Facilities Master Plan - 2012 - Chesapeake College

CHESAPEAKE COLLEGEFacilities Master Plan UpdateJanuary 2012

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHESAPEAKE COLLEGEWYE MILLS, MARYLANDBOARD OF TRUSTEESKent CountyMr. Matthew D. HogansMr. Thomas M. Groce, Jr.Caroline CountyMrs. Margaret MyersMr. L. Nash McMahanDorchester CountyMr. Vaughan D. Evans, Sr., ChairMr. Don W. BradleyQueen Anne’s CountyMrs. Jennifer C. DoegeDr. Michael E. PelczarTalbot CountyMs. M. Catherine Poe, Vice ChairMs. Blenda ArmisteadADMINISTRATIONDr. Barbara A Viniar, PresidentDr. Kathryn A. Barbour, Vice President for Academic ServicesMr. Douglass P. Gray, Vice President for Technology and Academic SupportMr. Michael D. Kilgus, Vice President for Administrative ServicesDr. Richard Midcap, Vice President for Student Success & Enrollment ServicesMs. Chandra Gigliotti-Guridi, Dean of Learning Resources/Academic Support ServicesMs. Susan Cianchetta, Director of Human ResourcesMr. Monte W. Garrettson, Director of FacilitiesMs. Maureen Gilmartin, Dean for Career and Professional StudiesMs. Kimberly Miller, Director of Institutional Planning, Research & AssessmentMs. Kathleen J. Petrichenko, Dean for Recruitment ServicesMs. Jackie L. Potter, Executive Director for Division of Continuing Education and Workforce TrainingMs. Joan M. Seitzer, Dean for Retention ServicesMr. Rogers Smitter, Dean for Liberal Arts and Sciencesi

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateINTRODUCTIONThis Master Plan was undertaken to establish a framework for the physical growth and change that can beanticipated for Chesapeake College. It provides projected enrollment growth and establishes space needs bydiscipline.Capital projects are identified as short or long term projects; some may be undertaken as funds become availableand as influenced by other projects by partner institutions. For each major project that proceeds, the master plan willneed to be followed by programming, design, and construction, unless programming or design have been undertakenalready. The master plan does not attempt to design projects, but it does provide a site plan for the Wye Millscampus, identifying locations and establishing relationships of major components.The Master Plan should be regarded as a working document, which will need to be periodically reviewed andupdated; it is recommended that the update should occur by or before 2015. An early event such as availability offunding for a major project, may suggest an earlier update.This report is both a master plan and facilities assessment. The facilities assessment component provides aninventory and evaluation for the site infrastructure, buildings, and building systems for the Wye Mills campus, as wellas assessments of the Cambridge Center and the Health Sciences Center at Easton Memorial Hospital. Thisprovides the foundation for the evaluation, both quantitatively and qualitatively, of the facilities and forrecommendations for improvements to the site and buildings.Because of inevitable unforeseen changes in programs, priorities, policies, and funding, this Facilities Master Planshould be viewed as a fluid document that is a conceptual tool and comprehensive guide for making decisionsregarding Chesapeake College’s physical resources. This document integrates academic and physical planning on acampus-wide basis; as facility and site development needs change or are newly identified, they must be incorporatedinto subsequent plan updates.The planning process for development of this Facilities Master Plan results in a long-range planning document thataddresses a broad range of subjects:• Review of the College’s vision, mission, functional and instructional program emphases, and organizationalstructure.• Description of the student clientele in terms of credit participation and choice of academic programs.• Analyses of the academic programs and projections of institutional growth.• Inventory of existing facilities and patterns of physical development.• Identification of projects that are needed to support the programs, personnel, and student clientele of theCollege for the next ten years.The information contained in this Facilities Master Plan serves various purposes. It affords the College a writtenreference that can be used to facilitate communication within the Chesapeake College community and withrepresentatives of local and state review agencies. This document provides the rationale for physical improvementsand serves as the basis for long-range capital development.Inventory data concerning the existing facilities are collected and presented. Alternative actions to deliver improvededucational facilities are presented. Recommendations are provided for renovation, replacement, and/or newconstruction as necessary, and priorities are suggested for the recommended facilities actions. In brief, thisdocument aggregates the inventory of existing facilities and physical resources, identifies current and future facilityneeds of Chesapeake College, and then provides a framework for achieving the required additional facilities.ii

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateORGANIZATION OF THE REPORTChapter 1Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapter 4Chapter 5Chapter 6Chapter 7Chapter 8AppendixExecutive SummaryOverview of the CollegeAcademic Programs and Space NeedsWye Mills Campus FacilitiesWye Mills Campus: Mechanical, Electrical, Technology Systems AssessmentWye Mills Campus: Site Infrastructure and Campus PlanningOff-Campus CentersProposed Capital ProjectsPlan for SustainabilityACKNOWLEDGEMENTSAny project such as this requires a great deal of help from a large number of people. We want to thank a number ofindividuals that have made our job possible through their efforts. These include:The President, Barbara Viniar• Kathryn Barbour• Miriam Collins• Monte Garrettson• Douglass Gray• Mike Kilgus• Phil Mertens• Richard MidcapCollege Council, Administrators, Staff and StudentsThe consultant team is grateful to the entire Chesapeake College community with whom we met, and weacknowledge the College’s contributions to this planning effort.Bruce Manger, HCM ArchitectsMatthew Fitzsimmons, HCM ArchitectsSteve Layden, McCrone, Inc.Dan Booze, Gipe Associatesiii

TABLE OF CONTENTSChapter 1…………………Executive SummaryChapter 2…………………Overview of CampusChapter 3…………………Academic Programs and Space NeedsChapter 4…………………Wye Mills Campus FacilitiesChapter 5…………………Wye Mills: Mechanical, Electrical,Technology Systems AssessmentChapter 6…………………Wye Mills: Site Infrastructure andCampus PlanningChapter 7…………………Off-Campus CentersChapter 8………………....Proposed Capital ProjectsAppendix………………….Plan for Sustainability

Chapter 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYHISTORYFounded in 1965 to serve the counties of the Upper Eastern Shore of Maryland, Chesapeake College opened thedoors of its Wye Mills campus in the Fall of 1968. By 1972, the Community College was fully accredited by theMiddle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. Initially serving Kent, Queen Anne’s, Caroline andTalbot counties, the College expanded its service area to include Dorchester County in 1979. Responding to theneed for program offerings outside the main campus at Wye Mills, the College began conducting classes in arenovated facility in Cambridge in 1994; and entered into a relationship with Easton Memorial Hospital to offer alliedhealth classes in the hospital facility in 1997. In addition to the main campus and two centers, the Collegeadministers programs at various locations throughout the 5-county service area.The original campus was comprised of 5 buildings: Dorchester Library/Administration, Talbot Science, KentHumanities, Gymnasium, and Caroline College Center. Queen Anne’s Technical Center and a pool addition to theGymnasium were added in 1976, followed by the Maintenance Building and Manufacturing Training Center in 1978,Early Childhood Development Center in 1989, and Center for Business & Arts (now known as the Todd PerformingArts Center / Economic Development Center) in 1996.In 1998, the College commissioned a master plan that laid out the need for several renovation and new constructionprojects at the Wye Mills campus; since that time, the College has made significant progress towards completingthose projects, including a new Learning Resource Center in 2002 and renovations and additions to Dorchester in2004, Caroline in 2006, Talbot in 2007, and Kent in 2010. In addition, a new Eastern Shore Higher Education Centerand a new water tower and water distribution system were completed in 2003. A renovation and addition to thePhysical Education building to house PE, Athletics and Allied Health programs is proposed; the program for thisproject has been written and approved. All buildings still exist.MISSIONThe College serves a population from its Upper Eastern Shore region and beyond, in face-to-face settings and online.It is the only public institution of higher education in the Upper Eastern Shore service area. Students find anurturing and supportive environment, embodied in the faculty and staff committed to their success. Students includetraditional high school graduates and non-traditional life-long learners, all of whom are embraced by the College’slearner-centered Mission Statement:The College’s mission states that “Chesapeake College is a comprehensive public two-year regional communitycollege serving the educational needs of the residents of Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne's and Talbotcounties on Maryland's Upper Eastern Shore. The college's mission is offer affordable, quality educationalexperiences in a learner centered environment. Each student’s success is nurtured by comprehensive support1-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateservices, innovative instructional approaches, and individual attention. The college is the regional center foreconomic development, sustainability, recreation and the arts.”PROGRAMSAs a public comprehensive, open admissions two-year regional community college, Chesapeake College offers awide range of transfer, career, continuing education and personal development education programs. Theseprograms lead to the Associate of Arts (A.A.), Associate of Science (A.S.), Associate of Applied Science (A.A.S.),and Associate of Arts in Teaching (A.A.T.) degrees and certificates and letters of recognition in specialized areas.Additional programs are offered at various off-campus sites on the Upper Eastern Shore. In addition to its core artsand sciences and health sciences programs, the College is also known for the strength of its business administration,computer science, and teacher education transfer programs. Partnerships and articulation agreements with otherinstitutions help assure the ability of students to complement and continue their learning experience at and beyondthe College.LOCATION, SETTINGThe 5-county service area is the largest of any community college in Maryland. The Wye Mills location is relativelycentral but is still a long commute – up to one hour – from the most remote areas. While the location is readilyaccessible from two major roads – US Route 50 and Md Route 213 – the campus is relatively isolated from anypopulation center; other than the highways, it is surrounded by farmland. Proposed commercial and residentialdevelopments along Routes 50 and 213 will bring correspondingly more activity to the immediate vicinity of theCollege and can improve the setting as long as the developments are carefully planned and are stable and active.As a 170 acre campus, there has been ample land for the College to expand since 1968, allowing growth to occurwithout limitations by which many other campuses are constrained. The property is relatively flat, with some gentlyrolling terrain towards the southeast corner. The College leases some of its unused land for cultivation. All of theparking on site is in surface lots. Nearly all of the College’s buildings have been built inside the original ring road,and this area is able to accommodate some additional buildings and additions. When the Higher Education Centerwas built in 2002, it was located outside the ring road to distinguish it from other Chesapeake College facilities.There is sufficient land area for the College to continue to expand for several decades.ENROLLMENTIn FY 2010, Chesapeake College served 3914 credit and 9127 non-credit students. In Fall 2010, seventy-fivepercent of credit students were Caucasian; 67% female, and the mean age was 25. Seventy-six percent of oncampuscourses take place during the day (before 5:00PM). Enrollment has grown steadily since the Collegeopened in 1968, leveling briefly in 2000 and 2005 but resuming in following years. It has increased approximately35% in the last 10 years; also in that time, full-time students increased from 28% to 38%. Credit enrollment isexpected to increase by 21% over the next 10 years.1-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSPACE NEEDSThe space needs projections assume that the Center for Allied Health and Athletics will be completed within the 10-year planning horizon of this report. Accordingly, several of today’s current space needs will be reduced uponcompletion of that project. Major needs system-wide and for Wye Mills are for open labs, testing/tutoring,stack/study, exhibition, meeting space, and central storage.PARKINGCurrently, a deficit of 155 spaces exists; this is projected to grow to about 190 spaces by 2020.FACILITIES, CONDITIONThe combined gross area of all of the Wye Mills buildings is approximately 256,000 square feet. Individual buildingsummaries are as follows:CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE WYE MILLS CAMPUS: BUILDING INVENTORYBldg NameYrConstrYrRenov Sustainability NASF GSF Penthouse Primary UseDorchester Admin 1968 2003 Geothermal 14,020 23,554 OfficeCaroline Coll Cent 1968 2006 Geothermal 21,833 35,419Dining, Office, Instruction,BookstoreKent Humanities 1968 2010 Geothermal 13,144 25,398 4,148 gsf* InstructionTalbot Science 1968 2007 Geothermal 11,975 23,043 1,820 gsf* InstructionPhysical Education, Pool1968,19761976 25,984 37,611 Athletics, Physical EducationQueen Anne's Tech 1976 1983 11,870 18,058 InstructionManufacturing Training Ctr 1979 1984 9,870 10,930Instruction, Shops, CentralServicesMaintenance 1979 3,383 4,000 Shops, Storage, OfficeEarly Childhood Devt Ctr 1989 2,981 3,994 Day CareEconomic Development Ctr/ Todd Performing Arts Ctr1996 20,294 29,400 Assembly, Instruction, OfficesLearning Resource Center 2002 31,474 44,484 Library, InstructionSub-total 166,828 255,891Note: Penthouse GSF taken @ 50%Higher Education Center 2002 Geothermal 15,142 28,054* not included in inventory for reporting purposesNot in inventory for reportingpurposesThe oldest buildings on campus are over 40 years old. Of the College’s 11 buildings, only three (Child DevelopmentCenter, Todd Performing Arts Center / Center for Economic Development – TPAC/EDC, and Learning ResourceCenter) have been built in the past 30 years. (The Higher Education Center, not a Chesapeake College building,was built in 2002.) Of the other 8, four – Dorchester, Caroline, Talbot and Kent – have had major renovations. The1-3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCollege has maintained their un-renovated buildings in serviceable condition, but it has been largely a strategy ofgetting by while awaiting the resources for proper, comprehensive renovations.The major needs are in two major buildings: the PE Building and Queen Anne’s Technical Building. These buildingsare over 30 years old, and the gym portion of the PE building is over 40 years old. Major building systems –mechanical, electrical, telecommunications, special systems – and architectural elements – doors, windows,casework, built-in equipment – have been deteriorating, do not meet current codes, do not support (and in severalcases inhibit) the functions that take place in the spaces, are energy-inefficient, and, increasingly, parts formechanical equipment are difficult or impossible to obtain.Two other buildings, the Maintenance Building and Manufacturing Training Center (MTC), are also in need of majorrenovations. The Maintenance Building continues to serve just part of the needs of the maintenance activities andneeds to be expanded. The MTC has been serving as temporary space for several departments over several years,developing into de-facto “surge” space. It has been made over so many times and its MEP systems have beenmodified so often, most of the building is not original. This building should be razed as soon as the need for surgespace is abated by the renovation of the major buildings described above and the replacement of the MaintenanceBuilding..CAPITAL PROJECTSThe following building projects are proposed:PriorityGroup1ProjectPE Building Renovation and Addition(Center for Allied Health & Athletics)RemarksRenovation: Retain Gym, eliminate re-purpose Pool;Wellness/Fitness Center; multi-purpose space.Addition: Allied Health1 Queen Anne’s Tech Replacement New academic building at other location on campus1 New Cambridge Center New or renovate another facility1 Maintenance Building New replacement facility near existing building2 New Classroom Building At Wye Mills2 Expand TPACAdd: Black-Box Theater, dressing rooms, scene shop, lobby,more toilet rooms, elevator for balcony* Concession Building Adjacent to Athletic Fields* New Student Housing Size to be determined* Raze MTCAfter Center for Allied Health & Athletics, Queen Anne’sReplacement, and Maintenance Building projects1-4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePriority Group Notes:Priority 1: Needs are immediate; should be accomplished as soon as possible. 0-10 yearsPriority 2: 5-20 years. Needs may also be immediate* Priority to be determined as needs arise, as affected by other projects, and as funds become availableIn addition to building renovations, additions, and new buildings, other capital projects that support the buildings orare independent, including site, mechanical, electrical, special systems, and technology projects are identified inChapters 5 and 6. Major projects in these categories include parking lots, and several important informationtechnology and telecommunications upgrades. Expanding the campus wireless network coverage is an especiallyhigh priority. While the capacity of the waste water treatment plant will accommodate at least one more majorbuilding project, an upgrade will eventually be necessary.DESIGN STANDARDSDesign Standards are described in Chapter 4 and include standards for building design, both exterior and interior;site accessories such as benches and waste receptacles; signage, both exterior and interior; and lighting, both siteand interior. The standards are suggested to: 1) achieve a cohesiveness in the physical development of the campusand 2) simplify the ability of the College to maintain its facilities. At the same time, development of design unique toeach project is encouraged. It is recommended that the College continue with and expand the standards to includecertain mechanical and electrical equipment and automatic HVAC control systems. In addition to these designstandards, the College has committed to developing projects sustainably, including achieving LEED silvercertification for all new major building and renovation projects.WYE MILLS DEVELOPMENTAcknowledging that the Wye Mills campus will continue to be the main campus for the College for the foreseeablefuture, the site development plan allows for continued growth and enhances several aspects of the existing andfuture, expanded campus. In addition to planning for building projects to be constructed over the next 10 years, theplan accommodates future long term building expansion. Renovation projects will proceed along with new buildingsand additions.The plan improves pedestrian safety by relocating the loop road, a concept introduced in the 2007 facilities masterplan. Parking is brought closer to the campus core. Convenience parking and handicapped parking are locatedcloser to the buildings that persons need to access. Pedestrian ways are coordinated and enhanced withlandscaping; major pedestrian ways unify the campus by creating major axes.Finally, the transition from a completely rural setting to one more tied to other off-campus development is reinforcedin this plan. The plan provides an informed framework for the College to continue its growth in a deliberate mannerthat supports and enhances the academic mission of the College.1-5

Chapter 2OVERVIEW OF CAMPUS

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateOVERVIEW OF CAMPUSHISTORY AND CHARACTERIn 1965, the Maryland General Assembly adopted legislation providing for the creation of regional community colleges. On December22 of that year, Chesapeake College was founded as Maryland’s first regional community college with a mandate to provide transferand career programs, continuing education courses, and educational services responsive to the citizens of Caroline, Kent, QueenAnne’s, and Talbot counties 1 . The following year, the College purchased a 170-acre site near Wye Mills, developed its first masterplan, and began constructing five buildings: Kent Humanities, Talbot Science, Dorchester Library/Administration, Caroline CollegeCenter, and Gymnasium.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGEVICINITY MAPWhile its new campus was under construction and with an initial enrollment of 260 students, Chesapeake College opened classes inSeptember 1967 in the Queen Anne’s County High School in Centreville. The faculty, staff, and library were housed in the Kennard2-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateElementary School in Centerville. The following September, the College took gradual occupancy of the five new buildings at Wye Millsand graduated its first class in May 1969.Shortly after the opening of its new campus, Chesapeake College fulfilled its community mission by making its facilities available toState, county, and local groups for their events. The College was granted full accreditation by the Middle States Association of Collegesand Secondary Schools at the end of its third academic year.Subsequent to construction of the initial five buildings, development at Wye Mills resulted in the Queen Anne’s Technical Center beingconstructed in 1976, the Manufacturing Training Center and the Maintenance Building in 1978, expansion of the ManufacturingTraining Center in 1984, construction of the Early Childhood Development Center in 1989, the Center for Business and the Arts in1996, and the Learning Resource Center in 2002. The Dorchester Administration Building was completely renovated in 2003. TheCollege’s focal point for student-related activities, the Caroline College Center re-opened in 2006 after a major renovation/expansion.Similarly, the renovations to the Talbot Science building and Kent Humanities were completed in 2007 and 2010, respectively.Chesapeake College is also the host campus for the Eastern Shore Higher Education Center, one of six regional higher educationcenters in Maryland. This center was opened in 2003 and is the only higher education center in Maryland located on the campus of acommunity college.Responding to the need for program offerings outside the main campus at Wye Mills, the College began conducting classes in arenovated facility in Cambridge in 1994; and entered into a relationship with Easton Memorial Hospital to offer allied health classes inthe hospital facility in 1997.Chesapeake College serves a five-county rural area covering over 1,800 square miles of Maryland’s Mid Eastern Shore, comprising 19percent of the State’s total land area. The Mid Eastern Shore is largely rural with many traditional occupations and industries such asfarming, fishing, manufacturing, and service. Chesapeake’s service area is in transition, facing the difficult challenges of balancinggrowth and development while maintaining its unique character and culture.MISSIONChesapeake College’s mission statement reflects its uniqueness in that the statement recognizes Chesapeake as a regionalcommunity college that serves the educational, economic development, and cultural needs of the residents of Maryland’s Mid EasternShore.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGEMISSION STATEMENTChesapeake College is a comprehensive public two-year regional community college serving the educational needs of theresidents of Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne's and Talbot counties on Maryland's Upper Eastern Shore. The college'smission is offer affordable, quality educational experiences in a learner centered environment. Each student’s success is nurturedby comprehensive support services, innovative instructional approaches, and individual attention. The college is the regionalcenter for economic development, sustainability, recreation and the arts. In particular, the college embraces its commitment tostudent learning in the following ways:Prepare students as independent learners who are intellectually competent, skilled in the application of learning,technologically proficient, and grounded in the values and common goals of our civic culture.2-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateChallenge students to see beyond themselves to better understand their place in a global society and culturally diverseworld, while preserving and enhancing the rich cultural heritage of the region.Provide a curriculum and activities that meet the needs of an increasingly diverse student population.Enhance learning opportunities, in partnership with community organizations that reinforce the value of service to othersand strengthen students’ ethical development and civic engagement.Ensure an environment conducive for learning by providing appropriate facilities, support services and other resources toenhance student learning.The college offers a large selection of credit and continuing education offerings designed to help students prepare for transfer toupper level institutions, for immediate entry into a career, or for enhancing work-related skills. Beyond the curricula, the collegeoffers many opportunities for further academic, social, personal, cultural, and athletic development through a rich variety ofextracurricular and co-curricular activities.To enhance student learning and to promote teaching excellence, the college commits to providing a supportive learningenvironment characterized by a dedicated, caring and highly qualified faculty and staff. The college offers all employeesprofessional development opportunities that are aligned with goals outlined in its Strategic Plan. Through these commitments, thecollege nurtures a community of lifelong learners among faculty, staff and students.In addition, the college embraces its commitment to regional economic and community development that will improve the qualityof life by acting on the following:Support workforce development by providing the courses and training needed to build a skilled labor force.Enhance enjoyment and appreciation of the arts by incorporating cultural activities into the curriculum and bringing fineand performing arts events to the region.Sponsor a broad range of community and civic activities that reflect the college’s role as a community-learning center.Extend access to baccalaureate and graduate degree programs for Upper Shore residents through inter-institutionalpartnerships.VISIONIn order to fulfill its mission, Chesapeake College is committed to “Fostering a Community of Learners,” a philosophy embodied in itsvision statement as approved by the Board of Trustees.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGEVISION STATEMENTChesapeake College will have the resources, programs and services necessary to offer every citizen in its service regionopportunities for learning. Students will build on their strengths and excel in the College's dynamic learning environment.In order to implement the College’s mission and pursue its vision, the College faculty and staff dedicate themselves to being guided bythe following core values:Quality: Creating a learning environment that establishes high standards for individual excellence.Student-centeredness: Encouraging and supporting each student to achieve his or her greatest potential.Community: Engaging our community and serving as a catalyst for positive change.Diversity and Respect: Fostering inclusiveness and an appreciation for individual differences.Adaptability: Responding rapidly to local and global change.2-3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTeamwork and Collaboration: Working together to share ideas, knowledge, and creative solutions.Responsibility: Taking responsibility for our actions, acting as stewards of our resources, and adhering to the highest standards ofethical and civic behavior.STRATEGIC GOALSChesapeake’s FY 2009-2013 Strategic Plan identifies the following five goalsSustainabilityWe will be a leader on the Eastern Shore in the creation of a strong economy, a thriving environment, and a just community.Community CollaborationsWe will stay true to our regional roots, meeting community needs through strategic partnerships.College of First ChoiceWe will be the region's first choice for education and training.AppreciationWe will emphasize mutual respect and appreciation, regularly acknowledging those who make our successes possible.Individual ExcellenceWe will promote and support excellence among our students, faculty and staff.GOVERNANCE AND ORGANIZATIONChesapeake College is governed by a Board of Trustees, appointed by the Governor of Maryland, and confirmed by the MarylandHouse of Delegates. The Board is comprised of ten members, two from each of the five counties, Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, QueenAnne’s, and Talbot, which make up the institution’s service area. The Board is responsible for setting policy for the institution and theselection of the President of the College. The President has overall operational authority and responsibility for Chesapeake Collegeand as such, exercises general supervision of all departments. The President shares administrative responsibility with vice-presidentseach with a broad range of responsibilities for Academic Services, Administrative Services, Technology, and StudentSuccess/Enrollment Services. Also reporting to the President are directors of Resource Development and Institutional Research,Planning & Assessment. The faculty also participates in the governance of the college through standing and ad hoc committees, theFaculty Assembly, and representation on the College Council.Blenda ArmisteadDon W. BradleyJennifer C. DoegeThomas M. Croce, Jr.BOARD OF TRUSTEESVaughn D. Evans, Sr., ChairM. Catherine Poe, Vice ChairMatthew D. Hogans,L.Nash McMahanMargaret MyersMichael E. Pelczar, M.D.2-4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateADMINISTRATIONDr. Barbara A. Viniar, PresidentKathryn A. Barbour, Vice President for Academic Affairs and Economic DevelopmentDouglass P. Gray, Vice President for Technology and Academic SupportMichael D. Kilgus, Vice President for Administrative ServicesRichard D. Midcap, Vice President for Student Success and Enrollment ServicesSTUDENT GOVERNMENTThe College encourages students to assume the responsibilities of self-government recognizing this is an important facet of highereducation. The Chesapeake College Student Government Association (SGA) is a cooperative organization based on mutualconfidence between the student body and the administration, faculty, and staff of the college. Authority is granted the student body avoice in the regulation and conduct of student affairs. Governing powers of the SGA are vested in the legislative officers including apresident, vice-president, secretary, events coordinator, public relations officer, and two representatives.STUDENT BODY CHARACTERISTICSThe student body of Chesapeake College is comprised of individuals with a wide variety of experiences, goals and educationalbackgrounds. The College is a community of 2,600 credit and 8,200 non-credit learners.FACULTY AND STAFFDuring the academic year 2010-2011, Chesapeake College employed 238 full-time faculty, administrative, and support staff. Inaddition, the College employed 271 part-time faculty and staff. The following table illustrates the distribution of personnel who arecritical to the mission, strategic initiatives and learning experience at Chesapeake College.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE FACULTY AND STAFF: FALL 2010Category Full-time Part-time Total FTE (Faculty)Faculty (Credit) 61 86 147 82.5Faculty (Non-Credit) 0 92 92 23Sub-Total Faculty 61 178 239 105.5Administrative 16 0 16Professional 65 25 90Support 96 68 164Sub-Total Staff 177 93 270Total Faculty & Staff 238 271 5092-5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateACADEMIC PROGRAMSAs a public comprehensive, open admissions two-year regional community college, Chesapeake offers a wide range of transfer,career, continuing education and personal development education programs. These programs lead to the Associate of Arts (A.A.),Associate of Science (A.S.), Associate of Applied Science (A.A.S.), and Associate of Arts in Teaching (A.A.T.) degrees and Certificatesand Letters of Recognition in specialized areas. During the 2006-2007 academic year, the College offered 60 programs in transfer andcareer areas plus an array of non-credit courses and community service programs. Additional programs are offered at various offcampussites on the Mid Eastern Shore.Chesapeake College is fully accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. The Radiologic Sciences Program isaccredited by the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology; the Physical Therapist Assistant Program isaccredited by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education of the American Physical Therapy Association; theSurgical Technology Program is accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP); andthe Nursing Program is approved by the Maryland Board of Nursing, and is accredited by the National League of Nursing AccreditingCommission.WYE MILLS CAMPUSThe Chesapeake College campus is located on a 170 acre site at the intersection of routes 50 and 213 in Wye Mills, Maryland and isapproximately 26 miles east of the Bay Bridge.Chesapeake College enjoys a campus that has both a rural character and physical environment. Currently consisting of thirteenbuildings that contain approximately 256,000 gross square feet (GSF) of space, the campus includes four classroom buildings, astudent center, a physical education complex, a maintenance building, an early childhood development center, and a center forbusiness and the performing arts. The 45,000 square foot Learning Resource Center was completed in 2002. The Talbot Science andKent Humanities Buildings were fully renovated within the last four years. The program for the renovation of the Physical EducationBuilding and addition to house the Allied Health programs has been written in expectation of beginning design work in FY 2013, and afeasibility study was conducted in 2010 for the Center for Leadership in Environmental Education. The campus also has outdoor tenniscourts, six playing fields used primarily for intercollegiate athletics and community activities, and numerous parking facilities.Also located on the campus, although not part of the Chesapeake College, is the Eastern Shore Higher Education Center. This facilityis one of six regional higher education centers in Maryland.2-6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe following table contains a programmatic description of each Wye Mills campus building. Further detailed information relative toeach building is provided in Chapter 4.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE WYE MILLS CAMPUS: BUILDING INVENTORYBldg NameYrConstrYrRenov Sustainability NASF GSF Penthouse Primary UseDorchester Admin 1968 2003 Geothermal 14,020 23,554 OfficeCaroline College Cent 1968 2006 Geothermal 21,833 35,419 Dining, Office, Instruction, BookstoreKent Humanities 1968 2010 Geothermal 13,144 25,398 4,148 gsf InstructionTalbot Science 1968 2007 Geothermal 11,975 23,043 1,820 gsf InstructionPhysical Education, Pool1968,19761976 25,984 37,611 Athletics, Physical EducationQueen Anne's Tech 1976 1983 11,870 18,058 InstructionManufacturing Training Ctr 1979 1984 9,870 10,930 Instruction, Shops, Central ServicesMaintenance 1979 3,383 4,000 Shops, Storage, OfficeEarly Childhood Devt Ctr. 1989 2,981 3,994 Day CareEconomic Devt Ctr / ToddPerforming Arts Center1996 20,294 29,400 Assembly, Instruction, OfficesLearning Resource Center 2002 31,474 44,484 Library, InstructionSub-total 166,828 255,859Higher Ed Ctr 2002 Geothermal 15,142 28,054Not in inventory for reportingpurposes2-7

