Issuu

Santa Fe Community College Master Plan Final Report - Adopted 12.01.21

Table of Contents 3 Executive Summary 6 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Letter from the President and CFO Planning Scope Timeline Guiding Principles

15 Chapter 2: Planning Context 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

Process Overview About SFCC Geographic Context Building Assets Main Campus HEC Campus Climate Analysis Equity and Inclusion Context of Current Events

62 Chapter 4: Observations and Recommendations 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5

Campus Connections Technology Assessment and Plan Campus Design Guidelines Flexibility and Growth Plan Other Opportunities

98 Chapter 5: Summary 103 Chapter 6: Appendix

29 Chapter 3: Quantitative Findings 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

Facilities Condition Assessment Facilities Condition Index Facilities Condition Recommendations Space Utilization

Executive Summary

Executive Summary At the end of 2020, Santa Fe Community College (SFCC) embarked on an ambitious effort to develop a new Institutional Masterplan of their campus. Across the span of 9 months the college, as well as a team of planners, architects and engineers led by Shepley Bulfinch and McClain + Yu completed an in depth analysis of the current state of the facilities and physical infrastructure of the college and developed a series of findings and projections that create a framework for the next ten years of development at the college.

that this document recommends, similar in scope and depth to the Siemens Energy Audit recently completed by the college. These studies should be undertaken when appropriate as determined by the leadership of SFCC and the need for, and financial capability to complete the work is apparent.

The Institutional Masterplan does define the development/redevelopment priorities, delineates campus program zoning, estimates, in 2021 dollars, for budgeting of capital projects, and This effort was undertaken during a time of great identifies a framework in which the college can uncertainty and upheaval, not just at the college, responsibly, and holistically continue to carry but the State of New Mexico, and the country out its mission. As of the spring of 2021, the as a whole. The Covid-19 pandemic created an college had developed or had under its control environment not experienced since the Spanish Flu just over 670,000 sf of space, with 366 acres at Pandemic from 1918-1920, causing unprecedented the main campus and 4 acres at the HEC, totaling challenges for the faculty, staff, students and the 370 acres of land available for development or community which SFCC serves. There were, conservation. This report finds that given the however, lessons about flexibility of education current enrollment trends at SFCC there is little to services, health and welfare, and financial no need for additional square footage of facilities stewardship that cannot be overstated and those for the college, rather, as the buildings on the main lessons should influence and carry forward into campus age, there is a need for and an opportunity future plans and initiatives by the college. to redevelop within the existing footprint of the buildings and meet the expectations of a 21st Currently, SFCC is addressing the demands for century higher education provider. However, one professional development and higher education note related to that finding, if there are expansions in the region, through its programs focused to programs that require highly specialized on job placement and careers in high demand educational space, (for example a major expansion professions. The 2021 Institutional Masterplan of the nursing program requiring additional lab for SFCC provides a facilities and land use space), there may be a need to construct new plan to guide the physical development and buildings, as remodeling existing spaces to redevelopment of campus. The document does function for these educational goals can be more not include financial, enrollment, or educational costly and less effective than constructing a new program planning or projections beyond where building. those elements intersect with the physical planning of the campus. There are also follow up studies

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Executive Summary Principles of the plan

Organization

The 2021 Institutional Master Plan aims to support the SFCC community, including the broadest scope of community, faculty, staff, students, alumni and visitors possible, culminating in an environment that is unique to SFCC and the opportunities that the institution creates. The college, as any other higher education institution, is continuously learning and adapting to a number of factors, thus creating a need to create appropriate physical spaces and facilities. The 2021 Institutional Masterplan is based on a set of key principals and strategic goals as briefly described below:

The Institutional Masterplan is organized as follows:

•

Chapter 1 – Introduction

•

• •

Chapter 2 – Planning Context

The plan should reinforce the goals of the strategic plan, supporting students, allowing for community partnerships and build the capacity of the college.

•

The plans, goals and outcomes of the report reflect and address issues related to sustainability, resiliency, equity and diversity.

•

The plan, and the college, serves on 3 levels, the individual student, the campus community and the larger region. The plan addresses the impacts, both positive and negative, on all three levels and consideration is given to how each (student, community and region) will experience changes on campus.

Defines the scope and limits of the plan, defines the timeline of events during the planning process; Defines the guiding principles of the masterplan within the context of the SFCC strategic plan;

•

• • • •

Introduces the structure of the report, the findings and recommendations and introduces areas for further exploration; Describes the geographic context of campus; Describes the introductory information about the college; Locates and describes the physical building assets of the college; Maps the land use of the campus and Higher Education Center; Describes the climate of the region with future climate projections to aid in further planning; Describes the current event context within the college.

Chapter 3 – Quantitative Findings

• •

Describes the process, purpose, methodology and findings of the Facilities Condition Assessment (FCA); Describes the process, purpose, methodology and findings of the Facilities Condition Index (FCI); Presents the recommendations for capital projects based on FCA and FCI findings; Presents the findings of the space utilization analysis

Chapter 5 - Summary and Cost Estimates Appendix • Engagement Meetings • Visioning Summit Summary • Survey Results • Facilities Condition Index • Facilities Condition Assessment • Campus Plans • Large Prints (for full campus maps needing a larger scale)

Chapter 4 – Observations and Recommendations •

• • • •

• •

Presents findings, analysis and recommendations of a number of physical campus elements including, pedestrian and vehicular connections, wayfinding and signage, technology and IT; Presents a series of campus design guidelines focused on creation of a holistic campus experience; Presents a high level sustainability plan as a framework for future analysis and exploration; Presents a flexibility and growth plan for future development on campus; Describes the importance of equity and inclusion efforts on campus and guidelines for how those can be addressed in the physical infrastructure of campus; Identifies potential opportunities for funding strategies, physical improvements and community partnerships; Identifies potential long term highly ambitious goals for the physical infrastructure on campus

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Introduction Letter from the President + CFO Acknowledgments Scope Timeline + Engagement Guiding Principles

Letter from the President and CFO Santa Fe Community College’s 2021 Long-Term Facilities Campus Plan presents a long-range vision that guides capital improvements so that we continue to further our mission: Empower Students. Strengthen Community. Empoderar a los Estudiantes. Fortalecer a la Comunidad. Each investment in the College’s facilities is an investment in our students, our faculty and staff, and our community. While acknowledging the beauty of our existing campus with its welcoming facilities and stunning views, we undertake a review of our plan every five years to ensure it is both current and forward-looking. The 2021 Facilities Campus Plan provides a roadmap that allows us to consider changing student and community needs as we prepare capital funding requests for Main Campus. With an up-to-date plan, we demonstrate that we are good stewards of public funding when we prioritize recommendations for upgrades to our infrastructure. We developed the Facilities Campus Plan through a Visioning Summit that included stakeholder engagement with students, faculty, staff, the Governing Board, neighbors, and members of the community we serve. In addition, insights from the 2021 Strategic Plan helped to inform our project. Thanks to the diversity of voices, we have a broader perspective on how we might plan for our learning spaces, technology requirements, design options, and other concerns, including the addition of hybrid classrooms prompted by the pandemic.

We looked at the plan through multiple lenses, including, among others: • Student-Focused Individual, Collaborative, and Interactive Learning Spaces • Student Comfort, Growth and Achievement • Collegial, Supportive Working Environments • Community Connections • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion • Accessibility and Accommodations • Interior and Exterior Visual Appeal • Sustainability • Safety and Security • Innovation and Partnerships Because of this approach, any improvements that are proposed will incorporate these important guiding principles. We are well prepared to respond as our College evolves and opportunities arise. We extend special thanks to SFCC’s Assistant Director for Facilities and Campus Planning Andrea Mueller, who oversaw the process; the Local Bond Advisory Committee, for their valuable contributions; and to Shepley Bullfinch, McClain + Yu, and Biohabitats for their professional expertise and recommendations. With gratitude for all those who participated in envisioning our future, we look forward to realizing our potential in the coming years. Sincerely, Becky Rowley, Ph.D. President Nick Telles Vice President of Finance/ Chief Financial Officer

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Acknowledgments

The planning team of Shepley Bulfinch and McClain + Yu would like to extend our sincere thanks to the Faculty, Staff, Students, and Administration of Santa Fe Community College. Your time and feedback was essential to the successful outcome of this document. The process was truly enjoyable and we hope that these efforts will help guide your development over the next decade. A special thanks to Andrea Mueller, Facilities & Operations Assistant Director & Campus Planner was a fantastic resource to the planning team, and her navigation of the process through a pandemic was much appreciated. Thank YOU! Alison Rainey, Raimund McClain, Kristina Yu, Peter Rasmussen Nada Shuaib, Sam Strasser, Carlos Martinez, Amanda Levesque

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Scope The 2021 Santa Fe Community College Institutional Masterplan touches on a wide range of items, specifically those that are physical in nature, on the SFCC Campus. From a detailed Facilities Condition Analysis of the campus infrastructure to broad scope ideas about districting the academic programs on campus, the plan analyzes both the current infrastructure and identifies future projects and growth which can be presented to the New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee for funding requests and Local General Obligation Bonds and associated funding sources for capital consideration. This master plan report supports the College Strategic plan, is influenced by enrollment trends, as well as the construction projects currently underway or planned. Recommendations, both large and small, are influenced by these important drivers.

Based on the initial request for proposal and the interview process, the general scope of the planning project is as follows: 1. Assessment and Analysis of Data Program enrollment and class size recommendations to include growth plan and outreach areas 2. Analysis and Physical Development Projections – Quantified space needs current and for future programs 3. Development of Conceptual Plans and Campus development options to include Facilities and site improvement project scopes and sequences of implementation 4. Creation of Design Guidelines 5. Development of Implementation Strategies 6. Collaboration and integration with SFCC Strategic Plan and Technology Planning 7. Creation of a Sustainability Plan 8. Determination of a Funding Strategy and provide budget recommendations to include State Capital Outlay funding and positioning, project funding schedules and recommendations for alternative source of funding for capital projects 9. Provision of a Utilities Master Plan 10. Provision of Safety and Security assessment and needs 11. Provide qualified and experienced Assessment Team(s) to complete Comprehensive Facilities Condition Assessment (FCAs) with Facilities Condition Index Report – physical assessment of facilities and building systems to identify deficiencies, required actions, and associated timelines and costs.

A snap shot of the 5 most frequently discussed topics during the Visioning Summit - a virtual workshop engaging a large number of the SFCC stakeholders over a period of 2 days *see appendix for additional information

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Timeline + Engagement The SFCC Institutional Masterplan began in January of 2021 and was set up to occur in 3 main phases. Those phases were described as follows: 1. Data Gathering and Assessment (Phase 1) 2. Visioning and Strategy (Phase 2A and 2B) 3. Implementation (Phase 3A and 3B) Each phase focused on specific aspects of creating the plan, however, there was overlap between the phases and often, discoveries in later phases required new analysis of previous data. This is not unexpected. Further explanation of the scope of each section is described below: •

•

Data Gathering and Assessment – This phase took a deep look at the physical condition of campus through extensive site visits and considered enrollment*, scheduling and utilization trends. Previous masterplan documentation was provided and referenced, as well as detailed information from previous capital improvement projects, such as the Siemens Energy Audit.

•

Implementation -This phase focused on solutions, recommendations and the creation of the plan. Meetings were held to ensure buy in from the staff and administration. A draft report was delivered to the Governing Board on September 10, 2021 for comment and review, as well as to the LBAC committee, and the final report was delivered for final approval in early November of 2021. *Note - Due to the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on enrollment, data from the 2019 academic year was utilized as the baseline for enrollment. **Additional information about the Visioning Summit is available in the Appendix

Visioning and Strategy – This phase was kicked off by a large virtual visioning summit** which included a diverse range of participants from the college and the greater Santa Fe Community. This phase focused on the creation of ideas and concepts based on the data from phase 1. The planning team engaged a number of subcommittees during this phase continuing the data gathering, but also verifying progress and concepts with these expert groups on campus.

