worker
II.
Current Issues
a. Would like file storage outside the office.
b. General storage space would be good.
c. Would like a separate space for student worker because there is no
space for an extra person or work study student in her office.
III.
a. Admissions and Records
i. The physical space for Admissions & Records is crowded and
does not provide a good first impression.
ii. Needs more storage for both areas.
iii. Prefer to see a less open floor plan and some more private
space.
iv. If both Admissions & Records are to remain together, they need
more room.
v. Envisions self-service kiosks for students with assistance
nearby.
vi. There are some hearing issues due to HVAC in the Admissions
and Records area.
b. Counseling Center
i. Space is fairly good although preferred being in a classroom
building.
ii. Two counselors; lack gathering space.
iii. Would like to start training sessions for work study students in
Financial Aid.
iv. Counseling provides workshops.
c. Financial Aid
i. Offices are too small.
ii. Reception and waiting area are inadequate.
iii. Houses Director, Assistant, and 1 staff in the outer area.
iv. Unable to offer appropriate programs.
v. Copy machine is located in a storage space.
3 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
d. Other
i. The Library has no reception area.
ii. The Child Center may be incorrectly located in a classroom
building (Snow Hall), although it is close to the playground.
1. There is no playground indoors for bad weather.
2. Licensed for 24 3-5 year olds.
3. Storage is an issue at the pre-school.
4. Would like to expand the service to include infants. That
requires bigger space, more staff, and more specialized
space.
5. Currently open to student’s children, then faculty and
staff, and finally, the community.
6. Drop-off center would be welcome.
iii. Placement Testing is located in Chapman (Library) but would
like to be back with counseling. Would see tutoring remaining in
library.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. The President moved placement testing and tutoring center to
Chapman. This was a move to get at some one-stop issues. Would like
to see placement testing and advisement together in Founders Hall to
support registration.
V.
Campus Issues
a. There is an internal committee to work on improving Founders Hall.
b. Founders Hall is an administrative building in need of renovation and
upgrades. New students and their parents come in and are not
impressed.
c. Faculty need better space, more privacy.
d. Would like to see basic multimedia available in every instructional
space on campus.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
4 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
10:15 – 10:45 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Mensimah Shabazz, Director
Admissions Office
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Generally 3-4 persons at all times: assistant director, two support
staff, and two work study students.
II.
Current Issues
a. Admissions is in a central location which is good, but there is no
distinct image, not welcoming.
b. The main door to the office has to stay open for visibility but, without
heat, it gets cold.
c. Admissions shares an office (approximately 1/3 of space) with
Records, and the staff are physically split in the one space.
d. Two work study students share the counter.
e. People walking through to get to Records interrupt work in Admissions.
It may also give the impressions that staff are not taking care of
people. It looks like 1 office and no one knows to whom to direct their
questions.
f. There is no waiting area for Admissions, which is especially difficult
during registration.
g. Director needs space in office for meetings with upwards of four
people, particularly as younger students start to enroll and bring
family with them to meetings.
III.
a. Files are mostly upstairs. There are some files in the office but they
are primarily Records files. Admissions needs secure storage.
b. If enrollment grows, will have to add staff (+2).
c. There is no work space for Admissions to collate mailings. Perhaps
there could be a work space for the building.
d. There is no storage space for catalogs, materials, or other promotional
material. Would like a shelf for boxes of literature, which would also
help with planning for the year.
e. Admissions has no space for volunteers and international students.
i. Will be expanding the international program. Currently
expanding the Puerto Rico program.
ii. Will be adding summer ESL institute using dorms and language
labs at Wesleyan.
5 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Would like to remain adjacent to Records but distinct from it. Signage
would help. The lack of definition between the two offices is a problem.
They need to be separated with some shared space.
b. Ideally, would move Admissions to the library building where support
labs currently are located.
V.
Campus Issues
a. The roof in Founders Hall leaks.
b. During the Open Houses, there is lack of signage and directories.
c. The landscape needs more color and plants; beautification.
d. The ads posted on the walls, particularly in Founders, looks poor.
e. Do not utilize the open field enough, either by the College or by the
community. People from Wallingford go to Gateway Community
College. More community functions on-campus may increase
awareness.
VI.
Other Comments
a. Would like to upgrade furniture and fixtures.
b. Admissions has one dedicated phone line, and the roll-over to the
second line does not always work. All the calls made to the College
come to Admissions, so much time is spent transferring calls.
c. The College may try to increase enrollment four percent per year, but
there is no room for additional students.
d. Need better publication; students do not know the college exists.
6 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
11:00 – 11:30 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Susan Salowitz, Director
Records Office
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Identified 3.5 persons: Registrar, Assistant (50% and shared with
records) plus two work study students (one at a time for 10 hours per
week).
b. The shared assistant is located in the Records office.
II.
Current Issue
a. Lack privacy
b. Space is visible to students and faculty but was not specifically
designed for admissions or records.
c. It is difficult to keep functions working effectively.
d. Electrical outlets were not distributed throughout the space, so there
are structural poles.
e. Lighting is poor and HVAC inadequate.
III.
a. Need space for private conversations with students.
b. Would like terminals to support on-line functions; promote use of kiosk
areas.
c. Storage is upstairs, but storage is now being shared with many other
areas. Need storage for central stores to free up space for dedicated
storage for Admissions and Records.
d. Would like a small conference space for private conversations with
students.
e. Need a reception/waiting area.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Records is close to Admissions and would want to stay adjacent, but
not in the same space.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Physical plant is aging and it is beginning to show.
b. Classrooms need to have a basic suite of multi-media; currently only
two are available with technology.
c. Classrooms have too many seats for their physical space.
d. Classrooms are scheduled through the Records office.
e. Would like to “spruce up” the place.
7 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
11:30 – 12:00 noon
Interviewees:
Department:
Frances Leon
Communications and Information Center
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Two people sit in the mailroom (CICC)
II.
Current Issues
a. Student I.D.s are being done in Founders Hall, and for the
photographs there is a blue cloth taped to the hallway side of the door
to the President’s Conference Room. There is no security office for
student I.D.s.
b. The mail room could be made more efficient.
c. CICC doubles as the campus Lost and Found.
III.
a. Need a more professional space.
b. Lacking general storage, particularly for the copy paper.
c. A new phone system may require new or bigger space. Unsure if this
requires an additional person.
d. Could see a one-stop-shop arrangement with windows opening on a
hallway.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. Admissions and Records is not an effective space.
b. The student lounge is programmed, but commuter students do not
often stay for the events.
c. Special Events are scheduled through Frances’ office. She is
encouraged to schedule evenings and weekends. A number of outside
groups schedule meetings and events at the College, including State
offices, ARC, the Home School Network, OD&D, and local non-profits.
VI.
Other Comments
a. CICC has a large copy machine and the mail metering equipment.
b. CICC is supposed to be the switchboard for the campus.
8 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
1:00 – 1:30 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
John Shafer, Chair
Humanities and Arts Division
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. There are 7 faculty collocated in one space: 4 English / 1 ESL / 1
Media & Communications / 1 Language.
b. Adjuncts housed in Snow 520 as well as 414.
c. Shared secretary with Social Science Department (secretary physically
housed with Social Science).
II.
Current Issues
a. The location of the shared secretary provides limited access.
b. Lacking appropriate storage space.
c. No dedicated space for language lab or ESL.
III.
a. A need for private faculty offices and more space for adjuncts.
b. Would like to have a division secretary or at least a student assistant.
c. Need storage space for supplies.
d. Need a language lab, which could also be used by ESL.
e. Arts and Media
i. There are Mac labs, but they are too small.
ii. Want a radio station, but need the appropriate space.
iii. Need an audio lab for 20 students.
iv. Would like to bring labs together to ensure security and better
oversight.
v. Would like a dedicated art gallery.
vi. Eliminate the kilns and reclaim the space.
vii. Art needs a clean room.
viii. Dark room is inadequate but may become obsolete with digital
photography.
ix. Arts and Media would like to be combined.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Collocate broadcast and digital so there is no security issue with an
unmanned space.
