Space Utilization Study for Academic Spaces - Facilities - Wake ...

February 18, 2008 

To: 

WFU Campus Community 

From: Jill Tiefenthaler, Provost 

Matt Cullinan, Vice President for Administration 

Subject: 2007 Space Utilization Study 

After 12 months of assessment and analysis, we are pleased to provide the attached 2007 

Space Utilization Study summary report to the WFU community. 

The intent of this space study was to gather a detailed understanding of the Reynolda 

Campus building spaces that support our academic mission as well as understand how 

well those spaces were being utilized. The project involved the collection and analysis of 

data at a departmental level for all of the academic schools and colleges, administrative, 

and other support units. In total, the study assessed over 924,800 assignable square feet 

(ASF). 

It is important to note that the study did not address the quality of our academic spaces. 

We understand both through the strategic planning and campus master planning 

processes that significant renewal projects are in order for many of our facilities. The 

study also did not include assessments of spaces related to student life, dining, 

recreational sports, or athletic performance venues. 

From a campus-wide perspective, the study revealed that the campus has space shortfalls 

in some areas, to include office space, library space, support space and research 

laboratories. Conversely, the results show that the campus has sufficient classroom space 

and instructional lab space for our current academic curriculum. The review also found 

that although we do have sufficient classroom space for current academic needs, our 

process for efficiently scheduling and using classrooms could be improved. 

The report also includes analysis regarding additional space needs should there be a 

decision to increase undergraduate enrollment. 

The information from this study will be invaluable in guiding the campus community in 

our efforts to finalize the Strategic Plan as well as in the development of a new campus 

Master Plan. We hope you find this information helpful as well. 

Should you have any questions regarding the report or the study process, please feel free 

to contact Jim Alty or Mike Draughn of Facilities Management at 758-5679.

Wake Forest University 

Space Utilization Study 

Summation of Findings Report 

October 2007 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. 84 North Stanwood Road Columbus, Ohio 43209 www.cfp-planners.com

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents................................................................................................................................................................................... i 

Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................................................................1 

Project Scope ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 

Space Included in Study ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

Basic Data................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 

Space Needs Calculations......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

Peer Data Analysis.................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 

Classroom Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 

Space Management................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 

Summary................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

Recommendations..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

Project Scope and Summation of Findings............................................................................................................................................5 

Tasks......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 

Process...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 

Process Methodology................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 

General Planning Assumptions................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 

Basic Data................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 

Peer Data Analysis.................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 

Current Space and Current Space Needs ................................................................................................................................................................................ 10 

Future Space Needs ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 12 

Classroom Analysis ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 

Space Management................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 20 

Recommendations................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 

Appendices...........................................................................................................................................................................................22 

Space Needs Summaries......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 

Classroom Analysis: Detailed Data ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 29 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. October 2007 i

Executive Summary 

Project Scope 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. (CFP) was retained by Wake Forest 

University (WFU) to conduct a comprehensive analysis of its Reynolda 

campus facilities. The project involved the collection and analysis of data 

on a departmental level for all of the academic schools and colleges, 

administrative, and other support units. The tasks and process involved 

included the following: 

• Create a space inventory database. 

• Provide base data to inform short and long term decision making, to 

be specifically used as part of a new campus master plan. 

• Collect peer data and evaluate the University’s current space and 

needs to comparable universities. 

• Prepare space needs calculations. 

• Model future space needs based on three projected across-the board 

undergraduate enrollment scenarios. 

• Recommend policies, procedures and guidelines for improving the 

University’s space management practices. 

Space Included in Study 

The space utilization study was limited to the Reynolda campus of Wake 

Forest University located in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Residential, 

food service, athletic performance venues, and building support facilities 

(i.e., mechanical rooms, etc.) were not included in the scope of the study. 

All academic and administrative units were included in this study. Current 

space included in this report totals just over 924,800 assignable square feet 

(ASF). 

Basic Data 

The space needs modeling methodology is a data-driven process that 

utilizes four data files. These four databases are the current campus space 

inventory, current personnel, Fall 2006 class schedule and Fall 2006 student 

credit hours. These files were compiled into an aggregate relational 

database and appropriately mapped or linked to generate the formula-based 

space needs calculations. 

Space Needs Calculations 

The current calculated needs shown in Table 1 indicate the University 

should have about 1,010,100 square feet of space. The current calculated 

need identifies a net deficit of just over 9% of the current space (85,300 

ASF). Most of this current need is in administrative and support units. The 

aggregate assigned space of the academic colleges matches up well with the 

calculated need. 

Table 1: Current Space Needs 

Division Current ASF Current Need Difference 

President 2,480 2,239 241 

VP Investments 1,739 2,210 -471 

VP Student Life 61,169 56,881 4,288 

VP General Counsel 1,619 1,719 -16,370 

VP Advancement 17,989 20,796 -2,807 

VP Administration 51,630 55,768 -4,138 

Sr. VP Finance 26,238 30,259 -4,021 

Provost 680,565 724,703 -44,138 

Athletics 43,609 43,340 269 

Campuswide Support 37,770 72,194 -34,424 

Total 924,808 1,010,109 -85,301 

Space needs for three potential undergraduate enrollment growth scenarios 

were also developed. These scenarios uniformly increase the undergraduate 

enrollments for the College and Calloway School of Business and 

Accountancy by the following increments: 7%, 12.5% and 25%. Based on 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. October 2007 1

Wake Forest Space Utilization Study 


these increments, an estimation of relative growth in staffing needs was 

developed and factored into the calculations. This process produced 

projected increases in staffing ranging from 2.5% to 9%, with the 25% 

growth scenario identifying a potential total increase of over 188 positions. 

As displayed in Table 2, the growth scenarios produce aggregate space 

needs of 1.041 million, 1.059 million and 1.1 million square feet or 

additional space deficits of 12.5% (115,787 ASF); to 14.5% (134,300 ASF); 

to 19% (175,831 ASF) respectively. 

Table 2: Projected Space Needs 

Division 

Current 

ASF 

7% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

12.5% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

25% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

President 2,480 2,239 2,239 2,239 

VP Investments 1,739 2,210 2,210 2,210 

VP Student Life 61,169 57,324 57,575 58,144 

VP General Counsel 1,619 1,719 1,719 1,719 

VP Advancement 17,989 20,796 20,796 20,796 

VP Administration 51,630 55,768 55,768 55,768 

Sr. VP Finance 26,238 30,259 30,259 30,259 

Provost 680,565 752,694 769,603 807,568 

Athletics 43,609 43,340 43,340 43,340 

Campuswide Support 37,770 74,246 75,617 78,596 

Total 924,808 1,040,595 1,059,126 1,100,639 

Table 3 displays the current and project needs by type of space. The 

campus has sufficient instructional space (classrooms and teaching labs) to 

meet both its current as well as projected needs. The greatest aggregate 

need in all four scenarios is in library space, with a current need of about 

49,800 ASF. Campus support space (i.e., shops, storage, etc.) is the next 

greatest space type need followed by offices for the current and 7% 

scenarios. This order of need is reversed in the latter two scenarios with 

offices needs exceeding support space. Current research space is deficient 

by about 16%, which increases to almost 38% if the enrollment grows by 

25%. General use space, especially in student lounges, is the next major 

category where a modest deficit was identified in each scenario. 

Table 3: Current and Projected Space Needs by space Type 

Space Type 

Current 

ASF 

Current 

Need 

7% UG 

Growth 

12.5% UG 

Growth 

25% UG 

Growth 

Classrooms 115,015 82,808 86,967 90,235 97,657 

Instruct. Labs 62,564 55,477 58,616 61,081 66,685 

Research Labs 60,711 70,356 73,851 76,916 83,661 

Offices 343,354 368,853 377,804 384,836 400,820 

Library 159,455 209,254 217,094 217,827 219,494 

Special Use 23,930 24,272 24,288 24,300 24,327 

Student Lounge 13,022 15,302 15,831 16,248 17,194 

Oth. General Use 106,567 108,740 108,851 108,851 108,851 

Support 36,050 70,372 72,493 73,920 76,800 

Health Ctr. 4,140 4,675 4,800 4,912 5,150 

Total 924,808 1,010,109 1,040,595 1,059,126 1,100,639 

Table 4 displays the current and project needs by academic college. Current 

needs indicate in general the current space is adequate to meet the current 

needs. Future space needs for the departments in the College and the 

Calloway School are impacted by the planned enrollment growth. 