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCAMBRIDGE CENTERIn addition to the facilities at Wye Mills, the College also occupies a 20,600 gross square foot two-story brick building located at 416-418 Race Street in downtown Cambridge. The Cambridge Center is a full-service educational center for Mid-Shore citizens offeringDorchester County residents top-quality education close to home. Modified in 1993 to accommodate the College’s educationalmission, this multi-service center currently has six general classrooms, one science laboratory, two computer laboratories and onedistance learning classroom in support of both credit and non-credit offerings.EASTON MEMORIAL HOSPITALIn a partnership arrangement with Shore Health System, Inc., Chesapeake College uses approximately 8,700 assignable square feet ofspace provided by Memorial Hospital in Easton for the College’s Allied Health and Nursing programs.The next Chapter discusses the academic organization, its programs, and analysis of the space needed to support those programs.2-8

Chapter 3ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND SPACE NEEDS

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHAPTER 3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND SPACE NEEDSINSTRUCTIONAL ORGANIZATIONThree academic divisions, two headed by a dean and one headed by an executive director, offer the instructionalprograms for Chesapeake College: Arts and Sciences, Career and Technology, and Continuing Education/WorkforceTraining. These divisions are each comprised of several departments or programs. This instructional organization isadministered by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Economic Development.CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE INSTRUCTIONAL ORGANIZATIONACADEMIC PROGRAMS OVERVIEWChesapeake College directly contributes to the quality of life, not only on the Mid Eastern Shore, but also throughoutthe State of Maryland. It does so by preparing its graduates for careers in a global economy, as well as preparing itsstudents to become productive members of society. Chesapeake serves the needs of students with a variedcurriculum and other learning opportunities that will help each student to begin focusing on a lifetime of independentlearning. Programs are designed to provide the first two years of baccalaureate education (Transfer Programs) inpreparation of transfer in addition to programs of study designed to prepare the student for direct entry into theworkforce (Career Programs).The College offers 36 transfer and career programs leading to associate degrees; four transfer and 26 careerprograms leading to certificates of proficiency; and ten transfer and 11 career programs which award letters ofrecognition.TRANSFER PROGRAMSTransfer programs are designed to prepare students for transfer to the upper division of a college or university uponcompletion of programs in the following areas:Associate of Arts (AA) Degrees• Business Administration• General College Studies• Liberal Arts and Scienceso Biologyo Chemistryo Communication Studieso Fine and Performing Artso Humanitieso Mathematicso Performing Arts3-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateo Social SciencesAssociate of Science (AS) Degrees• Environmental Science• Nursing: Registered NurseAssociate of Arts In Teaching (AAT) Degrees• Early Childhood Education / Early Childhood Special Education• Elementary Education / Elementary Special Education• Secondary Education – Chemistry• Secondary Education – English• Secondary Education – Mathematics• Secondary Education – PhysicsCertificate Program• Transfer Studies – Basic Certificate• Transfer Studies – Advanced Certificate• Environmental Monitoring• Environmental TechnologyLetters of Recognition• African American Studies• Biology• Basic Chemistry• Communications• General Science• Geography• Land Use Management• Mathematics• Music Composition• Music PerformanceCAREER PROGRAMSThe Career Programs offered at Chesapeake College are designed to meet increasing demands for technicians,skilled workers, and craftsmen for employment in industry, business, the professions, and government. The programsin career studies are designed primarily to meet the need for workers in the region served by the College. Studentscompleting these programs are prepared to seek employment in their chosen field.ASSOCIATE OF APPLIED SCIENCE (AAS) DEGREESAccountingBusiness Management TechnologyComputer Studies – Computer Information SecurityComputer Information Systems• Interactive Media and Web Design• Microcomputer Applications Specialist Option3-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update• PC and Network Management OptionCriminal Justice• Corrections Option• Crime Scene Technical Option• Law Enforcement OptionEarly Childhood DevelopmentEmergency Medical ServicesEngineering Technology - Drafting and Design OptionHotel/Restaurant ManagementHuman Services – Mental HealthHuman Services – Substance Abuse/AddictionParalegal StudiesPhysical Therapist AssistantRadiologic SciencesScience Laboratory Technology – Histotechnology OptionTechnical/Professional StudiesCERTIFICATE PROGRAMSAccountingBusiness Management TechnologyComputer Information Systems• Educational Technology• Interactive Media and Web Design• Microcomputer Applications• PC & Network ManagementCriminal Justice• Corrections• Crime Scene Technician• Law Enforcement• Natural ResourcesEarly Childhood DevelopmentEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Medical Technician: ParamedicEngineering Technology – Drafting & DesignEngineering Technology – Welding Advanced CertificateEnvironmental Science – Monitoring CertificateEnvironmental Science – Technology CertificateHotel/Restaurant Management• Food Service Management• Hotel/Resort ManagementParalegal StudiesSurgical Technology3-3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTeacher AideLETTERS OF RECOGNITIONAccounting: TaxBusiness Management TechnologyCardiac Rescue TechnicianComputer Information Systems• Interactive Media & Web Design• Microcomputer ApplicationsEngineering Technology – Drafting & DesignEngineering Technology – WeldingHotel/Restaurant Management• Food Service Management• Hospitality ManagementPhlebotomyASSOCIATE DEGREE DESIGNATIONSAssociate degree programs require completion of a minimum of 60 credit hours including an established set ofrequirements for graduation. The Associate degree often parallels the first two years of study at a four-year collegeor university. Students need only two additional years of study to complete a Bachelor degree. The Associatedegree is also suitable for career exploration, advancement, and skills upgrading.The Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree focuses on specific occupational areas, and is intended to providestudents with entry-level employment skills, instruction for employed students seeking to upgrade skills, and trainingfor students preparing for a career change. The Associate of Arts (AA) degree focuses in the liberal arts, humanities,and fine arts. Scientific and technical studies are the focus of students pursuing the Associate of Science (AS)degree. The Associate of Arts in Teaching (AAT) degree is intended to facilitate transfer into a teacher educationprogram at any Maryland four-year college or university, but is also suitable for persons needing to meetrequirements to become teacher aides.NON-TRADITIONAL STUDIESChesapeake College offers a variety of opportunities for students to earn college credits through non-traditionalcourse formats and individualized program advising. These formats are oriented toward self-directed students whoeither have encountered obstacles in meeting their educational goals through conventional academic scheduling, orwho prefer the flexibility afforded through these options. Through non-traditional course formats, students canaccess a broadened learning environment, develop a new kind of relationship with academic faculty, and pursue apersonalized approach to study which is tailored to fit their individual situations and learning styles. The followingnon-traditional learning formats are available at Chesapeake:On-line CoursesGuided Self-Instruction3-4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateIndependent StudySpecial StudyIn addition to the program formats offered by Chesapeake College, various statewide programs are available toMid/Upper-Eastern Shore residents at other Maryland community colleges. Area students enrolled in theseprograms are eligible for in-county tuition rates at the host institution. Eligible high school juniors and seniors mayearn college credits while still in high school under Chesapeake’s Dual Enrollment program. College credits earnedby Dual Enrollment students can often be applied toward high school graduation requirements and, in all cases, willbe a part of the student’s permanent college record.CONTINUING EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE TRAININGThe Division of Continuing Education and Workforce Training provides programs and non-credit course offeringsdesigned to afford lifelong learning opportunities for adult individuals, to meet licensure/certification requirements ofvarious professions, and to meet the specific training needs of employers throughout the region. A wide range ofcourses to upgrade skills, develop new skills, or just for special interest are offered throughout the year at locations inCaroline, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s and Talbot counties. Courses are offered in areas such as: child care,computer training, nursing and other allied health professions, industrial technology, insurance, law enforcement,family, food/restaurant, GED prep, personal interest, real estate, travel, and truck driving, welding, and more. Somecourse offerings are designed specifically for special populations, such as senior citizens, or talented and giftedyouth.The Division regularly provides customized training for employers in the College’s five-county service area.Customized training is provided for clients in both the public and private sectors including for-profit business andindustry, government, non-profit organizations, service agencies and professional associations. The Division hasalso been very successful in providing training opportunities for displaced workers as part of federal, state, and localgrants supporting workforce development objectives. The Division provides adult basic education (ABE), GED prepand English as Second Language (ESL) courses. The Division works in partnership with the local WorkforceInvestment Board which is located on the Wye Mills campus and the Upper Shore Manufacturing and BusinessCouncil.In Fiscal Year 2011, Continuing Education produced approximately 33% of the total full-time equivalent (FTE)enrollment for Chesapeake College. The following table illustrates this relationship over the past five years.3-5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSTATE-FUNDED FTE ENROLLMENT (FY 2007 – FY 2011)Fiscal Year2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Credit FTE 1422 1473 1550 1730 1751Non-Credit FTE 571 650 885 849 859Total FTE 1993 2123 2435 2579 2610Non-Credit %29% 31% 36% 33% 33%OFF-CAMPUS PROGRAMSChesapeake College provides credit and non-credit instruction at many locations throughout its five-county servicearea. Many of the sites are used for evening instruction, particularly area high schools. Memorial Hospital, in Easton(Talbot County), allows the College space to provide programming in Allied Health. The Cambridge Center, indowntown Cambridge (Dorchester County), is a College facility that offers credit and non-credit programs throughoutthe week and on weekends. The strategic location of the Cambridge Center ensures that academic programs areavailable to citizens in the southernmost region of the College’s service area. Continuing Education courses areoffered at over thirty off-campus sites throughout Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, and Talbot counties.ENROLLMENTSHISTORICAL TRENDSA preliminary examination of the table below, which shows fall credit headcount enrollment trends for studentsattending Chesapeake College during the past ten years reflect a steady 3.1% average annual growth rate for totalheadcount students, with minor downward fluctuations occurring only in fall 2005, resulting in a ten-year change of35.2%.More importantly, the ratio of full-time to part-time students has changed substantially over the ten year period. Theannual growth rate for full-time students has outpaced that of part-time students. In the fall of 2000, 28% ofChesapeake’s students were classified as full-time. In 2010, 38% of the students were full-time. The average annualgrowth rate for full-time students over that time is slightly more than double the growth rate of part-time students.3-6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateFALL ENROLLMENT HEADCOUNT TRENDS (2000 – 2010)Fall Semester Full Time Part-Time Total2000 613 1573 21862001 683 1565 22482002 724 1630 23542003 832 1657 24892004 789 1768 25572005 859 1682 25412006 877 1702 25792007 947 1673 26202008 998 1624 26222009 1106 1750 28562010 1116 1840 2956% Change2000-201082.1% 17.0% 35.2%Average Enrollment2000-2010893 1689 2582Average Annual Growth2000-20106.3% 1.7% 3.1%CURRENT CONDITIONSDuring the fall semester of 2010, 879 FTE Chesapeake College students generated 26,381 credit hours. Thefollowing table shows the enrollment distribution in terms of campus sites, off-campus and distance learning.CURRENT CREDIT ENROLLMENT DISTRIBUTION (FALL 2010)LocationTotalCredit Hours Total Credit FTEWye Mills 19150 638Cambridge Center 3465 116Memorial Hospital 1008 34Off Campus 96 3Distance Learning 2662 89Total Chesapeake College 26381 8803-7

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateA comprehensive summary of actual on-campus credit hours generated by each campus site is provided in the tablebelow. The data are further organized by site by Day before 5:00 p.m., Evening after 5:00 p.m., and Weekend(Saturday and Sunday). The overall on-campus enrollment is concentrated primarily during the day at the Wye Millsand Memorial Hospital sites, while the Cambridge Center enrolls slightly more of its students during the eveninghours. Overall, 76% of Chesapeake College’s campus site enrollments occur before 5:00 p.m.COMPARATIVE SUMMARY: DAY, EVENING, WEEKENDCAMPUS SITE CREDIT HOUR GENERATION (FALL 2010)GenerationsWye MillsCambridgeCenterMemorialHospitalTotalCredit Hours: Day 15193 1960 805 17958Credit Hours: Evening 3957 1505 91 5553Credit Hours: Weekend 0 0 112Credit Hours: Total 19150 3465 1008 23511% Day 79% 57% 80% 76%% Evening 21% 43% 9% 24%% Weekend 0% 0% 11% 0%% Total 81% 15% 4% 100%One factor in identifying the academic thrust of an institution is the student subject selection distribution amongdisciplines. For purposes of establishing the integrity and substance of parameters required for providing appropriaterationale for educational space planning and thorough consideration and application of the Maryland HigherEducation Commission (MHEC) Space Allocation Guidelines for Community Colleges, systematic relationshipsbetween credit hours and weekly student contact hours (WSCH) are established. Analysis of student subjectselection distribution among disciplines and the crucial ratios between credit hour and contact hour generation isfundamental to the application of guidelines for determining quantitative indicators of space need.For example, the total number of credit hours at Wye Mills for fall 2010 was 19,150, but the total number of contacthours generated by students occupying spaces was 14,175. For purposes of facility and space planning, this deriveddifference is a crucial factor for determining the quantity and quality of existing educational environments andfacilities. It also ensures a relatively stable foundation for extrapolating future needs. If credit hours are used toestimate instructional space needs, extrapolations would result in a shortfall of estimated need. The table belowsummarizes the detail presented on the next two pages.3-8

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCAMPUS SITE CREDIT VS. CONTACT HOUR GENERATION: CHESAPEAKE COLLEGEFALL 2010 (DAY ONLY)Site LocationNumberEnrolledWSCHLecture WSCH Lab WSCH Total Credit HoursWye Mills Campus 5,948 12,435 1,770 14,205 18,290Cambridge Center 1,132 2,685 300 2,985 3,465Memorial Hospital 363 1,220 557 1,777 1,008Offsite (HEC, other locations) 335 915 60 975 980Totals: Chesapeake College 7,778 17,255 2,687 19,942 23,743While data relative to credit hour and contact hour distribution at all three Chesapeake College campus sites arepresented for comparison purposes, the primary focus of quantitative analyses will be the Wye Mills Campus.Because the single-building nature of the Cambridge and Hospital sites and their unique purposes neither lend themto nor benefit from typical “campus-wide” guidelines analyses, their space needs will, for the most part, be addressedqualitatively.PLANNED ACADEMIC DIRECTIONENHANCEMENT OF PROGRAMSCurriculum development at Chesapeake College is a cooperative of the Office of Institutional Research, Planning &Assessment, faculty, and administration; colleagues in area high schools and four-year institutions; and the MarylandHigher Education Commission. A number of program enhancements and additions are in the development stage atany given time. On the other hand, Chesapeake anticipates no immediate deletions from its current credit program.Rather than becoming obsolete, programs are evolving to reflect changes in instructional delivery methodology,technology, and needs of the market.Recent data published by the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation relative to demand for skillsin top growth occupations for Maryland’s Upper Workforce Area suggests opportunities for Chesapeake College toenhance existing programs or offer new programs in the high-demand areas of Nursing, Allied Health, TeacherEducation, Criminal Justice, Business, and Social Work. The tables below depict these top growth occupations byeducational requirements (Associates degree or Bachelor’s degree).UPPER SHORE JOB OPENINGS 2002 – 2012 BY EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTSAs the College’s student body continues to grow in size and diversity, there will be greater demands placed onresources devoted to developmental education. It is expected that over the next ten years Chesapeake, as will mostcommunity colleges, will need to enhance programs and services for a student population increasingly composed ofthe under-prepared.3-9

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe Division of Continuing Education and Workforce Training primarily offers “market-driven” programs and courses.Since Continuing Education’s offerings must be extremely flexible, course changes are continuous. This flexibility isessential in order to meet the ever changing needs of its unique market. As the general population ages, it isexpected that large numbers of Baby Boomers will demand continuing education and personal enrichmentopportunities. The Maryland Higher Education Commission projects Chesapeake’s State-funded credit FTE toincrease from 1813 FTE in fall 2011 to 2199 FTE by fall 2020. This 21% increase is slightly above the averageprojected increase for all Maryland Community Colleges.We believe that demand for critical skills in top growth occupations, amplified need for developmental educationprograms and services, flexibility in contract and workforce training, and aging of the general population will be theprimary drivers for future program offerings and student enrollments.MODERNIZATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERYDue to ever changing technology for both teaching and learning, much of higher education must rethink its learningenvironments. Although the lecture/lab instructional delivery mode will continue to be used, colleges and universitieswill increasingly supplement that delivery methodology with specialized learning environments that allow for bothscheduled and unscheduled instruction and learning in discipline related simulated environments.Central to Chesapeake College’s intense efforts to enhance and refine its learning environments are the majorthrusts of restoring and maintaining existing and currently planned facilities, as well as the aesthetic environment.These thrusts are to be developed, guided, and modified within the parameters of systematic, coordinated planningefforts. The short and long-term outcomes of each planning methodology will provide direct evidence of therevitalization of levels of integrity that reflect optimal teaching and learning environments.Contemporary learning environments are required in order for the College to enhance its success in retaining orattracting a representative level of the Mid Eastern Shore’s available student population. Chesapeake will continueto stress the emphases of removing some obsolete facilities from inventory, renovating and rehabilitating otherexisting facilities, as well as providing new facilities. Contemporary teaching/learning environments include theprovision of detailed and unique needs for classroom, laboratory, library/study, and office space, as well as ancillaryspaces required for supporting future programmatic impetus.Improved literacy and refinement of technology in educational institutions dictate the provision of instructional spacesthat are designed for both unique and/or shared functions. These spaces will further require adequate consistencywith a global reconfiguration that increases the utilization efficiency ratio. The lack of sufficient numbers ofcontemporary, flexible instructional and learning spaces has directly and indirectly curtailed Chesapeake’s ability tofully develop the inherent potential of its credit and non-credit course offerings.Future environments should be such that the distinction between a computer lab and a lecture classroom willdisappear because the technology and furnishings will be unobtrusive but available on demand. All furnishings willbe easily movable or the instructional area will automatically be able to configure the furnishings based uponimmediate need. With the exception of science labs, physical education spaces, and some visual and performing3-10

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updatearts studios, nursing & allied health, welding, the idea of rooms belonging exclusively to an instructional area willdisappear. Credit classrooms would be available to Continuing Education learners and vice versa.Electronic presentation that allows integration and manipulation of complex data into the learning environment isbecoming more and more the norm. Teleconferencing and online capabilities will make learning partnerships withother schools and businesses, even ones in other countries, commonplace.Modernization of instructional delivery requires that instructional spaces be configured relative to futuredisciplinary/programmatic goals whose objectives and functions dictate more efficient organization and utilization ofspace.IMPLICATIONS OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS ON FACILITIESThe growth of existing programs and the establishment of new programs suggest significant growth in enrollment anda need for specific, specialized facilities. We believe that the demand for the previously discussed skills will driveprogram offerings in the coming years. Many of these programs, health sciences in particular, require specializedclassrooms, labs and other facilities that can be flexibly adjusted for a variety of teaching/learning settings. Thisdemand is used in subsequent sections to develop space needs and suggested physical development.SPACE NEEDS ANALYSISINTRODUCTIONThe purpose of space needs analysis is to assess the extent to which the current total amount of academic and otherspace is adequate for use in support of future enrollments. The ultimate outcome of this assessment is to provideestimates of the types and amounts of space likely to be needed to support Chesapeake College’s projectedacademic programs and their ensuing enrollments and staffing levels.The College provided a room-by-room facility space inventory, course enrollment data from fall 2006, and currentstaffing data which formed the basis for analyzing Chesapeake’s space needs. The consultant team applied the datato the Maryland Higher Education Commission’s Space Allocation Guidelines for Community Colleges (COMAR Title13B) to provide quantitative indicators of current space needs. Definitions and room use codes are those provided bythe Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) taxonomy found in the Postsecondary Education FacilitiesInventory and Classification Manual published in 1992 by the U.S. Department of Education in cooperation with theNational Center for Education Statistics.Future space needs are the result of demand, in terms of anticipated programs, enrollments and staffing, on buildingsand spaces at a future date. The College developed ten-year enrollment projections to 2020. Using theseprojections, discipline-level distribution of credit hours and weekly student contact hours (WSCH) for the fall semesterof 2010 were extrapolated through fall of 2020.3-11

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe projected credit hour and contact hour data maintains existing ratios between credit hours and contact hours bydiscipline, as well as the established overall total percentage differences between lecture and laboratory contacthours. Again, Maryland space planning guideline applications were used to provide quantitative indicators of futurespace needs.Space needs and data relating to facilities refers to on-campus permanent buildings at Wye Mills Campus,Cambridge Center, and Memorial Hospital. However, because the single-building nature of the Cambridge andHospital sites and their unique purposes neither lend them to nor benefit from typical “campus-wide” guidelinesanalyses, their space needs will, for the most part, be addressed qualitatively. In order to most accurately reflectfacilities inventory needs, the primary focus of quantitative analyses is the Wye Mills Campus.The College anticipates student headcounts to be 21.4% higher in 2020 than current enrollments. With full-timestudent enrollments growing at a much more accelerated rate than part-time students coupled with emphasis onenhancing priority programs, Chesapeake expects a 21.2% increase in FTES and a 21.4% increase in FTDES overthe same ten-year period.Chesapeake has experienced higher rates of enrollment than anticipated in previous master plans. The 2007 Ten-Year Facilities Master Plan projected 21.7% enrollment growth from 2006-2016. Maryland Higher EducationCommission (MHEC) projected a 14.6% growth in headcount enrollment between 2006 and 2016. Actual 10-yeargrowth (2000-2010) was 35.2%.The most recent data provided by the Maryland Department of Planning projects population growth for ChesapeakeCollege’s five-county service area at 11.8% between 2010 and 2020. This growth exceeds the 8.7% projected forMaryland during the same period.MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING POPULATION PROJECTIONSIn addition, data supports a larger proportion of high school graduates seeking postsecondary educationalopportunities throughout the state. With acceptance rates at four-year institutions facing limited expansion, more andmore high school seniors are opting to begin their college career at Chesapeake. These, as well as demand for skillsin high-growth occupations previously discussed will continue to drive increases to the number of students attendingChesapeake College, especially full-time traditional students.Anticipated student population increases and the planned renovation of PE Building / CAHA will have a significantimpact on institutional space needs at Chesapeake College. The 2010 space inventory for Wye Mills, Cambridge andEaston collectively was 186,368 net assignable square feet (NASF). The College anticipates a corresponding 2020space inventory of 213,577 NASF as the base or supply against which the need, generated by the demand of futureenrollments, would be quantified.When space surpluses and deficits were computed as a result of comparing enrollment and staffing projectionsagainst the projected space inventory, the outcome was a projected 2020 overall space surplus of 29.200 NASF for3-12