V.
Campus Issues
a. The campus needs performance/screening space. There is no
auditorium.
9 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
1:30 – 2:00 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Judy Mazgulski and Cora Preibis
Student Life, Learning Center, Tutoring
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Administrator for both the Learning Center and Student Activities. One
office located Founders (Student Activities) and one office in Chapman
Hall for Learning Center.
b. Part-time support person.
II.
Current Issues
a. Learning and Tutoring Center
i. Testing now takes place in Chapman Hall, requires additional
staff.
ii. Cannot test and tutor in the same space; need to book
conference room 628 at same time to hold meetings.
iii. Testing spaces are now shared with Humanities and Arts.
iv. The testing room is a training room for Web CT. It is actually an
open lab that has to be scheduled.
v. The current space is downsized from their original space.
vi. All tutoring in the Center is in one long room. Computers and
Cora’s office are in another small space.
vii. There is no space for the “office worker” with access to phones.
viii. Space was remodeled contrary to actual need – private
conversations occur in public areas.
b. Student Activities
i. Students use Founders 123 for their activities. The environment
is one of constant interruption.
ii. Campus-wide events have to be held outside, especially with
food for 150-200 people.
iii. The proximity of the game room and student lounge to the
Counseling Center and some offices presents problems. It limits
what can be programmed (no loud/music events).
iv. There is no food service for evening students. Wheaton Hall has
a very small student lounge on the upper floor, but no vending
or cafeteria. (Cafeteria services are contracted out.)
10 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
III.
Master Plan
Learning and Tutoring Center
a. They have 15 hours per week through a grant for a staff member for
testing.
b. Testing room needs a glass window.
c. Post-test meetings with students need to be private.
d. Need space for a copier.
e. A testing “lab” could be used at other times by students, including
math tutoring.
f. Need a reception area.
g. Reading/Writing lab is in the same area but not together.
Student Activities
a. Need for dedicated storage for Student Activities.
b. The performance venues are: the student lounge, cafeteria, and multipurpose room(s). Need space for music events, something with a
stage.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Would like to test, tutor, and meet with students all in adjacent areas.
V.
Campus Issues
a. n/a
VI.
Other Comments
a. Lack student gathering space on campus.
11 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
2:15 – 2:45 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Richard Patrick, Chair
Social Science Division
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. n/a
II.
Current Issues
a. Request to put a phone in the conference room for private phone calls.
b. Against large instructional spaces; not the mission of the institution.
c. Share secretary with Humanities.
III.
Childhood Development Center
a. Director of Early Childhood needs additional space and a lab.
b. Would like a proper lab room with glass for observation.
Instructional
a. Would wire the classrooms to supplement teaching as web-based;
have better media available in instructional spaces.
b. In general, there has been a call for larger classrooms in the 40-50
seat range.
c.Would like better office space in general, and faculty would like better
“desks”. (This concern could be the result of crowded offices.) Faculty
have expressed a desire for private offices.
d. Need file storage, A/V equipment and LCDs need secure storage.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. Faculty and students leave campus rather than hanging around, so the
need for gathering spaces is arguable.
VI.
Other Comments
a. If wireless accessibility was available, access to food and coffee would
draw and maintain more students on campus.
12 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
2:45 – 3:15 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Emily Canto and Gail Russell
Career Development and Counseling
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Two offices and testing room; located in Wheaton.
II.
Current Issues
a. Recently moved from Snow 406 to create a one-stop shop for Student
Services.
b. There is concern about having traffic flow during the pre-semester
rush in the Fall.
c. The game room can get very loud and interferes with the adjacent
testing space.
III.
a. They are currently using the hallway for computers.
b. There is no room to add staff. If the College gets any larger, they
would need to add a counselor.
c. The ceiling leaks in their space; new roof needed for the building.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Placement Testing should be relocated with the one-stop shop
functions; preferably with admissions and records.
b. Helpful to maintain the ADA testing adjacent to the placement testing.
Prefer to be in an academic/classroom building.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Labs need upgrades; need more lab spaces.
b. There is no private study space for students.
c. The campus looks tired and is showing its age. It needs paint, carpet,
general maintenance.
d. There is no auditorium or space to hold large events. Would like a 300
seat venue. There also is no large lecture hall. An auditorium may help
with that need.
e. The younger students appear to want to stay on campus, but currently
there is nothing to keep them on campus such as: events, better
gathering space, social areas, or wellness center.
f. Need a space to display art that is not part of a heavily scheduled
conference room.
13 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
g. If there is a new building, parking would need to be rethought for the
lower campus.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
14 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
3:30 – 4:00 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Howard “Skip” Wiley, Chair
Science and Health Division
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Identified 7 personnel and lab assistant
b. Shares secretary with Math (physically located in Math Department)
c. Have 3-4 work study students at same time.
d. Approximately 20 adjuncts (18 Science and 2 OD&D)
II.
Current Issues
a. The current building was built in 1975 and is pretty much unaltered.
The space is not working for Science.
b. Need more flexible space; ability to move between lecture and lab
during the course of instruction—but does not want to teach the
lecture in the lab proper.
c. Need storage space; currently storing non-chemicals in chemical
storage.
d. The infrastructure can not handle the current technology; lab hoods
are passable but reaching life expectancy.
e. The hallways double as book cases.
III.
a. Possible Programs:
i. Pursuing a new Veterinary Technician Program in relation with a
local vet who would host the lab. Lecture would occur at MXCC.
1. Would require a dedicated classroom on campus;
possibly Wheaton 204/205 to support 2 – 3 hour
sections.
ii. Biology Program will only be expanding as programs grow and
enrollment increases.
iii. Environmental Science curriculum needs to be revised to
incorporate current requirements.
iv. Forensic program and 2+2 articulation with the University of
Hartford is in process.
b. The Microbiology Lab is too small. Needs to be double its current size.
c. Need full-sized labs. They can not schedule enough time for
breakdown and set-ups for labs with the current number and size.
d. There is a need for a science classroom to ease the burden on labs for
the lecture sections.
15 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
e. A need for identified and separate space for adjuncts which is separate
from the copier and the refrigerator area.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. May be helpful to be located near the Math Department.
V.
Campus Issues
a. The campus should have a “fitness center” or wellness center.
b. There should be a bigger Child Care center for drop-in service.
c. Would like to see a departmental study/group room for science;
support 8 – 10 students with 3 – 4 computers and relevant reference
material.
d. The student areas need to be larger and better. Students would “hang
out” if there was a nice place on campus.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
16 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January, 30 2006
4:00 – 4:30 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Irod Lee, Director
Academic Support Services/Math Lab Representative
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Shares secretary with Registrar (located in Registrar’s Office)
II.
Current Issues
a. The Math Lab has been dismantled and no longer exists. There is no
space for it, and there is no staff; currently runs it from his office out
of boxes.
b. Provides advising from his office.
c. The Learning Center and Reading/Writing labs went into smaller space,
yet serve more students.
d. Confidentiality issue; lack privacy for meetings.
e. Issue of the game room sharing the wall with testing is a distraction
for those being tested and not fair to students in game/lounge who are
asked to be quiet.
f. Lacking health care on campus (such as nurse or place to lie down
when feeling ill).
III.
a. Would like to see a departmental study room or Math Lab. Estimated
would serve 6 – 12 students. Could provide some specialized tutoring
in this room.
b. Learning Center needs more private tutor space.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. The Math Lab should be recreated, staffed, and located close to the
Learning Center and near students who are taking math.
b. Could be adjacent to Sciences.
c. Testing should be part of the Learning Center.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Could use another building for dedicated and private areas.
b. No identified or available space for Faculty to meet with students.
c. Would like to see an employee lounge/fitness center/wellness center.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
17 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 30, 2006
4:30 – 5:00 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Yi Guan - Raczkowski, Director
Distance Learning (Library)
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Two persons; 1 Full-time, 1 Part-time
b. Located in Chapman 632 and 633
II.