Assuming existing instructional space (classrooms and instructional labs) is 

retained to address future growth and will not be reprogrammed to meet 

other needs, the “real” future space deficit for the College ranges from 

about 41,900 ASF to 78,100 ASF. For Calloway the “real” need ranges 

from a deficit of 3,050 ASF to approximately 4,900 ASF. 




Table 4: Current and Project space Needs by College 

College 

Current 

ASF 

Current 

Need 

7% UG 

Growth 

12.5% UG 

Growth 

25% UG 

Growth 

Divinity School 16,813 14,013 14,013 14,013 14,013 

School of Law 82,799 85,083 85,083 85,083 85,083 

Babcock 32,739 30,403 30,403 30,403 30,403 

Grad School 2,376 2,773 2,773 2,773 2,773 

Calloway 27,191 23,733 24,954 25,841 27,859 

The College 384,468 386,386 404,946 419,831 453,436 

Totals 546,386 542,391 562,172 577,944 613,567 

Detailed space needs calculations reports were developed for each 

department and are available for review through Facilities Management. 

Peer Data Analysis 

Space data collected from six peer institutions were used for comparative 

benchmarking and to analyze the reasonableness of the space needs 

calculations. 

The data show that the FTE student to FTE faculty ratio for Wake Forest is 

about 10:1 which are on par with the peer institutions. 

Compared to peer universities, WFU has a fairly substantial current space 

shortage when viewed both on a per student FTE and faculty basis. 

Additional details regarding the peer analysis are presented in later sections 

of this report. 

Classroom Analysis 

A focused analysis of classroom needs was completed as part of the study, 

using the Fall 2006 semester demand as a baseline. 

The current classroom supply consists of 159 rooms scheduled by the 

academic departments. These rooms are composed of 116 classrooms, 31 

seminar rooms and 12 lecture halls. 

exception of the Divinity School, this utilization pattern was relatively 

consistent among all of the colleges. 

For planning purposes the University’s room usage goal for scheduled use 

is 25 hours per week along with an increase of the station occupancy ratio 

to 65%. 

Applying these goals, the analysis shows that each college has adequate 

classroom space to meet their current needs. 

The primary focus of the analysis was on the capacity of the existing 

classroom supply to accommodate the proposed enrollment growth 

scenarios. The needs of the College and the Calloway School were 

specifically evaluated and identified. The 25% enrollment growth scenario 

was used to determine an upper range of need. For the College the analysis 

determined the existing classroom supply has sufficient capacity to 

accommodate a 25% undergraduate enrollment increase. A review of room 

capacity sizes indicated a deficit of rooms with less than 30 seats. 

However, surplus rooms in larger room sizes are available to offset these 

needs. 

The Calloway School has sufficient capacity to meet its future needs if the 

current station occupancy rate of 71% is maintained. Applying the station 

occupancy goal of 65% indicates a need of two additional rooms in the 50 

to 70 seat size range. 

Space Management 

Part of this study also included the development of recommendations and 

documents for establishing a more formal space management process. 

Besides the creation of a space inventory database to assist with the tracking 

of the University’s space resources, a range of policies and procedures as 

well as space planning guidelines were developed to provide a 

recommended structure for ongoing space management that may be 

implemented over time. Separate documents were prepared for this part of 

the study and are available from Facilities Management for review. 

Campus-wide the classrooms were used about 20 hours per week on 

average (8 am to 5 pm) with 63% of the seats filled when in use. With the 




Summary 

The University’s current calculated space need is about 1.010 million ASF, 

or a net space deficiency of about 9% concentrated in three primary 

categories: library, campus support and offices. In general, the academic 

colleges aggregate space needs are being met by the existing supply. The 

School of Law and the College have modest current space needs with the 

other units needs adequately addressed. As the projected enrollment growth 

scenarios are factored in however, there will be areas of significant need 

specifically in the College. Future aggregate campus space needs based on 

the planned enrollment growth scenarios indicate total needs of 1.040 

million ASF (a 12.5% deficit); to 1.059 million ASF (a 14.5% deficit; to 1.1 

million ASF (a 19% deficit). 

With the planned enrollment growth, the future space needs for the College 

could approach 78,100 ASF or about 20%. additional. Classroom space is 

adequate to address both current and future needs with improvements to 

existing scheduling and utilization practices. 

In general, quality of space does not seem to be a significant issue on the 

Reynolda campus. Although there are several older buildings such as 

Tribble Hall that will require upgrading, there were no critical quality issues 

noted. 

2) Should the University periodically update these space needs, 

modifications to the type of data and formats used in the process should be 

reviewed and implemented. The current study required significant 

supplementation and manipulation of some of the data to generate the 

model. Updating the space needs will require similar efforts unless 

improved database coordination and formatting is achieved. Improvements 

to the basic data inputs include: 

• Developing a class file that requires the reporting of all scheduled 

instructional activity in University-owned space. 

• A consolidation of reporting from all colleges by course of all student 

credit hours by term and course designation. 

• Creating a comprehensive personnel database that includes not only all 

full time employees, but also open positions, non-university, student 

employees and graduate assistants. 

3) The University should consider investing in database management 

software systems for maintaining their space inventory and other facilities 

data, as well as scheduling software for classrooms and other facilities. 

Recommendations 

1) The University should consider implementing a formal space 

management process that includes: 

• Periodic updating of its space inventory database through both selfreporting 

by departments and field audits. 

• Implementing a space allocation procedure to address needs that cannot 

be met within the management of a particular college. 

• Periodically updating its space needs calculations as input into future 

capital planning. 

Consideration should also be given for establishing a space planning office 

responsible for the coordination of these efforts. 



Project Scope and Summation of Findings 

Project Scope and Summation of 

Findings 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. (CFP) was retained by Wake Forest 

University (WFU) to conduct a comprehensive study and analysis of its 

campus facilities. This project involved the collection and analysis of data 

on a departmental level for all of the academic schools and colleges, as well 

as most of the administrative, athletic and support units on the Reynolda 

campus only. Residential, food service, athletic competition space and 

building support space were excluded from the scope of work. 

Tasks 

• Create a space inventory database using currently accepted national 

classification and coding conventions. 

• Provide base data to inform short and long term decision making 

concerning the reprogramming and/or construction of new space, the 

renovation and the appropriate utilization of existing space, 

specifically to be used as part of a new campus master plan. 

• Provide the tools necessary to develop a comprehensive planning 

approach to assist the University in setting capital project priorities. 

• Collect peer data and evaluate the University’s current space and 

space need to comparable universities. 

• Prepare space needs calculations based on current demands and 

compare with available facilities. 

• Model future space needs based on three projected enrollment 

scenarios. These scenarios included across-the board increases for 

undergraduate enrollments for the College and the Calloway School 

of Business and Accountancy. The three projected enrollment levels 

are: 7%, 12.5% and 25%. 

• Document and develop a recommended set of policies, procedures 

and guidelines for improving the campus’ space management 

practices. 

Process 

The following steps are involved in the space utilization analysis: 

• Review and confirm existing space utilization. 

• Develop appropriate space guidelines for each academic department 

and administrative units. Compare guidelines to collected peer data. 

• Evaluate existing facilities to determine space deficiencies and 

surpluses. 

• Provide the process tools and methodology for the ongoing 

prioritization of major capital and renovation investment projects. 

This study is a critical step in developing a space management process that 

clearly identifies the current space requirements (departmental space 

deficiencies or surpluses) and establishing capital planning priorities. 

General planning assumptions applied in the analysis are presented in the 

following section. Summaries of the calculated space needs are presented 

in the following sections of this report. Detailed space needs reports for 

each department have been produced as a separate document and are 

available through Facilities Management. 

Process Methodology 

The methodology used included measuring the quantitative space needs that 

may impact the delivery of services. This quantitative process calculates 

space needs based on a series of interactive work steps. Data and 

programmatic information from various user groups were gathered, 

analyzed, and documented. The data and assumptions developed from 

these initial steps were verified and adjusted to customize the space needs 

model for each department, including space criteria (modules) for the type 

of space being analyzed. 

The space need requirements, including the square footage amounts of each 

room type were determined by the discipline, equipment used in the area, 

utilization rates (i.e., station area, station occupancy ratios, and room 

utilization rates), number of persons occupying the space, etc. The results 

derived from the space needs calculations were then compared to the 

current assigned space to determine surpluses or deficiencies of space. 