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateall three sites, assuming that the proposed Center for Allied Health and Athletics project is complete. Quantitativeindicators do suggest immediate and long-term need for facilities to support the following space classifications atWye Mills (2020):Open Laboratory, Testing/Tutoring, Stack/Study, Greenhouse, Exhibition, Lounge, Meeting Rooms, Shop/Storage,Central ServicesComputation of space needs is summarized later in this chapter.In summary, space needs analysis is the process of estimating the needed supply of learning, support and resourcespace given a projected demand of academic programs, disciplines and student enrollments. Thus, space needsanalysis begins the transitioning from the language of academic planning to the language of facilities planning andmaster planning.NEED DETERMINANTSThe need for space via new or renovated facilities is typically calculated in terms of hours of instruction and thenumber of students, employees and library volumes to be accommodated.Gross projections of space need are based on an anticipated number of student enrollments, faculty and staff, andvolumes for fall semester 2020. For this master planning process, the enrollment assumption is that the projectedmix off academic disciplines maintains the program distributions for fall semester 2010.Space deficits and surpluses are identified based on the application of Maryland Higher Education Commission’sSpace Allocation Guidelines for Community Colleges (COMAR Title 13B) to inventories of various categories ofspace and projected student enrollments. However, guidelines are not to be used as the only determining factorwhen making decisions about facilities needs; a variety of qualitative or non-statistical indicators of space need, alongwith utilization analyses, offer augmentation to any statistical calculations.As previously stated, the primary focus of quantitative analyses of space needs will be Wye Mills Campus (“oncampus”).Because the single-building nature of the Cambridge and Hospital sites and their unique purposes neitherlend them to nor benefit from typical “campus-wide” guidelines analyses, their space needs will, for the most part, beaddressed qualitatively.ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONSHeadcount enrollments and full-time equivalent student (FTE or FTES) enrollments are the primary measures ofstudent population. Although the headcount is most commonly used when referring to enrollments, this measure isgenerally not used for facility planning purposes. The most generally accepted method of counting students for thepurposes of assessing facilities needs is the FTE. However, it is useful to analyze trends in headcount enrollments3-13

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updatewith particular attention given to the mix of full-time versus part-time students. Because full-time students have moreneeds for space than do part-time students, a sizeable shift in the ratio of full-time to part-time could have asignificant impact on FTE generation, and consequently, on overall space needs.The following projections of enrollments for fall 2010 through fall 2020 are the outcomes of complex and carefulextrapolations of data previously developed and presented. These projections represent the recommendationsdeveloped by Chesapeake College in keeping with the pursuit of its mission through the year 2020. Projections arepresented in such a manner as to satisfy the requirements of the Maryland Higher Education Commission and theState of Maryland.These enrollment projections primarily focus upon academic activities that are expected to occur during the primehours before 5:00 p.m. (Day), and will be engaged by full-time and part-time students, faculty and staff. Studentsenrolled during these hours are referred to as full-time day equivalent students (FTDES).The following tables present an overall distribution of projected contact/credit hours for the fall semester of 2020 incomparison with fall 2010 enrollments. The tables isolate those on-campus credit hours, FTDES and weekly studentcontact hours (WSCH) expected to be generated at Wye Mills during the day before 5:00 p.m.PROJECTED ENROLLMENTSBY HEADCOUNT, CREDIT HOURS, FTES, FTDES, AND WSCH (FALL 2020)FallSemesterFull-TimeHdcntChesapeake College TotalsParttimeTotal CreditHdcnt Hdcnt HoursCreditFTESOn-Campus (Wye Mills) Day Before 5:00 pmCreditHoursCreditFTDESWSCHLectureWSCHLabWSCHTotal2010 1116 1840 2956 27090 1806 15193 1013 9720 1140 108602020 1411 2179 3590 32985 2199 18240 1216 11664 1368 13032%Change 26% 18% 21% 22% 22% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%AnnualAve.GrowthRate 2.4% 1.7% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%3-14

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe College anticipates a steady, but controlled increase in student enrollments during the next ten years. Totalheadcount is expected to increase from an actual count of 2956 in fall 2010 to a minimum total of 3590 (21%) in fall2020. Projections for full-time equivalent students (FTES) will increase from 1,806 in fall 2010 to 2199 (22%) in fall2020.In consonance with the projections of overall FTES, those for FTDES are expected to increase from an actual total of1013 for fall 2010 to a minimum of 1216 FTDES by fall 2020.In consideration of an essential requirement for validating the rationale or underlying assumptions for systematicstrategic planning efforts in postsecondary education, additional data are presented. These additional data representextrapolations of the core parameters for projected enrollment patterns. While presenting various measures of credithours and FTES is important, of prime significance is establishing a stable foundation of planning tools upon whichthe effectiveness and quality of physical environments necessary for learning can be predicted. For those purposes,projections of weekly student contact hours (WSCH) are also presented.The College estimates that the total on-campus WSCH will reach 13032 by fall 2020. Of this total, approximately11664 WSCH (90%) will be generated by lecture segments and approximately 1368 WSCH (10%) are expected tooccur in laboratory segments for courses offered before 5:00 p.m.Determination of program and course content ten years out is difficult to identify with pinpoint accuracy. However,given an anticipated number of students to be enrolled, projections of weekly student contact hours generated, aswell as the number of classroom and laboratory sections, can be accurately calculated. This projection of contacthours forms the basis for planning for future instructional spaces.The table that begins on the following page attempts to establish detailed parameters, by discipline, where theCollege might exercise flexibility in determining the composition of course offerings. These tables utilize the programdistributions for fall 2010 and extrapolate the distribution through the fall semester of 2020. The credit hour andWSCH data take into account existing ratios between credit hours and WSCH by discipline, as well as theestablished overall total percentage differences between lecture and laboratory WSCH.3-15

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateFACULTY AND STAFF PROJECTIONSThe College expects to maintain its current student/faculty ratios for the year 2020. For master planning purposes, aconservative annual increase of 1.0% is projected for staff.Based on a 10% increase for fall 2020; Assumption: College employees shouldincrease at half the rate of student enrollment. Staffing projections are aligned withMHEC's projected 20% enrollment increase for fall 2020.Faculty and Staff10/FAActual15/FAProjection20/FAProjectionBased on20%EnrollmentIncreaseFull-time Faculty 59 62 65 10.17%Full-Time Librarians 2 2 2 10.26%Part-time Faculty 91 96 100 10.26%FTE Faculty* 84 88 93 10.26%Full-time Staff 165 173 182 10.26%Total Staff and FTE Faculty 249 261 275 10.26%26 Addl. Employees by 2020FACILITIES INVENTORYA building-by-building inventory of assignable space was prepared by the College. Temporary spaces and space infacilities at locations other than Wye Mills, Cambridge Center, and Memorial Hospital are not included in the basecalculations.Because of the unique, single-building nature of the Cambridge Center, and the space that Chesapeake Collegeutilizes under agreement with Memorial Hospital, these two sites do not lend themselves to the inherent “campuswide” quantitative analysis concepts of space planning guidelines. Therefore, the inventory of existing space at WyeMills (166,828 nasf), serves as the baseline data against which quantitative space needs are compared.3-16

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHESAPEAKE COLLEGE SPACE INVENTORY BY BUILDING BY CAMPUS SITE (NASF)FALL 2010CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE SPACE INVENTORY PROJECTED CHANGES 2010-2020One capital project has been identified at this time for implementation before 2020: the Center for Allied Health andAthletics, incorporating the renovation of the existing Physical Education Building and expansion to accommodateAllied Health Programs.3-17

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateQUANTITATIVE INDICATORS OF SPACE NEEDGUIDELINES APPLICATIONS (BUILDINGS)Total need for space is based primarily on the projected program of instruction and the number of weekly studentcontact hours (WSCH) that it generates. Determinations of current and projected space surpluses and/or deficits aredriven by current space inventory and anticipated changes, current enrollment and projected enrollments, and currentand anticipated staffing levels.Title 13B of the code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) prescribes guidelines for computing maximum allowancesfor space on community college campuses. These guidelines, Space Allocation Guidelines for Community Colleges,provide an initial assessment of facilities needs for Chesapeake College.By applying information about the type of space required to teach the various courses to the current and projectedenrollments previously presented, it is possible to determine the approximate amount of space that is needed usingthe guidelines. Then by applying current space inventory data, it is possible to determine the current and projectedspace surplus and/or deficit. The assumptions made for the application of the formula-driven space computations forChesapeake College are shown in the following table and applied to the current Wye Mills space inventory.3-18

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTwo versions of Table 3 follow: The first is for the entire college, including Wye Mills, Cambridge and Easton. Thesecond assumes space is available at Wye Mills only.3-19

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCOMPUTATION OF PARKING ALLOWANCEMaryland’s Space Allocation Guidelines for Community Colleges are also used to compute parking allowances.When the guidelines input data assumptions are applied to current parking inventory data, it is possible to determinethe number of eligible parking spaces. The current parking inventory and calculations of allowance are provided inthe tables to follow.There are 985 parking spaces currently at the Wye Mills site. The total inventory of parking does not include the 84parking spaces reserved for dedicated use by the Higher Education Center. There is a computed current deficit of155 parking spaces at Wye Mills.3-20

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCOMPUTATION OF PARKING ALLOWANCE (WYE MILLS)FALL 2010 AND FALL 2020The increase of a count of 943 parking spaces to 1,111 spaces under “Need in 10 Years” is a result of the need foran additional 168 parking spaces at the completion of the Center for Allied Health and Athletics Project expected tobe completed prior to 2020.3-21

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateQUALITATIVE INDICATORS OF SPACE NEEDUnlike quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is very subjective. Summaries of qualitative indicators of currentconditions and program characteristics and future space needs/desires are a culmination of observations by theconsultants and of views expressed by College personnel during interviews with the consultants and/or via writtenstatements.This listing is by no means all-inclusive. Future architectural programming for individual new or renovated facilities atChesapeake College will require, in each instance, a thorough review and analysis of each of the subject function’scomponent activities to determine a specific justification and rationale for new or reconfigured spaces.WYE MILLS CAMPUSINSTRUCTIONAL FUNCTIONSMany of the College’s computer rooms are undersized. Some of the instructional computer labs only support 18student stations.There are only two instructional spaces with a seating capacity of 50 or more students.There are no classrooms or class laboratories in the Physical Education Building.There is an insufficient number of classrooms.There are insufficient numbers of open access computer stations.Some of the allied health labs are without running water and sinks.The Physical Education Building has outlived its original purpose and can be considered as functionally obsolete.There are no suitable rooms for aerobics or dance. Therefore, classes must be conducted in the gymnasium or notoffered at all.Sports teams must share the gym during available times in the winter and spring seasons.Distance learning labs are booked months in advance. Often distance learning activities have to take place in theEastern Shore Higher Education Building (not a College facility). There is only one other distance learning laboratoryat Wye Mills.STUDENT ACTIVITIES FUNCTIONSStorage space is inadequate and insufficient for supporting student affairs organizations and activities.There is insufficient space to accommodate intercollegiate athletic teams, particularly when up to four teams are inseason.The two weight/fitness rooms in the Physical Education Building are extremely undersized with very little room forinternal circulation. Furthermore, the rooms are not adjacent resulting in users having to leave one area and travelthrough building circulation in order to use equipment in the other.3-22

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTeam rooms, locker rooms and coaches’ rooms are inadequate for contemporary use. Many of the qualitative issuesassociated with the Physical Education Complex can be directly traced to the overall computed deficit ofathletic/physical education space.INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT FUNCTIONSThere is limited storage of all types at Wye Mills. This is evidenced by boxes and equipment often being stored inhallways, stairwells, mechanical areas or other inappropriate locations, and having to resort to off-site storage toaccommodate the need, including inventorying replacement and repair parts such as lighting and lamp fixtures.Insufficient storage is a global problem at Chesapeake; for maintenance, housekeeping, performing arts, instructionalsupport, offices and files storage. There is essentially no central storage at Wye Mills. Tables and chairs for theCollege are sometimes stored in the Eastern Shore Higher Education Center, which is not a College facility. There isalso insufficient storage for the Student Success Center in Dorchester Administration Building.There is insufficient and inappropriate workshop space. As a result, some of the projects by maintenance and repairstaff are forced to be completed outdoors when they would more appropriately be done inside.The Child Care Center is age-restricted due to insufficient space for activity areas. Now that an Associate Arts inTeaching has recently been approved, the need for expanded facilities is even more acute.There are insufficient numbers of conference spaces at all locations.Space assigned to the Administrative Computer Center is insufficient and inadequate.OUTDOOR SPACESThere are very few designated outdoor student spaces for active recreation.There are no concession facilities for outdoor team events.Athletic fields are not illuminated, limiting events to daylight hours.CAMBRIDGE CENTERThe Cambridge Center is a converted department store that is ill-suited for contemporary academic purposes. Thedesign of the existing building provides neither the capacity to appropriately house current programs, nor theflexibility for easy adaptation of interior spaces to changing needs in the future. New spaces are needed to overcomequalitative issues resulting from the absence of adequate facilities for formal learning, informal learning support,housing of faculty and staff, meetings/conferences, for general building and hazardous materials storage, for storageof housekeeping supplies, and for maintenance operations. The needs of its future users will not be metquantitatively or qualitatively given the interior configuration of the current facilities.Many qualitative problems with the Cambridge Center stem from the impact of steady enrollment growth coupled withthe fact that the current building was never designed or built to accommodate unique postsecondary learningenvironments. As a result, there are little to no spaces for student life, bookstore administration and merchandising,3-23

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateadministrative services, and student services, and insufficient or inappropriate spaces for instruction, multi-serviceinstructional support, office/conference/meeting/food service, building support and outdoor spaces.INSTRUCTIONWith a full compliment of credit classes each semester, scheduling continuing education and other non-creditofferings in Cambridge’s limited instructional spaces becomes increasingly challenging.Cambridge has six general classrooms. Current distribution of lecture section sizes is 58% of the weekly studentcontact hours generated by sections of 1-15 students; 40% generated by sections of 16-30 students; and 2%generated by sections of 31-50 students. Maintaining this same distribution in 2016, it is estimated that the totalnumber of required lecture rooms will be 10, whose overall distribution is six (6) at 375 NASF; three (3) at 750 NASF;and one (1) at 1,250 NASF.Columns in instructional spaces interfere with room layouts, obstruct views, and force awkward proportions.Cambridge Center has only one 24-station biological sciences class laboratory which is insufficiently sized. Thenationally recognized Council of Educational Facility Planners International (CEFPI) recommends allocations of 50-75 net assignable square feet for biology laboratories. The laboratory at Cambridge provides only 42 NASF perstudent station.There is no room for waste holding. Hazardous materials are stored in the undersized prep room.The current lab has inadequate ventilation and that is one reason that chemistry cannot be taught here in Cambridge.Proper ventilation is needed in the lab to remove fumes from the room and the adjacent hallways. Ideally the Centershould have at least two science labs, one for the biological sciences and one for the physical sciences. This wouldthen enable the College to teach chemistry and other physical sciences.Currently the Center has two computer labs, discounting the small one in the Multi-Service Center. With more andmore instructors requiring lab time for their students, the Center needs to have at least three 30-station labs.There is insufficient space at each station to allow students to take notes, spread out work materials, or to workcollaboratively.The assembly (auditorium) room has no hand washing station.There is no space to store massage chairs, tables, blankets and pillows, etc.Ideally, a laboratory environment for massage therapy should be sized to accommodate 24 student stations plusample storage for equipment and hand washing facilities. CEFPI recommends allocations of 65-85 net assignablesquare feet (1,500 NASF plus) for allied health laboratories. There is no space in the Cambridge Center that canappropriately meet the laboratory instructional needs for this program.MULTI-SERVICE CENTERThere is no space for future growth of library collections without encroaching on other Multi-Service Center activityspace.The absence of flexible spaces to support group study compromises the curriculum.Lack of space to support collaborative assignments means noisy students disturb others who desire quiet study, butmust share the one common space.3-24

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateLimited port availability and space results in students waiting in line to use computers.Because there are no appropriate spaces for one-on-one tutoring, this activity takes place in the open common area.The Testing Center’s limited size can only accommodate up to 8 persons at one time. When available, classroomsare often used for testing.STUDENT LIFEThe space used for student lounge is too small. It is not designed to accommodate formal or informal studentgatherings. The layout discourages use as a TV lounge, game/activity space, or just a place for students to relaxbetween classes or while on breaks. The building does not provide quiet lounge spaces for student study.The College provides comprehensive services in support of student academic and social well being; however, thereis extremely limited space to access these activities for the students attending Cambridge Center. Activities such aspersonal counseling and academic counseling must be conducted in staff offices. There is only one room largeenough for small workshops, meetings, seminars exhibits etc.The bookstore is located in a room just inside the main office suite. At less than 300 square feet, the squaredconfiguration of this space prohibits efficient bookstore functions of administration and merchandising. Additionally,this space is currently accessed by walking into the main office; and during times of heavy advising/registration thiscauses severe congestion and noise in the office area.The limits of the building envelope restrict making additional space available to enhance services or add student lifeactivities.OFFICE/CONFERENCE/MEETING/FOOD SERVICEAs the Center programs grow, so does the need for additional office space. There is now one full-time instructor andplans are to have at least two more within the next five years. There is the need for space for adjunct faculty as wellas a faculty planning/prep area.Within individual offices there is insufficient space for temporary storage of reference materials and supplies, or foraccomplishing multifarious activities efficiently.There are no conference rooms or spaces available for staff meetings and other small group activities. Any suchgatherings must be scheduled around use of instructional space. There are requests from the public and from withinthe College that Cambridge is not in position to honor due to the lack of adequate meeting facilities.With only a handful of vending machines in the building, there are no facilities for preparation or consumption of foodand drink by students, faculty, staff or the public.3-25

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateBUILDING SUPPORTIn addition to insufficient space for temporary storage in office areas, there is no building storage at the CambridgeCenter. Consequently, materials, equipment and supplies are stored in hallways, stairwells, mechanical areas orother inappropriate locations.With the increased number of people in the Center on a daily basis and at any given time, there need to be morerestrooms.OUTDOOR AREASThere are no green spaces adjacent to or even near the building. Not only is outdoor space to gather, relax orrecreate limited to non-existent, but also areas conducive to outdoor learning are not available to the students of theCambridge Center.Parking at Cambridge has been and continues to be a major problem at various times during the day and into theevening. There are insufficient spaces for the number of building occupants, including students, faculty, staff andvisitors. The proximity to the local courthouse only exacerbates this situation. The Cambridge parking lot is a citymunicipal lot that is not owned by the College.This dismal facility limits the ability of the College, in keeping with its mission and vision, to successfully offer qualityprograms for residents of Dorchester County and the southern regions of Talbot and Caroline counties. In addition tothe insufficiency of space, the quality of the spaces at Cambridge Center is woefully inferior. The Cambridge Centerhas outlived its original purpose and can be considered as functionally obsolete.EASTON MEMORIAL HOSPITALThe facilities used for instruction and instructional support at the Allied Health Center at Easton Memorial Hospitalare ill-suited for modern learning. There is not enough appropriate space quantitatively or qualitatively toaccommodate the Colleges’ current programs and future program opportunities.Only one classroom has the capacity to adequately accommodate more than 20 student stations for lecture sections.Instructional labs are tiny. The Council of Educational Facility Planners International (CEFPI) recommendsallocations of 65-85 net assignable square feet for allied health laboratories. There is no space allocated to theCollege that meets the laboratory instructional needs of contemporary allied health programs.The only computer lab designated for College use has capacity for only five student stations.There are no study spaces or social spaces available to Chesapeake students.There are no spaces available for confidential discussions.There are no rooms at Easton Memorial Hospital for collaborative study, tutoring or testing.Storage for Chesapeake program areas is minimal. There is particular need for secure storage of sensitiveinstructional materials and equipment.3-26

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSUMMARY – WYE MILLS, CAMBRIDGE, EASTONThe data leading up to and including the computed and qualitative needs establishes the necessity for renovatedand/or additional facilities for Chesapeake College to meet its present and future space requirements. Potentialstrategies for meeting these identified space requirements are addressed, in physical terms, by the capital projectsoutlined later in this document.The next chapter begins the evaluation of the buildings and site at the Wye Mills campus to determine their suitabilityto support existing and future programs.3-27

Chapter 4WYE MILLS CAMPUS FACILITIES

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHAPTER 4: WYE MILLS CAMPUS FACILITIESWYE MILLS CAMPUS: BUILDING SUMMARYCHESAPEAKE COLLEGE WYE MILLS CAMPUS: BUILDING INVENTORYYr YrBldg Name Constr Renov Sustainability NASF GSF Penthouse Primary UseDorchester Admin 1968 2003 Geothermal 14,020 23,554 OfficeCaroline Coll Cent 1968 2006 Geothermal 21,833 35,419Kent Humanities 1968 2010 Geothermal 13,144 25,398 4,148 gsf* InstructionTalbot Science 1968 2007 Geothermal 11,975 23,043 1,820 gsf* InstructionDining, Office, Instruction,BookstorePhysical Education, Pool1968,19761976 25,984 37,611 Athletics, Physical EducationQueen Anne's Tech 1976 1983 11,870 18,058 InstructionManufacturing Training Ctr 1979 1984 9,870 10,930Instruction, Shops, CentralServicesMaintenance 1979 3,383 4,000 Shops, Storage, OfficeEarly Childhood Devt Ctr 1989 2,981 3,994 Day CareEconomic Development Ctr/ Todd Performing Arts Ctr1996 20,294 29,400 Assembly, Instruction, OfficesLearning Resource Center 2002 31,474 44,484 Library, InstructionSub-total 166,828 255,859Note: Penthouse GSF taken @ 50%Higher Education Center 2002 Geothermal 15,142 28,054Not in inventory for reportingpurposes4-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateDORCHESTER ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGBuilding Number: 1Number of Floors: 2Net Assignable Square Feet: 14,020Gross Building Area: 23,554Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 60%Year Constructed: 1968Renovations:1983, 1989 Interior Renovations1997 ADA Modifications2003 Total Renovation and AdditionAdditions:2003 New Front EntranceContains:College Administration and Student ServicesOffices and Related Support SpacesGeneral Condition:Very GoodAdequacy of Space:AdequateSprinkler Systems : Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Dorchester Administration Building is one ofthe original 5 core buildings built in the late1960’s and has been returned to one of its twooriginal functions. When the Learning ResourceCenter was built in 2001, the library was movedfrom the building. Subsequently, the remainingadministrative functions were temporarilyrelocated so the renovation work could occur.Student services functions took over that spaceafter the renovation work was complete. It is invery good condition, having been renovated witha small addition, completed in 2003. Therenovation provided much-needed space forexpansions to administrative and “one-stopshopping” student services functions.4-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateDorchester: Interior; Floor PlansFirst FloorSecond Floor4-3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALMechanical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.ELECTRICALElectrical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSTechnology systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.4-4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCAROLINE COLLEGE CENTERBuilding Number: 2Number of Floors: 2Net Assignable Square Feet: 21,833Gross Building Area: 35,419Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 62%Year Constructed: 1968Renovations:1988 Interior Renovations1997 ADA Modifications2006 Complete Renovation + AdditionAdditions: 2006Contains:Dining, Food Service, Bookstore, Classrooms, Music and Art Studios, Staff,Faculty and Student Life Offices, Active and Quiet LoungesGeneral Condition:Very GoodAdequacy of Space:AdequateSprinkler Systems : Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALUntil its 2006 renovation and expansion, theCaroline College Center was undersized andobsolete. The renovation and expansion providedmuch needed additional dining space which alsoaffords convocation and conference-relatedspace. Also expanding significantly were thebookstore, faculty office areas, student lifespaces, and art and music studio spaces. TheCaroline Center is now actively used by the entirecampus community.4-5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCaroline Center: Interior, Floor PlansFirst FloorSecond Floor4-6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALMechanical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.ELECTRICALElectrical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSTechnology systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.4-7

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateKENT HUMANITIES BUILDINGBuilding Number: 3Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 13,144Gross Building Area: 25,398 (includes 4,148 at penthouse taken @ 50%)Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 52%Year Constructed: 1968Renovations:1988 Interior Renovations1997 ADA Modifications2005 Roof Replacement2010 Total RenovationAdditions:2010 as part of renovation projectContains:Classrooms, Lecture Halls, Theater, Faculty OfficesGeneral Condition:ExcellentAdequacy of Space:Adequate for intended usesSprinkler Systems : Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Kent Humanities Building isone of the original 5 corebuildings built in the late 1960’sand is still used for its originalfunctions. This building providesmore classrooms and lecturehalls than any other building oncampus. The 2010 renovationmodernized classrooms, lecturehalls, and faculty offices, whileimproving the seating, layout,sight lines, and support spacesfor the Cadby Theater4-8

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateKent Humanities: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-9

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALMechanical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.ELECTRICALElectrical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSTechnology systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.4-10

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTALBOT SCIENCE BUILDINGBuilding Number: 4Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 11,975Gross Building Area: 23,043 (includes 1,820 at penthouse taken @ 50%)Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 52%Year Constructed: 1968Renovations1987, 1988 Interior Renovations1997 ADA Modifications1997 Roof Replacement2007 Complete RenovationAdditions:2007 – Mechanical penthouse as part of renovation projectContains:Science labs, classrooms, officesGeneral Condition:ExcellentAdequacy of Space:Adequate for intended usesSprinkler SystemsFully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Talbot Science Building isone of the original 5 core buildingsbuilt in the late 1960’s and hasbeen continuously used for itsoriginal functions. The entirebuilding was renovated in 2007,bringing the science labs,classrooms, and related spacesup to date.4-11