Screen captures from the visioning summit. Over 50 attendees participated in a completely virtual engagement session Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Jan

Feb

March

week

Phase 1 FCA on Site Collection

Data Sets Due

week

April week

week

May week

week

June week

week

July week

week

Phase 2A

Initial Findings Report Presentation SFCC Phase Review

Strategy Report Presentation SFCC Phase Review

Phase 3A

Client Deliverables

week

SFCC Phase Review

Governing Board Presentation

Subcommitte Meetings

week

OCT

Initial Findings Report Presentation

Phase 2B

Major Meetings

week

Sep

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Visioning Summit

KEY

week

Aug

Implementation Framework Report SFCC Phase Review

Phase 3B Draft Report Presentation

Governing Board Presentation

Final Report Deliverable SFCC Phase Review

Committees To achieve broad engagement with the College, committees were Sustainability: Andrea Mueller organized to focused on diverse topics and issues to provide input on the master planning process. Local Bond Advisory Committee (LBAC): Dr. Rebecca SFCC President Rowley - Nick Telles - VP of Finance and CFO Amy Pell - Controller Cori Bergen - Chief Information Officer Jessica Garcia Assistant Controller Karin Pitman - Facilities and Operations Director, Project Manager Margaret Peters VP Academic and Student Affairs Yash Morimoto Associate VP for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Patricia Newman Executive Assistant to the President Melissa Martinez General Ledger Accountant Andrea Mueller Facilities and Operations Project Manager / Assistant Campus Planner Ute Jannsen-Kerr Academic Director Executive / Steering Committee: Dr. Becky Rowley SFCC President Nick Telles - VP of Finance and CFO Margaret Peters VP Academic and Student Affairs Yash Morimoto Associate VP for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Andrea Mueller Facilities and Operations Assistant Director & Campus Planner Facilities and Campus Plan Committee: Dobby Schmidt Director of Facilities Jessica Garcia Assistant Controller Karin Pitman - Facilities and Operations Director Project Manager Amy Pell - Controller Teresa Roybal - Director of Academic Resources Jack Sullivan - Chair, Board of Directors Fran Nawrocki Facilities Coordinator/Special Event Planner Elizabeth Solis Academic Affairs Coordinator

Facilities and Operations Project Manager / Assistant Campus Planner Interim Director, Innovation Center

Mary Ondine Frauenglass - Dobby Schmidt Facilities Maintenance Manager Malvina Canon Grounds Manager Frank Currie - Lead Faculty Distributed Energy Technology and Systems Amanda Hatherly Director, Center of Excellence, New Mexico EnergySmart Academy Erin Lopez-Trask Administrative Assistant Lina Cassel - Director of Art on Campus Brookney Gondara - Interim Director of Early Childhood Center of Excellence

Technology: Cori Bergen - Chief Information Officer Chris Gettler - Safety and Security Manager Mason Kovac - Director of User Services David Keppel - Director of IT Infrastructure and Security Carla Slentz - Director of Online Teaching and Learning John Gorman - Learning Management System Administrator Julia Dunkin - Instructional Designer/Technologist Students:

Academics: Margaret Peters VP Academic and Student Affairs Terri Tewart - Dean of the School of Science, Health, Engineering and Math and of the School of Fitness Education Colleen Lynch Associate Dean, School of Fitness Education, School of Sciences, Health, Engineering and Math James Wysong Dean School of Arts and Media Arts Julia Deisler - Acting Interim Dean of Trades, Advanced Technologies and Sustainability and of Business, Professional Studies and Education Thomasina OrtizAssociate Vice President for Student Gallegos - Success Milton Riess - Faculty, School of Arts, Design, and Media Arts, School of Trades, Advanced Technologies and Sustainability Emily Stern - Assoc. Professor of English Richard Shultz Faculty, School of Trades, Advanced Technologies and Sustainability Lucas Gonzales Assistant Professor of Nursing Joseph Villegas Adjunct Faculty

Mary Eleas - Student Involvement Coordinator Andrea Loibl - Senate Chair, Student Government Association Ana Chavez - Treasurer, Student Government Association Mara Penfil - Student Anna Gallegos Student Brandon Sanchez Student James Muir - Student Todd Lovato - Executive Director Marketing and PR Yash Morimoto Associate VP for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Visioning Summit As part of Phase 2, a large visioning summit took place with a broad range of community partners. Santa Fe Community College Representatives Amy Pell - Controller Andrea Loibl - Senate Chair, Student Government Association Andrea Mueller Facilities and Operations Project Manager / Assistant Campus Planner Carla Slentz - Director of Online Teaching and Learning Chris Gettler - Safety and Security Manager Colleen Lynch - Associate Dean and Acting Interim Dean, School of Fitness Education, School of Sciences, Health, Engineering and Math Cori Bergen - Interim CIO Dawn Wink - Associate Dean of Trades/Tech/ Sustainability School of Business, Education and Professional Studies Deborah Bolt - Executive Director of SFCC Foundation Dr. Rebecca Rowley - SFCC President Henry Mignardot Former Associate VP Facilities and Operations Herman Garcia FEC Director of Fitness Education Ian Widrick Martinez - President, Student Government Association James Wysong Dean of School of Arts, Design and Media Arts, School of Liberal Arts Jessica Garcia Assistant Controller Julia Deisler - Interim Dean of Trades, Advanced Technologies and Sustainability of Business and Professional Studies and Education Karin Pitman - Facilities and Operations Director Project Manager Margaret Peters Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs Maria Eleas - Student Involvement Coordinator Mary Ondine - Interim Director Innovation Center Frauenglass

Mason Kovac - OIT Assistant Director Meghan McGarrity - Interim Director SFCC Higher Education Center Melissa Martinez General Ledger Accountant Nick Telles - Vice President for Finance and CFO Shalimar Krebs Associate Dean of School of Arts, Design and Media Arts, School of Liberal Arts Thomasinia - Associate Vice President for Student Ortiz-Gallegos Success Tomas Duran - Assistant Professor HPER School of Fitness Education Vaune Hegmann Director of Student Accessibility Services Yash Morimoto Associate VP for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Santa Fe Community College Community Partners Annmarie McLaughlin -Sr. Director of Community Programs, SF Community Foundation Brian DuBoff - Center Director, Small Business Development Center Cass Thompson Project Manager, Estancia Homes at Rancho Viejo Dr. Melissa Lomax - SFPS Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction, CTE Felicia Torres - Principal, Amy Biehl Community School Javier Gonzales VP and Chief Development Officer, Christus St. Vincents Foundation Jeremy Lovato CIO, NMDOT Katherine Miller Santa Fe County Manager Linda Sink - SFPS Deputy Superintendent Monica Leyba - Chief Nursing Officer, Christus St. Vincents Foundation Rachel Kutcher - Project Director, Expanding Opportunities for Young Families Rebecca Estrada - Outreach Specialist for Higher Education and Workforce Development, LANL Community Partnership Offices Reid Wessels - Head of School, Masters Program

Rich Brown - Economic Development Director, City of Santa Fe Robin Chavez - Principal, Santo Nino Regional Catholic School Sarah Program Director of Education and Amador-Guzman Opportunity, SF Community Foundation Warren Thompson - President, Los Atrevidos Inc Planning and Design Team- Workshop Facilitators Alison Rainey - Principal, Shepley Bulfinch Amanda Garvey Senior Associate, Thornton Tomasetti Carlos Martinez Designer, McClain + Yu Emma Reif - Project Director, Thornton Tomasetti Erin English - Principal, Bio Habitats Gunnar Hubbard Principal, Thornton Tomasetti Kristina Yu - Principal, McClain + Yu Luke Voiland - Principal, Shepley Bulfinch Nada Shuaib - Designer, Shepley Bulfinch Peter Rasmussen Associate, Shepley Bulfinch Raimund McClain Principal, McClain + Yu Sam Strasser - Designer, McClain + Yu

Constellation of SFCC Stakeholders convened for visioning summit Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Strategic Plan + Guiding Principles Early on in the process, the planning team worked with the LBAC committee to create a series of Guiding Principles that would serve as a check and a north star by which the process would be shepherded. These were based on a series of early meetings and were rooted in the SFCC strategic plan, which has 3 main focus areas; 1. Supporting our Students, 2. Partnering with our Community, and 3. Building our College Capacity It was clear that any guiding principles for the masterplan document must reinforce the strategic plan. Developed in February of 2021, the guiding principles are as follows: The masterplan should reinforce the goals of the strategic plan – supporting students, partnering with the community and build capacity • Welcoming environments that inspire a sense of belonging and engagement, • Treat space as an asset for enhanced student outcomes through easy access student support services and contemporary learning environments, • Use technology to support a mix of physical and digital environments that invite the broader community to campus for knowledge sharing and social connection, • Identify space use efficiencies that help contribute to the college’s financial solvency.

Plans, Goals, and Outcomes in the masterplan should reflect and address issues related to sustainability, resiliency, equity and diversity. ◦ Lead by example as a key regional resource for sustainable systems, training, and knowledge sharing, ◦ Design for a broad range of student journeys in the day-to-day experience of campus, inclusive of race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, socioeconomic status and age. Our College serves on three levels, the individual student, our campus community, and the larger regional community. The masterplan should address impacts, positive and negative, on all three levels and consideration should be paid to how each will experience change.

SFCC Strategic Plan

Support Our Students

Partner with our Community

Build our College Capacity

MP Guiding Principles The masterplan should reinforce the goals of the strategic plan supporting students, partnering with the community, and build college capacity

Plans, Goals, and Outcomes in the masterplan should reflect and address issues related to sustainability, resiliency, equity and diversity

The College serves on 3 levels, the individual, the campus, and the larger regional community. The Masterplan should address positive and negative impacts on all 3 levels and consider how each will experience change

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Planning Context Approach and Process About SFCC Geographic Context Building Assets Main Campus HEC Campus Climate Analysis Equity and Inclusion Context of Current Events

Approach and Process The long-term institutional master plan process and report addresses the Campus planning and capital project needs for the next five to ten years. The approach to the process is founded in the following: 1. Reference the 2016 masterplan update which created a baseline for the last 5 years of development on campus, and analyze which initiatives from that plan were complete and which required carry-over into this new plan. 2. Evaluate and validate current campus physical space needs based on 2019 scheduling data and create a utilization rate analysis and recommendation.* 3. Establish guiding principles which work together with the college strategic plan by which decisions could be evaluated. 4. Analyze the physical condition of space on campus 5. Recommend both short and long term capital improvements 6. Engage with students, staff, faculty and leadership to create ownership and awareness of the plan.

Projects currently in design or construction For context and future conditions, these projects have been incorporated into this report.

7. Emergency Preparedness and Fire Suppression Improvements

About Santa Fe Community College

8. Film and Media Lab Improvements – no direct impact on this plan

Santa Fe Community College (SFCC) was founded in 1983 with state funds appropriated for the creation of a community college in Santa Fe. In its first semesters, SFCC held classes in temporary facilities in Santa Fe. The early curriculum included courses in office tech, business, computing, information systems among others. In 1984 a bond was passed to support the construction of a new college. The Rancho Viejo Partnership made major contributions to this effort. The campus has grown over time with facility additions such as the William C. Witter Fitness Center, Early Childhood Development Center, Fine Arts Center, Instructional Technology Center, Higher Education Center, Trades and Technologies Center and the Health & Sciences Center.

9. Radio Station Improvements - no direct impact on this plan 10. Fitness Center Flooring Upgrades – see Facilities Condition Analysis 11. Facilities and Operations Parking Lot – location identified 12. Parking Lot Resurfacing – see Facilities Condition Analysis 13. Instructional Space Awnings – see Recommendation 4, Activate Courtyard. 14. TATC HVAC Improvements + window modifications 15. Life Safety Improvements 16. Wood shop dust collection improvements

Student population SFCC serves a broad regional community of approximately 13,000 students. Its student body includes learners of all ages, goals, experiences and backgrounds. SFCC values diversity of students, staff and faculty and advocates for inclusiveness and equity. * 2018 and 2019 scheduling data were the most relevant for the analysis due to the COVID 19 pandemic. **See Appendix for current academic departments and programs.

1. Wastewater Treatment Plant Decommissioning – see Recommendation 6, Sustainable Landscapes 2. Automotive Facility – see Recommendation 8, Campus Growth Areas 3. SE Connector – see Recommendation 9, SE Connector 4. Roofing Upgrades – see Facilities Condition Analysis 5. Adult Education Improvements – see Facilities Condition Analysis 6. Greenhouse Lab – For reference in Recommendations 5 and 6.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Geographic Context SFCC is located in North-central New Mexico in the Rio Grande valley. SFCC is within Santa Fe County, south of the city of Santa Fe, a regional center. From a geographic context, SFCC’s region is characterized by the Sangre de Cristo Range of the Rocky Mountains to the East, the Jemez Mountain Range to the West and the Rio Grande to the West. SFCC’s elevation is at over 7,000 feet above sea level. The region’s climate is characterized by cool Winters and warm Summers.

Main Campus The Main Campus is located within an area bounded by College Drive to the North, Richards Avenue to the East and Avenida Del Sur to the South. The college’s building assets are concentrated on the Western portion of the college’s lands (366 acres) which extend further to the East. The Main Campus was constructed starting in 1986. Major additions were constructed in 1990 (Physical Plant Addition), 1993 (West Wing), 1998 (Visual Arts Center), 2000 (East Wing/ ITC), 2009 (Health & Sciences Center, La Familia, Trades & Technologies Center). The Fitness Center, on Main Campus but constructed separate from the Main Building, was completed in 1991. Also separate from the Main Building, The Early Childhood Development Center (Kid’s Campus) was constructed in 1995. The Automotive Technology Center was completed in 2021. Today, SFCC’s building assets total over 670,000 building gross square feet.

Higher Education Center The Higher Education Center is located within the city of Santa Fe and remote from SFCC Main Campus. This facility was constructed in 2013. The distance between the HEC and the Main Campus is approximately 5 miles when following existing roadway connections.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Circulation Analysis of Existing Connections Vehicular Transport To & From SFCC Bus / Mass Transit SFCC can be accessed by two Bus Routes. The Route 21 Bus Route transports between the Santa Fe Place Transit Center (SFPT) and SFCC. The SFPT is a transportation node that connections with all major city bus routes. The Route 22 Bus Route connects the NM 599 Rail Runner Depot to SFCC. The Rail Runner connects Santa Fe, Albuquerque, and communities in between and south of Albuquerque. There is limited connection between the HEC and the main campus. This constricts opportunities for students to take classes between the locations and ultimately, the potential of the HEC. Personal Vehicles SFCC can be accessed by personal vehicles by way of Richards Avenue to the North and by way of Avenida del Sur to the West. Carpooling is supported and encouraged on campus with reserved parking areas. Bicycles access campus by way of Richards Avenue from the North, various surface streets and also dedicated hike and bike trails such as the Rail Trail and the Spur Trail, which connects close to campus.