General Planning Assumptions 

The following general planning assumptions were developed from direction 

provided by WFU. These planning assumptions provide guiding principles, 

which are critical in the formulation of the results of this study. 

1. The basic data used in this study were provided by Facilities 

Management (space inventory), Human Resources (personnel), class 

schedule and credit hour data (Institutional Research). Fall 2006 was 

used as the baseline for this study. 

2. This study is limited to space assigned to the administrative and 

academic units located on the Reynolda Campus. Building support 

facilities (i.e., mechanical rooms, corridors, etc.) residence halls, food 

services, athletic competition facilities, and non-university operations 

are not part of the scope of this study. 

3. The primary focus of this analysis is on the quantity of space by type 

and its use. Although only noted as it may impact the space needs, 

physical condition and functional quality issues have not been assessed 

as part of the analysis. 

4. The space needs calculations are based on nationally recognized space 

planning guidelines such as the Council of Educational Facility 

Planners (CEFPI) Space Planning Guidelines and the applied 

experience of the CFP consultants. These guidelines have been 

modified as needed to fit the culture and operations of the University 

and each department. 

5. Full time faculty, instructors and visiting faculty have each been 

provided with a uniform office module size of 150 square feet (ASF). 

Adjunct faculty have been allocated an office module of 35 ASF; post 

doctoral student 120 ASF and graduate assistants 90 ASF. No office 

space has been allocated for emeriti faculty. Office modules sizes for 

these and other positions are further elaborated in the University’s 

Space Planning Guidelines available through Facilities Management. 

6. Laboratory-based research space needs are based on the number of 

personnel engaged in research including: faculty, research scientists, 

research staff, graduate research assistants, and post-doctoral students. 

For planning purposes it is assumed that 100% of the faculty, graduate 

research assistants and post-doctoral students in lab-based research 

departments are engaged in research activities. When identified as part 

of a department’s curriculum requirements, undergraduate researchers 

have been included in the calculation for research laboratory space. 

When provided in the model, the undergraduate research space 

allocation is one-third of the typical space module for the particular 

discipline. 

7. Certain laboratory space has been classified as “special use” labs that 

may not be assigned to a specific faculty or researcher and likely are 

shared spaces that are functionally unique usually because of 

specialized equipment. Unless noted these existing spaces have been 

assumed to be sufficient. 

8. The space needs calculations for all departments include an allocation 

for conference room and office lounge space. Although these 

calculated needs may not generate sufficient space for a functional 

room, the generated need is recognized as a space allocation, and it is 

assumed that in practice shared conference space or lounges would be 

provided to serve two or more departments in order to create a 

functional room. 

9. Typically a factor of 10% of the calculated office need has been applied 

to determine office service space for academic departments and 15% 

for most administrative departments unless otherwise noted. 

Supplemental office support space requirements have been recognized 

above the normal office service allocation for departments requiring 

waiting rooms, processing areas and longer-term storage needs. 

Typically these departments include operations dealing with the public 

and students such as senior administrative and student service offices. 

10. For space planning purposes full time equivalent student counts have 

been determined using a conversion factor of 15 credit hours per 

undergraduate student and 12 credit hours per graduate student. These 

FTE totals are used in calculating certain space needs such as 

classrooms and student lounges. 

11. Classroom space needs have been analyzed by applying a uniform set 

of utilization goals across all departments within each college. The 

following utilization goals have been used in developing the classroom 

space needs: 25 Weekly Room Hours for scheduled use; 65% station 

occupancy in scheduled rooms and 20 assignable square feet per 

student station. These factors are modeling averages that may vary as 

related to existing usage patterns and conditions. For analysis 

purposes, the hours available for scheduling instruction and 




determining utilization have been reduced to recognize the Tuesday and 

Thursday chapel times and no Friday evening classes. Furthermore, it 

is assumed that the University will maintain its current department 

level scheduling practices. 

12. Instructional laboratory needs have been identified by individual 

academic program within each department. Lab calculation criteria 

have been modified to reflect current instructional requirements per 

program area. Programs that do not generate sufficient student credit 

hours to calculate a functional lab facility are provided with a minimum 

lab need as it is assumed delivery of the instructional program requires 

the provision of a functional lab space. 

13. Three “across-the-board” undergraduate enrollment growth scenario 

increments have been used. Future space needs scenarios are based on 

incremental increases of 7%, 12.5% and 25%. Professional school 

enrollments are assumed to remain stable for this planning period. 

14. Faculty and staffing personnel projections included in the study are 

based upon the projected enrollments. Projected personnel counts were 

reviewed by the Provost, Deans and other senior administrators. 

Projected staffing for all academic departments generating student 

credit hours are assumed to increase proportionately to projected 

enrollments for the respective department. Staffing for certain nonacademic 

departments that are student service oriented and are sensitive 

to overall campus enrollment growth have been projected using a 

campus-wide enrollment growth factor. Staffing needs for other 

departments have been reviewed on a case-by-case basis. These 

projections are assumed to be realistic expectations for future staffing 

levels. 

15. A space allocation for student lounge space is provided for each 

academic department. . 

16. Current space allocations for certain types of space needs are assumed 

to be sufficient and must be reviewed on a case by case basis. 

Typically these types of space will include: departmental libraries; 

student lounges assigned to administrative units; training rooms; testing 

rooms and interview rooms. 

Enrollment Increase Assumptions 

The Fall semester term 2006 served as the base year for student 

enrollments: 

Fall 2006 Baseline Enrollment – Reynolda Campus 

Table 5: Fall 2006 Student Data 

Headcount Credit Hours FTE 

Undergraduate 3,972* 60,742 3,932* 

Graduate 1,543 16,764 1,507 

Totals 5,515 77,506 5,439 

* Does not include study abroad students. 

Enrollment increase assumptions for the five year period from the base term 

of Fall 2006 were determined based on the following: 

The planning scenarios for the space needs calculations include three 

uniform incremental growth categories. The projected space needs 

therefore have been developed using across-the-board growth rates of 7%, 

12.5%, and 25% applied to the current student credit hour distribution. 

Enrollments for graduate and professional programs are assumed will 

remain stable. 

These incremental enrollment increases are expected to occur in the two 

undergraduate colleges presented in Table 6: 




Table 6: Current and Project Student Data – The College and Calloway 

Dean of the College 

College FTE Credit Hours 

Current 3,696 54,710 

7% Growth Scenario 3,937 58,337 

12.5% Growth Scenario 4,127 61,187 

25% Growth Scenario 4,559 67,665 

Calloway School of Business 

Current 413 5,964 

7% Growth Scenario 436 6,318 

12.5% Growth Scenario 454 6,597 

25% Growth Scenario 497 7,230 

Assumptions: 

• The teaching ratios will remain constant for most units over this period; 

hence the number of faculty will increase in proportion to the percent 

FTE change in the table above. 

• The change in teaching lab credit hour instruction is proportional to the 

percent FTE change. 

• Staffing and space for the non academic units that are not sensitive to 

enrollment changes will remain at their current level. 

Basic Data 

The space needs modeling methodology used in this assessment is a datadriven 

process that utilizes four data files that are maintained by the 

University. These four databases are the space inventory, personnel, 

schedule of classes (class file) and student credit hours. These files were 

compiled into an aggregate relational database and appropriately mapped or 

linked to generate the formula-based space needs calculations. A brief 

overview of the process used in collecting, verifying and modifying these 

files follows: 

Space Inventory: the space inventory was created from the existing 

Autocad drawings maintained by Facilities Management. Key data 

elements acquired from the drawings included building and room locations, 

square feet, room use or type and departmental assignment. National room 

use coding conventions were used for classifying the space and existing 

budget codes were used to identify the departmental assignments. Each 

department was then requested to review this data to insure the data was 

correct. 

Personnel Data: a basic personnel database was provided through the 

University’s Human Resources department. This data was supplemented 

with other positions not typically reported to Human Resources including 

authorized, open positions; non-university personnel; student employees; 

and graduate assistants. Each department reviewed and verified the data for 

accuracy. The verified data was then mapped to relate to the appropriate 

space department. Based on position title each position was also 

categorized to relate to an appropriate office module size. Although most 

position titles and responsibilities are uniform across the University, there 

are some that are not similar although they carry the same title. These 

positions required manipulation within the database to correctly map the 

position type with the appropriate office module type. 

Projected personnel were generated using an enrollment based process 

depending on whether a particular department’s staffing may be sensitive to 

enrollment changes. Therefore, based on the projected enrollments a 

department’s staffing was increased proportionately. This process may 

have resulted in calculated personnel that included fractional numbers. 