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTalbot Science: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-12

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALMechanical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.ELECTRICALElectrical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSTechnology systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.4-13

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateQUEEN ANNE’S TECHNICAL CENTERBuilding Number: 5Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 11,870Gross Building Area: 18,058Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 64.8%Year Constructed: 1976Renovations:1983 Interior Renovations1997 ADA Modifications2005 Roof Replacement2011 HVAC UpgradeAdditions:Storage Addition used for general storageContains:Computer labs, classrooms, distance learning lab, faculty officesGeneral Condition:Fair: Marginal for its current purposeAdequacy of Space:Adequate for current usesSprinkler Systems : Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Queen Anne’s Technical Center is one of two buildingsbuilt in 1976 as “Phase 2” of the first two groups of buildings.It is in generally good condition, except for the mechanicaland electrical systems, which are in need of replacementand modernization. Originally built to house technical tradesshops and related instructional areas, the “Tech Center” hasevolved to house more computer labs, as trades shopsmoved into the Manufacturing Training Center.This building has a very “enclosed” feeling, with dark brickcorridor walls, little interface between the interior spaces andcorridors, and no vertical relief. Former industrial shopshave been remodeled for instructional and office spaces,without proper air distribution systems. Several spaces arenot sized or proportioned appropriately for the learning andinstruction that takes place in those spaces. Due to lowfloor-to-roof structure height, inflexibility of the interiorspaces (narrow corridors flanked by bearing walls), andinefficiency of building systems, it is recommended that thisbuilding be razed, to be replaced by a new classroombuilding.4-14

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateQueen Anne’s Technical Center: Interior, Floor PlanFirst Floor4-15

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALThis building recently went through an HVAC renovation only. Many of the recommended items in previous reportswere taken care of by the latest renovation. Specific needs and recommended improvements include the following:1. Replace all existing plumbing fixtures with new Code-compliant water-saving fixtures, properly piped andvented.2. Replace all domestic water piping and equipment and install with energy code compliant pipe/equipmentinsulationELECTRICALThis building recently went through an HVAC renovation only. Specific needs and recommended improvementsinclude the following:1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Voice & data cabling is installed in different areas of the building.6. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.7. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.8. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.9. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSThis building recently went through an HVAC renovation only. Specific needs and recommended improvementsinclude the following:1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Voice & data cabling is installed in different areas of the building.6. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.7. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.8. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.4-16

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update9. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.4-17

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMANUFACTURING TRAINING CENTERBuilding Number: 6Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 9,870 excluding outdoor equipment storageGross Building Area:10,930 excluding outdoor equipment storageNet-to-Gross Efficiency: 90.3Year Constructed: 1979Renovations:1990, 1996, 2002, 2006 Interior RenovationsAdditions: 1984, 1996Contains:Technical trade shops, facilities management offices, mail room, print shopGeneral Condition:PoorAdequacy of Space:Inadequate, even for its use as temporary “surge” spaceSprinkler Systems:NoneARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Manufacturing Training Center (MTC)has been built, expanded and renovatedseveral times over several years, adaptingto new programs and functions, andproviding “surge” space while otherbuildings have been renovated. Theoriginal building and the first major additionare pre-manufactured metal buildingstructures; subsequent additions are metalframed. On-going maintenance andmodifications to building systems has beenrequired to keep up with the repairs andalterations that the building requires, all thewhile affected by renovation work in otherbuildings. A loose thermal envelopeburdens an inefficient HVAC system.Mechanical and electrical systems are inneed of replacement and modernization,and the roof has needed periodic repairand replacement. Until the renovations toother campus buildings are complete, theMTC remains the only building on campuswhich can provide the surge space neededto temporarily house displaced functions.4-18

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateManufacturing Training Center: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-19

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALThis building has outlived its usefulness as a permanent building. This report recommends maintaining the buildingas temporary surge space followed by eventual demolition. Specific issues include the following:1. Primarily, firm decisions need to be made as to how this building will be used, and what types of courses willbe taught. Only after this is established can HVAC system types, components, and requirements berecommended.If current usages are expected to remain, decisions need to be made as to whether or not “shop” areas willbe air-conditioned. Typically they are not. If not, there will probably not be enough of a cooling load todictate chillers or centralized equipment. Therefore, for classroom type areas requiring cooling, smalldedicated units such as split system heat pumps, geothermal units, or similar equipment could be utilized.2. Because of adjacent unlike usages and the nature of some of the operations, consideration should be givento sprinklering this building. Most likely several specifically located fire-rated walls to separate unlike usageareas, in addition to storage areas, etc., may be required.3. Replace or modify restrooms to meet the current Code requirements for fixture quantity and type.ELECTRICALThis building has outlived its usefulness as a permanent building. This report recommends eventual demolition.Specific issues include the following:1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.6. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.7. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.8. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.Recommendation: The electrical systems in the Manufacturing Training Center need to be modified to suit theintended use of this facility when this is determined. Costs are included in the overall building renovations project.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS4-20

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThis building has outlived its usefulness as a permanent building. This report recommends eventual demolition.Specific issues include the following:1. Provide Category 6 cabling to provide Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mbps) data server to computer outlets.2. Remove old and abandoned cabling to free up space in ceilings and conduits.3. Test, trace and label all copper cabling.4. Provide wireless network access4-21

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMAINTENANCE BUILDINGBuilding Number: 7Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 3,383Gross Building Area: 4,000Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 84.6%Year Constructed: 1979Renovations: None, except for minor ADA modifications in 1997Additions:NoneContains:Maintenance Shop, Facilities OfficesGeneral Condition:FairAdequacy of Space:InadequateSprinkler SystemsNoneARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Maintenance Building continues to beused for its original purpose, for thestorage and repair of maintenanceequipment for the entire campus. Itslocation at the back of the campus, nearthe ring road and rear campus entranceserves the maintenance needsconveniently. Built as a pre-manufacturedmetal building, it is appropriate as amaintenance building.The building is too small for themaintenance, repair, and storage functionsthat occur within the MaintenanceDepartment. Document storage, generalstorage, repair functions, and meetings alltake place in the same room. There isinsufficient storage space; several itemsare stacked above rooms and other storeditems and are not easily accessible. Inaddition, the layout, building envelope, andHVAC systems are labor- and energyinefficient.The building should bereplaced with a new, larger facility.4-22

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMaintenance Building: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-23

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALThis building requires complete renovation or replacement. Specific needs and recommended improvements includethe following:1. It is recommended that a greater volume of air movement be instituted for areas of the shop where workersmay be located for an extended period of time. Depending on the type of work being performed, this couldrange from combination wall-mounted or roof-mounted supply and exhaust units, either manually orthermostatically controlled. It may mean direct (or indirect) fired propane make-up air units to meet theneeds of various exhaust systems.2. Although not required by Code, because of the inherent storage use, consideration should be given to fullysprinklering this building, during any renovation or additions. Dedicated areas of storage should besprinklered.3. Incorporate outside air into the split system heat pumps serving occupied areas.ELECTRICALThis building requires complete renovation. Specific needs and recommended improvements include the following:1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.6. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.7. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.8. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.4-24

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateEARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTERBuilding Number: 8Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 2,981Gross Building Area: 3,994Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 75%Year Constructed: 1989Renovations: (New cladding in 1997)Additions:NoneContains:Pre-school classrooms, officesGeneral Condition:GoodAdequacy of Space:AdequateSprinkler Systems:NoneARCHITECTURAL, GENERALConstructed to house earlychildhood demonstrationlaboratoryclassrooms, thisbuilding continues to be used asoriginally intended. It is inrelatively good condition andhasn’t been altered since itsconstruction. The building isbright and cheery inside, befittinga pre-school environment. Twooffice areas are utilized by theCollege to provide space forrelated grant programs.4-25

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateEarly Childhood Development Center: Interior, Floor PlanFloor PlanMECHANICAL1. Replace all flex duct with, at a minimum, high quality flex duct.2. Provide outside air of sufficient quantities to the return side of the unit. This will require calculations toinsure that the existing units can handle the additional load.4-26

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update3. In the future, when the equipment’s service life is nearing its end, consider replacement units that arecapable of serving spaces for individual temperature control.4. A Geothermal system is a strong candidate for this small facility. This can be incorporated with a VRFsystem as described earlier in the report.5. At a minimum, install limited area sprinkler systems in the janitor’s closet and all storage areas.ELECTRICAL1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.6. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.7. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.8. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.Recommendation: Certain modifications need to be made to this facility if it will not be renovated in the next fewyears.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS1. Provide Category 6 cabling to provide Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mbps) data server to computer outlets.2. Remove old and abandoned cabling to free up space in ceilings and conduits.3. 3 .Test, trace and label all copper cabling.4. Provide wireless network access4-27

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePHYSICAL EDUCATION BUILDINGBuilding Number: 9,10Number of Floors: 1Net Assignable Square Feet: 25,984Gross Building Area: 37,611Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 68%Year Constructed: Gym: 1968Pool: 1976Renovations:1991 General Interior Renovations2005 Roof ReplacementAdditions:1976 Pool AdditionContains:Gymnasium, Pool, Weight/Fitness Room, Locker Rooms, OfficesGeneral Condition:FairAdequacy of Space:InadequateSprinkler Systems:Partially SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Gymnasium and original locker room portionof the building is one of the original 5 corebuildings built in the late 1960’s; this wasfollowed in 1976 with a swimming pool addition.Mechanical and electrical systems are in need ofmodernization and replacement.The gym is in high demand during the basketballseason, when the basketball and baseball teamsboth use the space. The swimming program hasbeen discontinued, and the pool is nowoccasionally used by various community groupsduring the day and evening. The HVAC systemfor the pool is inadequate, preventing intensechlorine-laden air to properly circulate andthereby deteriorating various buildingcomponents. Two areas of the building that areundersized are storage spaces and theweight/fitness room. Offices and storage roomsare small and inadequate. A proposed project tohouse athletics and physical educationprograms, combined with an addition for alliedhealth programs will include a full renovation.4-28

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePhysical Education Building: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-29

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALThis building requires complete renovation. Specific needs and recommended improvements include the following:1. Replace the HAVC system in it’s entirety. As the equipment is over 35 years old, replace the pool’senvironmental (HVAC) system in its entirety with equipment capable of handling the outside air distributionand dehumidification requirements. Match appropriate exhaust to the new air-handling unit to provide aslight negative in the pool area. Pool de-humidification, domestic water heating and space conditioningcould employ a geothermal plant.2. Install proper ventilation in the pool mechanical room.3. In the near future, consider a total replacement of the remaining Physical Education Complex HVACsystems to appropriately allocate and meet outside air, temperature and space requirements.4. The “official” occupancy level for the gym must be determined and discussed with the local fire marshal todetermine if further sprinklering may be required.5. Replace, in the near future, all plumbing fixtures. This is best facilitated as part of a planned renovationproject.6. Rework the controls on the gymnasium exhaust fans so that when an exhaust fan is started, the oppositeside wall louvers will open, not the adjacent louvers. This will provide for “cross flow” of air.7. Bring all HVAC systems (new or modernized) to a point where they can be centrally controlled andmonitored for peak operating efficiency and energy savings. Install the EMS system in the building.8. The existing solar system serves the pool area only, including the pool water heating, space heating anddomestic water heating. The solar panels, tank and associated piping and pumping equipment appear to bein good condition. A further detailed analysis should be performed to determine if there is any excesscapacity in this system to provide heating for any other parts of the Physical Education Complex and if thesolar system should be preserved in a renovation. The solar system heating will always need a back-upsystem as currently exists for the pool area.The detailed analysis of the solar system is beyond the scope of the master plan. It should include investigations ofthe capacity of the existing collectors, tank storage, pumping capacity, etc. Also, heat load requirements would needto be determined on the existing pool water heating, pool area space heating; and domestic water heating todetermine if there is any spare capacity.If spare capacity exists, then further heat loads would need to be determined for other areas of the PhysicalEducation complex to determine if solar supplementary heating would be applicable. Cost estimates and life cyclecosting should then be performed to determine the economic feasibility.ELECTRICALThis building requires complete renovation. Specific needs and recommended improvements include the following:1. The existing solar water heating system installed in the early 1970’s only can be used during warm weathermonths due to the lack of freeze protection.2. Two of the four electric heat units are not operational.3. The pool system lacks dehumidification.4. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).4-30

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update5. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.6. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.7. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.8. Voice & data cabling is installed in different areas of the building.9. The medium voltage switchgear serving the PE Building also serves the Dorchester Administration Building,which contains communications system equipment. When this switch is opened to service equipment in thePE Building, power to the Dorchester Administration Building is lost.Reccomendation: The gym portion was built in 1968 and the pool was added in 1976. Major electrical renovationsare required in this facility. Unless major building renovations are scheduled in the next several years, substantialfurther deterioration and costs will occur and consideration should be given to accelerating a separate project forrenovation of the HVAC/electrical systems.Detailed load studies should be made on the solar heating system in the pool area to determine if excess capacity isavailable. If so, economic studies and life cycle costing should be done to determine the feasibility of utilizing anyexcess solar heating capacity for any other portion of the Physical Education Complex. Also, the medium voltagedistribution equipment serving the building should be modified such that the Dorchester Administration Building canbe isolated from the PE Building.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSThis building requires complete renovation. Specific needs and recommended improvements include the following:1. Provide Category 6 cabling to provide Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mbps) data server to computer outlets.2. Remove old and abandoned cabling to free up space in ceilings and conduits.3. 3 .Test, trace and label all copper cabling.4. Provide wireless network access4-31

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CENTER /TODD PERFORMING ARTS CENTERBuilding Number: 11,12Number of Floors:1 + theater balcony/mezzanineNet Assignable Square Feet: 20,294Gross Building Area: 29,400Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 62.6%Year Constructed: 1994Renovations:2004 Balcony/Mezzanine added to TheaterAdditions:NoneContains:Performing Arts Center / Auditorium: 900 seat theater with stage, lobby,backstage support spaces, classroom, catering kitchenEconomic Development Center: offices, classroomsGeneral Condition:GoodAdequacy of Space:AdequateSprinkler Systems:Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Economic Development Center / ToddPerforming Arts Center is functioning much theway it was intended. The Todd PerformingArts Center provides a theater facility for theCollege and the surrounding community, aswell as a lobby that serves as meeting,reception, and special events space. Relatedperforming arts functions and spaces such asa black box theater, improved and expandedset shop, and additional toilet rooms areneeded. The Economic Development Centerprovides facilities for instruction and trainingfor/by the business community and forworkforce development. The building isoriented to the perimeter and ring road, facingaway from the rest of the campus buildings;the only campus side entrance door at theback of the building leads through a narrowcorridor to the center of the building. This anda functional connection to the Caroline CollegeCenter should be reconsidered during anyfuture renovation.4-32

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateEconomic Development Center / Todd Performing Arts Center: Interior, Floor PlanFloor Plan4-33

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICAL1. To reduce noise and vibration, investigate the capacity and vibration isolation relative to the rooftop unitserving the EDC office area.2. Investigate the capacity of the air handler serving the computer room (EDC-26) to determine if the“drive/sheaves” can be slowed to reduce airflow. Performance curves would need to be verified with themanufacturer to insure proper operation with regard to motor horsepower, fan stability, and proper cycling ofthe chilled water control valve. Dehumidification concerns would need to be addressed in the reducedairflow unit. Hot gas bypass or an APR valve would suffice.A Study is currently being performed (2011) by a third party that will address all the points noted in theparagraph above.3. Investigate the cooling requirements of the kitchen, including heat rejection from the equipment within, anddetermine if additional cooling capacity exists in that particular HVAC system which could be diverted to thatarea without causing problems elsewhere in the system.ELECTRICAL1. The building electrical system lacks transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS).2. The building systems lack generator power for sump pumps and other critical systems.3. The electrical branch circuits need dedicated neutrals in lieu of the existing shared neutrals.4. The continuity of the electrical grounding system is in question where the equipment grounds use theconduits in lieu of dedicated equipment ground conductors.5. Computers and other electronic harmonic distortion electrical loads are not equipped with K-ratedtransformers and over-sized neutral conductors and panelboard neutral busses. This is providing stress onall existing electrical distribution equipment.6. The existing lighting system serving the building utilizes traditional fluorescent lighting ballasts, and nottoday’s state of the art energy-saving electronic fluorescent ballasts.7. An addressable fire alarm system should be installed in accordance with all latest NFPA (National FireProtection Association) and State and Local Codes and connected to a central campus-wide monitoringlocation. Provisions should be made available for 24-hour off-site monitoring of the entire fire alarm system.8. The building should be equipped with a security system to match campus standards established during theaddition of the Learning Center, Higher Education Center and recent renovations to the DorchesterAdministration Building, as well as Caroline Student Center.Recommendation: Minimal modifications need to be made to this facility.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS1. Provide Category 6 cabling to provide Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mbps) data server to computer outlets.2. Remove old and abandoned cabling to free up space in ceilings and conduits.3. 3 .Test, trace and label all copper cabling.4-34

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update4. Replace the existing 50 pair copper cable from Dorchester Hall to CBA with a suitable outside plant ratedcopper cable.5. Provide wireless network access4-35

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateLEARNING RESOURCE CENTERBuilding Number: 13Number of Floors: 2Net Assignable Square Feet: 31,474Gross Building Area: 44,484Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 71%Year Constructed: 2002Renovations:NoneAdditions:NoneContains:Open and reserved collections, computer classrooms, computer study areas,cyber café, group study rooms, video media room faculty development center,learning assistance center, and officesGeneral Condition:Very GoodAdequacy of Space:AdequateSprinkler Systems : Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe LRC serves ChesapeakeCollege and the 5 counties of theupper eastern shore. More than alibrary, the LRC is an intensivelyused resource for the students,faculty, staff, and visitors usingthe facility, providing faculty andstudent support spaces, andoffering hard and wireless dataconnections throughout thebuilding. The building alsohouses a writing center, tutoringlabs, and other student andfaculty support services as well astwo computer classrooms and IThelp desk functions. It is a steelframed structure with brick andcurtain wall skin. HVAC: internalboilers and external chiller use theexisting oil tank in the EDC/TPAC.4-36

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateLearning Resource Center: Interior, Floor PlansFirst FloorSecond Floor4-37

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALMechanical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.ELECTRICALElectrical systems are functioning satisfactorily; there are no recommendations for specific changes or upgrades.TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS1. Provide a supplemental optical fiber backbone within the LRC.2. Provide additional computer outlets for computer areas for use by students and tutors in the LRC.3. Provide additional network computer and printer outlets, and associated electrical outlets.4. Provide dedicated spaces for network printers is desired to keep the printers and peripheral equipment inone location.5. Provide for the growth needs of the server room in LRC L220 which is rapidly outgrowing its current space.There is a need for a larger dedicated server room.6. Provide a separate testing room for Technology Support Services in currently in the LRC room L119. Thecurrent room does not provide sufficient space for both equipment storage and Technology technicians.4-38

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSTUDENT HOUSINGThe following is excerpted from the 2007 Chesapeake College Facilities Master Plan. It is still valid for this facilities master plan update.The question of student housing on or near the Wye Mills campus has been considered for several years. Currently,there is no student housing on or near campus. There seems to be a demonstrated need for some housing, but theextent of market demand is not clear. So far, no one has taken on the risk or possible reward of undertaking astudent housing project for Chesapeake College. Housing on a community college campus is unusual, but notwithout precedent, and where it has been done in Maryland, it appears to both satisfy a need and to be financiallyviable.In 2000, a study was undertaken to examine the need and viability for student housing on the campus. The studywas conducted by Anderson Strickler, LLC, for a local development company. The market analysis part of the studyshowed that, while most survey respondents were not interested in student housing, some did indicate an interest,and the study went on to suggest a project of 60 to 160 beds. Affordability was cited as an important factor. Theproject did not proceed and there appears to be no significant interest by any outside developers in developing aproject at this time. However, that is not to say that providing housing for students in traditional or non-traditionalmodels would not be feasible.The College has reported that they normally assist at least 30 students – mostly student athletes – in finding housingwithin commuting distance to the campus. The permanent housing for these students is too far for them to commute.There is very little housing available for students – indeed for anyone – near the Wye Mills campus. Most of thestudents for whom the College has provided assistance found housing in developed towns and communities such asEaston, Centreville, and Chestertown. So, there is an identified need for at least 30 beds. Whether those 30students would choose to live in a student housing project on or near campus is not known. As commuter schools,most community colleges do not provide student housing. When they do, it is for students in specific programs ortargeted demographics. Currently, two other community colleges in Maryland provide housing: Garrett College andAllegany Community College.Queen Anne’s County has been reviewing proposals to develop properties near the College, adjacent to theintersection of routes US 50 and MD 213, described in the Chesapeake College Area Community Plan (CCACP)published in draft form by the Queen Anne’s County Planning Commission in 2006. The Plan is still under review.The intersection will, over time, develop to be an important highway interchange. The State Highway Administrationis planning to build a grade-separated “diamond” interchange in the future reflecting the growing traffic count on bothroads. The CCACP is proposed to accommodate a combination of commercial (office), institutional, and residentialdevelopment. There is little question that the lands around the intersection will be developed for more intensive usethan the current farmland; it is a matter of when, not if the properties will be developed. It is conceivable that somehousing as part of this development could satisfy some or all of the need for student housing for the College. Thatwill require further investigation.Several factors will need to be assessed before the College or a private entity, together or independently, will be ableto move forward with a student housing project, either on- or off-campus. Considerations include:4-39

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update• Compatibility with the College mission and strategic plan. Does providing student housing enhance or supportthe mission and plan, or are modifications suggested?• Development of a student housing plan. Would the plan suggest long term evolution to a residential campus?Would it suggest or support institutional growth, broaden curricula, change the culture of the institution, improveretention, meet student needs, and/or help achieve a more balanced gender mix?• Affordability. This was cited by several students in the 2000 survey as a significant factor in their ability to takeon monthly rent and utilities. As construction costs rise, so is the ability of students to take on higher rents.• Governmental assistance and support. Except for accommodating the sale of tax-free bonds, the State does notprovide or develop new student housing on any public higher education campus. Beyond the question of directfinancial support, there are no known objections by either the State or Queen Anne’s County for on-campusstudent housing.• Land availability. As one concept for the master plan demonstrates, the College property can accommodate astudent housing project.• Zoning. Zoning approval would be required by Queen Anne’s County.• Impact on Utilities. Water for both domestic use and sprinklers would need to be extended from the existingcampus water loop. A sanitary sewer and connection would likewise be required, tied in to the existing or newwaste water treatment plant. An on-campus housing project will likely require expansion of the existing plant ordevelopment of a new plant. Power and telecommunications would be required, likely as extensions from theexisting campus infrastructure.• Impact on Campus Operations. Resources devoted to student housing-related issues might be required,including: increased security; staff to administer, operate, oversee, and maintain the housing; parking; meals;library, PE building, and student center resources, functions, and hours of operation; and student health andwellness. Several of these resources and initiatives can in part be provided by separate contract; this wouldrequire further study by the College.• The nature of the student housing: townhouse, walk-up, traditional dormitories with clustered support spaces(bathrooms, kitchen, etc), suite-style, apartments, amenities such as active and quiet lounges, laundry, kitchen(requires investigation of meal plan), and/or computer area(s).• Availability and proximity of amenities. Students are more attracted to housing situations where amenities thatthey utilize are convenient, proximate, and affordable. These include, to varying degrees, necessities andconveniences such as restaurants, food stores, entertainment, banking, and dry-cleaning/laudry facilities.Currently, there are no such amenities close to the campus.• Accommodation of extra-academic programs such as summer camp.• If student housing is developed and it creates a burden on the College, can the College cease operations andfind a new use for the facility?The idea of student housing on or near campus is exciting, particularly when possible growth and enhancements tocollege programs are considered, and especially when long term impact on the vitality of the student body, campus,and college experience is imagined. A more thorough analysis is needed but is beyond the scope of this report. Thecampus development plan incorporated in this report demonstrates the ability of the campus to accommodate astudent housing facility. Further study is recommended; the timing may be coincident or could follow the completionof the CCACP, and in any case would be informed by the recommendations and plans contained in the final CCACP.4-40

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateDESIGN STANDARDSThe following is excerpted from the 2007 facilities master plan. The design standards are unchanged.BACKGROUND, ARCHITECTUREOriginally developed in the 1960’s, the architecture of the academic campus core is modern and generally uniform inits language. Elements that are constant among the original buildings include flat roofs, exposed concrete columnsand beams, and brown brick with vertical windows at building corners and between brick panels. Original interiorspaces tend to be similar to public schools, with painted concrete block walls, and hard floor surfaces.Newer buildings, additions, and renovations have kept some of the original palette of materials and colors whileintroducing newer, often more energy-efficient, elements. There has been a conscious effort to bring the architectureinto the 21st century, removing the “13th grade” character of the original buildings (particularly interior spaces), whilemaintaining a unity of design throughout the campus. New projects should reflect the unique characteristics of eachbuilding, while incorporating certain elements from the original buildings and from recent projects, including: brownbrick in running bond; horizontal glazing patterns (some including fritted glass); green-tinted glass (also insulating,low-e units); clear anodized aluminum curtain wall, windows, and exterior doors; stainless steel tubular handrails. Allmaterials should be from renewable, sustainable sources to the extent practicable. The scale of new buildingsshould be similar to existing buildings, while allowing up to three floors in height.SITE ACCESSORIESSite accessories incorporated into recent projects include benches, tables, waste receptacles, (all manufactured by LandscapeForms) and ash urns (Forms & Surfaces), all steel finished in enameled black paint.4-41