Current bus route service the SFCC Main Campus

Current recognized bikeways accessing the SFCC Main Campus

Empower Students, Strengthen Community ##

Campus Circulation Vehicular Transportation Recommendations It is recommended for consideration that more stops are added for bus access to campus from Santa Fe. If, for example the Route 21 bus stop included a Health & Sciences stop, a Main Building Stop, a Fitness Building Stop and a Kids Campus Stop it would serve to link not only SFCC with Santa Fe but also SFCC building areas on campus. It is recommended that this route run regularly so that it can be depended on by the college population. Expected improvements to general vehicular access to the campus are in progress. The NE/SE Connector project is currently in the design phase. This project will create new linkages between Richards Avenue and Rabbit Road at the north (NE Connector) and will lead to the south to a new connection with Avenida Del Sur. These are indicated with the yellow line in the adjacent diagram. This connector project will enhance connectivity of the campus with the surrounding areas. Additionally, emergency access is bettered. The extension of College Drive shown in red on the diagram is not currently considered by the Connector project but is a recommended linkage that should be developed. If it is constructed, the impact to SFCC’s future development will be considerable; future development may occur along the new edge at College Drive allowing extension of the Health and Sciences district.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Circulation Vehicle to Pedestrian Transition Existing Parking Areas Major Parking Areas on Main Campus include four primary lots: The West Wing lot, Main Parking Lot, the parking lot near the Health & Sciences area and the Fitness Center Parking Lot. Additional parking can be found at the ATC and at the Kids Campus buildings. These latter lots are dedicated to those buildings and by their location do not tend to service the Main Building. In general parking areas are adequate in number and condition. Please refer to the Site Conditions Sheet in the appendix for Vehicular Parking. Campus Walkability Map Campus Walkability can be discussed as occurring in two forms. First, walkability on the Main Campus, Main Building. It was estimated that the Main Building is within 3-5 minutes walk from most of its parking areas. Outlying buildings such as the ATC, Kids Campus and to some degree the Fitness building are less accessible from these parking areas and are therefore provided with separate parking. In general the pedestrian connections from the Main Building to the outlying buildings are in need of further improvement in order to increase campus connectivity. Recent Changes on Campus SFCC has recently completed a parking resurfacing project, has added a parking lot near Facilities and Operations and has added parking at the ATC Facility. Distribution of Campus Parking Although parking is not deficient at the scale of the campus, it is recommended that additional parking capacity be provided at areas of recent campus growth, particularly at the Health and Sciences Area. The HEC has parking areas which are adequate in size and condition.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Circulation Outdoor Pedestrian Areas Campus Perimeter Walking Path The existing campus perimeter walking path is an asset to the college. The path navigates native landscape and offers distant views of the Sangre de Cristos, Jemez Mountains and the Ortiz Range to the South. Generally, additional awareness of this path would increase its use. SFCC may consider additional signage along the path and the development of outdoor exercise stations. Also, improving points of crossing at road intersections (e.g. @ La Familia near North Entry) would increase safety for pedestrians and bicyclists utilizing the path. It is recommended that the path is considered for integration with the rehabilitation of the wastewater treatment pond area (as discussed in Ch 4). Other Walking & Recreation Areas SFCC’s campus assets include a running track, football field, soccer field, baseball field, four tennis courts and a ropes course. The field facilities are generally in poor condition and are therefore not utilized. The areas occupied by these fields are strategic areas which may contribute to SFCCs future growth in several possible ways: (1) providing much needed outdoor recreation spaces to the broader Santa Fe community* (2) providing growth areas for future buildings, especially in regards to the growth of the Health & Sciences areas. Campus Wayfinding & Signage The existing campus consists of over 600,000 gross square feet of area. The ability of building visitors and regular occupants to navigate these areas is critical. This team considers the connection improvements above (Courtyard Access, Gateway Gallery, Main Entry Pavilion) as being potential contributors to clarifying wayfinding in the building by providing more direct connections. In addition to these recommendations, the team recommends that a unified wayfinding system be a point of study. A unified system could bring together signage information that is currently treated disparately or is missing: wayfinding, accessibility, building area/building name information, points of interest (counseling, cafeteria, gallery, student lounge, shared spaces), and points of reference for security (campus police, medical facilities etc.). *Note - increased maintenance budgets or different funding sources may be needed to bring these facilities up to a usable standard for a community resource.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Main Campus Map E

E DRIV

EG COLL

E DRIV

EG COLL

ETHYL THE WHALE

LA FAMILIA

ETHYL THE WHALE

LA FAMILIA

HEC - SECOND FLOOR

HEC - FIRST FLOOR WEST WING - LOWER LEVEL

HEALTH & SCIENCE CENTER

HEC - FIRST FLOOR

WEST WING

WEST WING PARKING

WEST WING

EAST WING

MAIN ENTRANCE

30 MINUTES & RESERVED

COURTYARD

RIC

COURTYARD

HA RD SA VEN U

E HA RD SA VEN U

HEC - SECOND FLOOR

RIC

HEC - FIRST FLOOR

WEST WING - LOWER LEVEL

HEALTH & SCIENCE CENTER

WEST WING PARKING

BUS STOP

FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER

FINE ARTS CENTER

FITNESS CENTER - SECOND FLOOR

PERMITTED CARPOOL

FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER

FINE ARTS CENTER

FITNESS CENTER - SECOND FLOOR

PERMITTED CARPOOL

WATER TREATMENT POND

TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

BUS STOP

FITNESS CENTER - LOWER FLOOR

WATER TREATMENT POND

MAIN PARKING

EAST WING

MAIN ENTRANCE

30 MINUTES & RESERVED

FITNESS CENTER - LOWER FLOOR

WATER TREATMENT POND WATER TREATMENT POND

TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

MAIN PARKING

SOLAR ARRAYS

KIDS CAMPUS

CONTINUING EDUCATION

SOLAR ARRAYS

SOLAR ARRAYS TAT - SECOND FLOOR

TAT - SECOND FLOOR

Campus Building Footprint

Campus Parking and Transportation Connections

E DRIV

EG COLL

E DRI

EG COLL

ETHYL THE WHALE

LA FAMILIA

ETHYL THE WHALE

HEC - SECOND FLOOR

WEST WING - LOWER LEVEL

AVE N DS

HEALTH & SCIENCE CENTER

RD HA

COURTYARD WEST WING

COURTYARD

RIC

HEC - SECOND FLOOR

RIC H

SA VEN

HEC - FIRST FLOOR

WEST WING - LOWER LEVEL

HEC - FIRST FLOOR

HEALTH & SCIENCE CENTER

HEC - FIRST FLOOR

WEST WING WEST WING PARKING WEST WING PARKING

30 MINUTES & RESERVED

EAST WING

MAIN ENTRANCE

BUS STOP

FINE ARTS CENTER

FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER

30 MINUTES & RESERVED

EAST WING

MAIN ENTRANCE

BUS STOP

FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER

FINE ARTS CENTER FITNESS CENTER - SECOND FLOOR

FITNESS CENTER - SECOND FLOOR

PERMITTED CARPOOL PERMITTED CARPOOL

WATER TREATMENT POND

MAIN PARKING

TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

FITNESS CENTER - LOWER FLOOR

WATER TREATMENT POND

MAIN PARKING

WATER TREATMENT POND

TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

SOLAR ARRAYS SOLAR ARRAYS

KIDS CAMPUS

CONTINUING EDUCATION

SOLAR ARRAYS

TAT - SECOND FLOOR

Undeveloped Area

Constructed Landscape Areas Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Climate Analysis The SFCC campus is located in one of the most unique climates in the United States. As defined by the US Department of Energy, Santa Fe is part of climate zone 5b, which is generally classified as a cold dry environment. It is a bit of a misnomer to refer to Santa Fe as a high desert as the county does receive on average slightly more precipitation than the 10” that is the cutoff for a desert definition, but the city and county is certainly arid and encounters many of the same stresses regarding water security as Albuquerque and other true deserts across the state and region. Santa Fe is a generally mild climate that, due to its elevation, experiences wide diurnal temperature swings of 30 degrees F or more. Average high temperatures range from approximately 43 degrees F in the winter months to approximately 95 degrees F in July. Average low temperatures range from 17 degrees F to 54 degrees F through the year. On average, Santa Fe receives just over 14” of precipitation a year, the bulk of that arriving with the North American Monsoon from Late June to Late September. Characterized by a change in the wind direction – winds originating from the South East – and large afternoon thunderstorms, these events are known for heavy short rainfalls which can cause localized flooding and erosion.

As provided by the in depth Siemens Solar Energy Analysis, completed in 2020 Santa Fe, is a prime candidate for solar energy installations due to the lack of cloud cover and amount of direct solar irradiance available for energy generation, which, on average is between 6.0 and 7.5 kWh/ sq m/day. This vast amount of solar availability also contributes to the need to provide shade, preferably through planted material, or via built elements, to provide comfortable outdoor environments for students. The amount of solar radiation also contributes to the Urban Heat Island Effect, which will be a major consideration for the campus moving forward and will be addressed later on in this document.

Department of Energy climate zone map

Wind conditions, which can be studied and utilized to create pleasant outdoor spaces for study and gathering, are typical of most southwestern states. Santa Fe in particular shows strong patterns of predominant winds originating from the Southwest and Southeast during the Late Spring to Early Fall, with wind patterns changing in the winter, originating primarily from the north.

AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA FE

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Wind Rose Data Wind conditions, which can be studied and utilized to create pleasant outdoor spaces for study and gathering, are typical of most southwestern states. Santa Fe in particular shows strong patterns of predominant winds originating from the Southwest and Southeast during the Late Spring to Early Fall, with wind patterns changing in the winter, originating primarily from the north.

Yearly compiled wind rose

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Solar Irradiance Santa Fe’s greatest resource may be it’s clear skies and access to solar irradiance*. As provided by the in depth Siemens Solar Energy Analysis which was completed in 2020, Santa Fe, as much of the Southwest United States, is a prime candidate for solar energy installations due to the lack of cloud cover and amount of direct solar irradiance available for energy generation, which, on average is between 6.0 and 7.5 kWh/sq m/day. This vast amount of solar availability also contributes to the need to provide shade, preferably through planted material, or via built elements, in order to provide comfortable outdoor environments for students. The amount of solar radiation also contributes to the Urban Heat Island Effect, which will be a major consideration for the campus moving forward and will be addressed later on in this document. *solar irradiance, in simple terms, is the amount of solar energy arriving at the surface of the earth, usually measured in watts per square meter.

Solar Irradiance Map of the United States. Darker colors indicate more solar energy available for renewable energy generation

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Future Climate The scientific evidence is clear that human caused climate change is here and is forcing nations, cities and organizations to adapt to new climate conditions. In general the Southwestern United States will be drier and hotter, and face more pronounced extremes in the climate. Heat waves and droughts will be longer, rainfall will be more sporadic and will likely come in fewer events that will be larger in magnitude and cause more acute flooding and runoff issues. It will be essential for the College to incorporate planning for these new normals not just over the next decade, but through the end of the century. The New Mexico Department of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources has provided resources which predict future climate patterns through the end of the century, based on current data models. At a high level, the college can expect, and plan for the following changes to the climate: • Average precipitation by the end of the century will be reduced by up to 4% through most of the year, however, spring precipitation (March – May) is predicted to be reduced by up to 28%. • Average temperatures through 2050 are predicted to rise 3% • Average temperatures by 2099 are predicted to rise 8%. • The watersheds feeding Santa Fe are considered to be at a high to extreme risk for wildfire, potentially effecting both water quality and water delivery to campus. Further data and information is available from the EMNRD website at https://nmclimaterisk.org/.

It is forecast that the areas around Santa Fe will become drier and hotter over the next 50 years.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Equity and Inclusion Santa Fe Community college presents students with affordable, high quality educational programs that serve the social, cultural, technological and economic needs of a diverse and unique community. As evidenced in SFCC’s written statements, current initiatives and programs, the College strives to provide an inclusive environment for educational development and growth. Coupled with policies, the characteristics and navigation of buildings and spaces on Campus has a powerful influence on students, faculty, staff and visitors. The built environment has the capability to both support and encumber the sense of inclusion, the sense of belonging. The built environment is a result of design and planning choices that have tangible impacts on the community. At it’s best, design and planning should be a reflection of the place and community in which it serves. Decisions that affect the diverse social, economic, and cultural population must be evaluated. Creating environments that are equitable and accessible to all, leads to the sense of belonging which cultivates inclusion and fosters diversity.

Incorporating color into wayfinding across the campus can be a key to improving equitable access and reducing confusion around campus

Signage in multiple language around campus, similar to international airports and many cities around the globe, can create a welcoming environment for all students. (Image - Brisbane, Australia - courtesy of SEGD.org)

Potential questions to consider while embarking upon new design and planning efforts on Campus include: • • • • •

Does this decision enhance or deny a sense of belonging? Does this decision increase or decrease the sense of security? Does this decision permit access to all? Does this decision create or eliminate a barrier? Does this decision forward SFCC’s mission and goals?

A singular point of access will provide clarity, enhance security and clarify wayfinding reducing anxiety. This will be covered further in Ch 4 All Gender Restrooms are in current practice on Campus.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Current Events Context COVID PANDEMIC

CURRENT CONTEXT

Since Mid March 2020, a critical time before Spring break in the academic year of SFCC, the entire world was held in suspension with the indeterminable COVID 19 outbreak. SFCC, along with all educational institutions, transitioned into remote virtual online learning platforms.

In spite of the hardships, the students, faculty and staff were intrepid in their pursuit to finish degrees and certificates. More than 300 graduates received 357 awards, 212 certificates and 145 associate degrees, and 25 students earned multiple awards. This snapshot of SFCC student success in the times of COVID attests to the robust infrastructure of the campus and its teaching commitment of faculty and leadership.