Chart 1 presents the current and projected personnel counts used in the 

analysis: 




Chart 1: Current and Projected Personnel 

2,400 

2,250 

2,100 

1,950 

1,800 

1,650 

1,500 

1,350 

1,200 

1,050 

900 

750 

600 

450 

300 

150 

0 

Senior Dir./Ch 

Admin. air 

Asst. 

Dir. 

WFU Personnel Data 

Current and Projected 

Faculty 

Other 

Fac 

Adj. 

Faculty 

Current 55.5 116.0 142.0 432.0 85.5 39.0 490.0 278.0 168.0 21.0 259.0 2,086.0 

7% Growth 55.5 116.0 142.0 455.0 91.0 42.0 495.0 284.0 178.0 22.0 259.0 2,139.5 

12.5% Growth 55.5 116.0 142.0 473.0 95.0 44.0 500.0 288.0 185.0 23.0 258.0 2,179.5 

25% Grow th 55.5 116.0 142.0 514.0 105.0 48.0 509.0 298.0 203.0 25.0 259.0 2,274.5 

Staff 

Cler./T 

ech 

Grad 

Assts. 

Post 

Docs 

Pers. 

w /o 

Office 

Schedule of Classes: as a proxy for the class file, a database maintained by 

Institutional Research entitled “Duplicated Class Load Data” was used. 

Although containing most of the records and data found in a typical class 

file, manipulation of this database to eliminate duplicate records was 

required. Also, independent collection of data not reported for certain 

instructional rooms was also necessary. For the rooms that had scheduled 

use that were not reported and later added, course enrollments were 

estimated applying the station occupancy factor of 65%. This data was used 

to generate the current room utilization profile. 

Student Credit Hours: this data file was provided through Institutional 

Research. Although this office maintains accurate current credit hour data 

for the College and Calloway, not all of the data for the professional schools 

Totals 

is readily available. The file was supplemented after a detailed survey was 

conducted by Institutional Research. 

Peer Data Analysis 

Space data was collected from six peer institutions that were used for 

comparative benchmarking and to analyze the reasonableness of the space 

needs model. The six peer institutions included: North Carolina-Chapel 

Hill, Notre Dame, Rice, Stanford, Vanderbilt and William and Mary. 

The data show that the FTE Student to FTE faculty ratio for Wake Forest is 

about 10, which is on par with the peer institutions. 

Compared to peer universities, WFU has fairly substantial current space 

shortage when viewed both on a per student FTE and faculty basis. The 

major space categorical needs identified by the WFU space model appear to 

be confirmed by the peer data with several of the calculated needs per 

category aligning with the peers. Overall, the ASF/Faculty ratio for the six 

peers was 2,812, while the WFU ratio is 2,042. The ASF/FTE Student ratio 

for the peers is 299 while WFU‘s ratio is 213. 

Table 7: Peer Institution Summary Data 

University (a) 

FTE 

Faculty 

FTE 

Enroll 

Total ASF ASF per 

Faculty 

ASF per 

Student 

Student 

Faculty 

Ratio 

NC at Chapel Hill 3,089 25,043 5,913,829 1,915.5 236.1 8.1 

Notre Dame 917 11,485 3,520,096 3,836.7 306.5 12.5 

Rice University 618 4,855 1,567,459 2,536.7 322.9 7.9 

Stanford University 1,400 14,009 6,130,915 4,379.2 437.6 10.0 

Vanderbilt University 592 6,329 2,268,626 3,832.1 358.4 10.7 

William & Mary 758 7,624 1,334,116 1,760.0 175.0 10.1 

Peer Average 1,229 11,558 3,455,840 2,811.9 299.0 9.4 

Wake Forest - Current 518 5,349 1,057,636 2,041.8 212.9 10.3 

(a) Main Campus only 




Current Space and Current Space Needs 

The space inventory data maintained by Facilities Management was used as 

the basis for identifying the current space assignment profiles for each 

department. The scope of this assessment includes 924,808 square feet 

(excluding residential facilities, non assignable, athletic performance 

venues, non-university operations and unassigned areas). Table 8 displays 

the assignable space by room use type for the areas analyzed in the scope of 

this study 

Table 8: Space Included in Project Scope 

Space Type Current ASF Percent 

Classrooms 115,015 12.4% 

Instruct. Labs 62,564 6.8% 

Research Labs 60,711 6.6% 

Offices 343,354 37.1% 

Library 159,455 17.2% 

Special Use 23,930 2.6% 

Stud. Lounge 13,022 1.4% 

Oth. General Use 106,567 11.5% 

Support 36,050 3.9% 

Health Ctr. 4,140 0.4% 

Total 924,808 100.0% 

Summary findings of the current space needs for the Reynolda campus are 

as follows: 

Summary Findings: Total Campus by Division 

The total campus space needs by division are summarized in Table 9: 

Table 9: Total Current Space Needs by Division 

Division Current ASF Current Need Difference 

President 2,480 2,239 241 

VP Investments 1,739 2,210 -471 

VP Student Life 61,169 56,881 4,288 

VP General Counsel 1,619 1,719 -100 

VP Advancement 17,989 20,796 -2,807 

VP Administration 51,630 55,768 -4,138 

Sr. VP Finance 26,238 30,259 -4,021 

Provost 680,565 724,703 -44,138 

Athletics 43,609 43,340 269 

Campuswide Support 37,770 72,194 -34,424 

Total 924,808 1,010,109 -85,301 

• The current calculated space needs for the total campus indicates a net 

deficit of 9.2% or about 85,300 ASF. 

• The current deficit is entirely in administrative support operations. The 

aggregate calculated needs for the academic colleges are on par with 

the current inventory. 

• Library space is the largest component of the current deficit (58%). 

Campus support space (i.e., central storage, shops, vehicle storage, etc.) 

makes up the next largest component of the current deficit (40%). 

• Of the nine major campus divisions, three were determined to have 

current needs. These include Administration, Finance and 

Advancement. Current space for the other divisions is sufficient. 

See Chart SN1 in the Appendix for a more detailed summary of the total 

campus current space needs. 




Summary Findings: By Space Type 

Current space needs by room use type are summarized in Table 10: 

Table 10: Current Space Needs by Space Type 

Space Type Current ASF Current Need Difference 

Classrooms 115,015 82,808 32,207 

Instruct. Labs 62,564 55,477 7,087 

Research Labs 60,711 70,356 -9,645 

Offices 343,354 368,853 -25,499 

Library 159,455 209,254 -49,799 

Special Use 23,930 24,272 -342 

Stud. Lounge 13,022 15,302 -2,280 

Oth. General Use 106,567 108,740 -2,173 

Support 36,050 70,372 -34,322 

Health Ctr. 4,140 4,675 -535 

Total 924,808 1,010,109 -85,301 

• Classroom and instructional laboratory space is sufficient to meet 

current needs and has excess capacity to meet potential future growth. 

• Assuming the existing instructional space is retained to address future 

growth and is not reprogrammed to other uses, the current “real” space 

deficit is approximately 124,600 ASF. 

• Research laboratory space is deficient by 9,645 ASF or about 7.7% of 

the current need. 

See Chart SN5 in the Appendix for more details of the space needs by type. 

Summary Findings: By College 

Current space needs by college are summarized in Table 11: 

Table 11: Current Space Needs by College 

College Current ASF Current Need Difference 

Divinity School 16,813 14,013 2,800 

School of Law 82,799 85,083 -2,284 

Babcock 32,739 30,403 2,336 

Grad School 2,376 2,773 -397 

Calloway 27,191 23,733 3,458 

The College 384,468 386,386 -1,918 

Totals 546,386 542,391 3,995 

• The calculated space needs for the three of the five academic colleges 

indicate the existing space is sufficient. The College and Law have 

modest needs. The College has a need of approximately 1,900 ASF, 

and Law about 2,300 ASF. 

See Chart SN5 in the Appendix for more details of the space needs by 

college. 

Departments with Greatest Current Needs 

The following departments were identified as having the greatest current net 

space need (deficit): 

• Office space is currently about 20% deficient or about 25,500 ASF. 

• Library space is the largest component of the space type deficit or 40% 

of the “real” need. 

• Campus support space constitutes about 28% of the need. 

• Other campus support space including student lounges, other general 

use space and health center space is just over 4% of the deficit. 