Current Issues
a. Provides technical support to faculty from all academic departments as
well as support for the on-line courses (currently 20 courses).
b. Teaches and supports use of WebCT and provides technology
workshops for faculty and staff (use room 629 for training, testing;
also use 633 when needed).
c. There are often schedule conflicts for the workshops.
d. The traffic through the library stays fairly consistent.
III.
a. The Dean and the President want to double the number of distance
learning classes and the use of WebCT. In order to do that, there is a
need to add 2 f/t staff in some combination. Will also need to have a
dedicated lab to orient distance learning students and to train students
on Web CT.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. The campus needs an auditorium for about 300 people.
b. Perhaps there is a need for a technology building or at least a lounge
to access wireless.
c. Would like to see a Wellness Center.
d. Would like to have outdoor spaces for meetings and courses during
nice weather.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
18 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
8:30 – 9:00 a.m. (rescheduled to 2:00 – 2:30 p.m. 2/1/06)
Room 628
Interviewees:
Department:
Hilary Phelps, Director
Childcare Center
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Current Issues
a. Demand has grown but the space has not. The children are now split
into two groups, dividing the space by activity. This helps with
compliance issues.
b. The office is in the wrong place for supervision.
c. State guidelines require 75 square feet per child. Because technology
and equipment have changed over the years, there may need to be a
new ratio.
d. HVAC in the building is not good. The facility is usually too warm.
II.
a. There is no adult bathroom in the space.
b. Need storage, even if it is outside the building.
c. There is a need for a gross motor recreational space indoors for use
during inclement weather.
d. Would like to expand the program and incorporate with the Early
Childhood Education program.
e. Would like a new, larger facility near the play ground. It would need to
be away from the street. Parking access is a must.
f. Would like to expand the program to toddlers and infants which
requires additional staff and space.
g. Would like an observation window/space to help current students
observe without disrupting the children.
III.
Adjacencies
a. Would like to be located near the Early Childhood Education
classrooms.
IV.
Campus Issues
a. It is hard to get students involved. There is hardly ever anyone in the
lounge and only a handful in the game room at any time. A common
area like the one at Tunxis CC would be nice.
b. Traditionally aged students will be more likely to take advantage of
campus activities, such as athletic facilities, food service, etc.
19 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
V.
Master Plan
Other Comments
a. Stop smoking in front of building doors. Having to walk through smoke
to enter buildings is a problem on main campus and at Meriden.
20 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
9:00 – 9:30 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Diane von Hardenberg, Specialist
Disability Support Services
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Office for specialist and one testing room
II.
Current Issues
a. The trade-off between former space and current space is not ideal.
Dealing with the noise from the game room, lounge, and cafeteria. Not
fair to tell those students to please be quiet.
III.
a. There is no current access to technology for tests, etc. Would like to
have 2 – 3 computers in the space for testing.
b. Would like individual study carrels and a table with chairs.
c. Current space holds 4; ideally there should be enough room to
accommodate 8-10 in a variety of settings.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Would like an office and testing area in an academic building.
b. Does not need to be adjacent to anyone in particular, but it helps to
facilitate communication with faculty if they are close.
V.
Campus Issues
a. The age of the facilities means there are lots of non-compliance (ADA)
issues. The existing facilities should be made accessible.
b. The population of people needing assistance is increasing. As
consumers become more savvy about the technology, they are
expecting/demanding upgrades and state-of-the-art technology.
c. There is need for another academic building.
d. There is need for a student center. Currently, no students can gather
without disrupting business.
e. Need better security on campus; possibly a public address system.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
21 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
9:30 – 10:00 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Kim Hogan, Director
Finance and Administrative Services
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 2 full-time staff (payroll)
b. 9 full-time in Business
II.
Current Issues
a. The space for the Business Office is poor; staff have their back to the
payment window, often do not know someone is there.
b. The configuration of the various functions is fragmented.
c. There is no private office space to meet with staff and people from
other offices.
III.
a. Currently investigating to have the space rearranged because the size
feels adequate, it is just the set-up which is incorrect.
b. Storage is sufficient for current purposes. Use space in basement of
Chapman (secured).
c. There is the possibility there would be the need to add one more
person if enrollment grows.
d. Need better flow of students and control during registration; would like
to see a one-stop shop similar to Capital Community College.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Payroll and HR need to be together.
b. The Business Office needs to be near Financial Aid and the Bursar.
V.
Campus Issues
a. The campus needs signage and building directories.
b. The upgrades to the classrooms have helped. The new classrooms in
Chapman are nice.
c. There is a sub-committee for building enhancement for Founders Hall.
d. The facilities need to be clean. Even Chapman (only ten years old)
needs some TLC at this point.
e. Food service is minimal over the summer. For that reason, vendors
have a hard time prospering.
f. IT upgrades have helped. Computer labs are basic. Wireless is limited.
g. Basic maintenance needs should be addressed to ensure that paint and
floors are clean and kept up.
22 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
h. There is no place to go for breaks or if someone is ill and needs to lie
down for a few minutes. Would like a medical area.
VI.
Other Comments
a. Finds space on campus can be an embarrassment.
b. Issue of home-schooled students attending campus (ages 12-18) need
place to call home until they are picked up on campus.
23 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
10:00 – 11:00 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Wilfredo Nieves, President
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Current Issues
a. The College’s service area will need science, engineering and
technology programs, and the College has to respond to these needs.
b. The College needs to project a more professional feel through its
facilities.
c. Would like to see total enrollment of 4,000 – 4,500 on the credit side
and an additional 5,000 non-credit students for all three campuses.
d. Biotechnology programs need to partner and respond to changes.
e. Technology needs to be a part of all programs so the curriculum is
current.
f. Route 9 is a good corridor, along with Meridan and Shoreline. The
College could attract more students, perhaps by leveraging
partnerships with area towns.
g. Gallery should be free of scheduled meetings.
h. The campus will remain a commuter school. There are no plans for
residence halls.
II.
a. If the College plans to incorporate research associates into the mix,
programs need to be upgraded.
b. Allied Health may need a generic lab on campus with clinical support
from area hospitals.
c. A transitional program in manufacturing technology needs more
development. It is currently a partnership.
d. Student gathering spaces are crucial.
e. The international program is expanding. There is need for a language
lab for ESL and foreign language.
f. Writing and Math need a lab and support space. Tutoring should
provide on-line support.
g. There is no current link to the state’s agricultural program in
Middletown.
h. Would like to expand Engineering program (the System transfer
program). It should be better supported.
i. The campus needs performance/presentation space for between 100 –
200, and a large lecture hall with a raked floor.
24 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
j.
Could see an addition of 10 f/t staff if enrollment growth occurs. Would
like to add more f/t faculty to get the f/t to p/t ratio to about 65% to
35%.
k. Biotechnology and Nursing may require additional faculty and
associated funding.
l. May move to more evening and weekend programming.
III.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
IV.
Campus Issues
a. Wired classrooms are “old” technology. The campus needs a modern
wireless environment (such as a cyber café).
b. Would like more “wellness” activities.
c. Would like an outdoor amphitheater / event space.
d. Need to address space for the student clubs and the Child Care Center.
The Early Childhood Education program is growing, so the Child Care
Center may need to grow.
e. Should be more student gathering spots with wireless access; meeting
spaces in each building.
f. Language lab for ESL and Foreign Language programs.
g. Younger students coming on campus are looking for more technology
and better space.
V.
Other Comments
a. Lines get long during registration, and that does not project a
professional image.
b. There is no private space on campus.
c. Sometimes it is not as much about the space as it is about the
configuration.
d. Technology could move the College to flexible space and movable
furniture for collaborative learning.
e. May be an increase in the number of honors students and there is a
sense that the trend is toward research in biotech through community
college programs.
