UniversityForumFeb23 2005

63 %
38 %
Information about UniversityForumFeb23 2005

Published on January 16, 2008

Author: Ulisse


Texas A&M University Faculty Reinvestment Phase 2 FY 06, 07, 08 :  Texas A&M University Faculty Reinvestment Phase 2 FY 06, 07, 08 Status, Opportunities and Constraints Presented to the University Community By the Council on the Built Environment February 23, 2005 Council on the Built Environment Membership :  Council on the Built Environment Membership G. Kemble Bennett, Dean Look College of Engineering H. Russell Cross, Deputy Vice Chancellor Agriculture Programs Representing College Station-based agencies Rick Floyd, Executive Associate Vice President for Business Affairs Division of Finance Clint Magill Professor of Plant Pathology Representing Faculty Senate David Parrott, Associate Vice President and Dean of Student Life Division of Student Affairs Bill Perry, Vice Provost Division of Academic Affairs J. Thomas Regan, Dean College of Architecture Charles Sippial, Vice President Division of Administration Max Summers, Distinguished Professor of Entomology Joel Wixson, Undergraduate Student Representative Council on the Built Environment:  Council on the Built Environment The Council on the Built Environment was established in October 2002 by President Gates and was given the following charge: "The purpose of the Council is to advise the President and the Executive Vice President and Provost on all aspects of the campus built environment development in support of Vision 2020 goals and the core missions of teaching and research. The Council will advise on items including but not limited to: Policies and plans supportive of development of a built environment enabling progress towards Vision 2020; Prioritization, location, and funding of new construction; Alternative methods of acquisition and financing of additional facilities; Prioritization of usage of existing space, renovation plans, and use of off-campus facilities; Support of and information to the Master Planning process; Plans for the built environment that recognize and incorporate the recommendations from new councils on finance, research and education.” Faculty Reinvestment Process Catalyst for Space Realignment:  Faculty Reinvestment Process Catalyst for Space Realignment The need to house 447 new faculty over the five year reinvestment period. Attention to Academic Corridor Collaborations, Interdisciplinarity Short-term solutions different than long-term solutions Resources force suboptimality in the short-term Relationships with support units Phase 2 Process to Date:  Phase 2 Process to Date Spring 2004 - Individual meetings with deans Fall 2004 – Follow up meetings with deans January 26, 2005 - Presentation to Academic Program Council February 2, 2005 – Presentation to Council of Deans February 9, 2005 – Phase 2 proposal posted to CBE website February 9-10, 2005 – Personal telephone calls and conversations with student and faculty leadership by CBE representatives February 10, 2005 – Bulk e-mail distribution (NEO) to entire campus February 11, 2005 – Aggie Hotline item announcing Phase 2 Faculty Reinvestment Draft Proposal Available Online and February 23 open forum Phase 2 Process to Date (Continued):  Phase 2 Process to Date (Continued) February 15, 2005 – Battalion advertisement announcing the open forum and directing readers to the CBE website February 17, 2005 – Signage placed in Rudder Theatre Complex announcing February 23 open forum February 17, 2005 – Aggie Hotline item reminder of open forum February 21, 2005 – NEO e-mail reminder about open forum February 22, 2005 – Aggie Hotline reminder of open forum February 23, 2005 – Second Battalion advertisement regarding open forum February 23, 2005 – Open forum held and posted to Council on the Built Environment website ( February 24, 2005 – Aggie Hotline item summarizing the open forum presentation and responses Comments Received to Neo E-Mail (28 responses as of mid-afternoon on February 22):  Comments Received to Neo E-Mail (28 responses as of mid-afternoon on February 22) Legett Hall conversion Renovation issues Try to do in the summer when there are less students on campus To save on costs, only change what is necessary to make the space usable; use cubicles instead of walls Purchase/Lease space off campus Contract out network installation Reduce time between classes to better utilize classrooms Estimate of Phase 2 Needs in Assignable Square Feet (ASF):  Estimate of Phase 2 Needs in Assignable Square Feet (ASF) *The new dean of Agriculture has reassessed the college’s space needs with respect to faculty reinvestment and the Agriculture entry in this column may be revised to 48,000. The third column entry for Agriculture will also change. **After deans’ presentations, needs were in some cases reduced due to meeting some of the column 2 needs with renovations, conversions and more efficient use of existing space. The Agriculture entry in this column may be revised. Timing of Potential Space Availability:  Timing of Potential Space Availability Recommendation 1:  Recommendation 1 Renovate and assign the following space to the College of Engineering: Graphic Services Building Graphic Arts space in Reed McDonald Building Agricultural Communications space in Reed McDonald Ag Communications would move to lease space in summer 2005 and eventually relocate to a University-owned building Classroom space in Reed McDonald Net effect: Approximately 14,205 additional square feet for Engineering by fall 2005. Approximately 25,467 additional square feet for Engineering by spring 2006 or spring 2007 depending on extent and type of renovations. Recommendation 2:  Recommendation 2 Move some Texas Transportation Institute (TTI staff) to lease space in summer 2005. Displaced staff would eventually relocate to an addition of the Gilchrist Building in the Research Park. Assign vacated space to the College of Engineering. Net effect: Approximately 13,500 additional assignable square feet (ASF) for Engineering by fall 2005. Recommendation 3:  Recommendation 3 The construction of the first new residence hall on campus since the 1980s will allow for the conversion of Legett Hall to office space and assignment of Legett Hall to the Department of Mathematics. After moving the mathematics department functions in Blocker to Legett Hall, reassign the vacated Blocker Hall space to the College of Engineering. Net effect: Approximately 26,703 additional ASF for Engineering in fall 2006. Recommendation 4:  Recommendation 4 Renovate of the YMCA building and assign to the Department of English. Reassign the current English department space in Blocker building to the Colleges of Science and Engineering. Net effect: Approximately 21,388 ASF for Science and Engineering by fall 2007. An outcome of this recommendation is renovated space for the Department of English in an historic campus building on the Academic quadrangle. Recommendation 5:  Recommendation 5 Use the south wing of Cain Hall, which will be vacated by spring 2007, in such a way as to support faculty reinvestment. Net effect: Approximately 16,663 ASF for faculty reinvestment by spring 2007. Slide16:  If recommendations 1 through 5 are implemented, the University still needs another 286,274 ASF of space. Life Sciences Building will meet some of this need, but 200,000 ASF will still be needed to satisfy faculty reinvestment needs. Slide17:  Remaining ASF must be met by unfunded new construction. Possibility: Emerging Technologies and Economic Development (ETED), approximately 192,000 ASF Recommendation 6:  Recommendation 6 The university convert some classrooms to office space or laboratories, provided alternate classroom space is available for class meetings. Implementation of this recommendation could create more class meetings scheduled at the beginning and latter part of the scheduling period (8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.). Recommendation 7:  Recommendation 7 The university engage a design consultant to advise deans on-site on actions that will enable more effective office space and increase capacity in current building spaces. Recommendation 8:  Recommendation 8 The university fund renovations to existing space when additional faculty offices or labs will result and they present an economical and workable alternative to building new space. Next Steps:  Next Steps The CBE invites your comments on these recommendations. Please send comments to by Tuesday, March 1, 2005. The CBE anticipates making amended recommendations to the President and Provost before March 15, 2005.

Add a comment

Related presentations