Table 12: Departments with Greatest Current Space Needs 

Department 

Current 

ASF 

Current ASF 

Need 

Difference 

Z. Smith Reynolds Library 117,537 160,270 -42,733 

Theatre and Dance 26,631 34,807 -8,176 

English 11,804 19,063 -7,259 

Chemistry 34,008 40,380 -6,372 

Physics 24,246 28,709 -4,463 

Alumni Activities 2,286 5,248 -2,962 

Political Science 5,223 8,000 -2,777 

University Stores 16,311 18,685 -2,374 

School of Law 82,799 85,083 -2,284 

Student Financial Aid 1,691 3,498 -1,807 

Philosophy 3,568 5,365 -1,797 

Facilities Management 15,619 17,382 -1,763 

Development 2,782 4,424 -1,642 

History 6,838 8,455 -1,617 

Future Space Needs 

Three scenarios of projected space needs were developed by applying 

across-the-board increases to the undergraduate enrollments of the College 

and the Calloway School of Business and Accountancy. Enrollments in the 

professional schools are assumed to remain stable for this planning period 

and therefore no future space needs have been developed for those areas. 

The three enrollment levels included increases of 7%, 12.5% and 25%. 

Table 13 summarizes the findings which are presented for each projected 

enrollment level: 

7% Undergraduate Growth Scenario 

• Under this scenario the aggregate space needs for the campus are 

expected to total 1,040,600 ASF. 

• Assuming existing instructional space is retained to address future 

growth, the “real” future space deficit for the College will be 

approximately 41,900 ASF, while the “real” need for Calloway will be 

abut 3,050 ASF. 

• The greatest area of space deficiciency in the College will be in offices 

(23,900 ASF), followed by research labs (13,140 ASF), and then Other 

support space (4,830 ASF). 

• The greatest area of space deficiency for Calloway will be in offices 

(2,770 ASF). 

Table 13: Future Space Needs Scenarios 

Division 

Current 

ASF 

7% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

Diff 

12.5% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. October 2007 12 

Diff 

25% UG 

Growth 

Scenario 

President 2,480 2,239 241 2,239 241 2,239 241 

VP Investments 1,739 2,210 -471 2,210 -471 2,210 -471 

VP Student Life 61,169 57,324 3,845 57,575 3,594 58,144 3,025 

VP General Counsel 1,619 1,719 -100 1,719 -100 1,719 -100 

VP Advancement 17,989 20,796 -2,807 20,796 -2,807 20,796 -2,807 

VP Administration 51,630 55,768 -4,138 55,768 -4,138 55,768 -4,138 

Sr. VP Finance 26,238 30,259 -4,021 30,259 -4,021 30,259 -4,021 

Provost 680,565 752,694 -72,129 769,603 -89,038 807,568 -127,003 

Athletics 43,609 43,340 269 43,340 269 43,340 269 

Campus wide Support 37,770 74,246 -36,476 75,617 -37,847 78,596 -40,826 

Total 924,808 1,040,595 -115,787 1,059,126 -134,318 1,100,639 -175,831 

Diff



12.5% Undergraduate Growth Scenario 








(29,990 ASF), followed by research labs (16,200 ASF) and then Other 

support space (5,200 ASF). 


(3,265 ASF). 









(43,740 ASF), followed by research labs (22,950 ASF), Other support 

space (68,970 ASF), and then instructional labs (5,300 ASF). 


(4,400 ASF). 

Detailed summaries for the projected space needs scenarios are presented in 

the Appendix. Detailed space needs reports for each department included in 

the project scope on on-file with Facilities Management and are available 

for review. 

Classroom Analysis 

A focused analysis of the classrooms was completed as part of the space 

needs assessment. The following section presents a detailed analysis for the 

University’s classroom facilities. 

Overview of Current Classroom Supply 

There are 159 rooms classified as classrooms, lecture halls or seminar 

rooms. The University has 116 classrooms, 12 Lecture halls and 31 

seminar rooms in its classroom supply. The total square feet of classrooms 

is 112,237 that contain 5,788 seats. The average room size is 706 ASF; 

average station size is 19.4 ASF and the average number of seats per room 

is 36. See the Appendix for details of the classroom existing supply per 

room type. 

In addition, three of these rooms had no regularly scheduled classes 

reported in the class file for Fall 2006. Winston Hall 236 and Collins Hall 

C007 and C008 were excluded from this analysis. Table 14 below 

summarizes this adjusted inventory by college: 

Table 14: Classroom Inventory by College 

College No. of Rooms ASF Seats 

Dean of the College 120 77,000 4,186 

Calloway School 13 11,736 471 

School of Law 11 10,354 520 

Babcock Graduate School 6 7,171 335 

Divinity School 5 3,563 172 

Other 1 796 42 

Total 156 110,620 5,726 

*Z. Reynolds Library – Room 476 is not assigned to a college 




Fall 2006 Utilization Profile 

Classroom utilization derives from two index measures: Weekly Room 

Hours (WRH), the number of hours each classroom is used per week for 

regularly scheduled classes and Station Occupancy (SO), the percent of 

seats occupied when a classroom is used for a regularly scheduled course. 

A summary profile of the classroom utilization from the Fall 2006 semester 

is presented in Table 15 below: 

Table 15: Fall 2006 Utilization 

College 

Avg. WRH 

Avg. Station 

Occup. 

Avg. Section 

Size 

Dean of the College 20.1 61.9% 21.8 

Calloway School 19.9 71.6% 26.4 

School of Law 20.8 65.8% 28.6 

Babcock Graduate School 23.9 58.7% 32.9 

Divinity School 13.5 63.7% 19.6 

Other 15.0 54.6% 21.6 

Total 20.0 63.0% 23.1 

For the total campus there were 156 classrooms with scheduled classes for 

Fall 2006. These rooms were used an average of 20 hours per week, which 

is on the low side of expected utilization for general purpose classrooms. 

The station occupancy percentage of 63% is in the range of most utilization 

guidelines. It is interesting to note that the utilization rates among the 

colleges are reasonably consistent. 

Ninety five percent of the classroom instruction takes place during the day 

(8AM to 5 PM). The classrooms are used 19 hours, which is only 44% of 

the 43 available hours. Prime time (9AM to 3 PM) does not show much 

improvement with an average use of 53% (15.9 hours) of the available 

hours during this time frame. 

be used about 27 hours during the day. If that guideline is applied to the 

Fall 2006 instructional load then only about 4,465 seats would have been 

required to meet the demand as compared to the 5,726 currently available 

seats. This would result in a reduction of about 25,200 square feet of 

classroom space. However, the outstanding space planning question to be 

addressed is what the impact on the classroom facilities are if the 

undergraduate enrollments increase by approximately 25% or to about 

5,000 students. The analysis to address this issue is presented in the 

following section. 

Impact of 25% Undergraduate Enrollment Growth 

Enrollment increases can be handled in several ways: 1) increase the class 

section enrollments (increases the station occupancy percentage); 2) add 

new sections (increases the weekly room hour utilization); 3) increase the 

classroom supply; 4) or combinations of these options. 

The number of classrooms and square feet of classrooms is dependent on 

the following factors: instructional demand (number of hours per week 

students spend in classrooms – WSCH), the utilization rate of the 

classrooms (average hours per week the classrooms are expected to be used 

–WRH times the expected station occupancy rate – SO), the average station 

size and the average section size. 

Planning Assumptions: 

• Instructional demand will increase by 25% across the board for 

undergraduates only; 

• Weekly Room Hour goal is 25 hours per week 

• Station Occupancy goal is 65% (Average section size may need to 

increase to achieve this goal.) 

• Average station size is 20 square feet 

• The analysis is limited to the two undergraduate colleges: The 

College and the Calloway School of Business and Accountancy. 

Most classroom utilization guidelines suggest that classrooms be used at 

least 60% of the available hours with a station occupancy percentage of at 

least 60%. Following these guidelines suggests that the classrooms should 





Table 16 presents the calculation of the number of classroom seats required 

to meet the planned increase in instructional demand for The College. The 

number of seats is governed by the utilization of the classrooms (average 

weekly room hour of use times the station occupancy). The number of seats 

multiplied by the average station size determines the square feet of 

classroom space. 