First, under consideration for health, safety and welfare, all SFCC members were requested to stay quarantined and at home away from any public spaces and gatherings. This placed a high emergency demand on all technology systems related to SFCC. Communications, messaging, technologies and accounting for all students, courses, faculty and staff became a high priority in accessing the SFCC conditions of Spring 2020. Following the mandates of the state of New Mexico department of Health, and Department of Higher Education, SFCC addressed the pandemic public health concern and emergency preparedness with close communications and instructions. A quick and comprehensive response to COVID reporting was critical to developing a statewide profile of spread. The initial steps required SFCC to create proper containment; self-isolation, quarantine, and a ‘watch and see’ position related to COVID cases. SFCC, like all institutions, was in a holding pattern for whether returning to our places of study and work was a feasible option. This was closely tied to national, state, local trends of COVID cases, and local hospital capacities. Moving forward, SFCC transitioned into productive and efficient online teaching modes, requiring adaptation and flexibility of all members, in order to conduct courses that are critical to curricula implementation. An unprecedented ‘Stay at Home’ order was issued and reissued over the 2020/2021 year, as COVID cases spiked several times to cause planning hardships. With the vaccination finally in place by early 2021, cases of COVID dramatically fell where the planning for the eventual return to campus was reengaged. With the goal to have face to face courses, and a "Return to Work" staged policy, the SFCC leadership is cautiously and attentively moving forward with the Fall 2021 semester.

Progressing into the year, community initiatives supporting young families are piloted by The Annie E. Casey Foundation and Los Alamos National Laboratory/Triad National Security, LLC with financial and advising assistance for SFCC students. This emphasizes the specific kinds of support needed for growing families within the SFCC community. This funding source was supported further with the City of Santa Fe Mayors for a Guaranteed Income pilot program for SFCC students. On the campus end, the over 17,000 square feet of new space has been added for the Automotive Technologies Center. The ATC houses three labs and shop space for automotive study. The new space teaches the latest in electrical and hybrid vehicle technology. In keeping with the values of the campus in LEED certifications and a highly performative sustainable campus environment, the ATC was awarded Gold certification.

Humoristic take on proper mask etiquette on campus

ENROLLMENT TRENDS In the years of 2016 to 2019, as we await public data for 2020 and 2021 (COVID semesters), enrollment credit hours dipped from 6101 to 5455, a nearly 11% decrease over the course of 4 years. There was an increase of part time students from 78.2% of the credit hours to 81.8% of the credit hours. Representation of female students held steady over the course of 3 years at 62% of the credit hours. Native / Alaska /Indigenous student population increased slightly generating credit hours of 4.7% to 5.6%. Other persons of color were responsible for the uptick in credit hours of 8.5% to 10.7%. The Hispanic student population generating credit hours, there was a slight dip of 44.3% to 43.0%. The three-year data suggests that SFCC campus and its curricula are increasingly more appealing to Female students, Indigenous students and Other students of color. Enrollment trends are available via: https://www.sfcc.edu/data-and-analysis/ enrollment-data/

Uncharacteristically empty spaces, normally filled with students

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Quantitative Findings Summary Facilities Condition Assessment Facilities Condition Index Facilities Condition Recommendations Space Utilization

Summary Chapter 3

Facilities Condition Recommendations

Chapter 3 contains 4 main sections, each of which are focused on the future of the SFCC Campus. An overview of each section is as follows:

The masterplan recommends that buildings with Fair assessments be considered for renovation and these projects should be initiated with the larger recommendations of chapter 4 in mind. The expectation is that each of these projects would range in construction duration of 3-6 months, creating minimal disruption to the academic instruction on campus and would be ongoing at the college for a number of years.

Facilities Condition Assessment As part of the decennial masterplan process, the planning team undertook a facilities condition assessment which has as its goals to identify, quantify and prioritize maintenance deficiencies. This report will assist the college in determining deferred maintenance plans and aid in the creation of a roadmap of current and near future capital improvement plans. Each room on campus was visited and current conditions were assessed. A note as these pages are read, there are cases where facilities do not meet current building or accessibility codes. Buildings are built to the code in force during the time of design and construction and are considered code compliant until the time of major construction or renovation, at which point, buildings must be brought up to current standards. Generally, this holds true for all renovation work, however, local jurisdictions create exceptions to these rules, often regarding structures that are eligible for or already listed as "historic" properties.

Facilities Condition Index

Space Utilization Lastly, this chapter analyzes the usage rate for classrooms and other educational spaces across campus. Typically, a utilization rate of 24 hours a week scheduled in a space should be targeted. This allows for adequate turnover time between classes and flexibility for other events to be scheduled in spaces. For SFCC, there are a few very high use rooms (the Woodshop, Fitness Center and some lab spaces), but as a general rule, many of the classrooms on campus are scheduled at or below this target rate. These analysis results imply that new physical space is not required on campus, but rather, repositioning of current spaces is needed to better service the student body. Concurrently, the renovations suggested by the FCI and FCA should be able to be accomplished with minor disruption to academic schedules, i.e. classes normally scheduled in spaces targeted for renovation should be able to be relocated elsewhere on campus.

The Facilities Condition Index consolidates the information from the Facilities Condition Assessment into terms by which assets can be compared. In general, the College’s building assets are of recent construction and in fair to excellent condition. The buildings are generally in a condition as would be expected for structures that are approximately 40 years old.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment Overview Higher education institutions in New Mexico are mandated to create, update and publish master plans for their campuses. Master plans are a road mapping tool for institutions in order to ensure an appropriate trajectory for the growth of their student population, for the utilization of existing space and for the allocation of funds to a university’s needs that are most deficient. Furthermore, as expenders of tax payer dollars, public institutions must meet requirements set forth by the New Mexico Higher Education Department (NMHED) to ensure proper custodianship of those tax payer dollars. A major factor in asking for funds from NMHED is the publication of a Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). McClain + Yu Architecture and Design in collaboration with Shepley Bulfinch in February of 2021 began such an assessment to document, assess and publish a report of the condition of the Santa Fe Community College’s building infrastructure. The goal of this report is to identify, quantify and prioritize maintenance deficiencies in order to assist the university with outlining their deferred maintenance plan and to road map their current to near future capital improvement projects. Intended outcomes for the FCA are to: • Collect and document information on each facility. • Document and list deficiencies. • Calculate each building facility’s condition (FCA) in order to generate a Facility Condition Index (FCI) rating. • Provide forecasts about asset replacement timing and costs. • Provide data to maintenance personnel who will be overseeing the long-term maintenance of each facility.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment Methodology McClain + Yu deployed 3 personnel to collect and document information on over 670,000 square feet of facilities owned by Santa Fe Community College. The team accessed each space and evaluated the condition of finishes, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, lighting systems and general fire alarms system, while also documenting deficiencies. A numerical rating system of 1 to 5 was used to score the condition of each finish where 1 indicated a “very poor” condition, 2 indicated a “poor” condition, 3 indicated an “adequate” condition, 4 indicated a “good” condition and 5 indicated an “excellent” condition. Factors which influenced each condition rating was visible damage, age, aesthetic quality and defects. Input from maintenance staff and regular building occupants was also cataloged during the information gathering process and integrated as part of the final report. Another major effort of the Facility Condition Assessment was walking the site and exterior building perimeter to assess site and building envelope deficiencies. Handrails, stair treads and stair risers and countertop heights were assessed for handicapped accessibility. These deficiencies were cataloged and published as part of the final FCA document. The data collected was then input into a Building Information Model (BIM) which helped to catalogue, analyze and synthesize the data collected. The BIM model was used to catalogue locations and descriptions of deficiencies which would later be entered into a spreadsheet for cost estimation purposes as part of the final FCI report. Cost estimate data from a local estimator, RS Means cost data as well as current project bid cost data was utilized to generate the Repair and Replacement (R&R) cost of the FCI report. Each rating from the Facility Condition Assessment was averaged into one conglomerate score which was then used as part of the Facility Condition Index (FCI) report. Each building system was broken down into sub-categories where a percent weight was assigned to give a sense of scope of the sub-system as part of the overall whole. Priority ratings were also assigned to each sub-category as a reference for future repairs and replacements, but was not used as part of the FCI condition score. Utilizing the condition, location and quantity of the

most critical repairs, a “repair quantity” was generated for repairs in systems that need repairs presently. This allowed for each building to be categorized and ranked for comparison to each other in a relative manner. The purpose of the index is to provide a rating of condition for the facility. Low scores characterize buildings which are in need of less repair whereas higher scores characterize buildings needing more repairs. The index is established as a ratio of the Total Cost of Existing Deficiencies (deferred maintenance) to the Cost of the Current Replacement of the Facility. This rating allows facility maintenance personnel and campus designers to plan for future repair and replacement of building assets.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment Asset Overview In total, Santa Fe Community College owns over 670,000 square feet of building assets divided between 5 building masses. The majority of these building assets are located at the Santa Fe Main Campus which is located to the south of the City of Santa Fe, on the opposing side of the main vehicular artery of Interstate 25. A smaller satellite campus called the Higher Education Center (HEC) is located in the city limits of Santa Fe off of Saint Francis Dr near the intersection of Siringo Road and Alumni Drive. The HEC campus is a single two-story building surrounding a central courtyard in a “C” configuration with parking on the east side of the building. Focusing again on Santa Fe Community College’s Main Campus, the main campus is quartered along axial northeast and northwest lines with parking occupying the majority of the southwest half of campus while the main building of Santa Fe Community College’s campus occupies the majority of the northeast half of this axial geometry. The main building on SFCC’s Main Campus consists of two building masses arranged around a central courtyard with northeast axial pedestrian access. The areas which comprise the main building masses are the 100’s, 200’s, 300’s, 400’s, 500’s, 600’s, Health and Science, La Familia, East Wing, Fine Arts Center and Trades and Advanced Technology Center (TATC) areas. Also part of the main campus, but not part of the main building are the Fitness Education Center, Kids Campus, Controlled Environment Agriculture Lab & Classroom Building and the new Automotive Technology Center. A wide range of structural systems make up the core of these buildings. These systems include CMU bearing walls, open web steel joists, concrete pan joists, concrete columns, slab on grade with strip footing, glue-lam roof joists and beams and steel deck both composite and non-composite.

*note - a larger version of the map to the right is available in the "large prints" appendix. This can be cross referenced with the following pages to identify areas of the building. ** Geographic location of HEC and Main Campus is discussed on page 17 - Geographic Context

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 1) 100 AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 18,918 SF 17.32% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 100 area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. The interior has numerous doors, walls and benches adorned with carved and panelized woodwork with earthy toned brick and tile flooring. An acoustical ceiling tile with subdivided linear striations can be found in most spaces. This portion of the building houses the administration and security suites.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • • • •

Knob type hardware is not ADA compliant. Stair and ramp railing height and extensions are largely not code compliant. Numerous countertops are not ADA accessible. Restroom facilities appear to have original finishes with updated fixtures. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were being made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Replacement for boilers and chillers is underway. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • • •

Consider replacing ceilings in public spaces as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing HVAC distribution system. Consider replacing exterior glazing systems with high efficiency, thermally broken glazing systems. Consider replacing door knob hardware with door lever hardware. Consider replacing fire alarm panels and fixtures in the next renovation. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 2) 200A AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 16,222 SF 17.61% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 200 A area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. One prominent exterior feature is a large patio adjacent to the cafeteria which has dramatic views toward the Jemez Mountains. The interior features a large cafeteria space with dramatic glulam construction, clerestory windows and wood parquet floors which were sourced from Dixon Apple trees in 2019. This portion of the building houses the student services and support suites which include the student enrollment center.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • •

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • • •

Consider replacing the ceiling in corridors as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing carpet in the Enrollment Center in the next renovation. Consider replacing HVAC distribution system. Consider replacing exterior glazing systems with high efficiency, thermally broken glazing systems. Consider replacing fire alarm panels and fixtures in the next renovation. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 3) 200B AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1993 46,658 SF 17.91% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 200 B area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1993 as part of the first expansion of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. This expansion continues the theme of large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames which were part of the original building construction. This portion of the building houses liberal arts classrooms and some administrative offices.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • •

Stair and ramp railing height and extensions are largely not code compliant. One countertop is not ADA accessible. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Replacement for boilers and chillers is underway. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • • • •

Consider replacing the ceiling in corridors and classrooms as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing flooring in classrooms as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing HVAC distribution system. Consider replacing exterior glazing systems with high efficiency, thermally broken glazing systems. Consider replacing fire alarm panels and fixtures in the next renovation. Consider replacing casework and countertops which are not ADA accessible. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 4) 300A AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 21,206 SF 17.52% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 300 A area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is almost entirely underground retaining basement walls. The interior features gypsum board walls, luxury vinyl tile and standard acoustical ceilings. This portion of the building houses sign-language, veterans resource center, liberal arts classrooms and several large mechanical rooms.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • •

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing the ceilings as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing flooring in the human resources and student accessibility services suites as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing HVAC distribution system. Consider replacing fire alarm panels and fixtures in the next renovation. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 5) 300B AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1993 49,703 SF 17.37% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 300 B area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1993 as part of the first expansion of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to common art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the Masters Program, an early high school charters program, and the school of business and education center.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • •

Stair railing height and extensions are largely not code compliant. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Chillers and boilers are in good condition. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing the ceilings as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing flooring in classrooms as well as the tutoring, student development and school of business and education centers as part of the next renovation. Consider replacing HVAC distribution system. Consider replacing fire alarm panels and fixtures in the next renovation. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 6) 400 PHYSICAL PLANT ADDITION AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1990 22,319 SF 17.47% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 400 Physical Plant Addition area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1990. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to common art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the Jemez meeting rooms, Campus Book Store, and Facilities and Operations offices.