25 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
11:15 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
David Sykes, Dean
Finance, Administration and Planning
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Current space is adequate. The Dean and one secretary.
b. Maintenance department is 1 full-time and 2 maintainers, three
general tradesmen.
II.
Current Issues
a. Founders Hall was originally built as the student center and library; not
well designed for the administrative functions it currently contains.
b. Storage is ok, located in Chapman basement, does not have or archive
many files.
c. Payroll and HR have environmental issues and may need to be
relocated temporarily.
d. Regulatory environment requires more administrative work with the
same number of staff and space.
e. Bookstore is too small / loading dock doubles as storage.
f. Building and Grounds storage appears adequate.
g. Feels can accommodate growth through tighter course scheduling.
h. Founders is “maxed out” with people and departments.
i. Too comfortable with status quo, sees growing programs such as Hotel
and Hospitality certificates.
III.
a. Changing clientele: younger students directly from high school.
b. The Business Office would be a priority with enrollment growth: will
require additional staff, also student support (Registrar, Records, and
Financial Aid).
c. The President wants a new Science and Technology building to supply
better lab space and to remain competitive.
d. Need appropriate and maintained storage.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. The dean should be in proximity to the President and the Academic
Dean, but does not need to be adjacent to Business or Payroll.
b. Preference to be close by/ approximate to Building and Grounds /
Safety and Security Supervisor as they interact on daily basis.
26 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
V.
Campus Issues
a. The bookstore needs a bigger space. (Perhaps consider moving it to
the Game Room area?) There is no storage and no direct access to a
loading dock. Now, all deliveries come directly to Purchasing.
b. Converted 5,000 square feet of storage in the lower level of Chapman
Hall to High Tech classroom space; lost storage.
c. The remaining Chapman storage areas seem crowded but that may be
a reflection that they need to be cleaned out.
d. There is room to expand if the College offers more vocational and
technical education. These programs could possibly double enrollment.
e. Need better laboratory space, more up-to-date.
f. Campus is showing its age.
g. Curriculum needs freshening.
VI.
Other Comments
a. Maintenance space is good and is co-located with the Dean of
Admissions.
b. Cleaning, security, food service, and the bookstore are all outsourced.
c. Would like to see better promotion of campus.
d. Meriden enrollment is growing. They do not have any complete
programs, but most Meriden students do not like to commute.
e. There is some potential at Shoreline; however, it is unclear if there is
demand. Old Saybrook is affluent and older (retired).
f. Meridan Center is growing, addition of 2,000 asf in June. Goal is to
have Meridan be self-sufficient and able to grant certificates to
students.
27 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
1:15 – 1:45 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Marlene Olsen, Director
Don Augusta
Marketing and Public Relations
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. Located on mezzanine in Founders
II.
Current Issue
a. The office produces all photos for College materials and 4 annual
campaigns.
b. The layout boards have to be done in the hallway because the office is
lacking layout space.
III.
a. Need secure storage for equipment, kiosks, printing equipment.
b. The office is not easily accessible because of its location on the second
floor.
c. Would like space with more natural light.
d. Noise from the Student Lounge is disruptive and traffic through the
area interrupts work.
e. Need an eight foot table or a counter for layout of material.
f. The Director should have a private office; the graphic designer needs
quiet space.
g. Need ground-level secure storage for very heavy equipment
(estimated 120 sq. ft.).
h. Need storage for schedules and mailers.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Need to be near the President’s office and administrative offices.
b. Would prefer to be on first level of building or storage on lower level.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Why is the loading dock where it is? Loading dock is currently part of
the campus’s front door appearance.
b. Aesthetics are poor, particularly in Founders.
c. Would like better security on campus, particularly at night.
d. Signage is too small and low, but codes restrict the size.
e. On-campus way-finding is difficult.
f. Handicapped parking is downhill from the classroom buildings.
g. Would like to see a kiosk or marquee for events.
28 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
VI.
Master Plan
Other Comments
a. n/a
29 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
1:45 – 2:15 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Walter Truscinski
Daniel Nocera
Business and Industry Services/Corporate Media Center
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 2 f/t, and 1 p/t project coordinator at the Brownfield Training Center.
II.
Current Issue
Business and Industry
a. B&I offer contract training and workforce development.
b. They do on-site training a Meriden.
c. Lacking confidential/private meeting space.
d. Due to restricted space, unable to offer the amount of Continuing
Education courses they could.
Corporate Media
a. Does video production for clients (media and editing).
b. Works with Broadcast area; uses their space as needed. Currently
office is located within their suite.
c. Consultants are added on a per project basis.
d. Space currently in was not designed to handle the equipment/creates
high levels of heat. Need better climate control ability.
III.
Business and Industry
a. Expects to add student help.
b. Need 4 private offices.
c. Storage space for binders, etc.
d. Would like to bring the precision machine program back to campus.
e. Need larger “dedicated” classroom for scheduling.
Corporate Media
a. Needs meeting space for 10 people and should be adjacent to office.
b. Needs 2 editing suites.
c. Needs secure closet and storage space.
d. Need dedicated space to store tapes/videos. Required to maintain as
part of contract.
30 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Media Services needs to be in the Broadcast / Communications area
for access to the equipment and students (who work on projects for
credit). Media Services does not need to be adjacent to Business &
Industry.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Need more general staff parking, should be dedicated and enforced.
b. Would like to see more meeting space on campus. Would be better if
the meeting space contained video capability for conferences and
events.
c. A need for larger classroom spaces and spaces which are flexible.
d. Need additional space in Meriden. Preferably a whole floor with 6
classrooms--similar to the multi-purpose rooms in Chapman.
e. Need connectivity to move video from one space to another.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
31 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
2:30 – 3:00 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Paul Carmichael, Director
Institutional Research
Interviewers:
Karen E. Hinton
RA
I.
a. Director only
II.
Current Issues
a. n/a
III.
a. Would like space for a research assistant or student worker.
b. Would like a door that closes and natural light to ease eye strain.
c. Would like workspace for reports and enough space to hold meetings
in the office proper.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. There is no elevator in Founders Hall
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
Note: Additional information gathered at a previous meeting.
32 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
3:00 – 3:45 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Richard Muniz, Director
Continuing Education and Community Services
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. There is 1 f/t Director, 1 f/t Assistant, and 1 p/t Assistant.
b. Meriden has 2 f/t personnel.
II.
Current Issues
a. Continuing Education/Community Services provide extension courses,
personal development, Weekend College, Winter and Summer
sessions, and the Seniors Program.
b. Continuing Education is turning away contracts due to lack of space.
With enough space, they could reach the President’s target of 5,000.
c. Use all of the campus on Saturday through courses and the Saturday
Math Academy (140 kids).
d. Serves over 1,000 students on a regular basis.
e. Courses taught with part-time faculty; no place for faculty to be
housed to offer office hours, etc.
f. Would like a stronger presence at the Meriden Campus.
III.
a. There is no faculty space at Meriden. The faculty use a small
conference table.
b. Would like to add a 20-hour position.
c. Current office space is too small; lacks counter space for registering
students.
d. File storage is critical.
e. Need meeting space or a conference room.
f. The CE office needs private offices.
g. Need an 18-station computer lab at Meriden.
h. PMI is not really working as well as it could. Maybe consider moving it
to Meriden if there is room.
i. Meriden could use 4-5 classrooms at least. One 35-seat classroom and
one 60-seat with a partition for larger activities.
j. Need two more offices at Meriden. One for faculty use and one for B&I.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Would like to make CE whole, except for Media Center.
33 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
V.
Campus Issues
a. The campus needs larger classrooms.
VI.