Table 16: Classroom Seats Calculation – The College 

Current (Fall 2006) Option 1 Option 2 

Total Rooms 120 120 120 

Total Enrolled 17,451 21,814 21,814 

WSCH 52,116 65,145 65,145 

Average WRH 20.1 25 25 

Stat. Occupancy 61.9% 61.9% 65.0% 

Total WRH 2,412 3,007 2,992 

Total Section 801 999 994 

Hours/Section* 3.0 3.0 3.0 

Section Size* 21.8 21.8 22.0 

Total Seats 4,186 4,210 4,009 

Seats/Room.* 34.9 35.0 33.5 

Station Size* 18.4 18.3 19.2 

ASF 77,000 77,000 77,000 

* Denotes average size 

Option 1: Enrollment and WSCH increase by 25%; WRH goal - 25; current SO 

Option 2: Enrollment and WSCH increase by 25%; WRH goal - 25; SO goal - 65% 

Two options are presented. In both options a 25% increase in enrollments 

is assumed. Option 1 applies an average weekly room hour (WRH) goal of 

25 hours per week but keeps the station occupancy at the current level of 

61.9%. Option 2 assumes an average weekly room hour (WRH) goal of 25 

hours per week but increases the station occupancy to 65%. 

Option 1 shows that the increased enrollment would only require a few 

more seats (24) than current while Option 2 shows that the increased 

enrollment could be accommodated in about 175 fewer seats. Both options 

would require an increase of nearly 200 sections but the average section 

sizes would remain essentially the same at the current average or about 22 

students per section. 

Since the calculated number of seats required for both options is reasonably 

close to the current classroom supply there is no reason to make major 

changes to the supply. Option 2 would permit the removal of few seats that 

would increase the station size to 19.2. Note: if the station is increased to 

20 square feet then the classroom supply would need to be increased by 

about 3,000 square feet. 

Size Range Analysis: Dean of the College 

This analysis examines number of classrooms by seat capacity size range 

and compares the number of weekly room hours of demand in that size 

range to determine surplus (+) or a need (-) for classrooms in that size 

range. 

Table 17: Needs by Size Range: The College 

Size Range Current Rooms Calculated Need Difference 

1-19 25 37 -12 

20-29 31 46 -15 

30-39 30 22 8 

40-49 17 10 7 

50-59 6 2 4 

60-69 2 1 1 

70-99 5 0 5 

100-129 2 1 1 

130+ 2 1 1 

Totals 120 120 0 

As Table 17 shows the need for 12 rooms in Size Range 1and 15 rooms in 

Size Range 2 can be met by the surplus of rooms in the larger size ranges. 

Therefore, the current mix of rooms can accommodate the planned 

enrollment increase. However, when classrooms are remodeled or new 

rooms are constructed, rooms of capacity 25 or 30 should be considered. 




In summary the current classroom will support an enrollment increase of 

25% across the board if the average weekly room hour (WRH) is increased 

from 20 hours per week to 25 hours per week and the station occupancy 

remains at its current rate or higher. 


Table 18 presents the calculation of the number of classroom seats required 

to meet the planned increase in instructional demand for the Calloway 

School. The number of seats is governed by the utilization of the 

classrooms (average weekly room hour of use times the station occupancy). 

The number of seats times the average station size determines the square 

feet of classroom space. 

Table 18: Classroom Seats Calculation – Calloway School of Business 

Current (Fall 2006) Option 1 Option 2 

Total Rms. 13 13 13 

Tot. Enroll 2,244 2,805 2,805 

WSCH 6,717 8,396 8,396 

Avg. WRH 19.9 25 25 

Stat. Occ. 71.6% 71.6% 65% 

Tot. WRH 259 324 380 

Tot. Sect. 85 106 125 

Hrs/Sect.* 3 3 3 

Sect. Size* 26.4 26.4 22.5 

Tot. Seats 471 469 517 

Seats/Rm.* 36.2 36.2 34 

Stat. Size* 24.9 25 25 

ASF 11,736 11,727 12,917 

* Denotes average size 

Option 1: enrollment and WSCH increase by 25%; WRH goal - 25; current SO 

Option 2: enrollment and WSCH increase by 25%; WRH goal - 25; SO goal - 65% 

Two options are presented. In both options the 25% enrollment increase is 

assumed. Option 1 assumes an average weekly room hour (WRH) goal of 

25 hours per week but keeps the station occupancy at the current level of 

71.6%. Option 2 assumes an average weekly room hour (WRH) goal of 25 

hours per week but decreases the station occupancy to 65%. 

Option 1 shows that the increased enrollment would not require any more 

seats than current, while Option 2 shows that the increased enrollment 

would require 46 more seats. Option 1 would require 21 more sections but 

the average section size would remain constant at about 26.4 students. 

Option 2, because of the decrease in station occupancy, would require 40 

more sections and the average section size would be reduced by about 4 

students per section. 

Option 1 can be accommodated in the current classroom supply, but Option 

2 would require two more classrooms as shown in Table 10. 

Size Range Analysis: Calloway School of Business 

This analysis examines number of classrooms by seat capacity size range 

and compares the number of weekly room hours of demand in that size 

range to determine surplus (-) or a need (+) for classrooms in that size 

range. 

Table 19: Needs by Size Range: Calloway School of Business 

Size Range Current Rooms Calculated Need Difference 

1-19 2 2 0 

20-29 5 7 -2 

30-39 0 3 -3 

40-49 5 1 4 

50-59 0 1 -1 

60-69 0 1 -1 

70-99 1 0 1 

100-129 0 0 0 

130+ 0 0 0 

Totals 13 15 -2 

As shown in Table 19 there is an overall need for two classrooms. These 

classrooms should be in the 50 to 70 capacity range. Note: if the station 

occupancy remains at its current rate of about 71% then the current supply 

can accommodate the planned enrollment increase. 

In summary the current Calloway classrooms will support an enrollment 

increase of 25% across the board if the average weekly room hour (WRH) 




is increased from 20 hours per week to 25 hours per week and the station 

occupancy remains at its current rate of 71.6% or higher. However, if the 

station occupancy is reduced from 71.6% to 65% then two additional 

classrooms would be needed. 

Classroom Analysis: Summary of Conclusions 

Based on most published space planning guidelines, the departmental 

classrooms at Wake Forest are underutilized even in the prime time. Most 

guidelines recommend a weekly room hour utilization of at least 60% of the 

available hours. For a standard 8 AM to 5 PM week (45 available hours) 

this translates into a utilization of at least 27 hours per week. The Fall 2006 

utilization for all rooms for the 8 to 5 time frame is just under 20 hours per 

week. The station occupancy is better at approximately 63% of the seats 

used when the classroom is occupied. This is in the low range of most 

guidelines which state station occupancy should be in the range of 60% to 

70%. 


The current classrooms will support an enrollment increase of 25% across 

the board if the average weekly room hour (WRH) is increased from 20 

hours per week to 25 hours per week and the station occupancy remains at 

its current rate of 61.9%.or higher. Size range analysis shows that the 

current mix of rooms can accommodate the planned enrollment increases. 

However, when classrooms are remodeled or new rooms are constructed, 

rooms of capacity 25 or 30 should be considered. 


The current classrooms will support an enrollment increase of 25% across 

the board if the average weekly room hour (WRH) is increased from 20 

hours per week to 25 hours per week and the station occupancy remains at 

its current rate of 71.6% or higher. However, if the station occupancy is 

reduced from 71.6% to 65% then two additional classrooms would be 

needed. These classrooms should be in the 50 to 70 capacity range. Note: if 

the station occupancy remains at its current rate of about 71% then the 

current supply can accommodate the planned enrollment increase. 




Space Management 

Wake Forest currently has no formal space management practices or 

organization. As part of this assessment CFP has developed companion 

documents to this report that provide a recommended structure, policies, 

procedures and space planning guidelines that the University may use in 

developing a more formal process for managing its space resources. The 

following is an excerpt from these reports, which are available for review 

through Facilities Management. 

Space management is a decision making process that gives direction for 

managing and providing adequate space for administrative and academic 

units. Effective space management is critical in maximizing the use of 

available resources and includes the unit assignment, building inventory, 

utilization, modification and evaluation of academic and administrative 

facilities on the campus. 

All space should be considered a valuable University resource and its use 

and disposition is to be thoughtfully considered. No space assignment 

should be considered exempt from periodic review of use; it is essential that 

use can be justified to insure continued relevance to the University’s 

mission and goals. 

Guiding Principles for Space Management 

The following principles may be followed to guide the University’s space 

management efforts: 

• Creation and the maintenance of the University’s space inventory 

should be considered a high priority. 