Observation Highlights: • • • • •

One counter was observed to be below ADA accessible height. Flooring in the Jemez meeting rooms and bookstore back of house areas are in poor condition. Flooring in the Campus Book Store and 232B are in very poor condition. Ceiling in 232B and the bookstore back of house areas are in poor condition. Ceilings in corridors are in very poor condition.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing counter with ADA accessible counter. Consider replacing flooring in the Campus Bookstore and 232B. Consider replacing flooring in the Jemez meeting rooms and bookstore back of house areas in the next renovation project. Consider replacing ceilings in corridors. Consider replacing ceiling in 232B and the bookstore back of house areas in the next renovation project.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 7) FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1991 127,843 SF 23.08% (Fair)

Building Description:

The Fitness Education Center at Santa Fe Community College’s main campus was constructed in 1991. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to common art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This building includes two swimming pools, several banks of restrooms (including gender neutral restrooms), a large gymnasium, large exercise rooms and classrooms.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • •

• •

Stair and ramp railing height and extensions are largely not code compliant. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building. Several counters are not ADA accessible. Window and door frames do not appear to be insulated or thermally broken in wet areas. Condensation buildup on steel and aluminum window and door frames were accelerating corrosion of materials. Water infiltration was observed at second floor window sill at bench southeast of stairs and at running track below skylight. Buildup of detritus at pool air intakes and outlets was evident.

* Select renovation was ongoing during the assessment process on the first floor. Completed condition of these areas are included in the building assessment. Additionally, Second Floor renovations were in the planning process and were therefore not reflected in the building assessment.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing ceilings. Consider repainting concrete floors in basement spaces. Consider replacing flooring finishes on the second floor. Consider repairing leaks found at window sill and skylight. Consider cleaning air intakes and outlets in pool areas for better airflow. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 8) 400 AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 56,477 SF 17.59% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 400 area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to common art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the student cafeteria, culinary arts and woodworking.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • • • • •

Knob type hardware is not ADA compliant. Stair and ramp railing height and extensions are largely not code compliant. Numerous countertops are not ADA accessible. Restroom facilities appear to have original finishes with updated fixtures. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Replacement for boilers and chillers is underway. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building. Necessary accommodations for ADA accessibility at most countertops are not provided.

*Note - during the completion of this report, a replacement and upgrade of the dust collection equipment in the wood shop was completed by SFCC. This should be assessed and considered when analyzing the frequency/ need of cleaning as discussed in the summary.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing ceilings in next renovation. Consider repainting concrete in wood shop areas. Consider scheduling more frequent periodical cleaning of high horizontal surfaces in wood shop areas. Consider replacing door knob hardware with door lever hardware. Consider replacing casework and countertops which are not ADA accessible.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 9) 500 (S) A AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 31,215 SF 17.64% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 500 (S) A area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the campus library and adult education programs.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • • •

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing flooring in the next renovation. Consider replacing ceilings in the next renovation. Consider replacing knob door hardware with lever door hardware. Consider renovating single occupancy restroom for ADA compliance. Consider replacing railings and handrails which do not meet code.

*Note - during the completion of this report, a replacement of flooring in the Adult Education Area was identified and budgeted by SFCC. This flooring replacement will address some of the identified needs in the summary section and will update the FCI calculation accordingly.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 10) 500 (S) B AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2000 41,427 SF 17.15% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 500 (S) B area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 2000. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the television and radio studios, a student-run café and computer labs.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • • •

Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Replacement for boilers and chillers is underway. Ducted air distribution systems are original to the building. Door knobs are not ADA accessible. Several countertops are not accessible.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • •

Consider replacing knob door hardware with lever door hardware. Consider replacing ceilings. Consider replacing casework and countertops which are not ADA accessible. Roof replacement is required - several areas where leaks have been identified by staff and roof warranty extends only through 2022.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 11) 600 AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1986 20,272 SF 18.54% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 600 area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1986 as part of the original building footprint. The exterior is mostly stucco with exposed concrete and wood accents. Large punched openings with concrete lintels and turquoise painted window frames pay tribute to common art and architectural themes found in Santa Fe. This portion of the building houses the testing center and several design and fashion studios.

Observation Highlights: • • • • • •

Stair and ramp railing height and extensions are largely not ADA compliant. Select electrical panel boards have been updated, but most are original to the building. Light fixtures are original to the building, and at the time of this assessment ongoing retro-fitting efforts were made to outfit these fixtures with new LED lamps. Air handling units are original to the building. Door knobs are not ADA accessible. Several countertops are not ADA accessible.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Consider replacing casework and countertops which are not ADA accessible. Consider replacing flooring in room 608. Consider replacing flooring in rooms 606, 610 and in the testing center in the next renovation. Consider replacing knob door hardware with lever door hardware. Consider replacing ceilings.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 12) 700 AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1998 51,428 SF 18.67% (Fair)

Building Description:

The 700 area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1998. This portion of the building houses the fine arts programs which include sculpture, photography, painting, ceramics and print making.

Observation Highlights: • •

Floor finish peeling/chipping off in corridors. Buildup of dust and debris in high spaces.

Summary/Recommendations: • •

Consider polishing concrete corridor floors to remove peeling finish. Consider replacing ceilings in east corridors, in offices attached to workshop spaces and in room 726.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 17) TATC AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2009 44,235 SF 12.11% (Good)

Building Description:

The TATC area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 2009. The exterior is mainly stucco over CMU with concrete, steel and aluminum accents. This portion of the building houses the plumbing, welding and electrical workshops.

Observation Highlights: • • • • •

Open risers on stairs are not code compliant. Several guardrails are not code compliant. Several handrails and extensions are not code compliant. Several stairs should have cane detection rails. Flooring de-laminating from concrete in room 817.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • • •

Close open risers on stairs. Modify guardrails to be code compliant. Modify handrails and extensions to be code compliant. Install cane detection rails. Replace flooring in room 817.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 13) HEALTH AND SCIENCES AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2009 36,458 SF 4.91% (Excellent)

Building Description:

The Health and Sciences area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 2009. The exterior is oxidized steel panels, stone veneer and stucco with deep overhangs to shade long strips of windows. The earthy tones in the stone and oxidized steel still complement the existing architecture while giving this area of campus a more contemporary look. This area houses the Health and Sciences programs which include dentistry, medical simulation labs and faculty offices.

Observation Highlights: • • • •

Rubber flooring is being abused with cleaning. Tile floor is being abused with cleaning. Leaky roof. Overall, finishes in this area are in excellent condition.

Summary/Recommendations: • •

Reconsider cleaning methods in this area. Patch roof where leaking.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 15) LA FAMILIA AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2009 8,212 SF 4.45% (Excellent)

Building Description:

La Familia at Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 2009. The exterior is oxidized steel panels, stone veneer and stucco with deep overhangs to shade long strips of windows. The earthy tones in the stone and oxidized steel still complement the existing architecture while giving this area of campus a more contemporary look. This area houses the La Familia Dentistry Clinic.

Observation Highlights: • •

Outside edge corners of walls are damaged. Existing plastic corner guards are falling off.

Summary/Recommendations: •

Consider installing stainless steel corner guards at all outside corners to maintain longevity of wall finishes.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 14) ATC AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2020 17,484 SF 0.02% (Excellent)

Building Description:

The ATC area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 2020. The exterior is Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS) with large bands of glazing, aluminum highlights and large turquoise lettering on one side of the building.

Observation Highlights: •

The construction of the building was being finalized by the architect and contractor at the time of this evaluation.

Summary/Recommendations: •

None

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 16) KIDS CAMPUS AREA SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

1995 29,772 SF 24.94% (Fair)

Building Description:

The Kids Campus area of Santa Fe Community College’s main building was constructed in 1995. The exterior is white and brown colored stucco with a red pitched steel panel roof and turquoise painted window frames.

Observation Highlights: • • • • •

Water infiltration is a large concern. Woodpeckers burrowing into EIFS is a large concern. Exterior steel columns are rusting at base. Stucco is in poor shape. Many interior finishes appear to be original to the building.

Summary/Recommendations: • • • •

Consider re-stuccoing exterior with metal lath applied to stucco layers. Patch and repair exterior walls as required to prevent water infiltration. Further assess water infiltration problem at high clerestory windows to prevent further water infiltration. Carpeting throughout the building is original and may need to be considered for replacement in the near future.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 18) HEC SUMMARY Year of Design: Gross Area: FCI Rating:

2013 - Built 2014 34,067 SF 3.76% (Excellent)

Building Description:

The Higher Education Center (HEC) was constructed in 2013. The exterior is various colored stucco with large areas of glazing mostly arranged in inverted U’s. This building houses classrooms for both Highlands University and Santa Fe Community College.

Observation Highlights: • • •

Several interior handrail height issues were observed. Overall, finishes are in good condition. A drop-off between a sidewalk’s walking surface and landscaping below was observed at the south exterior ramp.

Summary/Recommendations: •

It is recommended that a guard and handrail be installed at the south exterior ramp.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Condition Assessment 19) CHILLER PLANT ADDITION AREA SUMMARY Energy Center Building Year Built: 1998 Gross Area: 3,825 SF FCI Rating: 56.58% (Poor)

Building Description:

The Chiller Plant Addition was constructed in 1998. The exterior is a modest stucco building with small punched openings and turquoise painted window frames which recognize the themes of the larger surrounding main building structures. This portion of the building houses chiller equipment and offices/ maintenance shop.

Observation Highlights: •

Facility maintenance staff seem to be utilizing space for offices/ workstations.

Summary/Recommendations: • •

Decommission outdated/underutilized equipment. Renovate space for maintenance staff offices and workstations.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Conditions Index Building

Campus

While the Facilities Condition Assessment records detailed information about individual facilities. the Facilities Condition Index consolidates this information into terms by which campus assets can be compared in a relative manner. Please see the Facilities Condition Index pages in the appendix for additional detail. The purpose of the index is to provide a rating of condition for the facility. The index is established as a ratio of the Total Cost of Existing Deficiencies to the Cost of the Current Replacement of the Facility. Following industry standards, the grades of asset conditions are established as one of the following: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, and Critical. Please see image:

Campus assets were also evaluated and included sidewalks, shade canopies, site stairways, parking areas, landscaped areas, drainage features and elements such as site walls. These elements have been itemized per the Assessment Team’s walk-throughs on campus occurring in February and March 2021. Please see the following documentation: Site Conditions and the Exterior portions of the ADA Conditions. Please see the Facilities Condition Assessment drawing sheets for ADA Assessment. Some important site improvements were underway or imminent at the time of the survey including a number of parking lot improvements. It is the intention of this study to include those improvements in the assessment. Although, the Campus assets are not evaluated in the form of the Facility Condition Assessment or a Condition Index, the Assessment Team’s detailed list serves the purpose of identifying deficiencies.

In general, SFCC’s building assets are of relatively recent construction – the oldest dating to 1986. The older buildings generally received an FCI Rating of FAIR. Newer facilities, such as the Health & Sciences Addition and the Automotive Technology Center received an FCI Rating of EXCELLENT. No buildings were rated POOR or CRITICAL although individual building components within buildings did receive such scoring. ITEM

ZONE

BUILDING NAME

YEAR OF DESIGN

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

100 200A 200B 300A 300B 400 PPA 400 500 S (A) 500 S (B) 600 700 HEALTH & SCIENCE ATC HEC FITNESS LA FAMILIA KIDS CAMPUS TATC CHILLER PLANT ADD

1986 1986 1993 1986 1993 1990 1986 1986 2000 1986 1998 2009 2020 2013 1991 2009 1995 2009 1994

TOTALS

TOTAL GSF 18,918 16,222 46,658 21,206 49,703 22,319 56,477 31,215 41,427 20,272 51,428 36,458 17,484 34,067 127,843 8,212 29,772 44,235 3,825 673,916.00

BLDG COMPOSITE SCORE 2.667 2.822 2.822 2.774 2.759 2.912 2.903 2.750 2.770 2.848 2.788 4.263 4.998 3.456 2.794 4.263 2.825 3.543 2.282

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

2.998 $

R & R COST

REPLACE $/SF

1,228,464.76 1,071,203.12 3,133,908.75 1,393,564.31 3,237,109.12 1,462,469.62 3,726,285.69 2,065,188.08 2,664,333.59 1,409,292.84 3,600,273.03 670,997.37 1,081.58 480,296.71 11,065,120.30 136,992.27 2,784,235.70 2,008,424.12 $811,618.19

375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375

42,139,240.97

FACILITY REPLACEMENT COST

FCI

FCI RATING

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

7,094,250.00 6,083,250.00 17,496,750.00 7,952,250.00 18,638,625.00 8,369,625.00 21,178,875.00 11,705,625.00 15,535,125.00 7,602,000.00 19,285,500.00 13,671,750.00 6,556,500.00 12,775,125.00 47,941,125.00 3,079,500.00 11,164,500.00 16,588,125.00 1,434,375.00

17.32% 17.61% 17.91% 17.52% 17.37% 17.47% 17.59% 17.64% 17.15% 18.54% 18.67% 4.91% 0.02% 3.76% 23.08% 4.45% 24.94% 12.11% 56.58%

FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR EXCELLENT EXCELLENT EXCELLENT FAIR EXCELLENT FAIR GOOD POOR

254,152,875.00

16.58%

FAIR

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Conditions Recommendations Renovation Projects This team recommends buildings with FAIR assessments be considered for renovation. The buildings/building areas are identified in the Renovation Project sheets included in the appendix. Please also see Chapter 5 for cost estimate summaries. Cost estimate details are included in the Appendix. Projects are numbered to distinguish themselves and do not necessarily indicate a suggested sequence or priority of projects. The fundamental strategy is to provide a relatively complete degree of renovation to areas so that the areas experience one service/use interruption during the time of renovation and do not require ongoing interruption by other renovations in the near term. Likely possibilities for subjects of these renovation are: Windows, Doors, Wall Surfaces, Ceilings, Floors, Door Hardware, Lighting, Diffusers, Ductwork, Electrical Distribution Systems (Transformers & Panelboards), Fire suppression and fire alarm upgrades, IT upgrades and railings. The projects are identified as: • • • • • • • • • • •

Project 01 – Main Building 100s, 200s Project 02 – West Wing Upper Project 03 – West Wing Lower Project 04 – 400s Project 05 – 600s Project 06 -500s Project 07 – ITC / East Wing Project 08 – Visual Arts Center Project 09 – Fitness Second Floor Project 10 – HEC (Flooring) Project 11A &B – Kids Campus

Rough Order of Magnitude Costs (ROM Costs) have been established as a baseline expectation for SFCC to fund these projects for future capital projects planning. Although a strategy to make campus-wide improvement to individual building systems at a time (e.g replacement of all door hardware etc.) it is recommended that the Project Areas be

used as improvement zones which limit future disruption. Other advantages to this approach are: 1. Redesign/reconfiguration of spaces can happen simultaneously with lowest cost. 2. Possibilities of Space Consolidation arise when areas must be vacated for renovation. 3. Oversight of project by A/E and GC project management team (instead of individual subcontractors). 4. Institution of campus design standards for finishes, MEP, Technology systems, signage and accessibility.