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateBUILDING INTERIORS AND ACCESSORIESBuilding interiors will vary depending on the function and nature of each building. Generally, hard surface flooring,such as terrazzo or porcelain tile should be used in corridors and other similar public spaces. Classrooms,conference and seminar rooms, and office spaces should be carpeted. In public ways, painted walls should beflecked paint such as Zolatone or Polymix; other spaces may incorporate painted drywall or special paint systemsdepending on the use. All toilet rooms should include ceramic tile floors and walls. Where wood is considered forinterior finishes, doors, and elements, domestic hardwoods such as cherry should be used. Generally, interior doorsare 3’-0”x7’-0”; office door frames should include side-lights. All interior materials should be from renewable,sustainable sources. Examples of interior accessories that should be continued include water coolers, doorhardware (Russwin-Corbin), chair rails, and fire extinguisher cabinets (both recessed and semi-recessed).Generally, interior lighting is fluorescent, except for special accent or uplighting. Where practicable and in allclassrooms where computers are used or anticipated, indirect lighting should be used.SITE LIGHTINGSite lighting standards have been established for three general categories; large parking areas, major pedestrianways and driveways, and small scale gathering spaces and accent lighting.4-42

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSIGNAGEEXTERIOR SIGNAGEExterior building signage includes two types of elements; cast letters applied to opaque surfaces of the buildings, andtext applied to the exterior surface of glazing areas. Cast letters are clear anodized aluminum, 1’ high. All letters are“Arial”, all capitals.INTERIOR SIGNAGEGenerally, the interior signage is cast plastic, background in a light neutral color, with dark neutral-colored text. Allpermanent interior signage must comply with ADA requirements.4-43

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSUSTAINABLE DESIGNMany colleges have adopted sustainable design policies in their procurement and implementation of design andconstruction services. These range from weighing the value of sustainable design to requiring compliance withestablished standards. Several higher education institutions are reflecting on their missions as leaders in enlightenedcampus development as related to sustainable design practices.The current standards in the United States are LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) guidelinespublished by the United States Green Building Council, establishing levels of sustainable design. These standardsare now required for community college capital projects funded at least in part by the State of Maryland. There arefour levels of LEED certification for building projects, including both renovation and new construction: Certified, Silver,Gold, and Platinum. A rigorous review of all aspects of the project is required to determine the level of certification.The College has committed to developing all of its new and renovation projects to meet LEED Silver designationrequirements.Capital projects incorporating LEED standards add some additional cost; estimates range from 2%-3% additionalcapital cost. From a life-cycle perspective, this typically is balanced by lower operating costs and increased workerproductivity, not to mention the more global impact of a cleaner environment.The College has already invested in green design aspects in recent projects, such as renovating buildings, wellinsulatedbuilding envelope systems, energy-efficient lighting and HVAC systems, and geo-thermal heating andcooling. In 2010-2011, the College undertook investigation and conceptual design for a new, net-zero energybuilding to be known as the Center for Leadership in Environmental Education, and has implemented the first phase,a 45 mega-watt wind turbine, now producing electricity for a portion of the power needs of the Higher EducationCenter. The experience with these strategies may help inform discussions concerning sustainable design policies.The Chesapeake College Plan for Sustainability is included in the appendix.4-44

Chapter 5WYE MILLS: MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL,TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHAPTER 5: WYE MILLS: CAMPUS-WIDE MECHANICAL,ELECTRICAL,TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSMECHANICAL SYSTEMSEXISTING CONDITIONSThe 2011 Master Facilities Plan includes evaluations of the existing buildings on the main Wye Mills Campus exceptfor buildings renovated or constructed since the 2003 5-Year Facilities Master Plan Update. These buildings, whichare not included in this analysis, are: Kent Humanities, Learning Resource Center, Dorchester AdministrationBuilding, Caroline College Center, Talbot Science Building, Todd Performing Arts Center and Eastern Shore HigherEducation Center.GENERAL ANALYSISENERGY COSTSPrevious analysis in the 2003 Facilities Master Plan Update determined that electricity costs were about 2.25 timesthe cost of No. 2 fuel oil as an energy source for heating. Based on the magnitude of energy costs for heating, itwas determined that the capital costs for boilers, stacks, pumps, fuel storage, etc., probably could not be justifiedover the continued use of electricity as the primary heating energy source.Analysis on subsequent projects, involving either new construction or renovation, determined that a geothermal heatpump system was the most cost-effective system for heating and cooling the buildings on Campus. The geothermalsystem has become the preferred system on Campus for space conditioning. And, indeed, as long as the real-estateis available for the well fields and the well fields can be placed in a manner that will not hinder future development onsite, the continued use of geothermal systems is encouraged, thus providing a substantial contribution to sustainabledesign on Campus.Factors which have contributed to the success and popularity of the geothermal systems on Campus are:Requires less ceiling space than conventional ducted VAV systems, which integrates better with the lowfloor-to-floor heights in the existing buildings.Utilizes energy recovery units as part of the system design, thus reducing loads related to ventilation air.The result is a very efficient building.The simplicity of the system and its operation.Ease of control and controllability.The overall efficiency of the system and its use of a renewable energy source - thus a “green” design withsustainability.5‐1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePOTENTIAL ENERGY SAVINGSEnergy savings on Campus can primarily be realized by reduction of electricity use, since fossil fueled heatingsystems have been shown to be not cost effective. Potential electrical savings should be evaluated on renovationand new construction projects. Potential electrical savings to be considered are: Use of hydronic heat pump and geothermal heat pump systems (geothermal is preferred). Better HVAC system control (energy management). Manipulation of off peak energy and demand charges (energy management); investigate ice thermal storagefor existing buildings utilizing chilled water as a cooling media. Improved insulation on buildings. High efficiency windows and doors. Use of Energy Recovery (thermal wheels, heat pipes, etc.). Proper balancing or rebalancing of systems to improve operating efficiency. Variable speed pumping techniques. Hot water reset control strategies. Economizer (free cooling) control strategies. Geothermal domestic water heating.HVAC SYSTEMS SELECTIONA life cycle cost analysis should be performed in the early stage of design of any new building or renovation of abuilding or buildings. This analysis should include a geothermal system as one of the alternative systems.Buildings of excessive square footage, or buildings that have need of considerable outside air quantities or stringenthumidity control do not usually economically lend themselves to conventional geothermal heat pump systems. Thesesystems can require large amounts of acreage for the well or the trench fields which might limit future campusdevelopment.The most likely configuration for a geothermal system would be to utilize vertical wells with a central pump to servevarious geothermal units throughout the building.If a geothermal system is not appropriate for a particular building, then a small packaged boiler and evaporativecooler could be utilized to maintain a building “loop“ piping circuit (+/-70 degrees F) served by a central pump feedingvarious conventional water source heat pumps throughout the building.It is believed that life cycle costing will demonstrate that either geothermal systems or water source heat pumpsserved from a primary hydronic loop circulated throughout the building will perform very efficiently and effectively inthe majority of the above listed buildings.5‐2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe Early Childhood Development Building may lend itself more economically and efficiently to three (or four)independent geothermal units, each tied to their respective well or trench system. With this type of system, a “desuperheater”arrangement would produce much of the domestic hot water requirements most of the time.A new system that has recently (within the last 5 years) been introduced to the American market is the VariableRefrigerant Flow (VRF) system. This consists of either an air-cooled or water cooled condenser that serves “split” or“ductless” heat pumps throughout the facility. The benefits of this type of system are many. Some of the majoradvantages are: 1) Energy efficiency. These systems utilize digital scroll compressor technologies, ElectricallyCommutated Motors (ECM) for the fans within the Heat pumps themselves. Both of these technologies help in thereduction of energy usage by allowing the equipment to utilize only the amount of energy needed to meettemperature and humidity setpoints, no more and no less. 2) Simultaneous Heating and Cooling. 3) Lower installedcosts. No ductwork to fabricate, seal, test or balance. This is a huge labor savings.This type of system has already been installed within the Queen Anne’s Technical Building and is a good solutionwhen renovating a building with little head room above the ceilings for utilities.FIRE PROTECTIONTo meet both the domestic and fire protection needs of the campus, a water tower was constructed in the year 2001.This elevated tank system was the most efficient way for providing the needed available pressure of the potable andfire protection water to the campus.As buildings are constructed or renovated, they should be evaluated for sprinklering. Generally, a fully sprinkleredbuilding is desired for life-safety and loss prevention.Even though there exists a check valve in the fire protection riser at the Center for Business and Arts, this does notsatisfy Code requirements for cross connection prevention. Its main purpose is to prevent backflow when theSiamese connection is charged. Also, there are two independent control systems (two fire protection sources), whichcould be a potential problem and require periodic maintenance, testing and performance review.DOMESTIC WATERAt all future buildings (new/renovated), where connections are made to potable water piping systems, a double checkvalve assembly shall be installed.Install domestic water meters at a “master” location and at each building to develop a record of usage (trends) whichwill help to plan for future facilities, to detect (to some degree) underground leaks, and to give data for establishingwater conservation programs and to efficiently help size any new well or domestic water storage expansionThese meters could be electronically read and stored via the new building control and monitoring system or manuallyread at each site.5‐3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateBUILDING HVAC CONTROL AND MONITORING SYSTEMThe Campus has established a policy that will insure that each building receives a fully integrated HVAC controlsystem tied to a campus wide building control and monitoring system (BCMS). The Campus standard for newcontrols is Johnson MetaSys.GENERAL HVAC ISSUESIn general, eliminate all “flush with the floor” HVAC components such as:Below-slab ductwork with floor diffusers which are subject to ground water seepage and refuse collection.In-floor convective heating cabinets that are subject to accumulation of refuse (dirt, water, floor wax, dust, etc.). Theelectric heating elements tend to fail prematurely.In general, utilize fire dampers or approved transfer devices at ductwork wall penetrations in areas such asmechanical, janitor and storage rooms, floor penetrations and other rated walls by the Architect in accordance withpresent day Codes to comply with life safety requirements.Ventilation requirements (fresh outside air) should be as recommended by ASHRAE STANDARD 62 for eachbuilding. Each building should undergo a complete airside analysis/balance to insure that the occupants arereceiving an adequate amount of fresh air.During any future renovation project, the buildings that use the corridor area as a return air plenum must have theirHVAC systems modified (or replaced) to avoid this condition, currently not allowed by Codes.There is a need for additional development of mechanical and electrical building standards. These standards shouldbe in a written document that can be given to the various designers of the buildings, thus allowing for consistency onCampus as well as quality control.SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS1. Introduce various methods and procedures to reduce energy costs. Most of these can generally be accomplishedas new buildings are built or existing buildings are renovated. It is recommended that a more detailed analysis (orbuilding by building audit) be performed to determine the feasibility of implementing energy savings strategies in eachbuilding apart from major building renovations. Any renovation or new construction should take these energy savingstrategies into consideration.2. The mechanical (HVAC) and plumbing systems in the following buildings are in very poor condition, are veryinefficient, do not meet certain Code requirements, have exceeded their useful life, and are in need of totalreplacement. It is recommended that these buildings be renovated as soon as possible in the following priority:5‐4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePRIORITY 1: PE BUILDINGThe HVAC and plumbing systems in the PE Building have exceeded their useful life. The poor condition of theHVAC systems in the PE Building, continue to allow degradation to building structural and architectural components.To compound the problems with the building, many areas struggle to maintain proper temperature control and are notproperly ventilated. Space use of the building has changed over time and several of the spaces that should be airconditioned are not. For the above reasons, the PE Building is deemed to be first priority for renovation.The gym portion was built in 1968 and the pool was added in 1976. Major HVAC renovations are required in thisfacility. Unless major building renovations are scheduled in the next several years, substantial further deteriorationand costs will occur, and consideration should be given to accelerating a separate project for renovation of the HVACsystemDetailed load studies should be made on the solar heating system in the pool area to determine if excess capacity isavailable. If so, economic studies and life cycle costing should be done to determine the feasibility of utilizing anyexcess solar heating capacity for any other portion of the Physical Education Complex.2. Manufacturing Training Center.The mechanical (HVAC) and plumbing systems in the Manufacturing Training Center need to be modified to suit theintended use of this facility when this is determined. Costs are included in the overall building renovations project.3. Maintenance Building.The mechanical (HVAC) and plumbing systems in the Maintenance Building need to be modified when the building isrenovated/added to. Costs are included in the overall building renovation project. Recommend replacing electricinfrared radiant heaters with propane unit heaters.4. Early Childhood Development Center.HVAC, plumbing and electrical modifications need to be made to this facility if it will not be renovated in the next fewyears.5. Center for Business and Arts.The HVAC system serving the Theater has been worked on by Johnson Controls and the commissioning of therevisions made still needs to be accomplished.6. Domestic Water Supply.Install water meters as part of the major renovations to various buildings. Water meters could also be incorporatedinto any projects involving the installation of double check valve assemblies.7. Building HVAC Control and Monitoring System.Install a new Johnson Control “Metasys” system in each new building and as buildings are renovated so thatultimately the entire campus will be on this system.5‐5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update8. Perform life cycle cost analysis as each new building is designed and as each existing building is to be renovatedto determine most cost-effective HVAC system to be utilized. Since the new and renovated buildings are to besequenced over an extended period of years, the concept of a central fossil fuel plant would not be economicallyjustified. Initial analysis strongly supports the use of geothermal or water source heat pump systems whereapplicable.5‐6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateELECTRICAL SYSTEMSEXISTING CONDITIONSThe 2011 Master Facilities Plan includes evaluations of the existing buildings on the main Wye Mills Campus exceptfor buildings renovated or constructed since the 2003 5-Year Facilities Master Plan Update. These buildings, whichare not included in this analysis, are: Kent Humanities Building, Learning Resource Center, DorchesterAdministration Building, Caroline College Center, Talbot Science Building, Todd Performing Arts Center and EasternShore Higher Education Center.SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONSPOWER FACTOR CORRECTIONInstall capacitors at terminals of 3-phase motors of 3 HP and larger. Estimated savings - approximately $2,000 peryear in electric costs.LIGHTING FIXTURE REPLACEMENTContinue with a scheduled replacement of lighting fixtures with high efficiency lamps and electronic ballasts inexisting building interiors. Utilize more efficient equipment when existing buildings are renovated. If an existingbuilding is not expected to be renovated within five years, the lighting fixtures should be replaced and/or retro-fittedwith new lamps and ballasts as soon as possible. Payback generally occurs within two to three years, so if $75,000was spent, an approximate savings of $30,000 per year in electric costs could be realized.EMERGENCY LIGHTINGReplace all emergency lighting fixtures and exit signs with new fixtures utilizing LEDs in lieu of krypton and/orincandescent lamps.SITE LIGHTINGInstall additional metal halide fixtures to improve illumination and security on campus. Any additional fixtures wouldoffset any savings in energy costs. This includes new proposed parking areas and new access road from north endof campus.LED lighting should also be evaluated as a replacement for metal halide lamps; a payback analysis should beperformed.5‐7

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateFIRE ALARM SYSTEMRevise and revamp all existing fire alarm systems with a state of the art addressable system to provide a centralannunciator and remote monitoring system. This can be accomplished when replacing fire alarm systems as existingbuildings are renovated and also by tying existing fire alarm systems into the central annunciator/monitoring system.SECURITY SYSTEMInstall closed circuit TV surveillance system with central monitoring station. Portions of the security surveillancesystem could be installed as new buildings are built or buildings renovated.ELECTRICAL SYSTEM TESTINGSchedule annual testing of the medium voltage (25kV) system and components such as switchgear, transformersand cables.TRANSFORMER ENCLOSURESThe brick enclosures surrounding medium voltage switchgear and transformers should be removed and/or replaced.5‐8

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTECHNOLOGY SYSTEMSGENERAL ANALYSISVIDEO SYSTEMCurrently the campus video has inputs from Atlantic Broadband (optical fiber cable to the campus video head-end onthe Queen Anne’s Technical building). There are also three satellite dishes which provide input into the campus videosystem. They are reported to work but are rarely used. Continuing Educations, Food Service and Public Broadcastinguse the satellite dishes. The campus video output broadcasts on Queen Anne’s County public access channel 6.The campus video head-end needs to be relocated to the TV Studio in the LRC. The existing coaxial cable fromQueen Anne to the LRC fails during inclement weather. Also it is planned that all future building will be connected tothe LRC via optical fiber cables.The future trend for campus video will be to migrate to streaming video / video on demand, provided over the campusdata network. There is a need to transition away from the failing coaxial system and use the optical fiber cabling asthe preferred campus video distribution technology. Future projects should provide provisions and infrastructure forconvergence of voice, data, and video systems.The Distance Learning Rooms in the Higher Education Center and the Queen Anne’s Technical Building need to becombined.DATA SYSTEM - WIDE AREA NETWORKCurrently, the campus wide area network (WAN) system consists of two T1 lines (one data and one voice) betweenthe Chesapeake campus and Easton campus, and two T1 lines (one data and one voice) plus a 50Mb optical fibercable between the Chesapeake campus and Cambridge campus. A multi-T1 line (5 Mbps) connects the Chesapeakecampus to the internet.The T1 lines go to the campus head-end in room D119 of Dorchester Hall.From Dorchester Hall a optical fiber cable (4 to 6 Mbps link) connect to the Learning Resource Center (LRC).The LRC connect wirelessly to the campus tower via an unlicensed radio signal. The radio signal connects to theSailor equipment in the Radio Hut at the base of the tower for transmission via antenna to the internet.Sufficient bandwidth is a growing concern, due to the growth on on-line courses, streaming video, and otherdemands on the campus network. Future projects should provide provisions and infrastructure for convergence ofvoice, data, and video systems.The existing campus optical fiber system works well for now, but will be at maximum capacity in the near future.There is a need to provide supplemental campus optical fiber backbone to provide 10Gig (10000 Mbps) capacity5‐9

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updatebetween buildings. This can be accomplished by providing single-mode and enhanced multimode optical fiber cablesthroughout each campus.DATA SYSTEM - LOCAL AREA NETWORKThe majority of inside plant copper data cabling is rated for Category 5 (100 Mbps). In order to meet the demands forfuture bandwidth requirements, there is a need to provide gigabit Ethernet service (1000 Mbps) to the computeroutlets. New Category 6 cabling will be required to provide these increased data speeds.The existing communications conduit system is about 35 years old and will need to be supplemented and expandedto serve future cabling needs of the campus.Currently wireless access is available in Dorchester, Caroline, LRC, and in Higher Education Center. Future projectsshould include provisions for 100% wireless access throughout the entire campus.VOICE SYSTEMVerizon Telephone Utility serves the Wye Mills campus with 300 pair of copper cable and a optical fiber cable to themain point of presence in Dorchester Hall. There is also a Verizon optical fiber service cable to Queen Anne’sTechnical Center.The existing campus copper cables need to be tested, traced and labeled. In addition existing older and abandonedcables need to be removed from the conduits throughout the campus.The existing Siemens Hicom 300 telephone switch at Wye Mills Campus is 10 years old. This system in nearing theend of its useful life and will need to be replaced. A voice over IP (VoIP) solution should be considered in anytelephone switch replacement.T1 lines are used to provide voice connections to both Easton and to Cambridge.SYSTEMS RECOMMENDATIONSVIDEO SYSTEM1. The campus video head-end needs to be relocated to the TV Studio in the LRC. The existing coaxial cable fromQueen Anne to the LRC fails during inclement weather. Also it is planned that all future building will be connected tothe LRC via optical fiber cables.2. Provide video server equipment to provide streaming video / video on demand, over the campus data network.3. Provide optical fiber cabling and equipment to transition from the failing coaxial system and use the optical fibercabling as the preferred campus video distribution technology.5‐10

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update4. Combine the Distance Learning Rooms in the Higher Education Center and the Queen Anne’s Technical Building.DATA SYSTEM1. The majority of inside plant copper data cabling is rated for Category 5 (100 Mbps). In order to meet the demandsfor future bandwidth requirements, there is a need to provide gigabit Ethernet service (1000 Mbps) to the computeroutlets. New Category 6 cabling will be required to provide these increased data speeds.2. Provide generator power to backup UPS in the event of a prolonged power outage.3. Provide surge protection on circuits serving computers.4. Provide dedicated neutrals for each power circuit serving computers.5. Provide 100% wireless access coverage throughout the campus, including parking lots, for increased mobiledevice connectivity.6. Provide supplemental campus optical fiber backbone to provide 10Gig (10000 Mbps) capacity between buildings.Provide single-mode and enhanced multimode optical fiber cables.7. Provide provisions and infrastructure for a hot site at the Easton campus.8. Provide additional electrical receptacle outlets in all buildings to accommodate charging devices.9. Establish a second server farm to alleviate the burden that is placed on the existing server farm located at theLearning Resource Center (LRC).VOICE SYSTEM1. The existing campus copper cables need to be tested, traced and labeled. In addition existing older andabandoned cables need to be removed from the conduits throughout the campus.2. The existing Siemens Hicom 300 telephone switch at Chesapeake College is 10 years old. This system in nearingthe end of its useful life and will need to be replaced. A voice over IP (VoIP) solution should be considered in anytelephone switch replacement.3. Provide provisions and infrastructure for convergence of voice, data, and video systems.5‐11

Chapter 6SITE INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAMPUS PLANNING