Other Comments
a. Meriden needs parking, classrooms, and offices. The Mayor has agreed
to give a municipal parking lot of 75 spaces.
b. There is space in City Hall in Old Saybrook for day classes. The high
school can only provide so much space and for evenings only. An
additional space has been provided at City Hall for use.
34 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
4:00 – 4:30 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Donna Leonowich, Chair
Business and Mathematics
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Business
a. 6 f/t faculty including Chair
b. 1 f/t lab assistant and 1 f/t office assistant (also serves the building,
all three divisions)
c. 22 – 25 adjuncts
Math
a. 6 f/t faculty
b. 10 -13 adjuncts
II.
a. The three computer labs are tight. There are computer parts in the
back of one of the classrooms.
b. Secure storage is needed for Business for equipment.
c. Math uses some of the wired classrooms in Chapman.
d. The Math Lab is no longer functioning as a lab. Students are not going
to the tutoring center. Would like to re-instate the Math Lab.
e. There are three private offices for Math, but none for Business.
f. If enrollment grows, would need additional 1 f/t person.
III.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
IV.
Campus Issues
a. The general purpose classrooms should be upgraded to include
technology. Many spaces have computers but are lacking the ceiling
mounted projectors (not installed or have been stolen).
b. Because equipment is not always available, faculty use personal
laptops for instruction.
c. Need storage for equipment.
d. All Business courses should be technologically enhanced, but not all
the classrooms are wired or have stations.
e. Poor quality environment/overall appearance of campus. For example,
room 204 looks like a “storage dump”.
f. Need 45 - 50 seat classrooms.
35 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
V.
Master Plan
Other Comments
a. n/a
36 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
January 31, 2006
4:30 – 5:00 p.m.
628 Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Michael Amouzou, Assistant Director
Financial Aid
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 3 f/t and 1 p/t staff in Financial Aid.
b. Would add a financial aid counselor and a secretary if there was space.
II.
Current Issue
a. Lack private space; students who need privacy need to dislocate
residents of one of the two private offices available.
b. Lack storage space; no physical space for additional file cabinets.
c. Need additional secure storage to maintain the requisite 10-years of
records.
d. Need student support services at Meriden Campus, feel could recruit
and retain more students if these services were available.
III.
a. Meriden should have a dedicated office space for use by Financial Aid
Counselors vs. the current use of a computer lab.
b. Would like to see a one-stop set up similar to Tunxis Community
College.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. Founders Hall needs to be rebuilt. The student lounge is not good.
b. The Assistant Director of Financial Aid has a blue tarp to cover his desk
to protect it from leaks in the roof.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
37 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
8:30 – 9:00 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Josephine Agnello-Veley, Director
Human Resources and Labor Relations
Interviewers:
Karen E. Hinton
RA
I.
a. 1 f/t Director
II.
Current Issues
a. Current space is satisfactory.
III.
a. Need record storage which is secure and easy to access.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Needs to be near Payroll.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Things seem to be o.k.
b. The central space for big events needs to be larger.
c. There needs to be a systematic approach to maintaining records for
the entire campus.
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
38 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2005
9:00 – 9:30 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Randeane Tetu, Coordinator
Reading and Writing Lab
Interviewers:
Karen E. Hinton
RA
I.
Identified Staff/ Offices
a. Director, 1 p/t tutor, 1 p/t secretary.
II.
Current Issues
a. Currently located in Chapman 715. Uses 715 and 716 as a classroom
but the desk is in 715.
b. Students use the adjacent library carrels when there is overflow.
c. Course sizes average 16 – 20 students.
III.
a. The move from Snow was into several small rooms which do not work
well. The advantage is that since the space is dedicated, materials can
be available and secure. The space is “made to work”.
b. The space is in use all day.
c. Room 802 is also used for lecture sections scheduled through the
Registrar.
d. Room 717 is the office for private sessions.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Need to be near the Library.
V.
Campus Issues
a. n/a
VI.
Other Comments
a. The roof leaks in 715 and 717.
39 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
9:45 – 10:45 a.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Deborah Jeffers, Director
Meriden Center
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 2 f/t, 2 p/t tutors each semester for math and writing, plus peer tutors
for computers. Tutors do not overlap and use available classrooms.
II.
Current Issues
a. There are 484 credit students at Meriden (F 05) approximately 192
FTE.
b. Has asked to increase a p/t position to ¾ - time and add a new f/t
assistant director/coordinator.
c. Lack of consistent presence of Financial Aid, Counseling, and general
student services.
d. No dedicated student space or study space.
e. Lacking basic support staff.
III.
a. Will be adding regular visits from Financial Aid.
b. Counseling will also make regular visits to campus.
c. Room 403 is the “faculty area”.
d. Contact EOC comes once per week and works with the Director and
students.
e. The Center plans to increase enrollment and expand space (expect an
additional 2,000 asf to come on line).
f. Would like an ESL/Language Lab.
g. Would like the to flexibility of breakouts and collaborative learning
space.
h. The future goal is to become a branch campus which can also grant
certificates and degrees and not require students to attend the main
campus to graduate.
i. There is talk of a dry science lab, but it should be a wet lab. They
should be able to offer biology, which may need to be located in a high
school.
j. Would like to develop more student activities.
k. There are plans to get some full degree programs. Are finalizing some
additional certificate programs.
l. Would like to offer more credit and non-credit courses.
40 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
m. Considering the addition of a medical billing program. Would like to
incorporate workforce development and allied health. Fast
Track/Accelerated programs could work.
n. There are two CAN programs, but Contract Training ends up
scheduling 8-10 people.
o. Non-credit classes are held between 1:30 and 5:30.
p. There are no Friday classes.
q. Would like a dedicated building with parking. There is an initiative for a
City Center/Education Center.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. n/a
VI.
Other Comments
a. The Center should report to Academics.
b. There currently are 75 – 80 parking spaces, but during the day there
are about 120 students. Looking to gain additional parking about one
block away.
c. This is the first semester there have been complaints about the size of
the classrooms.
41 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
11:00 – 11:30 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Sanjay Jerath, Director
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 6 f/t and 1 p/t housed in Founders 305
II.
Current Issues
a. Storage for computers is an issue because the rolling replacement plan
means replaced computers are redeployed at some point.
b. Currently everything is stored in the 4 telecom closets located in
classrooms. This poses difficulty if the equipment is needed and a class
is in session.
c. When new computers are delivered during the summer they are stored
in a classroom for which the locks must be changed.
d. Security is generally not a problem in the IT department unless the
doors are left open. However, the lack of secure storage encourages
theft.
III.
a. Would like all telecom closets to have hall access.
b. Two technicians were added last year. These new people are stationed
at the help desk.
c. Repair space is adjacent to the help desk and although “ok” is not
adequate.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. Need to be located near the classrooms where most requests
originate.
b. Would like to have Mac and PC labs in the same building to overcome
the impressions about competition. Agrees with the President on the
creation of a technology building.
V.
Campus Issues
a. Campus should have its own security. It should not be outsourced.
b. Theft of equipment on campus from overhead projectors, to
keyboards, to larger laser printers as well as complete computers.
c. Due to security issues, “open labs” are often locked to prevent theft.
42 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
VI.
Master Plan
Other Comments
a. There are test areas for wireless on campus, but security and industry
standard may keep the campus wired.
43 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
11:30 – 12:00 (rescheduled from 3:45 – 4:15)
Interviewees:
Department:
Lan Liu, Director
Library Services
Interviewers:
RA
I.
a. 4 f/t, 2 p/t and 3-4 work study students (some overlap)
II.
Current Issues
a. When the Director and the secretary were moved, the microforms
room was split in half. Now, the microforms room is too small and the
overhead light sensor for both rooms is in the microforms room.
b. The Library hosts student, college and community events. This reflects
the new role of the Library as a social and learning center.
c. Maintain status quo with volumes (estimated 50,000). Approximately
150 titles of periodicals. Can not grow collection due to lack of space.
Goal is a 10,000 volume increase.