*Note - during the completion of this report, SFCC undertook a comprehensive life safety, fire suppression and fire alarm upgrade project. While not all areas of the campus may be covered under the umbrella of that project, this will set the standard for future life safety renovations and upgrades.

The expectation is that each of the projects would range in construction duration of approximately 3-6 months, and would be ongoing at the college for a number of years. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Facilities Conditions Recommendations Exterior Improvements As discussed previously in this section, exterior deficiencies were identified as a part of the FCA process by the Assessment Team. Exterior improvement recommendations that have been made as a part of the current capital funding strategy include: 1. Repair & Replacement of Stucco Areas 2. Repair & Replacement of Wood Soffit Areas It is recommended that SFCC consider the wholesale replacement of 1980s era exterior window and door systems in the entire campus. Replacement systems would offer substantial energy performance advantages in the form of: elimination of thermal bridging, new sealing of joints, high performance insulated glazing unit construction. Such replacement could be a component of the building interior renovations discussed previously.

Site Improvements As discussed previously in this section, exterior deficiencies were identified as a part of the FCA process by the Assessment Team. Similar to the Renovation Projects discussed above, it is recommended that improvements to the campus exterior and site are concentrated in project renovation areas when possible, especially in the higher traffic areas such as the Main Entrance or Main Courtyard. The types of deficiencies that were observed indicate conditions that are expected for a facility of this age (approx. 35 years): • Concrete Paving in Disrepair • Stone Site Walls in Disrepair • Site Stair Elements not in code compliance • Failing joints at Building Exterior (Exterior Wall to Mow Curb / Sidewalks) • Damage to site elements due to ongoing erosion. As discussed previously in this section, exterior deficiencies were identified as a part of the FCA process by the Assessment Team. Exterior improvement recommendations that have been made as a part of the current capital funding strategy on a basis of individual items are identified as deficiencies. Once funding is established for this item, SFCC may consider creating college priorities for repair and renovation.

ADA Improvements The Assessment Team has noted deficiencies on campus (exterior and interior) based on compliance with current requirements/standards for Accessibility. Please see the ADA CONDITIONS sheet. Please see the Appendix. Observations were made at the level of individual building elements. These elements may or may not have been compliant at the time of construction. It is recommended that ADA upgrades are planned as a part of the Renovation Project strategy in which building wings are closed for a period of 3-6 months for renovation activities. The Assessment Team recommends that the ADA improvements be made so that the campus is compliant with current codes/standards. It is expected that more detailed assessment of each of the items identified on the plan is required by the project A/E Team to determine the exact means of remediating each element’s deficiencies.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization An important factor in determining future capital outlays for SFCC is an analysis of space utilization on the campus. This analysis is based on usage statistics and enrollment for the 2018-2019 academic year as the 2019-2020 and 2020 – 2021 academic years were greatly impacted by the COVID 19 Pandemic. Enrollment can be measured in a number of different ways (full time students, part time students, degree seeking etc) but for the purposes of this study, per the SFCC enrollment data as published on SFCC.edu, enrollment in the 201819 academic year was 7,960 students enrolled in 75,245 credit hours for an average of 9.5 credit hours per enrolled student. Both enrolled students and total credit hours have been in decline since the 2014-15 academic year, which is similar to most other community college systems in the western United States. Additionally, programs within the college can serve very different populations within the student body. There is a delicate balance in course offerings that appeal to life long learners and hobbyists vs degree or certificate seeking students focused on career opportunities. In the course of the planning process, it became clear that while overall enrollment is not projected to grow by the college, certain programs will be given growth opportunities due to their overall job/ career placement potential and community need. These programs are: • • • • •

Health Sciences Programs (Nursing, Medical Assisting, Phlebotomy, Respiratory Care) Sustainable Technologies Automotive Technology Computer Sciences Engineering and related technologies

Focus on these programs is evident in recent building programs on the campus such as the Health Sciences Expansion, TATC, ATC and Greenhouse programs.

Current State Room Utilization Based upon classroom scheduling data for both academic classes and events it is possible to graphically display the usage of each room. As shown in adjacent charts, when looking at all classrooms on campus there are approximately 12 rooms with very high utilization, and a long

Rooms with very high utilization rates tend to be used for arts and design programs ( i.e. the woodshop), the masters program, and rooms that tend to be scheduled for events and meetings. The long tail of rooms (orange dash) that are scheduled under 24 hours a week indicate flexibility for SFCC to undertake renovation projects and not have an adverse effect on the quality of education offerings on the campus.

tail of rooms that sit at or below the average utilization for all rooms on campus. This is common across many institutions and often is a function of room size or available technology. As a baseline, we recommend institutions aim for a scheduled usage in each room of 24 hours per week or roughly 60% of the hours in a typical Monday through Friday schedule. This allows for sufficient time for turnover between classes and flexibility to adjust semester to semester or to allow extra curricular functions to take place in those rooms. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization Once a majority of schedulable spaces on campus exceed the 24 hour per week threshold, it indicates that the institution needs to look to add new SF to their campus. Based on our analysis, this is not the case for SFCC. Although out of the scope of our analysis, this is likely due to the building programs that the college has undertaken in the last decade with the ATC, Health Sciences and acquisition of the HEC building. This will be of great benefit to SFCC over the course of the next decade. As is discussed in the FCA and FCI, as well as in Chapter 4 – Recommendations, there are a number of renovations and upgrades to the existing buildings on campus to address deferred maintenance, as well as to bring rooms and the educational environment up to current classroom standards. As these projects are initiated, SFCC will have the ability to increase scheduling in under-utilized rooms and maintain the quality of, and number of class offerings to the student body. There is also likely the raw space available for student enrollment to increase by 10-15% and maintain reasonable scheduling flexibility on the campus. However, there is a disconnect between available space, and those spaces that are adjacent to specialized, high priority programs (i.e. health sciences). Programs requiring lab work, such as nursing and advanced trades programs already show high utilization, and as projected by the college, are likely to be the opportunities for growth. As will be covered as options in the capital improvement plan, in the future, the health sciences programs may need to consider planning for a future building to the east of the main building, or splitting lecture/ classroom and laboratory functions to take advantage of available space in the west wing. Additionally, there is currently a large amount of square footage devoted to non-revenue generating and non degree seeking and career development programs. These spaces serve an important role in the vibrancy of the college and as a major community service and often require specialized space such as studio or shop space with very specific ventilation or lighting requirements. These areas will likely remain fixed due to these infrastructural requirements as they can be expensive to relocate and the college will need to work around the footprint of those programs.

When analyzing by space type, one can begin to further define the types of spaces that are highly utilized. Rooms shown in pink (1,2) are fitness and special use classes (incl. the pool). The rooms shown at 3 are all arts classes, both including degree seeking students and lifelong learners. Labs spaces, especially those that are part of the Health Sciences wing have some capacity for growth, assuming that courses can be taught throughout the day, which, in a Community College can be difficult as the student body varies greatly from that at a traditional 4 year university.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization

TATC

FEC

HEC

KIDS CAMPUS

MAIN BUILDING Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Space Utilization

*by hours per week

WOOD MACHINE ROOM

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Observations + Recommendations Introduction Technology Assessment and Plan Campus Design Guidelines Flexibility and Growth Plan Recommendations for Future Study

Introduction Chapter 4 Chapter 4 contains 4 main sections, each of which are focused on the future of the SFCC Campus. An overview of each section is as follows:

Technology Assessment and Plan SFCC has invested in upgrades to internet speed, wifi accessibility and classroom technology in recent years. These efforts have culminated in the current classroom improvements which will provide 9 Hybrid teaching classrooms in the Fall of 2021, with provisions and funding for an 11 additional classroom upgrades in the near future. These classrooms should focus on fulfilling three principles for learning environments: 1. Encourage individual, collaborative and interactive learning, integrated instructional and information technologies 2. Provide access for all to participate 3. Promote the transition to future technologies. Recommendations for future technology improvements are focused on 5 main points: 1. Develop a grading system for classroom tech capability. 2. Contract with an AV specialist to conduct a full analysis and plan of IT and AV technologies. This analysis would be similar in scope and detail to the Siemens Investment Grade Audit completed by the college in 2019. 3. Leverage and expand technology to create pedagogical flexibility. 4. Invest in additional wifi capabilities, especially in outdoor spaces. 5. Invest in, or enter into partnerships to enhance cell phone reception and data capabilities across campus

Campus Design Guidelines The campus design guidelines are wide ranging and cover a number of the physical aspects of campus. These can be considered baseline expectations for future work on campus, could be included in future RFP’s, and could be the beginnings of a set of Campus Design Standards. These guidelines are focused on three areas, Sustainability, Landscape and Architecture.

Sustainability - SFCC has already set a high bar for the physical infrastructure on campus, including its commitment to LEED certification and the efforts to be completely powered by green energy. There are 5 major sustainability initiatives moving forward: 1. Create a Sustainability Statement/ Charter for the College 2. Consider creating a Sustainability Director Position 3. Considerations for future Physical Buildings 4. Net Zero Energy Campus 5. Sustainability in Landscapes Landscape- SFCC has devoted a tremendous amount of capital and time in the development of new building architecture as part of the previous masterplan. Over the next 10 years, equal attention should be paid to the landscapes on campus. There are 2 major focus areas in landscape development in the future: 1. Institute Native/ Adapted planting guidelines on campus 2. Renewed focus on the courtyards on campus • Enhance Wifi in Courtyards • Enhance seating opportunities in courtyards • Increase transparency • Explore the potential for outdoor classrooms Architecture- Moving forward, new developments should continue to pay respect to the massing, materiality and context of Santa Fe and Northern New Mexico. Guidelines around the Architecture of SFCC are focused on the following elements: 1. Massing 2. Materiality 3. Relationship to outdoor spaces 4. Continuity of regional context 5. Health Safety and Welfare 6. Planning and design of building interiors 7. Universal Design/ Accessibility

Flexibility and Growth Plan The items outlined in this section will be the 9 major recommendations to guide development across campus over the next decade. These recommendations are intentionally broad and interrelated and should be used to frame capital improvement initiatives moving forward. Each of the initiatives is correlated to its relationship to the SFCC

Strategic plan. There are 9 primary recommendations pertaining to future development on campus: 1. Renovate Buildings 2. Student Hub 3. Redefine Entry 4. Activate Courtyards 5. Campus Connections 6. Sustainable Landscapes 7. Campus Growth Areas 8. 21st Century Classrooms 9. Campus Districting A matrix showing these initiatives is on the following page.

Cost As part of the recommendation matrix, associated costs are included as a baseline reference. At the time of composing this document, incredible volatility in the construction market due to the COVID 19 pandemic has created an inflated cost environment for all construction costs. It is strongly recommended that all costs be verified prior to capital improvement requests.

Other Opportunities Lastly, this section contains a series of “other opportunities”. This section is focused on opportunities that are above and beyond the scope of this masterplan. These are projections by the planning team of potential opportunities and should be included in part of this plan as a planning reference. These 14 opportunities are as follows: 1. Transportation 12. Health + Wellness Counseling 2. Greenhouses 13. Extra Curricular Activity 3. Innovation Center 14. Food 4. Film Industry 5. Sustainability Partners 6. On Campus Housing 7. Senior Living 8. Hospitality Partners 9. Athletics Fields 10. Conference Center 11. LANL Opportunities

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Technology Assessment and Plan Existing Technology Landscape The existing technology survey performed as part of the Master Plan considers conditioned and non-conditioned exterior spaces. Learning is multi-modal and occurs in communal spaces, courtyards, roof terraces, as well as on display boards. A survey of the campus was completed and all spaces were assessed for visible presence of technology. Typically, audio-video capability is limited to instructional spaces, digital displays in the campus center, the front entrance and FEC are present in the common spaces. Currently, the campus is served by a 1Gbps circuit for internet connectivity which is adequate for current needs. The college also recently completed a wireless connectivity survey of campus which generally shows adequate coverage across the physical spaces in campus, however, coverage in courtyards and other exterior spaces looks to be potentially lacking and should be a consideration for the college moving forward.