• Space should be considered as much a University resource as 

faculty and staff or budget dollars. The physical facilities of the 

University are an enormous asset crucial to the operations of the 

campus. 

• Space is a University property to be allocated in a manner which 

best advances University priorities. 

• University space can and should be reassigned as required by 

objective criteria to meet justifiable needs. 

• University space needs will be evaluated in the context of 

traditional quantitative and functional considerations. 

• Responsibility for assignment and reassignment of space should 

generally follow divisional and departmental organizational 

hierarchies. While any and all space assignments are subject to 

change based on the authority of the President and/or Provost, the 

ability to assign and reassign space is generally delegated to each 

of the Deans and Vice Presidents for their respective departments 

and programs. 

The University’s space management process may consist of the following 

functions/areas: 

Space Inventory: One of the most important and valuable resources at the 

University are its facilities. An accurate space inventory is the essential 

backbone of any space management system. The goal of a space inventory 

is to identify, document, and allocate space for all institutional programs 

and activities. A space inventory system that organizes and manages the 

institutional space resources is fundamental in order to meet this goal. It 

ensures that the space is effectively and efficiently used to meet the overall 

academic, administrative, and support needs and objectives; ensures that 

each unit has sufficient space to fulfill its mission; maintains reasonable 

equality of space among similar functions of the different units; provides a 

record of how space is allocated or assigned; provides the ability to respond 

to new opportunities; and ensures that space is put to its best and most 

productive use. 

Space Audit/Surveys: Verification of the space inventory records, via a 

space survey or audit, should be implemented on regular cycle. This is 

needed to validate, correct and update the building and room records 

following new construction, renovation, and/or reassignments. This survey 

or audit should be conducted as a self-audit by each department. As a self 

audit, academic and administrative units will submit changes to the room 

use, classification, and assignment data though an annual space update form 

that can be electronic or web based. An accurate space inventory provides 

the basis for realistic space needs calculations; fulfills required reporting; 




and provides the University with accurate data for the assignment and 

management of the campus space. 

Space Utilization/Need: Along with the inventory, the space management 

process is used to determine the effective use of space and to look for 

opportunities in increase the efficient use of resources. This is done through 

an evaluation/analysis of existing space through the use of space needs 

calculations. These calculations are based on the University’s space 

planning guidelines and general planning assumptions that are reasonable 

and accepted by the University. These guidelines shall be periodically 

reviewed and updated as programs, teaching and learning pedagogies, and 

technological advances continue to evolve and influence the University’s 

physical environment. 

Space Assignment: Space is one of the University’s most valued resources, 

so relevance to the University’s Academic/Strategic Plan and to the 

University’s mission are key considerations in resolving space requests. 

Because square footage requests usually exceed the amount of available 

space, units are strongly encouraged to manage their space as effectively as 

possible. When space needs exceed the current allocation of space a 

process should be in place to reallocate or reassign space based on a set of 

established criteria. 

Capital Planning: Capital Planning is a key element to Wake Forest 

University’s facilities. Planning for capital development should involve the 

integration of space demands, financing, and the long range plans of the 

organization. The University should prepare a capital plan that establishes 

the priority projects for the budget cycle. Input to the plan includes priority 

projects that were not funded in the last budget cycle and still are a priority 

for the University, plus new projects that are physically and financially 

feasible. The number of worthy projects generally far exceeds available 

funds; hence funding priorities become an important part of this process. 




Conclusions 

The following section summarizes the conclusions and results from the 

Wake Forest space utilization study: 

• The current calculated space needs for the total campus indicates a net 

deficit of 9.2% or about 85,300 ASF. This deficit is mostly in 

administrative support operations. 

• Of the nine major campus divisions, three were determined to have 

current needs. In the aggregate, current space for the other divisions is 

sufficient. 

• Classroom and instructional laboratory space is sufficient to meet 

current needs and has capacity to meet potential future growth. 

• Assuming the existing instructional space is retained to address future 

growth and is not reprogrammed to other uses, the current “real” space 

deficit is approximately 124,600 ASF. Research laboratory space is 

deficient by 9,645 ASF or about 7.7% of the current need. Office space 

is currently about 20% deficient or about 25,500 ASF. Library space is 

the largest component of the space type deficit or 40% of the “real” 

need. Campus support space constitutes about 28% of the need. 



expected to total 1,040,600 ASF. Assuming existing instructional 

space is retained to address future growth, the “real” future space 

deficit for the College will be approximately 41,900 ASF, while the 

“real” need for Calloway will be abut 3,050 ASF. 








• Based on most published space planning guidelines, the classrooms at 

Wake Forest are underutilized even in the prime time. 

• The classrooms assigned to the Dean of the College will support an 

enrollment increase of 25% across the board if the average weekly 

room hour (WRH) is increased from 20 hours per week to 25 hours per 

week and the station occupancy remains at its current rate of 61.9%.or 

higher. Size range analysis shows that the current mix of rooms can 

accommodate the planned enrollment increases. 

• The classrooms assigned to the Calloway School will support an 

enrollment increase of 25% across the board if the average weekly 

room hour (WRH) is increased from 20 hours per week to 25 hours per 

week and the station occupancy remains at its current rate of 71.6% or 

higher. However, if the station occupancy is reduced from 71.6% to 

65% then two additional classrooms would be needed. If the station 

occupancy remains at its current rate of about 71% then the current 

supply can accommodate the planned enrollment increase. 

12.5% Undergraduate Growth Scenario 


expected to total 1,059,125 ASF. Assuming existing instructional 

space is retained to address future growth, the “real” future space 

deficit for the College will be approximately 51,400 ASF, while the 

“real” need for Calloway will be abut 3,400 ASF. 




Recommendations 

The University should consider implementing a formal space management 

process that includes: 

• Periodic updating of its space inventory database through both selfreporting 

by departments and field audits. 

• Implementing a space allocation procedure to address needs that cannot 

be met within the management of a particular college. 

• Periodically updating its space needs calculations as input into future 

capital planning. 

Consideration should also be given for establishing an office responsible for 

the coordination of these efforts. 

Should the University periodically update these space needs, modifications 

to the type of data and formats used in the process should be review and 

implemented. The current study required significant supplementation and 

manipulation of some of the data to generate the model. Updating the space 

needs will require similar efforts unless improved database coordination and 

formatting is achieved. Improvements to the basic data inputs include: 

• Developing a class file that requires the reporting of all scheduled 

instructional activity in University-owned space. 

• A consolidation of reporting from all colleges by course of all student 

credit hours by term and course designation. 

• Creating a comprehensive personnel database that includes not only all 

full time employees, but also non-university, student employees and 

graduate assistants. 

The University should consider investing in database management software 

systems for maintaining their space inventory and other facilities data, as 

well as scheduling software for classrooms and other facilities. 


Wake Forest Space Utilization Study Appendices 

Appendices 

Space Needs Summaries 

Classroom Analysis: Detailed Data 



Space Needs Summaries 

Chart SN1 

Current Space vs. Current Needs and Growth Scenarios 

by Major Division 

1,200,000 

1,150,000 

1,100,000 

1,050,000 

1,000,000 

950,000 

900,000 

850,000 

Square Feet 

800,000 

750,000 

700,000 

650,000 

600,000 

550,000 

500,000 

450,000 

400,000 

350,000 

300,000 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

100,000 

50,000 

0 

President VP Investments VP Student Life 

VP General 

Counsel 

VP Advancement 

VP 

Administration 

Sr. VP Finance Provost Athletics Campusw ide Total 

Current ASF 2,480 1,739 61,169 1,619 17,989 51,630 26,238 680,565 43,609 37,770 924,808 

Current Need 2,239 2,210 56,881 1,719 20,796 55,768 30,259 724,703 43,340 72,194 1,010,109 

7% UG Growth 2,239 2,210 57,324 1,719 20,796 55,768 30,259 752,694 43,340 74,246 1,040,595 

12.5% UG Grow th 2,239 2,210 57,575 1,719 20,796 55,768 30,259 769,603 43,340 75,617 1,059,126 

25% UG Growth 2,239 2,210 58,144 1,719 20,796 55,768 30,259 807,568 43,340 78,596 1,100,639 