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCHAPTER 6: WYE MILLS: SITE INFRASTRUCTURE ANDCAMPUS PLANNINGSANITARY SEWEREXISTING CONDITIONSChesapeake College has a permit from Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to discharge treatedwastewater into a tributary of the Wye River. The NPDES discharge permit number is 05-DP1064. The permit limitsthe amount of pollutants that can be discharged, based on a flow of 15,000 gallons per day (gpd). The college isrequired to notify MDE at least 180 days in advance if the average daily flow is anticipated to exceed 15,000 gpd.The discharge requirements are found in the permit as shown below.EFFLUENTCHARACTERISTICSMAXIMUMMINIMUMFecal Coliforms 14 MPN/100 ml monthly median N/ATotal Residual ChlorineDe-chlorination is required toreduce the total residual chlorine tonon-detectable level.Dissolved Oxygen N/A 5.0 mg/l min. at any timepH 8.5 6.5MONTHLY AVERAGEWEEKLY AVERAGEBOD 30 ppm 3.75 lb/day 45 ppm 5.63 lb/dayTSS 30 ppm 3.75 lb/day 45 ppm 5.63 lb/dayThe discharge monitoring reports for the period January 2010 to December 2010 show that the college discharges anaverage of approximately 3,950 gpd as shown in Table 1.6-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateTABLE 1DATEAVERAGE FLOW (GPD)1/06 3,3202/06 4,3903/06 5,0304/06 4,7305/06 3,8706/06 3,3007/06 3,3908/06 3,6109/06 5,47010/06 4,32011/06 3,93012/06 2,160AVG 3,950The highest flows reported occurred during the winter months, and the lowest flows have traditionally occurred duringthe summer. These flow rates are slightly lower than those recorded in 2006, which we believe is due to theimprovements the College has made to reduce the amount of stormwater and groundwater infiltration into thesystem. There were no non-compliances during the reporting period.The treatment system is a package plant designed to treat 15,000 gpd. The treatment plant employs an extendedaeration variation of the activated sludge process and includes two (2) aeration chambers, a surge tank, digester,chlorination/dechlorination, post aeration chamber, and clarifier. Drawings from 1989 show the package treatmentplant manufactured by DAVCO. The data presented herein was provided by Jay Janney from MarylandEnvironmental Services (MES). The contact is Don Reed, who can be reached at 443-223-0084.The existing gravity sewer system is generally in satisfactory condition with a few exceptions. Roughly 500 feet of 8”main needs to be replaced between the tennis courts and the Talbot Science building. In addition, two doghousemanholes located near the LRC and HEC buildings experience frequent flow blockages due to the lack of a smooth,shaped invert for the new-buildings’ tie-ins.ANALYSISWith the current 4-inch diameter force main coming from the maintenance building and the 8-inch diameter gravitycollection system, future plans for Chesapeake College will not be limited by the capacity of the collection system, but6-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updaterather by the treatment plant’s capacity. An 8-inch diameter collection line at a slope of 0.5% (6 inches of fall in every100 feet) can handle over 550,000 gpd.Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) in their design guidelines recommends that wastewater treatmentplants be designed based on a design flow per student of 20 gpd for schools with a cafeteria and no gyms orshowers. There are other design guidelines for schools without both a cafeteria and gyms and showers and forschools with both a cafeteria and gyms and showers. Since not every student uses both the cafeteria and the gymand shower each day, the 20 gpd per student is the most appropriate design guideline. Historical data can always beused to supersede recommended design guidelines.Since the current treatment system is designed to treat 15,000 gpd, roughly 550 combined day students and staff canbe added before the treatment system’s capacity is exhausted.(15,000 gpd – 3950 gpd) = 11,000 +/- unused capacity11,000 gpd / 20 gpd/student = 550 new students/staffThis number is based on design data, whereas actual campus enrollment information may show that the actualsewage flow per person is less than the assumed rate of 20 gpd per student. Similarly, MDE’s guidelines list adesign flow of 100 gpd for boarding students. This same 10,000 of excess capacity translates to 110 boardingstudents. If the college were to add dormitories for students to live on campus, the design flow for each residentstudent would be 80 gpd. The college could add roughly 125 resident students before the existing wastewatertreatment plant would reach capacity.RECOMMENDATIONSThe existing wastewater collection system and treatment plant can adequately serve the existing student populationand allows for significant expansion of both day students, resident students, or some combination.It may be to the college’s advantage to offer more classes/events during non-academic periods in the schoolcalendar. The treatment plant has a biological population (biomass) that reduces the pollution in the treatmentprocess. The biomass responds poorly to changes such as lower flows. It is better to treat 5,000 to 6,000 gpd yearroundthen to have low flow periods in the summer and over major holidays and other breaks in the academicschedule. By utilizing the campus and its resources more intensely during non-academic periods, the treatmentplant’s performance many improve.The existing farm located in the northwest quadrant of the Route 50/Route 213 intersection is under consideration fordevelopment into a business park. As plans for this development progress, it is recommended that the college beinvolved in the discussion of possible synergies related to wastewater treatment. One possibility would be to pumpthe college’s sewage to a new treatment plant that would also serve the proposed development. This new treatmentplant would use a more advanced treatment technology to treat a higher volume of flow to more stringent standards,and would discharge the effluent through the college’s existing outfall. Thus, the pollutant loading in the combinedeffluent would remain consistent with the college’s existing permit despite the higher volume of flow.6-3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe existing package sewer treatment plan is roughly 20 years old. A building enclosure is proposed that will extendthe life of this system to some extent, but the college may wish to consider replacement of the plant in its expansionplans for the next 10 years if the synergy with the development described in the previous paragraph does notmaterialize.New buildings and renovation projects may wish to consider such technologies as low-flow faucets, dual flush toilets,waterless urinals, and graywater reuse to reduce sewage flows. However, staff indicated that the gravity sewer fromthe HEC building is exceedingly flat and that blockages are occurring due to insufficient flow. This situation mayactually be improved by adding another building to this section of sewer because the flow’s pipe scour velocity wouldbe increased. It may not be wise to utilize water-saving features described above in this area if it will contribute toadditional frequency of blockages.The entire gravity system should be “scoped” with a video camera to identify potential problem areas, since this hasnever been performed before. At a minimum, the 500 feet of sewer mentioned above should be corrected utilizingslip-line or pipe-burst technology. The two dog-house manholes should be re-built with shaped inverts in place of theexisting dog-house connections.6-4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateWATER SYSTEMEXISTING CONDITIONSWater usage for students and staff at the college mirrors the flows discharged by the water treatment plant.Maryland Department of the Environment classifies Chesapeake College’s water system as a non-transient/noncommunitywater system. This means that Chesapeake College must meet the same requirements as the Town ofCentreville. The need for disinfection in a non-transient/non-community water system is determined by MDE on acase-by case basis. Normally a distribution system serving multiple buildings would require a disinfection system tomaintain a chlorine residual in the distribution system.The potable water used by Chesapeake College’s students and staff comes from two wells. Both wells areapproximately 425 feet deep and contain 7.5 horsepower, three-phase, submersible pumps. The wells were drilled in1967. Well #1 is located in the well house with the chlorination equipment and chlorine contact tanks. The pump inWell #1 was replaced in 2002. Well #2 is located 200 feet south of the well house in a concrete vault. Its pump wasreplaced in 2002. Both wells pump 60 gallons per minute (gpm) at 60 pounds per square inch (psi). Shannahantested the wells in 1993. No problems were discovered. Chesapeake College was issued GroundwaterAppropriation Permit (GAP), # QA2000G031(02) by Maryland Department of the Environment, effective November 1,2003. This permit expires on November 1, 2015.There are two tanks located partially in the well house, extending towards the adjacent parking lot. One is 10,000gallons and the other is 15,000 gallons. In 2010, the 15,000 gallon tank was abandoned in place and replaced with a2,000 gallon tank located entirely inside the well house. These tanks are used as chlorine contact tanks. Only one isused at a time. They are completely filled with water. The tanks provide the 30 minutes of chlorine contact timerequired by MDE before to water is used by the people on campus. The chlorine contact tanks are required becausethere are people using the water within 100 feet of the well house. The distribution system between the well houseand the first user does not contain the volume necessary to produce the required detention time. The wells pumpwater through the chlorine contact tanks and into the distribution system and the 50,000 gallon elevated waterstorage tank.Groundwater from the two wells was found to contain arsenic levels higher than allowed by state drinking waterstandards. An arsenic treatment system has been designed to correct this condition, and construction of the systemwas completed in 2009.The campus water distribution system consists of an 8-inch loop with several spurs. The distribution system includesapproximately 12 fire hydrants. All but two hydrants are connected to the 8-inch loop. Maintenance staff has addedseveral additional gate valves to more effectively isolate sections of water main for maintenance and repair such thatdisruptions to unaffected buildings can be minimized. Staff indicated that some additional gate valves are stillrequired to facilitate isolation of certain buildings.6-5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe elevated water storage tank is connected to the loop with a 12-inch pipe. Since water can take two paths to anypoint in the loop in the distribution system, less energy is needed to deliver the water and more pressure or flow isavailable. Fifteen hundred gallons per minute are available at any point in the 8-inch distribution system. Ifextensions to the water distribution system are constructed in the future, they should be designed consistent with thecurrent loop configuration to strengthen the distribution system.ANALYSISSince both wells pump 60 gpm, the pumps only run a total of 1.4 hours per day. The second pump is a back-up forthe first pump. Design criteria dictate that the system’s capacity be based on one pump out of service. The wellpumps and distribution systems are not the limiting factor that establishes the water system’s capacity because theypump far less than 12 hours on an average day. Storage in the college’s 50,000 gallon elevated water tank is whatestablishes the water system capacity.Chesapeake College only has 11,000 gallons of domestic storage in the elevated water storage tank. Thirty-ninethousand gallons of the elevated storage is reserved for fire fighting and sprinklers. A good rule of thumb is to haveapproximately one day of domestic use in elevated storage. The difference between the domestic storage in the tankand the current usage during the school year is 6,000 gallons per day. Assuming each day student/staff uses 20gpd, the college could add 300 more full time day students/staff. This number is based on design data, whereasactual campus enrollment information may show that the actual sewage flow per person is less than the assumedrate of 20 gpd per student. Similarly, 60 new boarding students may be added assuming a rate of 100 gpd perstudent.RECOMMENDATIONSThe Chesapeake College’s existing water system, wells, elevated storage tank and distribution system are more thanadequate to meet today’s needs for potable water for sanitary needs. There is also room for expansion in thenumber of staff and students on campus.Where feasible, future capital projects should include provision of additional gate valves that will allow for efficientisolation of buildings for maintenance and repair. Any additional gate valves may also installed as a part of regularcampus operations and maintenance.New buildings and renovations of existing buildings could reduce water usage through use of:• rainwater catchment systems for toilet flushing or landscape irrigation• waterless urinals• dual flush toilets• efficient fixtures• composting toilets• Implementation of drought tolerant landscaping materials with no irrigation drip efficient irrigation.6-6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateROADS AND PAVEMENTEXISTING CONDITIONSCurrently, the college has four access points from adjacent State roads. The main entrance is off of Maryland Route213 and is located approximately 800 feet from U.S. Route 50. This access is an 825 foot ± long dividedmonumental entrance with 22 foot wide ingress and egress lanes with concrete curb and gutter. The other threeaccess points are off of Maryland Route 662. The newest access is approximately 2300 feet from U.S. Route 50.This 24 foot wide, curb and gutter road was constructed as part of the Learning Resource Center and HigherEducation Center projects. Approximately 1200 feet further south on Maryland Route 662 is a 30 foot wide curb andgutter access near the Technical Annex. The final entrance point has restricted use and is primarily for access by themaintenance staff to the maintenance building, communications tower, and water tower.The main campus is surrounded by a one-way circular drive (traffic flow is counter clockwise). The drive isapproximately 24 feet from curb to curb, with the outer portion being utilized for parallel parking. The curb and gutteris concrete, and all paving is bituminous concrete.The concrete curbing and pavement on campus is generally in satisfactory condition, with some isolated areas ofdeterioration due to a variety of factors such as age, poor drainage, and traffic from construction vehicles.ANALYSISThe majority of the campus’s bituminous pavement was resurfaced approximately ten years ago and is in satisfactorycondition. However, some areas of pavement would benefit from immediate attention to prevent or rectify substantialpavement failure and potholing.RECOMMENDATIONSOutside of regular maintenance associated with patching, restriping, etc., we believe the on-site road and parkingsurfaces are generally in satisfactory condition. We do not anticipate the need for any major projects regarding theseareas within the next five years. In three to five years, we recommend that a pavement engineer be retained toevaluate the campus and prepare a report that:• Proposes immediate patch and repair areas• Predicts the lifespan of different pavements around campus• Develops a prioritized schedule for overtopping existing pavement• Establishes suitable maintenance plan between major overtopping projects• Identify any areas where sub-base may be deficient, requiring more extensive repairs or upgrades• Considers construction vehicle traffic patterns since the heavy equipment is contributing to reduced lifespan incertain areas.6-7

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePavement repair and improvement projects can be include to the extent practical in building renovation, andconstruction projects.6-8

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePARKING CAPACITYEXISTING CONDITIONSParking is provided in parallel parking spaces along the loop road, as well as in a series of parking lots that are offsetfrom the loop road. All parking lots, with the exception of lot E near the Kent Humanities building, are located outsideof the main loop road. Parking spaces are typically 9 feet wide and 18 to 20 feet long, which comply with currentcounty standards. Existing parking capacity is inadequate to meet current demand.ANALYSISAs the campus expands and the parking demand increases, we recommend the continuation of the parking lotconfiguration pattern. Parking courts should be extended radially with travel lanes aligned parallel to the main looproad. As the courts are extended further from the center of campus, a walkway system should be considered forpedestrians to safely traverse the parking courts. These “spokes” would serve to facilitate movement in and out ofthe center of campus.RECOMMENDATIONSIf new buildings are proposed those buildings should incorporate new parking spaces to serve the new building useat a minimum.Consider designing porous pavement or porous pavers for parking spaces (not drive aisles), with new construction tominimize the impact to the existing stormdrain and stormwater management systems. The college may also wish toconsider carpool or hybrid car parking spaces, similar to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)requirements.The existing farm located in the northwest quadrant of the Route 50/Route 213 intersection is under consideration fordevelopment. As plans for this development progress, the college may wish to consider synergies with regard toparking, restaurant food service, bus service, etc.6-9

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSIDEWALKSEXISTING CONDITIONSIn general, the sidewalks are in good condition and provide convenient access routes between buildings and parkingareas. Some of the older sidewalks are settling and/or turf is building up to prevent adequate drainage, creating wetor icy conditions. Some sidewalks provide access for emergency and maintenance vehicles to access the interiorcampus spaces and buildings. Not all of these sidewalks are wide enough to accommodate these vehicles.A sidewalk was never constructed adjacent to the loop road, in the vicinity of the pool building. In addition, there isconsiderable pedestrian traffic between parking lot A and the Kent Humanities building with no sidewalk along thisroute.ANALYSISThe existing annual budget for sidewalk improvements is not sufficient to repair damaged or degrading sidewalks andallow for the widenings and new sidewalks listed above. Some instances of wet/icy sidewalks may require minorregrading of the surrounding turf or the addition of small storm drain inlets.RECOMMENDATIONSWhere possible, building renovations or new buildings should include upgrades for new sidewalks, widening ofexisting sidewalks, and wider curb cuts from the loop road to provide emergency vehicle access. Drainage andstorm drain inlets should also be investigated at this time. Where improvements cannot be folded into larger projects,it may be necessary to request additional monies to fund these upgrades.6-10

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSTORM DRAINS AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENTEXISTING CONDITIONSThe campus is served by a network of inlet catch basins and storm drain pipes which generally drain surface runofffrom the north side of the campus to the south side. There are two main drainage networks each outfalling atseparate locations on the south side of campus. The first discharges directly into the existing woods and serves thesouthwest quadrant of the campus (i.e., the Queen Anne’s Technical Building, MTC, the maintenance building, theday care building, the tennis courts, and the associated parking lots and travel lanes). The main drainage networkserves approximately 85 acres of on-site drainage area and accounts for over 75% of the developed site. Anadditional off-site drainage area of approximately 50 acres from the north side of U.S. Route 50 drains through thesite. The discharge from this network outfalls into the existing stormwater management pond at the south side of thecampus.An existing stormwater management facility was enlarged on the north side of campus as part of the HigherEducation Center project. This pond receives approximately 20 acres of on-site drainage plus 50 acres of off-sitedrainage from the north side of U.S. Route 50.The site’s primary stormwater management pond is located on the south side of campus and has a surficial waterarea of approximately one acre at elevation 36.5 ±. The bottom of the pond is at elevation 31.0 ± and the top of theembankment is at elevation 40.5 ±. The existing corrugated metal riser structure that provides the outlet from thispond was replaced in 2007 and the accumulated sediment in the pond was removed at that time. .There is evidence in some areas of washouts from storm drain pipes that are not completely water-tight.ANALYSISComputations performed during the Kent Humanities renovation and parking lot expansion showed that the campusas a whole functions adequately to provide water quantity and quality control. Therefore, both the primary pond andthe northern pond are in compliance with current state and local regulations. The replacement of the primary pond’soutlet structure should ensure that this facility will continue to operate satisfactorily for the next 20-30 years.Due to the large offsite drainage area that flows into to the northern pond, there is inadequate storm drain capacity toconvey the pond outflow to the primary pond during intense storm events. Based on McCone’s analysis of the onsiteclosed storm drain system, it appears that these pipes were not sized to accommodate this additional offsite flowwhen the campus was originally designed. As a result, there is a possibility of periodic flooding throughout thedownstream storm drain system and adjacent low areas.The primary pond will require routine removal of sediment in the permanent pool as part of the regular maintenanceschedule of any stormwater pond. This may occur as early as 2007 in conjunction the outlet structure reconstruction.6-11

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateSediment removal, when it occurs, should include provision of a sediment forebay in accordance with current ponddesign standards.RECOMMENDATIONSIn 2010, Queen Anne’s County adopted a new stormwater management ordinance that requires Environmental SiteDesign (ESD) practices to be implemented to the maximum extent practicable to treat the Channel ProtectionVolume, or one-year storm event. This change will affect all new impervious areas proposed from this point forwardthat are larger than 5,000 square feet. ESD practices include bioretention, landscape infiltration, permeablepavements, green roofs, rainwater harvesting, and water quality swales. Future design should proceed with attentionpaid to stormwater management from the outset of project planning.New buildings and renovations of existing buildings will need to provide quantity and quality management ofstormwater in accordance with these new regulations. This can be accomplished either by utilizing excess capacity inthe stormwater management system, by providing new stormwater management facilities. Based on recentinterpretations by the Queen Anne’s County Department of Public Works, it may be unlikely that the pond capacitycan be utilized; meaning new ESD facilities will be required. Design should also consider that there may not besufficient capacity to accommodate additional stormwater flows from new construction to the existing ponds.At the time this section was prepared, the EPA had issued its final Chesapeake Bay TMDL, which presents apollution “diet” to restore and protect the Bay. Maryland has issued its Final Phase I Watershed Implementation Plan(WIP) to achieve the required reduction in pollutants, which includes those found in stormwater runoff. It is unclear atthis time what affect this new layer of regulation will have on development at the College, but this should be kept inmind when planning and budgeting for new projects.6-12

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateLIGHTINGEXISTING CONDITIONSThe college recently completed an effort to upgrade all light poles and fixtures. In some locations, the new polelocations allow for future addition or widening of sidewalks.ANALYSISLighting should be adequate for the existing campus for the foreseeable future.RECOMMENDATIONSNew capital projects should design the exterior lighting to meet the current campus and Queen Anne’s countystandards, as applicable.6-13

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateFOREST CONSERVATIONEXISTING CONDITIONSDuring the approval process for the Caroline College Center addition and renovation, the Queen Anne’s CountyPlanning and Zoning Department required that the college address forest conservation for the proposed project, butnot the entire existing campus. Of the 9.77 acres of existing forest on campus, 6.81 acres was placed in a forestconservation easement. The majority of this forest is located in the ravine on the south end of campus, into whichthe primary stormwater pond discharges. The unencumbered area of forest is the relatively flat area south of thetennis courts and water tower.ANALYSISIt is difficult to extrapolate the previous forest conservation analysis to determine what effect it might have on futuredevelopment, because it only analyzed the proposed project, not the entire site. If this same methodology is appliedin the future, it would allow for a project area of 7.41 acres, at which point, the entire 9.77 acres of forest would needto be placed in a forest conservation easement. Any area in excess of 7.41 would presumably require a portion ofthe site to be afforested.RECOMMENDATIONSDue to the uniqueness of this site, all we can recommend at this time is to be aware that an analysis of forestconservation will need to be performed with any project that creates new floor area, and possibly with any project thatcreates any additional impervious area. This should be addressed at the time if site plan submittal to the County forreview.6-14

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMARYLAND STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (MSHA):Several projects are being considered by the State Highway Administration in the vicinity of Chesapeake College:• Route 213 overpass, eliminating the at-grade intersection at Route 50, and providing round-a-bouts for theinterchange• Extending the length of the right turn lane into the main campus entrance from Route 213 southbound.• Elimination of left turns from Route 662 to Route 50 westbound (at the northwest corner of the property)None of these projects appear to be imminent at this time. However, the existing farm located in the northwestquadrant of the Route 50/Route 213 intersection is under consideration for development into a business park. If thisdevelopment materializes, it will very likely speed up the implementation of the Route 213 overpass and right turnlane projects. This also may involve some land taking by the state to provide enough room for the overpass andround-a-bouts.Maintenance staff is hampered by the fact that there is no single repository for up-to-date campus information forbuildings, sidewalks, underground utilities, etc. While McCrone, Inc. maintains a CAD file of this information, some ofthe original utilities were located incorrectly and need to be updated. In addition, the CAD file utilizes designinformation for underground utilities, which may or may not match the as-built location.A project should be undertaken to bring this information up to date based on the best information available, andregular updates should be performed as construction projects occur or as better information is found.6-15

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCAMPUS PLANNINGSITE ANALYSISThe Chesapeake College Campus is located in Queen Anne’s County, Maryland near the historic Village of WyeMills and Wye Mills state Park and is bounded by U.S. Route 50 to the north, MD Route 213 to the east and MDRoute 662 to the southeast. The campus occupies approximately 170 acres of land. There are a number of existingand planned conditions which will influence the development of this master plan. These influences are outlinedbelow:EXHIBIT 6-1:CIRCULATION AND PARKINGThe circulation system for Chesapeake College is comprised of the regional road network, internal campus roadnetwork, parking areas and internal pedestrian system.REGIONAL ROADWAY NETWORKChesapeake College is well-served by the regional road network as described above. The primary access is off ofRt. 213 with three secondary access points off of Rt. 662. Currently, the intersection of Rt. 50 and Rt. 213 issignalized allowing access from both the east and the west along Rt. 50 and from Centreville to the north. Inaddition, there is a median break along Rt. 50 to the west which connects Rt. 662 to Rt. 50 in both directions. While6-16

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updatethere is a median break, this intersection is not signalized; therefore, it is not ideal for accessing the campus fromwestbound Rt. 50 nor is it ideal for going westbound Rt. 50 from Rt. 662.There are a number of regional roadway improvements/modifications planned which will affect access to and fromthe campus. A “diamond interchange” is planned for Rt. 50 and Rt. 213, with Rt. 213 modified to bridge over Rt. 50.The interchange ramps will intersect Rt. 213 at traffic circles which should facilitate the movement of traffic. Theramp at the southwest corner of the interchange will encroach into the campus and will meet Rt. 213 approximatelyhalfway between the existing intersection of Rt. 50 and the main entrance to Chesapeake College. In addition, thereare tentative plans to eliminate the median break at Rt. 50 and Rt. 662, resulting in a right-in/right-out(accommodating eastbound Rt. 50 traffic only) intersection. These projects are currently identified as non-fundedprojects, without a set schedule for construction (MDSHA, 10/18/2011).INTERNAL ROADWAY NETWORKInternally, Chesapeake College is served by a clearly defined roadway system. The primary organizing element ofthis system is a one-way, circular “loop road” which surrounds the core of the campus. There are then threeconnecting roads linking the loop road with the surrounding roadway network. The main entrance is a dividedboulevard which connects Rt. 213 to the loop road at the eastern side and terminates in a smaller circular dropoff/visitorparking area. A secondary access road connects Rt. 662 to the loop road at the northwestern side and athird access “spur” connects Rt. 662 to the loop road at the southwestern side. In addition, there is an existingaccess lane that provides a direct connection between Route 662 and Maintenance. There are several drop-offextensions from the loop road: the primary campus drop-off at the main entrance road as described above; one atthe front of the Economic Development Center; a service/drop-off area to the rear of the Learning Resource Center,Caroline College Center and Economic Development Center; and a drop-off at the Daycare Facility. In addition, theQueen Anne’s Technical, Technical Annex and Maintenance Building have direct service access.PEDESTRIAN NETWORKThe campus core is well-served by an extensive system of pedestrian pathways linking buildings, open spaces andparking areas. Stakeholders have indicated, however, that some areas of campus, particularly the pond, athleticfields and woods are underserved by walkways. In addition, covered walkways among some of the buildings wherepedestrian traffic is heaviest (between Economic Development Center and Caroline and between Talbot and Kent)could be considered. While an extensive pedestrian system exists, additional improvements should focus onmaintenance and grading to eliminate pooling of water (particularly in front of Physical Education) and providingbetter connections across parking bays where pedestrians have to now squeeze between parked cars.PARKING RESOURCESChesapeake College has approximately 985 parking spaces (not including the 134 parking spaces for HigherEducation) as outlined in the Computation of Parking Allowance in Chapter 3 of this report. Most are located in lotsthat follow the alignment of the loop road. They are, for the most part, on the outside of the loop road with theexception of the lot to the southwest of Kent Humanities. In addition, some of the parking is located along the looproad (parallel parking) and on the campus drop-off loop.6-17

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateAs described in Chapter 3 under Computation of Parking Allowance, the College has a parking small deficit ofapproximately 131 parking spaces. More importantly, the parking that does exist is not well-distributed. Most of theacademic activity occurs in Kent, Talbot and Queen Anne’s Technical buildings; however, this portion of the campusis under-served by parking. In addition, there are no parking spaces convenient to the athletic fields. Only a fewbuildings have handicap parking (or the ability to add handicap parking easily) adjacent to the building and this hasbeen identified by many stakeholders as a problem.PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR CONFLICTSBecause most of the parking is located outside the loop road, pedestrian safety and conflict with vehicles has beenidentified as a concern to the College. People generally take the shortest and most direct route from the parking totheir destination which results in crossing the loop road in many different locations as opposed to designatedintersections. In addition, designated crosswalk areas are not always very visible. Speed bumps have been addedwith some success in some areas to calm traffic along the loop road. The campus master plan will need to addressthese conflicts. Options should consider speed humps, more visible pedestrian crosswalk areas and additionalwalkways/landscaping that help to channel pedestrians to the appropriate crossing areas. Longer-term solutionsmight also include relocating the loop road (or portions of it) outside of the parking areas to eliminate the need tocross it. Refer to Exhibit A-3, Pedestrian/Vehicular ConflictsADJACENT LAND USEOne of the most appealing attributes to Chesapeake College is its rural Eastern Shore location and agrarian setting.At the time of the previous master plan, Queen Anne’s County identified the campus and surrounding lands adjacentto Rt. 50 and Rt. 213 area as a potential site for mixed used development. The Chesapeake College AreaCommunity Plan (CCACP) was prepared by the Queen Anne’s County Department of Planning and Zoning to guidedevelopment, while respecting the rural and agricultural qualities of the area. In the draft CCACP, two adjacent areaswere identified for development. The area north of Rt. 50 was identified for mixed-use development and area east ofRt. 213 was identified for residential development. The master plan was not approved by the Planning Commission.Subsequently, the Queen Anne’s County 2010 Comprehensive Plan identifies Chesapeake College’s surroundinglands as Priority Preservation Areas (PPA), with the exception of the land northeast of the intersection of Rt. 50 andRt. 213, the Whalou Property. This property is classified as non-priority preservation area (Map ESA-10). TheComprehensive Plan’s classification of land for preservation is a reversal of the economic development goals of thedraft CCACP.At the time of this report the Whalou property and the property east of Rt. 213 submitted petitions for rezoning. Therezoning will allow development similar to the land uses considered in the draft CCACP. The area to the southwest ofthe campus, across Rt. 662, is likely to remain as agricultural uses, as supported by Queen Anne’s County 2010Comprehensive Plan.6-18

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateOPEN SPACES AND RECREATIONChesapeake College is fortunate to have a significant amount of open space for both active and passive recreationaluses, as described below.EXHIBIT 6-2:ACTIVE RECREATIONMost of the active recreation facilities are located on the eastern portion of the campus, along Rt. 213 and includesoccer, baseball and softball fields as well as a disc golf course. Tennis courts are also located to the southeast ofthe loop road. There is a need to provide better access to the athletic facilities (trail connections as well asconvenient access).QUADRANGLESThere remains a significant amount of open space within the core of Chesapeake College, however, only a few ofthese areas are developing as traditional campus quadrangles. The Learning Resource Center (“LRC”) quad is thecentral organizing space of the academic core. This quad is defined by Dorchester, Caroline, Talbot and Kent andthe Learning Resource Center. The western portion of this space is open to accommodate a variety of passive uses.The eastern portion contains the Core Garden with significant gathering and paved areas, landscaping and shadetrees, seat walls and picnic tables.6-19