Excerpt from SFCC Wireless survey report. Wireless speeds vary greatly across campus and can be increased to best serve the 21st century student

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Technology Assessment and Plan Existing Classroom Technology Plan The scope of the evaluation considered seminar-conference, classroom, laboratory, and lecture hall-auditorium type spaces. Classrooms were surveyed and the visible technology infrastructure was assessed. Distinctions among the space types surveyed (e.g. seminar, classroom, laboratory, auditorium) pertain to room size directly related to stations, presence of fixed furnishings or special equipment. The majority of classrooms contain a presentation wall consisting of a projector presentation screen and instructor station. Generally speaking, this is also true of laboratories and auditoriums. Seminar-conference spaces have some aspects of virtual conferencing capabilities but generally lack specific components for full capability. As of the summer of 2021, the college received a grant to upgrade classrooms across the campus in order to create hybrid style learning environments. For the Fall ’21 semester 9 classrooms are as follows: • • • • • • • • • •

Fitness Education Center 2014 221 412 487 570 612 711 805 Higher Education Center 147 (not shown on this map) Automotive Center Classroom (new classroom, did not require upgrades)

Upgraded classroom locations as of Fall 2021

As part of this project cycle, funding exists for an additional 11 classrooms to be renovated to hybrid style learning environments. It is recommended that these upgrades are coordinated with overall FCA recommended projects and priorities in order to minimize re-work and efficiently manage impact to campus and to students.

One Button/ Lecture Capture Studio

Hybrid/ Hyflex Teaching Environment

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Technology Assessment and Plan Technology Recommendations

SFCC MASTERPLAN

N O

N -D IG IT AL D FL IGIT PR AT A ES PA L P EN N RO SM TA EL J TIO AR D EC IS TO T N PL R PO AY / D AU IU M D IO SP EA VID KE EO R S C O N FR M IC EN R C O IN PH G O M N ES O BIL E C O M PO U W PT ER IN G & DA TA

Technology changes at a rapid pace, so much so that most institutions of higher education are often 1-2 generations behind “bleeding edge” technologies. It is recommended that the College create a set of guiding principles of learning environments in order to create a baseline for which upgrades may be taken. Guiding principles for learning environments include:

CLASSROOM I

◉

CLASSROOM II

◉

CLASSROOM III

◉

CLASS LAB I

◉

CLASS LAB II

◉

◉ ◉

PC LAB I PC LAB II

◉

AUDITORIUM

◉

CONFERENCE I

◉

CONFERENCE II

◉

◉ ◉

◉

NOTES: •

MATRIX CATEGORIES WERE DERIVED FROM EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REPRESENT TYPICAL INSTALLATIONS, INDIVIDUAL CLASSROOMS MAY INCLUDE ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS.

•

THIS SUMMARY EXCLUDES SPECIFIC AUDIO-VISUAL EQUIPMENT; DVD / BLURAY, EQUIPMENT RACKS; ETC.

•

THIS ASSESSMENT ASSUMES THAT AUDIO-VISUAL CONTROLS ARE INTEGRATED INTO SMART PODIUMS

•

QUANTITY OF POWER AND DATA OUTLETS WAS NOT ASSESSED

•

QUALITY OF WIRELESS ACCESS WAS NOT ASSESSED FOR MOBILE COMPUTING

•

THIS SUMMARY ASSUMES THAT EXISTING CEILING MOUNTED SPEAKERS IN CLASSROOMS ARE PART OF A CLASSROOM AUDIO SYSTEM

•

TYPE, AND QUANTITY OF NON-DIGITAL DISPLAY (CHALKBOARD, MARKERBOARD, BULLETING BOARD) WAS NOT ASSESSED

◉

1. Encouraging individual, collaborative, and interactive learning, integrated instructional and information technologies, 2. Providing access for all to participate 3. Promoting the transition to future technologies.

Once the college adopts these or other potential guiding principles, the following recommendations should be considered as the college continues on its development and deployment of technology across campus. 1. Contract with an AV specialist to complete a full analysis and plan of the existing campus technology landscape and create detailed guidelines and goals for future development. This would be similar in scope and scale to the Siemens Investment Grade Audit, completed by the college in 2019. 2. Develop Grading System for Classroom Tech Capability. It is assumed that this will become the baseline technology for instructional spaces. Implementation across campus, however, should consider existing characteristics of each room, anticipated use, student capacity and other aspects in order to best implement the technology. The task of accomplishing a structured approach to the implementation of technology will require a classification of room use and along with the development of a typological approach to recommending the appropriate technology. 3. Leverage and expand technology to create pedagogical flexibility. Continue the work and investment on the campus of hybrid classrooms that began in earnest in 2021. It is advisable to expand the landscape of these classrooms to also include small “studio” type spaces that faculty can use for lecture capture for online or remote learning opportunities. As a first step, low utilization classrooms/ spaces would be good candidates for this conversion. As was made apparent through the Covid 19 pandemic, flexibility in teaching capabilities is essential for the continued success of the college.

MAIN CAMPUS - 300 LOWER LEVEL 1" = 50'-0"

HEC - SECOND FLOOR 1" = 50'-0"

HEC - FIRST FLOOR 1" = 50'-0"

KIDS CAMPUS 1" = 50'-0"

MAIN CAMPUS 1" = 50'-0"

TRADES CENTER - SECOND FLOOR 1" = 50'-0"

4. Invest in additional wifi capabilities, specifically in the outdoor 5. SFCC MASTERPLAN FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY LEVEL areas of campus. A specific focus should be paid to the courtyards around the main building, parking lots (light pole mounted WAP’s are a good option) and in future outdoor enrichment zones identified in this plan i.e. around the decommissioned waste water treatment ponds. 6401 Richards Ave Santa Fe, NM 87508

FITNESS - SECOND FLOOR 1" = 50'-0"

[Drawing Description]

FITNESS - FIRST FLOOR 1" = 50'-0"

FITNESS - LOWER LEVEL 1" = 50'-0"

ATC 1" = 50'-0"

Invest in, or enter into Public Private Partnerships to increase cell phone reception and data capabilities across campus. Many service providers will rent space from institutions to place a cell tower. Given the campus location and relatively high elevation in relation to adjacent areas, the campus is a prime candidate for such a partnership. Cell service on campus is currently lacking and was brought up as a major issue during conversations, especially for staff and students with children who can be limited in their communication while on campus. DATE

PHASE PROJECT NO

06/30/21 4160

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Introduction The following Campus Design Guidelines are intended to be a series of high level instructions by which SFCC could internally create campus design standards. These guidelines could be included in future RFP’s and capital funding requests as “baseline” expectations for future work, or as an internal charter that is the basis for review of future work. These guidelines cover areas of sustainability, landscape, and architecture.

Sustainability Plan SFCC has made large commitments and investments in sustainability on campus, from the large, a creation of a campus solar energy microgrid, to the small, the elimination of plastic water bottles on campus, the college is undoubtedly pushing to showcase strategies for a more sustainable future. The upcoming assets the micro-grid will control include the 1.5MW Solar Array, 12kW Tracker array, 85kW DSS, 1M Campus Battery, 1M Natural Gas Generator, among more potentials. Through its commitment to LEED certification on new projects, the college has also shown a commitment to sustainable construction in the vertical infrastructure of campus. As the college embarks on the next 10-20 years of renovations and upgrades to campus there are a number of initiatives that the planning team recommends that SFCC commit to in order to accomplish a sustainable future. 1. Create a Sustainability Statement/ Charter for the college. The most successful higher education institutions address sustainability in a clear, concise statement that becomes a guidepost for all future initiatives on campus. It is recommended that the college, as part of a continuation of the strategic planning process draft a sustainability statement for the college. This statement should be visible, both in the physical and digital spaces of campus. 2. Sustainability Director. Although outside of the physical infrastructure focus of this report, this individual would be in charge of coordinating and advancing sustainability initiatives and construction on campus. This position could be under the President, or in the Facilities department, but a dedicated position allows this individual to focus these efforts.

Evening View of SFCC Main Courtyard - Image Courtesy of SFCC and the Santa Fe New Mexican

3. Physical Buildings. As the campus has grown, the commitment to ensure sustainable new construction through the LEED program has been a clear and important goal for the college. It is recommended that for all major renovation projects as outlined in this plan, a LEED BD+C rating is also pursued. For smaller renovation projects, it is recommended that the college commit to the removal of and no future use of Red List materials as outlined by the Living Building Challenge (https://living-future. org/declare/declare-about/red-list/). These materials, chemicals, and elements known to pose serious risks to human health and the greater ecosystem that are prevalent in the building products industry.

4. Net Zero Energy. With the commitment to a campus micro-grid, the Siemens Energy Audit, and the current and future installation of major solar panel arrays and other energy assets on campus, the college is well on the way to achieving a Net Zero Energy future. It is recommended that the college analyze the location of further solar arrays that may become more viable as additions and demands are made to campus. The large asphalt parking areas are excellent candidates for future array locations, which can reduce the urban heat island effect to a great degree, provide power to campus, and create a more comfortable parking solution for students and staff.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Additionally – this type of investment also has the ability to become the backbone of an electrical automobile infrastructure on campus. The recent commitments by the automotive industry, the federal government, and general trends in automotive purposes will require that SFCC provide charging infrastructure for staff, students and visitors. 5. Sustainable Landscapes. Greater detail on the landscape future at SFCC is discussed in the next section, however, there is a large opportunity for the college to make advances around sustainability in the landscape around campus. The college should become a showcase for native and adapted plantings, as well as responsible rainwater runoff and management around campus. These can be productive landscapes, providing not just food for human consumption, but also supporting habitat for native species and opportunities for a connected outdoor learning environment. Commit to analyzing future work and initiatives on campus in relation to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. These guidelines address more than just physical infrastructure and create a lens through which many initiatives on campus can be analyzed and judged.

Existing Solar Panel Installations Future Solar Panel Installations Note - solar array on TATC is not functioning due to service issues

Solar Arrays Over Parking - Arizona State University

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Landscape Guidelines Tied very closely to the Sustainable Landscapes recommendation in the next section, the college should consider the following guidelines as general rules for developing landscapes across campus. These should be expanded upon by individual design teams when new efforts arise and should guide decisions and actions in the facilities and maintenance department as they execute typical maintenance and upkeep projects. Establish and commit to a native/ adapted landscape palette on campus. From the US Environmental Protection Agency native plants are defined as those that have “evolved over thousands of years to be able to survive in a particular region and have adapted to the geography, hydrology, and climate of that region. A community of native plants provides habitat for a variety of native wildlife species; and will be hardy and resistant to the local conditions, thereby usually requiring less maintenance when used in landscaping.” These plants contribute to a native beauty of a landscape while also creating compounding benefits to the overall landscape including: • Create natural habitats for wildlife and should also enhance the effectiveness of the Bee Campus initiative at the college, • Typically are low water users, • Require little maintenance and reduce or eliminate the need for supplemental irrigation, soil amendments and fertilizers, • Aid in the control of runoff and erosion, • Lushly planted native landscapes will also reduce urban heat island effects, cutting building energy consumption and increasing opportunities for comfortable outdoor spaces on campus. A list and planting guidelines for native plants in the Santa Fe Region is available through the New Mexico State University Extension services. •

•

With the adoption of a native landscape strategy, it is recommended that the college commit to a standard of removing supplemental irrigation from landscapes whenever possible to align with current LEED guidelines. Any future impervious site developments (i.e. parking lots, building footprints etc) should be offset with investments in

Clockwise from top left - Wheaton College outdoor classroom, The University of Arizona School of Architecture courtyard, Arizona State University Polytechnic Campus, University of New Mexico

• • • •

landscaped areas which contain and filter all rainwater runoff from these new developments. Landscape should enhance the experience of entering and circulating within the core campus, and be integrated with the larger undeveloped campus framework. Where appropriate, landscape, both natural plantings and constructed areas, should create social spaces for gathering, collaboration, meeting and entertainment. All new landscape projects should be evaluated for their resiliency in a changing climate.

into landscape designs. At its core, SFCC has two main landscape character areas, Courtyards (constructed) and Wild (unstructured) landscape. Courtyards are defined by enclosure on at least 2 sides and are all located adjacent to existing buildings on campus. The wild landscapes extend across most of the campus and define a perimeter around the existing campus development zone.

Where appropriate, artwork and sculpture should be integrated Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines The courtyard spaces on campus are major amenities for the SFCC community and are also major opportunities for enhancement on the campus. Future development in the courtyards should focus on the following elements: • • •

• •

Enhance wifi accessibility and power availability in the courtyards, Create additional seating opportunities in the courtyards for respite and study, Create transparency of space between the courtyards and adjacent building areas. This can be physical (i.e. more doors into the courtyards or operable windows allowing for engagement) or visual transparency by increasing the amount of glazing looking into the courtyards. Explore the opportunity of outdoor classroom space in courtyards. Future buildings and development should encourage the continued use of courtyard spaces. These are a strong defining characteristic of the campus and should continue to be encouraged in future design and construction work.