III.
a. Information literacy classes are mandated by the state and as such are
part of the General Education program. A classroom for this program
could serve as an open computer classroom for students but would be
owned and scheduled for Bibliographic Instruction by the Library.
Estimated need for 30-seat space.
b. Currently have 20 workstations; need more. Current workstations are
crowded.
c. Access to the book processing room is confusing since the
Reading/Writing lab has a key and uses the kitchen facilities.
IV.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
V.
Campus Issues
a. n/a
VI.
Other Comments
a. n/a
44 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
12:30 – 1:20 p.m.
808D Chapman Hall
Interviewees:
Department:
Faculty Focus Group: Patrick Bryan, Lucinda Patrick, Rick
Eriksen, Rich Lenoce, Joan Donato, Frank Samuels, Greg Horne.
Various
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Current Issues
a. One concern is specialized instructional space and labs versus general
purpose instruction. There are over 200 students per semester in
biology and other classes. It is inappropriate to conduct lectures in a
lab space. In addition, set-up and breakdowns are either cramped for
time or they reduce teaching time. A separate lecture room would be
ideal.
b. The Gallery is inadequate and is only open for general viewing a few
hours per week.
c. There is no satisfactory screening room.
II.
a. Broadcast Communications space was built to the old program. None
of the rooms are soundproofed; rooms are too small for the
technology. Would like to expand into radio and reinstate the radio
station. Would need 1 live and 1 recoding studio, and storage for the
station.
b. The English department has no advising space or student/faculty
meeting room. Neither the Chair nor the Coordinator has a private
office for meeting with students or faculty.
III.
Adjacencies
a. Art and the Media group have a security issue because the lab tech
stationed upstairs provides “security” for that space as well as for the
downstairs labs. At any one time space is left unsecured.
b. Would like to have Art and Media made whole.
c. Digital Arts and Multimedia hope to keep the Media Technology
together.
d. Behavioral Science: There are no labs to support the clinical programs.
Looking for a small room with glass in the back for group observation.
e. Kiln should be removed. Ceramics program will not be reinstated.
f. Would like the outside space developed with Nature trails, an
Arboretum for specimens, etc.
45 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
IV.
Campus Issues
a. The campus needs space for conferences, meetings, and adjunct
faculty.
b. Larger classrooms are necessary for classes of 45 – 50 students. Need
flexibility in the configuration. There is the “MxCC cramp”, which is
caused by trying to face the class while using technology.
c. The campus is short on privacy and sound-deadening/acoustics.
d. Not all the teaching tools are conveniently available, i.e. chalk boards
covered by the projector screen.
e. Heating, cooling and air handlers create problems with noise. Rooms
get too hot with the doors closed because of computers generating
heat. Air handlers are so loud faculty have to talk over noise.
V.
Other Comments
a. Smoking areas near entrance doors to the buildings is an issue.
46 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
Date:
Time:
Location:
February 1, 2006
1:30 – 2:00 p.m.
Interviewees:
Department:
Student Focus Group:
Sarah Romanic, Vinnie Marotty, Brian Gorman,
Courtney Hardy, Raphael Scharborough, Jessica Hill, Micki
Charton, Camille Smith, Kathryn Horsman, Christopher
Whicker, Irod Lee, and Judy Mazgulski
Student Government
Interviewers:
RA
I.
Current Issues
a. Student space at the Meriden Center is non-existent.
b. Smoking areas are an issue for students. Door areas are supposed to
be smoke-free.
II.
a. Would like tables between academic buildings for socializing or
breakouts from classes.
b. Classrooms are too crowded. If general purpose classrooms were more
flexible classes could be shifted for right-sizing.
c. The Lounge is too small and students have to keep the noise down. “If
we can’t make noise, is it really our Lounge?”
d. Faculty offices are too small, cramped, and there is no privacy. The
cubicles are just jammed together and there no space in the cubicles.
e. Desks are not available for big or handicapped students. Chairs in the
conference room in Chapman are nicer. Tables and chairs are a better
option.
f. There is no space for a student radio station. The idea was to put it
into the Lounge, but if they’re worried about noise that is not an
option.
III.
Adjacencies
a. n/a
IV.
Campus Issues
a. There is no outdoor space for gathering. The indoor gathering usually
occurs in the Lounge or Library. Student places need to be where the
students are.
b. Some Questions:
i. Why doesn’t the College have wireless internet?
ii. Why doesn’t MxCC issue student email addresses?
47 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Meeting
Notes
Master Plan
iii. Why isn’t a student allowed to connect to the College system?
Web CT helps a student access course materials and their
faculty, but do faculty truly know how to use it?
iv. Why are there locker rooms?
v. Why are other community colleges better, nicer looking
(cleaner)?
c. Food Service changes hands too often for consistency. Not enough
staff.
d. Facilities are dated. We would stay if there were nicer facilities and
something to do.
V.
Other Comments
a. Rooms don’t seem to be up to standard. They seem to be less well
equipped than high schools.
b. The rooms in Chapman are significantly different (better) than the
rooms in the other building. There are only two classrooms you can
use your laptop in to give a presentation. Other rooms are not set up
for that.
48 of 48
March 2006
Interview Notes
Appendix:
Space Inventory
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
Chapman Hall
808E-1
20.00 Continuing Education & Community Services
Chapman Hall
601
385.98 Finance & Administration
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage
Chapman Hall
602
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY boiler rm
Chapman Hall
603
363.73 Learning & Student Development
Science & Allied Health
Ophthalmic Design & Dispensing
Chapman Hall
604
Chapman Hall
605
Chapman Hall
606
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
Continuing Education & Community Services
Notes
685
Allied Health Program
220 OD&D workshop
315 storage for Richard Muniz
Registrar
Instructional
110 52 lg tablets
Registrar
Instructional
110 25 lg tablets
607
Registrar
Instructional
608
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
609
610
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
611
612
613
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Instructional
Chapman Hall
614
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
615
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
617
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage
Chapman Hall
618
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
619
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage
730 Storage
Chapman Hall
620
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
622
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
623
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 storage behind semi-circle stair
YYY mechanical room
YYY mechanical room
Chapman Hall
625
310 office
Chapman Hall
626
112
Chapman Hall
627
Chapman Hall
628
Registrar
Instructional
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
Chapman Hall
629
630
631
Registrar
Registrar
Registrar
Instructional
Instructional
Instructional
540 dispensing clinic
111 high tech cr
210 18-20 comp. academic
110 classroom
110 classroom
311 Yi Guan-Raczkowski
110 27 lg tablets
XXX womens bathroom
550 contact lens clinic
110 large desks
XXX mens bathroom
112
112
YYY Electrical Room
XXX closet
Chapman Hall
632
Chapman Hall
633
Chapman Hall
634
Building & Grounds
Chapman Hall
701
Library Services
440 circulation & cataloging
Chapman Hall
702
Library Services
410 microforms rm
Chapman Hall
703
Library Services
410 computing rm
Chapman Hall
704
Library Services
350 conf rm
220 Erin Mason (PT) 5 comp
Facilities
730 Storage
August 2006
Rickes Associates, Inc.