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe other area of campus that acts as a quadrangle is “Talbot Quad” the area defined by Talbot, Dorchester, QueenAnne’s Technical, Daycare and the Physical Education building. In comparison to the “LRC Quad”, this space hasless of a geometric organization, with less open lawn and more tree canopy cover. This quad is mostly a passiveopen space.SACRED SPACES“Sacred spaces” are those areas of the campus that serve an important function in the daily social interaction on acampus, represent historical aspects of the campus and/or are important components of a campus image. Theseshould be preserved and enhanced. These are areas that should be preserved and enhanced as part of the masterplan. Three areas were identified by stakeholders as “sacred” and include “Talbot Quad” as described above, thepond and its surroundings, and the existing woodland. The pond and the woods, in particular, are currentlyunderutilized so there is opportunity as the campus develops to enhance these resources and make them moreaccessible to students, faculty and the community.While the above spaces were identified by stakeholders as sacred spaces, other areas that the planning team thinksshould also be considered sacred are the “LRC Quad” and the main entrance drive/drop-off corridor. The latter notso much because it is a space not suitable for activity, rather it is an important part of the campus image and identity.GATHERING AREASGathering areas are those areas where students and faculty congregate because they are pleasant spaces, they areassociated with a particular interior use or they are located at particular junctions. As with sacred spaces, the masterplan should strive to preserve and reinforce these spaces. The most significant gathering spaces include the eastside of the “LRC Quad” (the Core Garden near Dorchester and Caroline), the Caroline Patio on the north side ofCaroline, the entrance area in front of Talbot and the terrace outside of the LRC. Because the terrace on the northside of Caroline has become so popular, there is a need to create a stronger connection between it and theEconomic Development Center. This most likely will be an architectural solution.IMAGE OPEN SPACESome open space areas are not used for activities, but are nonetheless important in terms of overall campus image.In particular, the open space associated with the main entrance drive and the drop-off circle is particularly important.As identified in the previous master plan, this entrance drive is reminiscent of the traditional approach drive to manyEastern Shore estates and conveys a distinct sense of arrival and welcome. The frontage along Rt. 50 also conveysan important Eastern Shore rural image for the College.6-20

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdatePRIMARY DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIESThe Chesapeake College Campus contains a significant amount of acreage providing for expansion for its facilities.Following is an outline of the primary opportunities for development of new (or expansion of existing) facilities:EXHIBIT 6-3:BUILDING EXPANSIONMany of the existing buildings have open space adjacent to them which would allow for expansion opportunities.The Daycare facility could expand to the east or west. There is an existing playground and grove of trees to thenorth and expansion to the north would cut off window access to some of the existing classrooms.The Physical Education facility could expand to the south or the east. Expansion to the south should takeadvantage of the opportunity to provide an attractive architectural face along the north side of Talbot Quad.Expansion to the northeast provides an opportunity to enhance the arrival experience to the College and shapethe future development around the existing drop-off loop.6-21

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe Economic Development Center has expansion opportunities to the east or west. Expansion to the west shouldtake into account the service and loading access to the LRC and Caroline College Center. Expansion to theeast should take advantage of the opportunity to reinforce the central drop off area as the campus “front door”.The Maintenance Building could expand to the southeast or west. Telecommunication infrastructure is constraintfor eastward expansion. Expansion to the west and south will displace surface parking and services.NEW BUILDINGS WITHIN COREIn addition to building expansion opportunities, there are numerous development sites that could accommodate newbuildings. These include:The Manufacturing Training Center as described in other chapters should ultimately be demolished. Areplacement building could be constructed in its place or further to the west to create an architectural presenceon the secondary entrance road and to create a more useable parking service lot adjacent to the MaintenanceBuilding. Any new building development in this area should reinforce the north-south pedestrian connection tothe core of campus. The Technical Annex cannot be demolished until surge space is constructed that couldaccommodate its programming.The land north and west of Kent Humanities is an opportunity to site a new building on the LRC Quad, reinforcingthe definition of this space. Site planning and design of this building should take into account the existingevergreen grove and future opportunities to expand parking resources in this area.The land east of the Economic Development Center provides generous space for a new building site, if the EDCdoes not expand east. This building site offers an opportunity to reinforce the central drop off area and enhancethe sense of arrival to the campus.The Queen Anne’s Technical building site offers a good opportunity for redevelopment, assuming this building’sprogram is relocated to a new facility elsewhere on campus.NEW BUILDINGS OUTSIDE COREThere are a number of opportunities for future development outside of the core area. Because there is a significantamount of land available, there is a danger of building where it is easiest and most convenient. Consideration shouldbe given, however, to using development outside the loop road to continue to reinforce significant campus spaces.LRC Quad Extension: The obvious and most important development sites are to the west of the LRC Quad, tocontinue to reinforce this space. The placement of buildings here will play an important role in shaping thewestern terminus of the LRC Quad and enhancing the arrival from Rt. 662. Building expansion here needs toconsider realignment of the loop road to minimize pedestrian/vehicular conflicts.6-22

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateParking Lot D North Site: This site located between Rt. 50 and parking lot D offers great visibility to Rt. 50. Therecently installed wind turbine and proposed CLEEn building are slated to be located here. As the wind turbinehas done, a building here offers an opportunity to strengthen the College’s identity from Rt. 50.PARKINGAs buildings are expanded and added, it will be important to expand parking facilities, but in the short term, it will beimportant to better locate parking resources. Much of the area to the southwest of the core should be preserved forparking resources since this is where the greatest shortage is. Parking could be developed inside and outside theloop road. In addition, parking should be developed convenient to Rt. 213 and the athletic fields.While there is great land availability for surface parking, long-term consideration should be given to providing for“placeholders” for future structured parking. Parking structures should be located to the periphery of the campus.One location would be to the northeast in the existing surface parking lot near the Higher Education Center. Aparking structure could be developed in conjunction with new building development to help accommodate theconnection to the future mixed-use development north of Rt. 50. Another logical location to preserve flexibility forstructured parking is the area to the southwest of the core where the parking demand is highest.LOOP ROAD REALIGNMENTOne of the inherent problems with the loop road and the existing parking is that the parking is located on the outsideof the loop road, thus creating many opportunities for pedestrian/vehicular conflicts. Some consideration might begiven to relocating portions of the loop road to outside the existing parking areas to minimize these conflicts. Thearea where this would seem to be feasible, with the fewest conflicts, is from the east side of the tennis courts to thesecondary access road near the Higher Education Center. In addition, there is the possibility of moving the loop roadoutside of future parking areas on the south side of the existing loop and should be considered in conjunction with thedesign of expanded parking facilities.RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTThere has been some discussion about whether or not to provide student housing on campus. There are a number offactors that need to be considered before deciding whether or not this is feasible. However, a few areas of thecampus lend themselves better to housing than others. The area to the south of the main entrance road would besuitable as it would be convenient to Rt. 213 and the recreational resources of the athletic fields and pond, howeverstudent housing here will be highly visible to campus visitors.Another suitable area would be in the vicinity of the eastern expansion of the LRC Quad west of the Higher EducationBuilding. This site places housing conveniently located near the campus core, future parking areas and access to Rt.662. Additionally, this site preserves the landscape character and openness of the main entrance on Rt. 213.OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTSIn addition to accommodating building, parking and open space projects, there may be the need to accommodateother programs that may not require a building. For example, there is an interest in considering a CDL/Transportation6-23

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateProgram that includes a training track and lab area for students to learn appropriate techniques and operations oftruck, bus, motorcycle and/or emergency vehicles. Exhibit E identifies several areas on campus where this might beconsidered, if appropriate to include on the campus. If this facility is to be developed on campus, consideration forlocating it in any of the sites identified should be given to the ability to utilize existing natural resources, such as thewoods, to provide visual buffering. In addition, consideration should be given to the ability to provide additionallandscape screening and, potentially, noise buffers without adversely affecting the character of the campus andsurroundings.6-24

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateVISUAL AND PHYSICAL CORRIDORS TO MAINTAINThe expansion of buildings within the academic core has enhanced a clear sense of organization in terms of campusspaces and a hierarchy of walkways. The LRC Quad is defined on three of the four sides by buildings and associatedwalkways reinforce this organization of this quadrangle. The expansion to Caroline and its associated site work hascreated a direct and clear pedestrian connection between the campus drop-off and the LRC Quad. As the campuscontinues to grow and expand, it will be important to maintain and reinforce these connections, both visually andphysically. Consideration should also be given to reinforcing a significant pedestrian connection along a north-southalignment linking Economic Development, Dorchester, Physical Education, Talbot and Queen Anne’s. Refer toExhibit 6-2.CAMPUS IMAGESince the campus is set within the expansive context of agricultural fields, the campus image has both an internaland external character. The external character, or approach, to Chesapeake College campus reflects that of atraditional Eastern Shore estate or farmstead with the buildings and trees clustered in the center, accessed via a longentrance drive, and surrounded by open space and fields. Internally the campus core has developed in a moretraditional academic character defined by quads, walks and gardens defined by buildings and landscape features.This image has been maintained with recent development projects and continues to define a unique identity for thecampus. Future building projects should continue to respect and reinforce the academic campus core andfarmstead character where possible.The College has a consistent language of site furnishings and lighting standards that unifies campus and its diversespaces and buildings. The application of these standards has done a remarkable job in elevating the character andaesthetics of the campus. The application of these standards should be continued with all future projects andenhancements.IDENTITY AND ARRIVALThe campus’s proximity to Rt. 50 is an undervalued asset to the identity of the campus. Currently there is a singlewall sign at the intersection of Rt. 50 and Rt. 213. The orientation of this sign at this major intersection has limitedvisual presence to drivers on Rt. 50. The southeast corner of Rt. 50 and Rt. 662 has great visibility for south boundcommuters on Rt. 50 and should be targeted for a signature sign announcing the arrival to Chesapeake College.The TPAC theater, the recently constructed wind turbine and to a lesser extent the water tower are architecturalfeatures that have great visibility from Rt. 50. Opportunities to enhance the architectural character or apply signage tothese structures will help enhance the visibility of the Wye Mills campus to commuters.6-25

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMASTER SITE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the findings of the campus site analysis and program needs, the master planning team prepared severalsite development alternatives for review with the Master Plan Steering Committee. Following review and discussionof these alternatives, they were distilled into the Draft Master Site Plan, as illustrated in Exhibit 6-4 and describedbelow.EXHIBIT 6-4:SHORT-TERM CAPITAL BUILDING PROJECTS1. PHYSICAL EDUCATION (CAHA): BUILDING EXPANSION AND RENOVATIONFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4The two-story, 83,500 GSF CAHA expansion should take advantage of its location adjacent at the front of thecampus and along Talbot Quad. Significant window areas and access points should be provided to help improvevisual connections between the building and adjacent quad and drop-off circle.6-26

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Update2a. / 2b. QUEEN ANNE’S TECHNICAL: BUILDING REPLACEMENTFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4Two sites were identified for the location of a two-story, 24,000 GSF Queen Anne’s Technical replacementbuilding:Site 2a, similar to the CAHA expansion, offers an opportunity to shape the main drop-off loop. Significantwindow areas and access points should be oriented towards the drop-off loop and the open space north of thebuilding to help activate these open spaces. An academic building here has close proximity to the CarolineCenter.A building at Site 2b is instrumental for reorienting and expanding the LRC quad. The proposed master siteplan building configuration frames the southern side of the LRC quad expansion. The main axis of the buildingis in an east-west orientation, which is favorable for solar orientation, to implement passive and active solarbuilding strategies. The preservation of an existing stand of white pines is encouraged.3. MAINTENANCE: BUILDING REPLACEMENTFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4The Site Master Plan indicates constructing a new 16,000 GSF replacement Maintenance building on the site ofthe existing building. The proposed layout locates the core of office space adjacent to the loop road and servicebays closer to Rt. 662. A public main entrance should be oriented west towards the MTC building rear or totowards the Loop Road. Both entrance orientations are visible to pedestrian access from the campus core, via theNorth-South Pedestrian Lane (see below). The east face of the Maintenance building provides service access tothe building.In terms of site planning, the Maintenance building physically separates public and visitor access from the serviceside of the building. A visitor parking lot (Parking Lot G) of approximately 32 spaces should be located betweenthe MTC and proposed Maintenance Building to provide clear public access. Vehicular access to the visitor lotshould be limited to the Loop Road. A new service yard for maintenance vehicles and staff parking (approximately24 spaces) is proposed for the east side of the building with direct access to the new service bays. Restricted, butdirect access to Rt. 662 should be maintained to the service area so that maintenance vehicles and trucks are notrequired to utilize the loop road and to help prevent unwanted cut-through traffic. The preservation of existingtrees and utilities needs to be incorporated in to the service area design.While this area of the campus is recognized as the service area or “back door”, the redevelopment of this siteshould employ landscape buffers and screens to restrict the view of service areas from the loop road and Rt. 662.4. CLEEn: NEW BUILDING6-27

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe Center for Leadership in Environmental Education is a single-story 4,000 GSF structure located adjacent tothe recently constructed wind turbine, north of parking lot D. The building and site will provide classroom spaceand serve as a model for sustainable development, employing strategies such as green roofs, solar hot waterpanels, rainwater collection, geothermal well fields.SHORT-TERM CAPITAL SITE PROJECTSREALIGNED LOOP ROAD – PLANNING AND DESIGNBecause most of the parking areas are located outside the loop road, pedestrian and vehicular conflicts continueto be a concern of the College. Some traffic-calming measures can be implemented as described below; however,these will only do so much to improve the situation. Students, faculty and administrators will continue to take theshortest route between parking and their destination, regardless of where designated crossings are located. Alonger-term option that could make considerable impact, however, is to move the loop route to the outside of theparking areas (and parking expansion areas) to eliminate these conflicts.The Master Site Plan illustrates a potential alignment for the loop road. Because of overall site constraints(triangular –shaped parcel, existing road network, etc.), it will be impossible to maintain the pure circular alignmentthat the current loop road utilizes. Instead, the master plan recommends a varied alignment that responds toconstraints while taking advantage of potential views from the loop road to various site amenities such as theChinese Pavilion and two ponds. The proposed alignment is also designed so that the new loop road can beimplemented in phases as new parking areas are added or existing parking areas expanded, as shown in Exhibit6-4. While it is not expected that all of the new loop road will be implemented as a short-term capital project, thealignment and design parameters, using this master plan as a guide, should be determined in the short-term sothat other projects can be constructed while keeping the flexibility for adding the loop road at a later date.As the proposed loop road expands in length to service more buildings and parking areas, the plan recommendsallowing two-way traffic. This strategy offers drivers more choice to access parking more directly without having tocircle the entire campus. The illustrative site plan identifies a landscaped traffic circle at the main entrance toenhance the sense of arrival and to allow continuous vehicular flow.The plan recommends that abandoned sections of existing loop road to be converted primarily for pedestrianaccess around the core campus and to accommodate emergency and occasional service vehicles. The descriptionof Pedestrian Lanes below is applicable to the conversion of abandoned sections of the loop road.SHORT-TERM PARKING EXPANSIONAs described in Chapter 3, parking at Chesapeake College is deficient by 131 spaces, which will grow to adeficiency of approximately 171 within 10 years based on projected program and space needs. The Master SitePlan illustrates several areas where parking expansion can occur.Parking Expansion A.1:6-28

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe CAHA Building expansion will require additional localized parking spaces. An additional bay of a parkingshould be located between existing parking bay A and future outer alignment of the Loop Road. It is importantthat this new parking bay as well as existing Parking Lot A be configured to provide for generous landscapespace between parking bays and spaces to accommodate localize environmental site design storm waterstrategies, shade trees and to minimize the visual dominance of surface parking. The layout and landscaping ofthese parking lots need to accommodate the crossing of the East-West Pedestrian Lane along the south side ofthe CAHA Building, linking the athletic fields, Chinese Pavilion and pond with the campus core. This expansionwill result in a net increase of approximately 60 parking spaces.Parking Expansion B.1:Similar to A.1, parking lot B.1 will be an additional parking bay located between existing lot B and the future outerloop road. The new bay of parking will run parallel with the existing lot between the existing drop-off loop to theproposed radial expansion of TPAC’s drop-off loop. This expansion will result in a net increase of approximately110 parking spaces. Adequate space between existing and future parking bays should be considered topreserve existing trees and provide space for storm water and landscaping opportunities. This parking lotexpansion should be implemented with the building construction of a new Queen Anne’s Building or futureacademic building (site 2a).GATEWAYSThe southwest corner at the intersection of Rt. 50 and Rt. 662 is a highly visible location for a new ChesapeakeCollege wall sign and landscape feature to announce the arrival to the school. The sign needs to be sized to belegible for cars moving at high speeds, while not detracting from the view of the agricultural fields and school in thebackground. Coordination with SHA’s plans for intersection improvements need to be considered. Additionally thelanguage of the sign should be consistent with College signs elsewhere on campus.OUTDOOR COURT RECREATION SPACES (e.g. Basketball and Volleyball)The College does not provide outdoor space for hard court recreational activities, such as basketball andvolleyball. These activities provide flexible pick-up sporting opportunities for students and should be located inconvenient locations to the academic core and parking. The area along the southwest side of the PE building canaccommodate a single basketball court or volleyball court. This location is near the academic core, parking andprovides a recreational program synergy with the PE building. In the event residential housing is constructed oncampus, basketball and volleyball courts should be incorporated with these buildings to provide recreation amenityto residents.PEDESTRIAN LANESWhile the campus core is well-served by sidewalks, there is an opportunity to establish a hierarchy of walkways tostrengthen campus organization and linkages between the campus core and areas at or beyond the loop road. Inaddition, these lanes could also serve as emergency access, fire and/or delivery lanes. It is important, however,that their design emphasizes pedestrian access and that vehicular access, while accommodated, is secondary.The lanes should be designed to be a minimum of 14’ in width with a horizontal clearance of 20’ to accommodatefire vehicles.6-29

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateEast-West Pedestrian Lane:The East-West Pedestrian Lane provides a clear corridor through the campus core to the athletic fields. Thewestern origin of this lane is at the proposed LRC drop-off loop, linking Lot D and the Higher Education Buildingto the LRC Quad. The lane crosses the LRC Quad and follows the existing walkway alignment on the north sideof Kent and Talbot before traversing Talbot Quad south of the proposed Physical Education / CAHA Building.Care should be given to maintain the significant trees located on the south side of the Physical Education /CAHA Building that currently line this walkway. Windows along the façade of the new CAHA Expansion havethe potential to animate this pedestrian connection and Talbot Quad. The design of Parking Lot A.1 expansionand the new loop road accommodate pedestrian movement. Pedestrian crosswalks should be clearly visible topromote safe and convenient access to the Chinese Pavilion, pond and athletic fields.North-South Pedestrian Lane:The North-South Pedestrian Lane will follow the existing alignment of the walkway to the east of EconomicDevelopment and along the east side of Dorchester. The site design of Queen Anne’s Technical CenterReplacement (2a) or a new academic building lane offers an opportunity create a plaza off of this lane anddeflect the lane to shape and define a new open space between the east face of the Economic DevelopmentBuilding and the north face of Queen Anne’s Technical. This walkway terminates on the southern end at theLoop Road and at the face of the proposed Maintenance Building.QUEEN ANNE TECH REPLACMENT (2A) –ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CENTER LAWNThe land area framed by the east face of the Economic Development Building and the north face of Queen Anne’sTech Replacement is the northern terminus of proposed North-South Pedestrian Lane. This space represents alandscape opportunity to create a welcoming approach to the core campus from parking lot B and the TPAC/EDCdrop-off in addition to providing an amenity space for adjacent buildings. Where possible the site design shouldincorporate existing trees.POND TRAIL AND PLANTINGPedestrian access to the pond and athletic fields is desired and needed to better integrate these amenities with thecampus core. The Master Site Plan illustrates a trail that extends from the East-West Pedestrian Lane and createsa loop around the pond. The design of the pond loop trail and landscape is an opportunity to integrate the ChinesePavilion with the pond. Ultimately the trail will connect to the new concession building. Landscape vistas should beencouraged to strengthen the visual connection between the Talbot Quad, the Chinese Pavilion, the pond and newconcession building. This would be the minimum trail recommended. Over time, the trail system could be extendedfurther south along the athletic fields and tie into any future bike path or lane provided along Rt. 213.MAIN VEHICULAR DROP-OFFThe existing main drop-off loop is spacious, but is an underutilization of land. The Master Site Plan identifies astrategy to reconfigure the geometry of the drop-off loop to increase useable land for future buildings and relatedsite improvements, and provide an opportunity to increase convenient visitor and accessible parking spaces withinproximity to Dorchester. The design needs to accommodate transit service. Since this site improvement is at theterminus of the main entrance from Rt. 213, the landscape design has an important role to enhance a visitor’s first6-30

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateimpression. The reconfiguration of this space could be implemented at the time of CAHA expansion, QueenAnne’s Tech Replacement (2a) or at a later time when funds are available.TRAFFIC CALMING ALONG LOOP ROADUntil the loop road can be relocated to outside the parking areas, some enhancements need to be made tominimize pedestrian and vehicular conflicts along the loop road, recognizing that most people will continue to crosswhere it is most direct. This master plan recommends speed humps prior to any designated pedestrian crossingalong the loop road, visually enhanced pedestrian crosswalks and expanded landscape islands at crosswalks tomake crossing areas more visually pronounced. In addition, the plan recommends the addition of landscapeislands at key areas within existing parking areas to help channel pedestrian movement along specific routes.6-31

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateFUTURE CAPITAL BUILDING PROJECTSIn addition to accommodating the immediate needs of the College, the master plan identifies several“placeholders” for future development or expansion opportunities for buildings, parking, active open spaces orother programming. While “development” may never occur in some of these locations, the purpose of identifyingthem is that they are logical locations for expansion, and care should be given in the accommodation of moreimmediate needs to minimize disruption of these future possibilities. Following is an outline of the potentialplaceholders.A. ATHELETIC FIELDS CONCESSION BUILDING: NEW BUILDINGFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4The construction of a new single-story, 200 GSF concession building presents an opportunity to provide neededcomforts and amenities for spectators and athletes during athletic events as well as an opportunity to create astrong visual link between this area of campus and the campus core. The master plan recommends that theconcession building be located adjacent to the new parking resource and on axis with the East-West Lane (bothdescribed below) to visually connect the pond and athletic fields with the campus. Because of the opportunity tobe quite prominent in spite of its size, the concession building should incorporate appropriate design details so thatit appears as a “pavilion”. The concession building program should include an outdoor terrace area that takesadvantage of views to the pond and back toward the campus core. Sidewalk connections should be provided tothe new parking facility and to the new trail around the pond (described below).B. DAYCARE: BUILDING EXPANSION AND RENOVATIONSFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4While 6,000 GSF expansion to Daycare could be accommodated on the east or west side of the existing facility,the preferred location is to the east to maintain maximum land area and flexibility for a future building to occur tothe west, between Daycare and Queen Anne’s.C. TODD CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS / ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CENTER: BUILDINGRENOVATIONS & ADDITIONSFor architectural commentary see Chapter 4The 10,000 GSF black box theater and associated support space expansion on the west side of the TPAC/EDCshould be designed to reinforce a pedestrian connection from Parking Lot D to the center of campus and the CoreGarden area. As much as possible, the building façade should be articulated with windows and façade treatmentsto create a pleasant pedestrian experience.In order to accommodate the expansion, the existing service loop drive will need to be modified by reducing thelandscape island in size. Care should be given to providing for adequate turning radii for service vehicles as wellas for accommodating a safe crossing of the pedestrian access described above.6-32

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThere is an existing north-south corridor through the core of the campus, from TPAC/EDC to Queen Anne’s Tech.The southern or back door to TPAC/EDC facing Caroline College Center is not generously sized or visuallywelcoming to enhance this pedestrian corridor. Expansion of the south facing exterior doors, reconfiguration ofclassroom and hallway space is needed to strengthen the north-south corridor through the campus and toreinforce the Caroline Patio.FA. FUTURE ACADEMIC BUILDING SITESThe Master Site Plan identifies multiple locations for future academic buildings. Typical academic buildings aredesigned to be 2-story and approximately 24,000 GSF. In general the placements of future academic buildings arelocated around the existing core of the campus to enhance the definition of public spaces and pedestrian corridors.Parking expansion to the west side of the campus core should be timed with the construction of academicbuildings.FR. FUTURE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGSShould Chesapeake College decide to pursue student housing on campus, the most appropriate location is insidethe loop road, near the campus core and west of the Higher Education Building. The Master Site Plan creates asmall residential precinct, consisting of two two-story xxx GSF dormitories surrounding a central open space. Theopen space should be flexible and adequately sized to serve the passive recreational activities of students. If aresidential program on campus is not desirable than these building locations could serve as future academicacademic buildings.FUTURE CAPITAL SITE PROJECTSFollowing are placeholders for potential future site projects that might be considered by the College:PARKING EXPANSIONNew Parking Lot L: Parking Lot L is a new parking resource located within the athletic field complex. It is centrallylocated between the main baseball field and soccer field, with access off of Rt. 213. The Master Site Planillustrates how this parking could be developed to provide a strong vista to the concession building upon enteringthe parking area. In addition, consideration should be given to defining the edges of the parking area with“hedgerows” or rows of shade trees to help give the parking lot context within the open area, while responding tothe agrarian character of the area. This expansion will result in a net increase of approximately 90 parkingspaces.Parking Expansion E.1:Additional parking capacity will be required for the relocation of Queen Anne’s Tech and future academicbuildings on the western end of the LRC Quad. New bays of parking should be located to the outside of theexisting Loop Road, which should ultimately be abandoned to accommodate landscaping, storm watermanagement and pedestrian movement. This lot’s close proximity to the campus core is ideally positioned for6-33