Chart SN2 


by College 

Square Feet 

650,000 

625,000 

600,000 

575,000 

550,000 

525,000 

500,000 

475,000 

450,000 

425,000 

400,000 

375,000 

350,000 

325,000 

300,000 

275,000 

250,000 

225,000 

200,000 

175,000 

150,000 

125,000 

100,000 

75,000 

50,000 

25,000 

0 

Divinity School School of Law Babcock Grad School Calloway The College Totals 

Current ASF 16,813 82,799 32,739 2,376 27,191 384,468 546,386 

Current Need 14,013 85,083 30,403 2,773 23,733 386,386 542,391 

7% UG Growth 14,013 85,083 30,403 2,773 24,954 404,946 562,172 

12.5% UG Growth 14,013 85,083 30,403 2,773 25,841 419,831 577,944 

25% UG Growth 14,013 85,083 30,403 2,773 27,859 453,436 613,567 



Chart SN3 

Variance Between Current Space and Calculated Space Needs by Space Type 


40,000 

Square Feet - Deficit (-) / Surplus (+) 

20,000 

0 

-20,000 

-40,000 

-60,000 

-80,000 

Offices Classrooms Instructional Labs Research Labs Other Net Total 

Current ASF Minus Current Need -16,235 22,532 5,741 -9,645 -4,310 -1,918 

Current ASF Minus 7% Growth Need -23,937 18,781 2,646 -13,140 -4,829 -20,478 

Current ASF Minus 12.5% Growth Need -29,988 15,833 216 -16,205 -5,220 -35,363 

Current ASF Minus 25% Growth Need -43,740 9,139 -5,308 -22,950 -6,109 -68,968 



Chart SN4 

Variance Between Current Space and Calculated Space Needs by Space Type 

Calloway School of Business and Accountancy 

8,000 

Square Feet - Deficit (-) / Surplus (+) 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

0 

-2,000 

-4,000 

-6,000 

Offices Classrooms Instructional Labs Other Net Total 

Current ASF Minus Current Need -2,139 5,703 -38 -68 3,458 

Current ASF Minus 7% Growth Need -2,770 5,294 -82 -205 2,237 

Current ASF Minus 12.5% Growth Need -3,266 4,975 -117 -243 1,350 

Current ASF Minus 25% Growth Need -4,392 4,247 -196 -327 -668 



Chart SN5 


by Space Category 

1,200,000 

1,150,000 

1,100,000 

1,050,000 

1,000,000 

950,000 

900,000 

850,000 

Square Feet 

800,000 

750,000 

700,000 

650,000 

600,000 

550,000 

500,000 

450,000 

400,000 

350,000 

300,000 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

100,000 

50,000 

0 

Classrooms Instruct. Labs Research Labs Offices Library Special Use Stud. Lounge Oth. General Use Support Health Ctr. Total 

Current ASF 115,015 62,564 60,711 343,354 159,455 23,930 13,022 106,567 36,050 4,140 924,808 

Current Need 82,808 55,477 70,356 368,853 209,254 24,272 15,302 108,740 70,372 4,675 1,010,109 

7% UG Growth 86,967 58,616 73,851 377,804 217,094 24,288 15,831 108,851 72,493 4,800 1,040,595 

12.5% UG Growth 90,235 61,081 76,916 384,836 217,827 24,300 16,248 108,851 73,920 4,912 1,059,126 

25% UG Growth 97,657 66,685 83,661 400,820 219,494 24,327 17,194 108,851 76,800 5,150 1,100,639 



Chart SN6 

Space Need Variance by Room Type 

Difference of Current Space from Current Need 

and Growth Scenarios 

85,000 

65,000 

45,000 

25,000 

5,000 

Deficit (-) / Surplus (+) 

-15,000 

-35,000 

-55,000 

-75,000 

-95,000 

-115,000 

-135,000 

-155,000 

-175,000 

Classrooms 

Instructional 

Labs 

Research Labs Offices Library Special Use 

Current ASF Minus Current Need 32,207 7,087 -9,645 -25,499 -49,799 -342 -2,280 -2,173 -34,322 -536 -85,302 

Current ASF Minus 7% Growth 28,048 3,948 -13,140 -34,450 -57,639 -358 -2,809 -2,284 -36,443 -660 -115,787 

Current ASF Minus 12.5% Growth 24,780 1,483 -16,205 -41,482 -58,372 -370 -3,226 -2,284 -37,870 -772 -134,318 

Current ASF Minus 25% Growth 17,358 -4,121 -22,950 -57,466 -60,039 -397 -4,172 -2,284 -40,750 -1,010 -175,831 

Student 

Lounge 

Other General 

Use 

Support Health Net Difference 



Classroom Analysis: Detailed Data 

Table CR1: Current Classroom Inventory by Type 

Room 

Type 

Room Type 

Description 

No. of 

Rooms 

Square 

Feet 

Total 

Seats 

Average 

Room 

Size 

Average 

Seat Size 

Average 

Seats per 

Room 

110 Classroom 116 81,105 4,108 699 19.7 35 

120 Lecture Hall 12 17,590 1,148 1,466 15.3 96 

130 Seminar Room 31 13,542 530 437 25.6 17 

Totals 159 112,237 5,786 706 19.4 36 

Table CR2: Fall 2006 Classroom Utilization by College - 8 AM to 10 PM M-F 

College 

No. of 

Rooms ASF Seats 

Avg. 

Room 

Size 

Avg. 

Station 

Size 

Avg. 

WRH 

Avg. 

Station 

Occupancy 

Avg. 

Section 

Size 

Dean of the College 120 77,000 4,186 642 18.4 20.1 61.9% 21.8 1 

Calloway School of Business 13 11,736 471 903 24.9 19.9 71.6% 26.4 0 

School of Law 11 10,354 520 941 19.9 20.8 65.8% 28.6 0 

Babcock Graduate School of Mgmt. 6 7,171 335 1,195 21.4 23.9 58.7% 32.9 0 

Divinity School 5 3,563 172 713 20.7 13.5 63.7% 19.6 0 

Other 1 796 42 796 19.0 15.0 54.6% 21.6 2 

Total Reynolda Campus 156 110,620 5,726 709 19.3 20.0 63.0% 23.1 3 

*Z. Reynolds Library – Room 476 is not assigned to a college 

Rooms 

with No 

Use* 



Table CR3: Dean of College Classroom Size Range Analysis 

Size Range 

Current 

Rooms 

Planned 

WRH 

Demand 

Mode 

Modified 

Demand 

Whole 

Rooms 

Difference 

1 1-19 25 1,550 62.0 37.2 37 12 

2 20-29 31 780 31.2 46.6 46 15 

3 30-39 30 461 18.4 22.3 22 -8 

4 40-49 17 143 5.7 10.1 10 -7 

5 50-59 6 36 1.4 2.3 2 -4 

6 60-69 2 11 0.4 0.6 1 -1 

7 70-99 5 9 0.3 0.4 0 -5 

8 100-129 2 12 0.5 0.5 1 -1 

9 130+ 2 4 0.1 0.2 1 -1 

Totals 120 3,007 120.3 120.3 120 0 

Table CR4: Calloway School of Business Classroom Size Range Analysis 

Size Range 

Current 

Rooms 

Planned 

WRH 

Demand 

Mode 

Modified 

Demand 

Whole 

Rooms 

Difference 

1 1-19 2 111 4.4 2.7 2 0 

2 20-29 5 196 7.8 7.3 7 2 

3 30-39 0 42 1.7 3.5 3 3 

4 40-49 5 18 0.7 1.1 1 -4 

5 50-59 0 9 0.4 0.4 1 1 

6 60-69 0 4 0.2 0.2 1 1 

7 70-99 1 0 0.0 0.0 0 -1 

8 100-129 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 

9 130-9999 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 

Totals 13 380 15.2 15.2 15 2 

Notes: 

• The Current Rooms column is a count of 

rooms from the room inventory based on 

the reported seats in each capacity size 

range. 

• The Planned WRH (weekly room hour) 

column is the sum of the contact hours for 

each size range after applying the planned 

enrollment increase. 

• The Demand Mode is the number of rooms 

required assuming a utilization goal of 25 

hours per week. 

• The Modified Demand assumes that some 

of the demand “cascades” into larger size 

ranges to reflect more realistic scheduling 

patterns. 

• The Whole Rooms column rounds the 

modified rooms to whole number. For 

smaller size ranges this is rounded down 

since unmet demand can be met in a larger 

room. 

• The Difference column is the Whole 

Rooms minus the Current Rooms. 


Comprehensive Facilities Planning, Inc. Columbus, Ohio 43209 www.cfp-planners.com

Space Utilization Study for Academic Spaces - Facilities - Wake ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?