Developed January 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
Chapman Hall
705
Library Services
350 conf rm
Chapman Hall
706
Library Services
350 Pegasus Gallery - conf rm
Chapman Hall
707
Library Services
410 art slide viewing rm
Chapman Hall
708
Library Services
410 TV viewing rm
Chapman Hall
709
Library Services
Chapman Hall
710
Learning Center & Placement Testing
316 closet-RW Lab
Chapman Hall
711
410
Chapman Hall
712
410
Chapman Hall
713
Chapman Hall
714
Library Services
Chapman Hall
715
410 reading/writing lab
Chapman Hall
716
Chapman Hall
717
Chapman Hall
718
Library Services
Chapman Hall
719
Chapman Hall
720
Chapman Hall
721
Chapman Hall
722
Chapman Hall
723
Chapman Hall
801
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY mechanical room
Chapman Hall
802
Registrar
Instructor
110 21 tablet desks
Chapman Hall
803
Registrar
Instructor
110 19 tablet desks
Chapman Hall
804
Chapman Hall
805
Chapman Hall
806
Chapman Hall
808
Chapman Hall
609A
Chapman Hall
609B
Chapman Hall
618A
410 listening rm
311 Judy Mazgulski & Support
410 TV distrib & recording room
440 process room
Library Services
420 book stacks
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX womens bathroom
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX mens bathroom
Library Services
420 reference
Library Services
420 Periodicals
685 Kitchenette - General Use
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX womens bathroom
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX mens bathroom
Notes
680 multipurpose room (can be 4 spaces 808A-D)
550
550
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage Cage
Chapman Hall
618B
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage Cage
Chapman Hall
618C
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
619A
Building & Grounds
Facilities
730 Storage Cage
730 Storage
Chapman Hall
619B
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
625A
730 Storage
315 storage
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
625B
Chapman Hall
701A
Library Services
440 circulation
Chapman Hall
702A
Library Services
410 microforms rm
Chapman Hall
714A
Library Services
455 media & equipment
Chapman Hall
718A
Library Services
455
Chapman Hall
722A
Library Services
420 reference
Chapman Hall
722B
Library Services
420 reference
Chapman Hall
722C
Library Services
420 reference
Chapman Hall
722D
Library Services
Chapman Hall
804A
Chapman Hall
420 reference
Building & Grounds
808A-1
685
Chapman Hall
808B-1
685
Chapman Hall
808C-1
685
Chapman Hall
808D-1
685
Chapman Hall
808E
685 storage
Chapman Hall
808F
685 storage
Chapman Hall
808F-1
685
Chapman Hall
808G-1
685
Chapman Hall
808H-1
685
Chapman Hall
808I-1
685
Chapman Hall
808J-1
685
Chapman Hall
808K-1
685
Chapman Hall
808L-1
685
Chapman Hall
808M-1
Chapman Hall
C-01
Chapman Hall
C-01
Chapman Hall
C-01
Chapman Hall
C-02
Building & Grounds
Chapman Hall
C-02
Chapman Hall
C-02
Chapman Hall
C-03
Chapman Hall
Facilities
685 Landing
Facilities
685
WWW corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Facilities
WWW Corridor
WWW corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Main Entrance Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
C-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Building & Grounds
Notes
315 storage
Chapman Hall
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Dean/Organization
Department/
Sub-
Unit
Department
NCES
Code
Chapman Hall
C-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-05
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-05
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-05
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-06
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-06
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-07
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-07
214 Finance & Administration
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-08
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-08
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-09
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
C-09
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Chapman Hall
C-10
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW corridor
Chapman Hall
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY elevator
Chapman Hall
EL-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY elevator
Chapman Hall
EL-2A
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY elevator
Chapman Hall
EL-B
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Elevator
Chapman Hall
HV-1
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-2
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-3
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-4
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-5
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-6
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-7
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY HVAC
Chapman Hall
HV-8
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Chapman Hall
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
ST-04
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX stairs
Chapman Hall
TC5
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Notes
YYY HVAC
YYY Telecommunication Closet
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
TC6
Building & Grounds
Founders
103
255.10 Executive
President
Founders
104
311 Patti Hard - Assistant
Founders
105
267.60 Executive
President
315 Reception Area
Founders
106
311 David Sykes - Dean
Founders
107
311 Frank Samuels
Founders
108
311 Adrienne Maslin - Assoc Dean
Founders
114
Founders
115
Founders
116
Business Office
Founders
117
630 Kitchen
Founders
118
630 Café
Founders
119
Career Development& Counseling
311 Gail Russell
Founders
120
311 Emily Canto
Founders
121
311 Heidi Carlson-Kennedy& Computers
Founders
122
Learning Center/Student Life
Founders
123
311 Mary (Micki) Charton-Sec Student Activities
311 Judy Mazgulski - Student Activitity Office
Founders
124
Founders
127
Founders
132
Founders
133
Founders
134
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Handicap Bathroom-Not Working
Founders
135
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Womens Bathroom
Founders
136
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Janitorial Closet
Founders
137
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
Founders
138
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Founders
139
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Womens Bathroom
Founders
140
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
Founders
141
Founders
144
Facilities
Notes
Chapman Hall
350 Conference room
Building & Grounds
XXX Custodian Area
311 Josephine Agnello-Veley
Payroll
311
311 Student Activity Coordinator
311 Irod Lee - Director
311 Reception
Admissions & Records
Building & Grounds
312 Student Senate Group
311 Evening Pgm - Assist Dir Admin-M. Shabazz
Facilities
YYY Mechanical Room
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
Facilities
Notes
Founders
147
Building & Grounds
750 Mailroom
Founders
148
Building & Grounds
311 Cary Repoli
Founders
149
Building & Grounds
660 Book Store & 1 office
Founders
151
311 Mensimah Shabazz - Assist Dir
Founders
152
311 Director of Records - Vacant
Founders
153
Founders
154
650 Student Lounge
Founders
155
670 Game Room
Founders
104A
311 Richard Muniz - Director
Founders
105A
266.09 Executive
President
310 Wilfredo Nieves - President
311 Admissions & Records-6 people
Founders
105B
24.17 Executive
President
315 Bathroom
Founders
105C
154.59 Executive
President
311 Exec Assist to President
Founders
106A
311 Frances Leon
Founders
107A
311 Linda Ansarra
Founders
108A
311 Noreen Wilson - Secretary
Founders
113A
Business Office
310 Business Office-Accts Rec
Business Office
315 Payment Window
311 Judy Uliasz-Admin Assist
Founders
113B
Founders
115A
Founders
118A
Founders
121A
635 Café Entrance
Disability Support Services
311 Diane Von Hardenberg
315 Testing Room
311 Walt Truscinski-Director - Split Space
Founders
121B
Founders
131-1
Founders
131-2
Allied Health Program
311 Winifred Standish-Allied Health - Split Space
Founders
131A
316 Kitchen, Files, Copies
Business & Industry Services & Allied Health
Founders
132A
Financial Aid
311 Gladys Colon - Director
Founders
132B
Financial Aid
Founders
132C
Financial Aid
311 Secretary
311 Associate Director
Founders
141A
316 Storage
Founders
141B
316 Storage Area - CE
Founders
147A
Building & Grounds
750 Info Center
Founders
154A
Founders
C-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
650 Student Lounge
WWW Corridor
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
Unit
Department
Dean/Organization
Founders
C-01
Founders
C-02
Founders
C-03
Founders
C-04
Founders
C-05
Founders
Building & Grounds
NCES
Code
Notes
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
C-06
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Founders
C-07
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Founders
C-08
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Founders
C-09