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan Updateaccessible parking spaces. This expansion will result in a net increase of approximately 108 parking spaces.New Parking Lot H:This parking lot located north and west of the proposed drop-off loop at the western terminus of the LRC Quadexpansion provides parking for future residential buildings and/or future academic buildings. This expansion willresult in a net increase of approximately 136 parking spaces.As parking is expanded, the loop road can be relocated, incrementally, outside the expanded parking lots. As thisis done, the existing loop road can be re-developed for a pedestrian and limited access emergency access lane. .In addition, a walking/jogging path may be incorporated into the original re-purposed/reconfigured loop road,supplementing and linked to the proposed pond trail.LRC QUADRANGLE “WEST”The LRC Quad should be planned to extend across the existing loop road to become the organizing element forfuture buildings (Queen Anne’s Replacement 2b and Future Academic Buildings). The LRC Quad should rotate toexpand along an east-west axis, aligning with the deflected southern face of the LRC. This orientation allows futurebuildings to have a preferable solar orientation to improve the use of passive and active solar strategies, such asnatural lighting, passive heating, and protection from overheating and deploy photovoltaic or other solar powersources. The loop road as shown on the Master Site Plan will be relocated to allow a seamless connectionbetween the east section of the quad and the new west section, without being bisected by vehicular roadways.LRC QUADRANGLE “WEST” DROP-OFFThe Master Site Plan identifies a drop-off loop that provides access with convenient and accessible parking to thefuture academic building at the western terminus of the LRC Quad and future residential buildings. Additionally theproposed loop road organizes and provides access to adjacent surface parking lot expansions. The open spacebetween the proposed loop road and drop-off lane offers provides an opportunity for landscaping, storm watermanagement and future geothermal fields.LRC DROP-OFFThis drop-off provides an opportunity to allow vehicular drop-off and accessible parking within close proximity tothe academic core. The design and road configuration provides a framework to reinforce pedestrian movementfrom parking lot D, Higher Education and CLEEn to the campus core.AMPHITHEATERIn order to take better advantage of the existing main pond, an amphitheater should be considered. The existingtopography would allow an informal or formal design amphitheater to be constructed on the west or east side ofthe pond. The advantage of the east side is that it could be developed in closer proximity to the concessionbuilding and new Parking Lot L, with views of the Chinese Pavilion, while allowing for construction of the new looproad on the west side of the pond.6-34

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateAFFORESTATION / ENVIRONMENTAL LAND BANKAs the campus continues to develop and increase its impervious coverage, there will be the need to meetenvironmental requirements, particularly as it relates to afforestation requirements. The open space to the west ofthe Secondary Entrance Road (defined by the junction of Rt. 662 and 50) presents an opportunity to “bank” land tofulfill on-site afforestation requirements or to for the College to generate revenues by making land available to fulfillafforestation requirements for other development projects within the watershed. A significant portion of this landarea should be preserved for future afforestation and other environmental requirements. Because the Collegecherishes the open space image which is evident from eastbound Rt. 50 traffic, the Master Site Plan illustrateshow an afforestation land bank could be established on the south side of this triangular land area to still allow foropen vistas to the campus core.SUSTAINABILITYA number of campus projects, both building and site, have been described above to fulfill immediate and futureCollege needs. There on college campuses nationwide toward more sustainable design and LEED certification.There is an opportunity on the Chesapeake College campus to employ sustainable practices wherever possible onany development project. These practices may include the use of recycled building materials, building materialsobtained locally (within 500 miles), site planning that takes advantage of solar orientation, accommodation of bicyclesas a transportation mode, green roofs and use of native and adapted plant materials that do not require irrigation toname a few.6-35

Chapter 7OFF CAMPUS CENTERS

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCAMBRIDGE CENTERBuilding Number: 14Number of Floors: 2Net Assignable Square Feet: 14,598Gross Building Area: 20,680Net-to-Gross Efficiency: 70.5%Year Constructed:Mid-20th CenturyRenovations: (by Chesapeake College): 1994Additions:NoneContains:Classrooms,Computer Labs, Student Lounge, Science Lab,Offices, “Multi-Service Center” SpaceGeneral Condition:PoorAdequacy of Space:InadequateSprinkler SystemsNot SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALThe Cambridge Center is located in downtownCambridge, primarily serving Dorchester and TalbotCounty residents and proximate geographic areas.The Center occupies a former department store andis accessed from the rear parking lots and the mainstreet. As a department store, the building was notbuilt with education spaces in mind, and the spacesare compromised, accordingly. Little natural lightenters the building, corridors are not intuitive, andcolumns interfere with room layouts, obstructingviews and forcing awkward proportions. Unwantedsounds are transmitted from room to room due tolack of sufficient attenuation and barriers. Theinterior of the building does not inspire occupants orvisitors to want to stay for long periods of time; it is dreary. There are little-to-no spaces for student life, bookstore,administrative services and student services. There is no green space adjacent to or even near the building. Parkingis very limited, indeed insufficient for the number of occupants, including staff, faculty, students and visitors.The most successful area of the building is the multi-service center, used intensively by students and staff for study,testing, tutoring, and related activities, but it has become too small for the use demand.This facility limits the ability of the College to successfully carry out its programs in a Cambridge facility. In addition tothe inadequacy of the space, the quality of the spaces is inferior, and building systems regularly break down andrequire maintenance.7‐1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe inadequacies of the building, building systems, space, lack of parking and the “non-campus” experience of thestudents all combine to suggest that the building can no longer adequately serve the needs of the College. TheCollege should find suitable, larger, alternative space as soon as possible, certainly within the next five years.Cambridge: Interior; Floor Plans2 nd Floor Plan1 st Floor Plan7‐2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICALHEATING, VENTILATION AND AIR CONDITIONING (HVAC)The mechanical systems are approximately 13 years old. The HVAC systems consists of two packaged rooftop units utilizingnatural gas for heat and packaged condensing units for cooling. Carrier Model VVT terminal units are utilized for individualspace temperature control. The facility’s manager indicated that recent upgrades to the HVAC units and terminal equipment haveoccurred in 2006 but are not fully operational at this point and there are extreme variations in zone temperatures throughout thefacility. Unitary electric heaters are utilized throughout the building for areas such as the elevator machine room. A ductless splitsystem provides space cooling for the central IT and Electrical room located on the first floor. Building HVAC system control isaccomplished by a Siemens Control System serving the Rooftop Units and Terminal Units.PLUMBINGThe plumbing fixtures are in good condition. The urinals and water closets have flush valves. The facility is connected to theTown of Cambridge water and sewer system.FIRE PROTECTIONThe building is fully sprinklered. The fire protection water supply is provided by the Town of Cambridge.ELECTRICALIncoming electrical service – 1,200 Amp – is provided by Choptank Electric. The electrical service is a 208 Volt/3 Phase/60 Hzsystem. The equipment was originally manufactured by Square D.EMERGENCY POWEREmergency Power is not provided for this facility. Emergency battery packs are provided for egress lighting.LIGHTINGThe lighting system is a combination of fluorescent, metal halide and incandescent fixtures.SPECIAL SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGYFIRE ALARMFacility is equipped with a Silent Knight model 5104 4-Zone Control Communicator. The fire alarm consists of manual pullstations, smoke detectors, horns and strobes. The central fire alarm annunciator panel is located in the Main Lobby.SECURITYThe building is equipped with a central security system monitored by Delmarva Time and Control. The system consists of doorcontacts, room and building entry keypads and motion detectors.TECHNOLOGY, TELECOMMUNICATIONSComputers for instructional and administrative use are utilized throughout the facility. A central server system is provided in theMain Electrical Room.There is a need for wireless network access throughout the facility.There is a need for a computer lab (similar to the Chesapeake Campus LRC computer lab).7‐3

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, SPECIAL SYSTEMS, TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONSRefer to the Architectural, General section for recommendations for the entire facility. Mechanical, electrical, technology andspecial systems should be maintained to provide functional and continuous operating ability for the Cambridge Center for theduration of the College’s tenancy; however, long term investment of resources into the facility should be avoided in considerationof the recommendation to seek and/or develop alternative facilities.1. Provide wireless network access throughout the facility.2. Provide a computer lab (similar to the Wye Mills Campus LRC computer lab).7‐4

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateHEALTH SCIENCES CENTER AT EASTON MEMORIAL HOSPITALBuilding Number:N/ANumber of Floors: 2Net Assignable Square Feet: 8,700Gross Building Area: 9,869Net-to-Gross Efficiency:80% (excludes central mechanical systems)Contains:Space for Allied Health Programs: Classrooms,Clinical and Computer Laboratories, Office Areas, andSupport SpaceGeneral Condition:SatisfactoryAdequacy of Space:InadequateSprinkler Systems :Fully SprinkleredARCHITECTURAL, GENERALEaston Memorial Hospital has generously provided spacefor the College’s allied health programs for several years aspart of a MOA since 1997. Nearly all of the health sciencecourse work, lab experience, and clinical experience takesplace in two floors of the hospital’s west wing. Therelationship between the College and hospital is mutuallybeneficial: the College receives needed space for itsprograms and the hospital is afforded the opportunity toestablish relationships with students and graduates from itsprograms, helping to fill the on-going need to fill its own staffvacancies.Spaces include classrooms, a computer lab, clinical labs,office space, and storage areas. The spaces are fitted outas well as possible given the amount of available space.However, therein is the problem: there simply is not nearlyenough space for the College’s programs. The clinical simulation lab and surge tech labs are tiny, permitting only a handful ofstudents in each room at the same time. The nursing lab has no break-out space for instruction and is limited in the number ofbeds that can fit in the room. There is no open computer lab. There are no study rooms, no library space, and no social spacesfor students to gather. Students must leave the area to access food service, including vending. Storage is very inadequate,compromising the security and integrity of materials and equipment that need to be more securely stored. The technology withinthe hospital imposes restrictions on wireless systems, preventing them from being installed.As the hospital considers its long term plans, the needs of the College’s allied health programs should be paramountconsiderations.7‐5

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateCambridge: Interior; Floor Plans2 nd Floor Plan1 st Floor Plan7‐6

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateMECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS1. Provide hardwired data outlets since the wireless system is limited. The need is greatest for student usecomputers.2. Provide air conditioning for the telecom equipment room.3. Provide access control and security hardware for the telecom equipment room.4. Provide network interface with hospital equipment.5. Provide optical fiber connection to Chesapeake campus.7‐7

Chapter 8PROPOSED CAPITAL PROJECTS

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe capital improvement needs of the College are significant. Several of the proposed projects have not yet beenaccomplished, because other, even more pressing projects have taken priority in recent years – not because they didnot demonstrate need. The following table summarizes and establishes relative priority for major capital projects, byproject type. Most are on the Wye Mills Campus.BUILDING PROJECTSPriorityGroupProjectRemarksProposed Area-GSFBudget ConstructionCost1PE Building Renovation andAddition (Center for Allied Health& Athletics)Renovation: Retain Gym, eliminate repurposePool; Wellness/Fitness Center;multi-purpose space.Addition: Allied Health83,500 $29,310,0001Queen Anne’s TechReplacementNew academic building at other locationon campus24,000 $10,840,0001 New Cambridge Center New or renovate another facility 42,000 $18,970,0001 Maintenance BuildingNew replacement facility near existingbuilding16,000 $5,200,0002 New Classroom Building At Wye Mills 24,000 $10,840,0002 Expand TPAC* CLEEnAdd: Black-Box Theater, dressing rooms,scene shop, lobby, more toilet rooms,elevator for balconyCenter for Learning and EnvironmentalEducation10,000 $8,350,0004,000 $2,500,000* Concession Building Adjacent to Athletic Fields 300 $175,000* New Student Housing Size to be determined TBD --* Raze MTCAfter Center for Allied Health & Athletics,Queen Anne’s Replacement, andMaintenance Building projectsTBD --Priority 1: Needs are immediate; should be accomplished as soon as possible. 0-5 yearsPriority 2: 0-10 years. Needs may also be immediate* Other Projects: Non-state fundedNote: All proposed areas and budget construction costs are estimated. Programming is necessary to determine actual net and grossbuilding areas.8-1

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateThe following tables summarize major capital projects for site and infrastructure improvements. Many of the projectscan be coordinated and implemented with capital building projects.SITE PROJECTSPROJECTScope Sanitary and Storm Water Piping andManholes; Replace Defective SectionsREMARKSSanitary sewer survey completed in FY10. Storm water survey in progressto be completed in FY12.Campus Sign at Intersection of Route 50 and Route662Sidewalk / Pedestrian Access to Athletic FieldsRe-Route Ring Road Outside Parking LotsRepave Parking Lots and RoadwaysUpgrade / New Waste Water Treatment PlantExpand Large Storm Water PondExpand Parking: East CampusDepends largely on implementation of student housingWill be needed for new construction (additional impervious area) – buildingsand/or parking lots to supplement Environmental Site Design facilitiesExpansion of parking lots to be implemented with building expansion: PEbuilding Renovation and Addition, CAHA expansion and/or Queen Anne’sTech Replacement (2a)Outdoor Recreation Spaces, e.g. Basketball,VolleyballMain Vehicular Drop-offTo be implemented at time of CAHA expansion and/or Queen Anne’s TechReplacement (2a).MECHANICALPROJECTREMARKSDomestic / Fire Protection Back-Check Valves andWater Meters for TPAC/EDC, Queen Anne’sMTC’s mechanical (HVAC) and plumbing systemsneed to be modified to suit the intended use of thisfacility when determined.Install new Johnson Control “metasys” system in eachnew building and as buildings are renovated so thatultimately the entire campus will be on system.8-2

Chesapeake College January 2012 Facilities Master Plan UpdateELECTRICALPROJECTREMARKSAlternative Power Source(S) For Servers AndDistance LearningCapacitors For Large MotorsLight Fixture ReplacementEnergy savingsOn-going; energy savingsSPECIAL SYSTEMSPROJECTFire Alarm Central Annunciator and RemoteMonitoring SystemREMARKSQueen Anne’s Tech, PE, MTC and Maintenance require updatingCCTV Surveillance System with Central MonitoringStationCard Access for Future Building/Renovation ProjectsTECHNOLOGYPROJECTInstall an Ubiquitous Wireless NetworkingEnvironmentREMARKSVarious locations on campus – in buildings and on siteUpgrade Fiber-Optic Loop System; Replace Co-AxialCable between BuildingsVoice-over IPMiscellaneous ProjectsNo work has been completed for this item. However, it has beenincorporated into the update of the technology plan IT dept is working onImplementation is in progressSecurity audit - Red Flag – UMComputer testing space - LRC double capacityStorage for new computer delivery orders - Added Campus Wide Storagebuilding at Wye Mills FY12Improve security in server rooms - No work has been completed for thisitem. However, it has been incorporated into the update of the technologyplan IT dept is working on8-3

Appendix

To insure that we achieve each of those goals, our Sustainability Operations Group (SOG) derived strategies, specific action plans, and measures of success for FY 2010-2012. The SOG is a cross-divisional team which has representatives from all segments of the college including student representation. The SOG will work with theappropriate division to support efforts to attain our sustainability goals.Chesapeake College Plan for SustainabilitySustainability is one of five core themes in Chesapeake College’s new strategic plan. It drives our efforts to supportthe interconnected environmental, economic, and social needs of Our Vision: Chesapeake will our local area and of the broader world. Throughsustainability we can meet “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations tomeet their own needs.” (Brundtland Commission, 1989)be an educational leader in aThe College has identified seven sustainability goals:thriving, ecologically stable1. Promote and model environmental and social responsibility.2. Improve campus energy efficiency.3. Support “green” business development.4. Offer learning opportunities in and across disciplines and through co-curricular activities5. Build on the cultural heritage of the Shore as we develop new academic and career programs.6. Use transparent, inclusive budget processes to ensure appropriate allocation of resources.7. Expand the base of private financial support for the college.Goal 1: Promote and model environmental and social responsibilityStrategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:SOG reps will scheduleworkshopsa. Provide a continuing series of sustainabilityworkshops.At least 3 workshops will bepresented by December 31,2010Participants will fill outevaluations for each workshop.October 28 – Fiscal Sustainability – MikeKilgusNovember 11—Cultural-Social JusticeSustainabiliy – Greg FarleyDecember 2 – Environmental Sustainability –Doug Grayb. Develop a sustainability website for thecollege and the community.SOG will work with theGreen Team and theWebmaster to develop asustainability page.New website will be developedby December 31, 2010.Doug GraySustainability-1

c. Sustainability advocates will meet withconstituencies to encourage their supportand collaboration including: CollegeCouncil, Divisional meetings of Academics,Administration, Student Success, andTechnology, Staff Assembly (STARS),Student groups, Board of Trustees.SOG will present ourcurrent plans and seekinput from our variousconstituencies.Brainstorming results from eachconstituency group will beincorporated into ongoingsustainability planning.All – Invite STARS reps to our meetingsd. Provide objective measurement ofsustainability efforts and current status.First report will be developed and deliveredto the president by June 30, 2010.SOG will develop anannual report onsustainability efforts atthe CollegeFirst report will be developedand delivered to the presidentby November 30, 2010.Committeee. The College will provide leadership forsustainability efforts on the Eastern Shore.SOG reps will meet withother organizations toseek partnerships.Committee will develop a recommendationon the Climate Change Commitment by June30 2011.The College Presidentwill sign the AmericanCollege and UniversityPresident’s ClimateChange Commitment.Goal 2: Improve campus energy efficiency.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:The College will seek The College’s new constructionLEED certification for all will be certified as LEED Silver.new construction and Participants will fill outrenovation projects. evaluations for each workshopa. The college designs and builds its facilitiesin such a way that we efficiently use ournatural resources.Director of Facilities: The College hasincorporated LEED principles in its planningfor the next two construction projects. Thisrequirement has been incorporated into theprogram statement for the Center for AlliedHealth and Athletics.Sustainability-2

. The College operates its facilities in such away that we efficiently use our naturalresources.The College will contractwith an energy firm tosupport its efforts toreduce energy use.The College will reduce energyuse by 15 % over the next threeyears.Director of Facilities: There have been nosignificant savings from this agreement yet.It will continue to be monitored over thenext 3 years.c. The College will purchase new equipmentthat helps to reduce our energy use.The College willestablish a greenpurchasing policy.The SOG will meet withPurchasing and IT Departmentsto establish the new policy andimplement by Fall 2011.Vice President for Administrationd. Use renewable energy resources The College will seek topurchase powerproduced by wind andsolar sources.The College will obtain at least20% of our electricity fromrenewable resources by 2015.Director of Facilities: The SOG is planning toinvestigate the status of our energy buyingconsortium to determine the status of thisinitiative.e. Complete a comprehensive analysis of theCollege’s Carbon FootprintThe analysis will beincluded in theagreement with theEnergy savings firm.The Carbon Footprint Analysiswill be produced by the EnergyEducation Consultant by July2011.Director of Facilities (Energy Management)Goal 3: Support “green” business development.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:Establish a solar/windpower information center on the Wye Mills campusInstall anemometer; move forward with design/cost estimate for wind/solareducation/businessdevelopment facility.Design completion by August 2010. Construction during 2011.Completion and installation bySpring 2012.Director of FacilitiesSustainability-3

Goal 4: Offer learning opportunities in and across disciplines and through co-curricular activities.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:a. Design credit courses and programs that SOG reps will work with Recommendations to Academic Greg Farley to work with Academics.teach sustainability practices andthe academicAdministration by August 2011.administration toprinciplessuggest measures thatwill incorporate andexpand sustainabilityacross the curriculum.b. Incorporate sustainability education acrossthe curriculum.Academic administrationto approve new coursesand programs.At least two new “greencurricula” will be in place bySpring 2012.Greg Farley to work with AcademicsGoal 5: Build on the cultural heritage of the Shore as we develop new academic and career programs.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe SOG in cooperation with academic SOG reps will work with The College will introduce a Greg Farley to work with Academicsadministration will inculcate our richAcademic administration to new course on Eastern Shoreintroduce Eastern Shore history and culture by Springcultural history into the academicliterature and history into our 2012.curriculum.curriculum.Sustainability-4

Goal 6: Use transparent, inclusive budget processes to ensure appropriate resource allocation.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe college will develop an auxiliary fund for the support of sustainable projects and will support the fund through savings generated by incorporation of sustainable practices and will also support the fund through a variety of methods including useof auxiliary fund balance earnings, annualinternal giving, private donations, andgrants.The SOG will work with the Vice President for Administration to establish an auxiliary fund for approval by the Board by December 2010.The College will create funding proposal forsustainability projects by July2012.Vice President for AdministrationGoal 7: Expand the base of private financial support for the college.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe SOG will work with the At least one grant will beCollege’s grant writer to pursue obtained by July 2011.funding for Sustainabilityprojects.Seek grants and other funding support forsustainability projects.Grants Director hired: waiting for themoney to roll in.Sustainability-5

To insure that we achieve each of those goals, our Sustainability Operations Group (SOG) derived strategies, specific action plans, and measures of success for FY 2010-2012. The SOG is a cross-divisional team which has representatives from all segments of the college including student representation. The SOG will work with theappropriate division to support efforts to attain our sustainability goals.Chesapeake College Plan for SustainabilitySustainability is one of five core themes in Chesapeake College’s new strategic plan. It drives our efforts to supportthe interconnected environmental, economic, and social needs of Our Vision: Chesapeake will our local area and of the broader world. Throughsustainability we can meet “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations tomeet their own needs.” (Brundtland Commission, 1989)be an educational leader in aThe College has identified seven sustainability goals:thriving, ecologically stable1. Promote and model environmental and social responsibility.2. Improve campus energy efficiency.3. Support “green” business development.4. Offer learning opportunities in and across disciplines and through co-curricular activities5. Build on the cultural heritage of the Shore as we develop new academic and career programs.6. Use transparent, inclusive budget processes to ensure appropriate allocation of resources.7. Expand the base of private financial support for the college.Goal 1: Promote and model environmental and social responsibilityStrategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:SOG reps will scheduleworkshopsa. Provide a continuing series of sustainabilityworkshops.At least 3 workshops will bepresented by December 31,2010Participants will fill outevaluations for each workshop.October 28 – Fiscal Sustainability – MikeKilgusNovember 11—Cultural-Social JusticeSustainabiliy – Greg FarleyDecember 2 – Environmental Sustainability –Doug Grayb. Develop a sustainability website for thecollege and the community.SOG will work with theGreen Team and theWebmaster to develop asustainability page.New website will be developedby December 31, 2010.Doug GraySustainability-1

c. Sustainability advocates will meet withconstituencies to encourage their supportand collaboration including: CollegeCouncil, Divisional meetings of Academics,Administration, Student Success, andTechnology, Staff Assembly (STARS),Student groups, Board of Trustees.SOG will present ourcurrent plans and seekinput from our variousconstituencies.Brainstorming results from eachconstituency group will beincorporated into ongoingsustainability planning.All – Invite STARS reps to our meetingsd. Provide objective measurement ofsustainability efforts and current status.First report will be developed and deliveredto the president by June 30, 2010.SOG will develop anannual report onsustainability efforts atthe CollegeFirst report will be developedand delivered to the presidentby November 30, 2010.Committeee. The College will provide leadership forsustainability efforts on the Eastern Shore.SOG reps will meet withother organizations toseek partnerships.Committee will develop a recommendationon the Climate Change Commitment by June30 2011.The College Presidentwill sign the AmericanCollege and UniversityPresident’s ClimateChange Commitment.Goal 2: Improve campus energy efficiency.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:The College will seek The College’s new constructionLEED certification for all will be certified as LEED Silver.new construction and Participants will fill outrenovation projects. evaluations for each workshopa. The college designs and builds its facilitiesin such a way that we efficiently use ournatural resources.Director of Facilities: The College hasincorporated LEED principles in its planningfor the next two construction projects. Thisrequirement has been incorporated into theprogram statement for the Center for AlliedHealth and Athletics.Sustainability-2

. The College operates its facilities in such away that we efficiently use our naturalresources.The College will contractwith an energy firm tosupport its efforts toreduce energy use.The College will reduce energyuse by 15 % over the next threeyears.Director of Facilities: There have been nosignificant savings from this agreement yet.It will continue to be monitored over thenext 3 years.c. The College will purchase new equipmentthat helps to reduce our energy use.The College willestablish a greenpurchasing policy.The SOG will meet withPurchasing and IT Departmentsto establish the new policy andimplement by Fall 2011.Vice President for Administrationd. Use renewable energy resources The College will seek topurchase powerproduced by wind andsolar sources.The College will obtain at least20% of our electricity fromrenewable resources by 2015.Director of Facilities: The SOG is planning toinvestigate the status of our energy buyingconsortium to determine the status of thisinitiative.e. Complete a comprehensive analysis of theCollege’s Carbon FootprintThe analysis will beincluded in theagreement with theEnergy savings firm.The Carbon Footprint Analysiswill be produced by the EnergyEducation Consultant by July2011.Director of Facilities (Energy Management)Goal 3: Support “green” business development.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:Establish a solar/windpower information center on the Wye Mills campusInstall anemometer; move forward with design/cost estimate for wind/solareducation/businessdevelopment facility.Design completion by August 2010. Construction during 2011.Completion and installation bySpring 2012.Director of FacilitiesSustainability-3

Goal 4: Offer learning opportunities in and across disciplines and through co-curricular activities.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success Assigned to:a. Design credit courses and programs that SOG reps will work with Recommendations to Academic Greg Farley to work with Academics.teach sustainability practices andthe academicAdministration by August 2011.administration toprinciplessuggest measures thatwill incorporate andexpand sustainabilityacross the curriculum.b. Incorporate sustainability education acrossthe curriculum.Academic administrationto approve new coursesand programs.At least two new “greencurricula” will be in place bySpring 2012.Greg Farley to work with AcademicsGoal 5: Build on the cultural heritage of the Shore as we develop new academic and career programs.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe SOG in cooperation with academic SOG reps will work with The College will introduce a Greg Farley to work with Academicsadministration will inculcate our richAcademic administration to new course on Eastern Shoreintroduce Eastern Shore history and culture by Springcultural history into the academicliterature and history into our 2012.curriculum.curriculum.Sustainability-4

Goal 6: Use transparent, inclusive budget processes to ensure appropriate resource allocation.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe college will develop an auxiliary fund for the support of sustainable projects and will support the fund through savings generated by incorporation of sustainable practices and will also support the fund through a variety of methods including useof auxiliary fund balance earnings, annualinternal giving, private donations, andgrants.The SOG will work with the Vice President for Administration to establish an auxiliary fund for approval by the Board by December 2010.The College will create funding proposal forsustainability projects by July2012.Vice President for AdministrationGoal 7: Expand the base of private financial support for the college.Strategies Plan of Action Measures of Success ProgressThe SOG will work with the At least one grant will beCollege’s grant writer to pursue obtained by July 2011.funding for Sustainabilityprojects.Seek grants and other funding support forsustainability projects.Grants Director hired: waiting for themoney to roll in.Sustainability-5