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Founders
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Elevator
Founders
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Elevator
Founders
FM-1
316 Records Office Storage
Founders
FM-2
801.80 Executive
Marketing & Public Relations
311 Foundation, Alumni, CONNTAC Office (Olson, Marlene)
Founders
FM-3
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Founders
L-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Main Entrance Lobby
Founders
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairway - Bookstore
Founders
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Founders
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairway to Mezzanine
Founders
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Founders
ST-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairway in student lounge
Founders
ST-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Founders
V-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Founders
V-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Main Entrance
Founders
V-03
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Entrance
Snow Hall
403
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Elevator Machine Room
Snow Hall
Snow Hall
404
406
Building & Grounds
Unassigned
Facilities
Unassigned
660 Vending Room
050 Vacant
Snow Hall
407
393.14 Unassigned
Humanities & Fine Arts
Fine Arts/Graphics
310 Faculty Offices (5)
Snow Hall
408
Fine Arts/Graphics
210 Art Studio
Snow Hall
409
Fine Arts/Graphics
210 Drawing/Painting Studio
Snow Hall
410
Fine Arts/Graphics
210 2 Dimensional Art Studio
412
Snow Hall
Social & Behavioral Sciences
220 MAC Lab, Open
Snow Hall
414
310 Adjunct Offices
Snow Hall
415
Marketing & Public Relations, Development,
Registrar
Instruction
316 Staff Lounge
755 Loading dock area
110 GPCR
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Number
ASF
Unit
Department
Code
Snow Hall
416
Snow Hall
418
Snow Hall
419
Snow Hall
421
Snow Hall
423
Snow Hall
426
Snow Hall
427
Dean/Organization
174.59 Unassigned
Notes
Child Development
640 Gross Motor Skills Room
Child Development
311 Director, Hilary Phelps
Child Development
640 Messy Room
Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Unknown
201.78 Unassigned
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Hot Water Room
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Womens Locker Room
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
77.34 Unassigned
Snow Hall
430
Snow Hall
431
Snow Hall
433
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Snow Hall
434
Facilities
502
Building & Grounds
Snow Hall
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Snow Hall
503
Snow Hall
504
Snow Hall
505
Snow Hall
Snow Hall
050 Mens Locker Room
XXX Womens Bathroom
660 Vending Machines
Building & Grounds
Facilities
660 Vending Machines
Registrar
Instructional
110 36 seats
Registrar
Instructional
110 41 seats
506
Registrar
Instructional
110 35 seats
507
Registrar
Instructional
110 36 seats
Snow Hall
508
Snow Hall
509
Snow Hall
510
Snow Hall
512
Snow Hall
514
Snow Hall
516
Snow Hall
517
social science division offices
Snow Hall
518
Snow Hall
520
Snow Hall
521
Snow Hall
525
310 10 fac/1 sec/1 conf. space
Registrar
Instructional
110
Broadcast Communications
210 TV Studio
215 TV Control Studio
310 reception area/Peter Golgano
Registrar
Instructional
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
210 audio production studio
350
Foreign Language
310 Angelo Glaviano, Assoc Professor
310 Adjunct Office
110
Snow Hall
526
Snow Hall
528
Snow Hall
406A
92.24 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Vacant
Snow Hall
406B
112.17 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Vacant
Snow Hall
406C
145.26 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Vacant
XXX Womens Bathroom
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Snow Hall
406D
Snow Hall
407A
Snow Hall
407B
Snow Hall
408A
Snow Hall
408B
Snow Hall
408C
Snow Hall
408D
Snow Hall
410A
Snow Hall
413A
Snow Hall
413B
Snow Hall
419A
Snow Hall
419B
Snow Hall
420A
Snow Hall
421A
Snow Hall
421B
Snow Hall
427A
Snow Hall
427B
Snow Hall
433A
Snow Hall
508A
Snow Hall
514A
Snow Hall
514B
Snow Hall
515A
Snow Hall
515B
Snow Hall
C-01
Snow Hall
C-01
Snow Hall
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
93.84 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Vacant
Notes
Fine Arts/Graphics
315 Storage
Fine Arts/Graphics
315 Storage
Fine Arts/Graphics
215 Darkroom
Fine Arts/Graphics
215 Storage, Kilns
Fine Arts/Graphics
215 Darkroom
Fine Arts/Graphics
215 Darkroom Entrance/numbered 408D
Fine Arts/Graphics
215
Instructional
210 MAC Lab, scheduled
Registrar
210 MAC Lab Schedules
Child Development
645 Kitchenette
Child Development
645 Storage
23.96 Unassigned
Child Development
Unassigned
Unassigned
24.33 Unassigned
31.58 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
050 Mens Locker Room
050 Numbered 421B
Unassigned
Unassigned
30.58 Unassigned
Unassigned
Unassigned
Building & Grounds
Facilities
640 Child Restrooms
310
Corporate Media
310 Dan Nocera, Corporate Media Producer
315 storage closet
215 edit studio
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
C-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Snow Hall
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Snow Hall
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Snow Hall
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Snow Hall
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Snow Hall
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Snow Hall
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Snow Hall
TC2
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Snow Hall
TC-3
Building & Grounds
Facilities
215 edit studio
YYY Elevator
YYY Elevator
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
Notes
Wheaton Hall
203
Building & Grounds
Registrar
Facilities
YYY Elevator Machine Room
Wheaton Hall
204
Wheaton Hall
205
Instructional
110 45-gen purpose cr - 2 storage stuff
Registrar
Instructional
Wheaton Hall
206
110 29 seats-gen purpose cr
Biology
210 Lab
Wheaton Hall
207
Wheaton Hall
208
Biology/Anatomy & Physiology
310
Wheaton Hall
210
310 J.Wallace
Biology
210 lectural lab
Wheaton Hall
213
Wheaton Hall
214
Physical & Earth Science
210 lecture/lab
Wheaton Hall
215
215 physics prep
310 2 ft. faculty, 24 adjuncts
Wheaton Hall
216
Wheaton Hall
218
310
Chemistry
215 chem storage
220
Wheaton Hall
Wheaton Hall
Chemistry
215 chem storage
221
Chemistry
Wheaton Hall
223
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
224
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
226
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
Wheaton Hall
302
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
303
650 Lounge
Wheaton Hall
304
311 Open office
Wheaton Hall
305
Wheaton Hall
306
Registrar
Wheaton Hall
307
210 chem lab
XXX Womens Bathroom
316 storage for Maintenance
220 Computer Lab - Open
Instructional
111 Comp CR - Desktop each station
M.Cavanaugh-work study/
311 Audio-Vis Med Srv
Wheaton Hall
308
Registrar
Instructional
111 Computer CR
Wheaton Hall
309
Registrar
Instructional
Wheaton Hall
310
Mathematics
Mathematics
110 General Purpose CR
310 Adjunct
Wheaton Hall
311
Registrar
Instructional
110 4 seats - General Purpose CR
Wheaton Hall
312
Registrar
Instructional
110 General Purpose CR
Wheaton Hall
313
Business Division
Wheaton Hall
315
Building & Grounds
Wheaton Hall
316
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
318
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Mens Bathroom
310 6 Faculty & Secretary
Facilities
XXX Womens Bathroom
August 2006
Space Inventory
Building
Room
Room
Number
ASF
Department/
Sub-
NCES
Unit
Department
Code
Dean/Organization
Notes
Open area to stairs, elevator,
Wheaton Hall
203A
Wheaton Hall
209B
Wheaton Hall
WWW & entrance to 203A
Building & Grounds
Facilities
310 Bio offices-3 ft faculty adjunct
210A
Biology
215 Storage
Wheaton Hall
215A
Wheaton Hall
226A
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
304A
310 Sanjay Jerath Office
Wheaton Hall
304B
311 Sanjay Jerath
Wheaton Hall
305A
210 Classroom/Lab-8:30-8:00pm
Wheaton Hall
305B
310 3 people sitting ?
Wheaton Hall
306A
Wheaton Hall
310A
Mathematics
Mathematics
Wheaton Hall
310B
Mathematics
Mathematics
310 Need Occupants
Wheaton Hall
310C
Mathematics
Mathematics
310 Need Occupants
Wheaton Hall
310D
Wheaton Hall
C-01
Wheaton Hall
C-01
Wheaton Hall
EL-01
Wheaton Hall
EL-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Wheaton Hall
ST-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Wheaton Hall
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Wheaton Hall
ST-02
Building & Grounds
Facilities
XXX Stairs
Wheaton Hall
TC1
Facilities
Wheaton Hall
V-01
Building & Grounds
Facilities
310
311 Adm or Faculty?
310 Need Occupants
Mathematics
Mathematics
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Main Hallway
310 Need Occupants
Building & Grounds
Facilities
WWW Corridor
Building & Grounds
Facilities
YYY Elevator
YYY Elevator
WWW Entrance
August 2006
Appendix:
Floor Plans