The unstructured landscape areas of campus are vast and make up the majority of the acreage on campus. These areas should be preserved to whatever extent possible and special care should be taken with any future development that negative effects on these areas be mitigated. When possible, as will be explored in the sustainable landscapes section of this report, specifically the re development of the former waste water treatment ponds, these landscapes should be enhanced and be looked at as a major asset to the campus.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Architectural Guidelines Characteristics of SFCC Architecture

Massing

The architecture of SFCC’s Main Campus references the regional architecture of Northern New Mexico. Some of the primary characteristics of this architecture are: Strong building massing, punched window and door openings, wood soffit surfaces, and concrete lintels. The stucco finishes are of a relatively limited palette of earth tones. Facades are expressed as massive building volumes deemphasizing building joints and subdivision of surfaces. Parapets and caps are expressed as stucco continuations of the building massing. Materiality The buildings on the Main Campus utilize stucco for exterior facades, dark window frames, wood plank soffits and concrete lintels. The Health & Sciences campus has added natural stone and oxidized steel to this palette of materials, which are successfully integrated as materials which are natural in appearance. Courtyard areas of the campus’ outdoor spaces are delineated with stone site walls which contribute to the consistency in use of these natural materials Relationship to Outdoor Spaces SFCC’s buildings relate strongly to the outdoor spaces by the use of glazed windows and doors. This important connection between interior and exterior is achieved primarily in two ways: (1) a relationship to the distant landscapes of the Jemez, Sangre de Cristo and Ortiz ranges and (2) a relationship to the immediately adjacent courtyard spaces. This second kind of connection is critical to developing a future campus which continues to become increasingly connected and spatially interrelated. Thus, the development of courtyards is critical. Courtyards should provide a number of types of relationships to the architecture: (1) pedestrian paths through the courtyard (2) outdoor occupation of the courtyard and (3) direct relationships between indoor spaces and their adjacent outdoor courtyards spaces which may activate the courtyard further.

Characteristics of New Architecture at SFCC Sympathetic with SFCC Architecture New architecture proposed for the Main Campus should contribute to the context of the existing architecture at SFCC. The purpose of this is to create a campus which creates a sense of unified space and thus strong institutional identity. This existing context is one defined by the architectural characteristics described above: Massing, Materiality and Relationship to Outdoor Spaces. Additional particular points of coordination with the existing architectural context are: Articulation and proportional size of window and door openings, building height, and the expression of shading devices, portals and other covered outdoor areas which are attached to the building. Future architecture at SFCC may observe the ways in which recent additions to the campus style have made appropriate, sensitive, contemporary contributions: The Health & Sciences Addition and

the Automotive Technology Center. These two buildings vary from the Main Campus’ materiality (H&S) and vary from the Main Campus’ sense of tectonics and massing. Significantly though, they establish new and meaningful sympathies with SFCC’s Architecture. Continuity of Regional Context The architectural regional context is an important reference point in general. Specifically speaking, the Pueblo Revival Style or Santa Fe Style was a major point of reference for the original Main Building areas constructed in the mid-1980s. These buildings focus on building mass, flat roofs & parapets and details such as lintels and sills which reference the hand-carved corbels and wood details of Pueblo Revival Architecture. Seen through a lens of a longer history, SFCC’s architecture references examples of New Mexico’s architectural heritage such as the pueblo structures of Northern New Mexico as well as the ancient structures of Chaco Canyon. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Health, Safety and Welfare

5. Reliable building systems, with contingent power overlay Properly sized and reliable performance from building systems, equipment, and tools contribute directly to the wellness, safety, health, and comfort of building inhabitants.

Provision for user controls support the overall assessment of comfortable spaces. Compliance with various codes/ best practices that affect comfortable spaces are: SFCC, in keeping with all standards for Health Safety and Welfare, • sound transmission class ratings, prioritizes the elimination and prevention of hazards to personnel, the • American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air people and community of the College. In promoting health, SFCC Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 55 Secure and Safe Spaces is concerned with the mental and physical health of its community. • Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy, The measure of risk for all stakeholders, future inhabitants, design The leadership of SFCC is vigilant of codes and regulations related engineering contracting professionals, lenders, all responsible project • specific light requirements for artificial and natural to exposure and pertinent issues of indoor air quality, occupational daylighting, illnesses and injuries, exposure to hazardous materials, and accidental managers, and officials should be minimized as a goal for any campus improvement. Working carefully with experts who understand natural, • monitoring and sensor detections for optimal air and moisture falls. human caused, security concerns to buildings, campus infrastructure levels, should be paramount and these aspects shall be assessed in all • utilization of operable and user control driven systems to In the promotion of healthy and productive buildings, this report create individual or group comfort in environment. emphasizes creating the best environment for concentration, learning, projects. A balance between these causes and the safety goals of stakeholders, project members need to be reached. This is what communication, and collaboration. Many elements that are isolated defines safe and secure spaces. Through careful project planning, These factors should be considered in all early design work related in the report highlight these aspects of productivity for building scheduling, and understanding of the component construction to campus renovation or new construction. occupants. segments allow for greater safety of all involved and ensure a better project outcome. Planning for Equity and Fairness Aspects of Healthy Productive Buildings include: In all campus environments, it is critical to provide access to daylight, Critical areas of consideration for early design phases: degrees of privacy warranted by program, exterior views, and 1. Promotion of Health and Well-being • Fire Protection Plan learning spaces that are aesthetically pleasing. This establishes It is known that indoor environments have a strong connection • Planning for all building and site systems in concert for a total a set of values centered on the importance of the people who use to human health. The campus stresses the design of effective building fire safety systems analysis SFCC buildings. This creates a fairness of access and equity to all environments to support health and well-being inclusive of sustainable • Occupant Safety and Health Protection Plan environments in the SFCC community. design ideals. • Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan • Building and Site Security Plan 2. Promotion of Comfortable Environments • Human Aggression Contingency Plan appropriate to program The highest level of productivity is achieved by careful attention type and areas of campus to visual, acoustics, ergonomic, and thermal comforts in all environments. This attention to these factors contributes to the Comfortable Spaces highest level of productivity. To ensure the greatest level of comfort in buildings is to create an effective, satisfactory and pleasing environment for students and the 3. Attention paid to flexibility and change in campus buildings community. The following inclusion of: Creating multiple spatial configurations for collaboration and interaction with all levels of academic instructional personnel enriches • Superior acoustics the learning environment. This means creating flexible spaces, • Optimal thermal comfort integrated with social support, implemented with latest technologies • Highly considered visual environment that promote overlap of use and programming are the best types of • Comfortable furniture and equipment campus spaces. 4. Anticipation of technological integration With increased technology use in the classroom, providing data rich speed and future oriented portal access are critical to outfitting the future classroom in higher ed buildings. Anticipatory network infrastructure for data allows the campus to have multiple classroom configurations. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Planning and Design of Building Interiors The interior spaces of buildings are important to the overall health of its inhabitants. To create a coherent and visually pleasing interior space for work and learning is the optimal goal for buildings. All aspects of previously mentioned topics of health safety and wellness are reiterated and included specifically for interior conditions. The design professional should take into account aspects of comfort, safety, technology and equitability with the lens of their impact in interior spaces. Visual Coherence Beyond the mere functional, technical and financial criteria of buildings, are the goals to create memorable and important places on the campus of SFCC. In evaluating the localized and greater context of architectural contribution, each project should consider factors of architectural significance and consequence. The factors can be articulated in the early design phase with all stakeholders to ensure the integration and implementation of design and coherent spatial to visual ideas in all phases of the project. The goals of reaching holistic design intentions incorporating all factors of heath, safety and wellness are the accomplishments of a successful project. Interior Finishes In order to create interior coherency, for purposes of planning, maintenance and future changes, interior finishes can be an area of coordination. Preset conditions of finish can be systematized for the purposes of planning, purchase orders, ease of maintenance and operations. This can be a goal within future documents to streamline campus operations and projective budgets. Use of Transparency The use of transparency in interior planning is recommended as a means of connecting the college community, of offering a sense of accountability and of offering a sense of safety for faculty, staff and students alike. The Master Plan assessment team recommends that transparency be considered in its many forms, ranging in material from glass to acrylics to eliminating barriers altogether and ranging in degrees of physical transparency from full transparency to translucency.

Means of Connection With the diversity of SFCC’s course offerings, there are unrealized potential benefits from allowing the college community to be aware of one another’s academic activities. Such awareness could lead to the development of additional interests on the part of students and may lead to collaboration and synergies between previously unrelated areas of study. Accountability Awareness by members of the college community of the activities which characterize its operation are essential for students, faculty and staff to feel that the institution is accountable to them and that they are accountable to the institution. Transparency can offer this sense of shared purpose. Safety Transparency creates safety. In laboratories and workshops, transparency allows observation of working spaces by those in adjacent spaces. If something were to go wrong, the possibility exists that a person outside the space could assist. In the case of private meetings between individuals, the use of transparency can promote feelings of trust and a sense that even private interactions take place within an observed, accountable public realm. Additionally, with new lockdown safety considerations, SFCC is providing blinds for glass door side lights and other spaces with large windows.

is vital to maintain course offerings/course credits and will become an essential stress point for the viability of the institution. Formalization of procedures for switching modes of operation is essential and is recommended to be undertaken. This switching of modes should be able to turn as quickly as other events which challenge school operations such as snow days. It is also recommended that further study be undertaken as to whether there will be sectors of the student/faculty population or areas of course offerings which would benefit from continuing to be offered online, either exclusively online or part online, part in-person. The online learning experience can be considered both as a potential replacement of some in-person learning or as a component of inperson learning (hybrid learning). This second scenario is arguably the most difficult to accommodate since students attend both inperson and remotely, but is likely to be a required mode of operation for the foreseeable future.

Adaptability to Alternative Modes of Operation

The Covid 19 Pandemic has forced institutions to accommodate remote learning when in-person learning was not a possibility due to the threat of sickness. In a broader context, this pandemic could stand in for other emergencies such as natural disasters or social unrest. For the 2020/2021 school year, SFCC has been offering courses remotely with the exception of some of the healthcare oriented training courses the college offers such as Allied Health and the Emergency Medical Services Institute (EMSI), as well as courses in the art and film departments that could not effectively be offered online. In the future, the ability of the institution to switch modes of operation from in-person to remote and back to in-person is likely to be tested again. The agility of the institution to accommodate these changes

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Campus Design Guidelines Universal Design / Universal Accessibility

Considerations for those Who Rely on Wheelchairs

The notion of universal design was pioneered by the Center on Universal Design at North Carolina State University in the 1990s. The principles attempted to broaden the reach and implementation of accessible design so that accessibility was not a feature of some designs but was rather included in all design. The Principles of Universal Design (http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/ The-7-Principles/) were established as: Equitable Use, Flexibility in Use, Simple & Intuitive, Perceptible Information, Tolerance for Error, Low Physical Effort, Size and Space for Approach and Use. Rather than providing a prescriptive series of rules, Universal Design seeks to set a process in motion for the evaluation of existing spaces as well as the design of spaces in which design can be “accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible in the most independent and natural manner possible, in the widest possible range of situations, without the need for adaptation, modification, assistive devices or specialized solutions . . .”

Accessibility of SFCC’s spaces should accommodate those who rely on wheelchairs for mobility. A major challenge on campus is the natural topography. The Main Building, for example, is comprised of a series of large indoor terraces. The grade separations of terraces tends to be relatively minor (2-4 feet) but does pose a challenge for maintaining wheelchair accessibility. This is currently achieved by means of ramps at grade transitions. A second challenge for SFCC’s buildings is to connect buildings remote from the Main Building in a manner which is accessible to wheelchairs. Careful thought should be dedicated to making these transitions as integrated as possible into the primary paths for all pedestrians, not just those in wheelchairs. When possible, it is recommended that these paths become shared paths which are inclusive of persons of all abilities.

Considerations for the Blind & Visually Impaired Considerations on campus for accommodating access for the Blind and Visually Impaired included recommendations for interior and exterior spaces. Generally speaking, use of color or tone contrasts in navigable surfaces can improve legibility of surfaces to users. Some examples are: Contrasting nosing at stair treads/risers, added illumination of the ground plane in darker areas, use of textured paving to alert pedestrians to changes in terrain or traffic. The legibility of surfaces is an important notion for the Blind and Visually Impaired. Overly curvy or angled walkways should be avoided as they cause confusion and frustration with these users. Surfaces should not be unnecessarily textured or colored when those characteristics do not contribute to legibility. Special attention should be given to the design of boundaries of spaces so that they are meaningful, legible and so that they do not impose trip hazards. Adding adhesive decals to glass surfaces helps to improve visual legibility.

Considerations for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing

DeafSpace has brought to the forefront important considerations for the design of spaces which include such aspects as: 1. Spatial awareness which takes into account visual and tactile cues which may be secondary to most users such as shadows and vibrations. 2. Spatial requirements for signers is more than is required for those not signing 3. Movement of signers together through space will tend to require more space so that signing can continue during mobile activity 4. Low Contrast/High Glare lighting hinders spatial legibility and may contribute to eye fatigue and 5. Careful consideration of the acoustical properties of spaces so that they are not unnecessarily distractive or uncomfortable to those whose hearing sensitivities are heightened.

An important point of reference in the design of spaces for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing is the notion of ‘DeafSpace Design’ pioneered by Hansel Bauman and the American Sign Language Deaf Studies department at Gallaudet University. DeafSpace Guidelines offer an entire architectural vocabulary of elements for the design of the built environment which is sensitive to the hearing-impaired spatial experience. Critical concepts in DeafSpace are the notions of Sensory Reach, Space and Proximity, Mobility and Proximity, Light and Color, and Acoustics (https://www.gallaudet.edu/campus-design-andplanning/deafspace/).

Signage should be large and of contrasting tones. Signage should include tactile elements such as Braille and raised signage elements. Space design should be considered for the cues that may be inadvertently communicated to the Blind and Visually Impaired. An example could be an elaborate tile pattern in a floor which is unrelated to space navigation. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations

Campus Districting

21st Century Classrooms

Campus Growth Areas

Sustainable Landscapes

Build our College Capacity

Campus Connections

Each of these are covered in more detail in the following pages.

Partner with our Community

Activate Courtyards

Renovate Buildings Student Hub Redefine Entry Activate Courtyards Campus Connections Sustainable Landscapes Campus Growth Areas 21st Century Classrooms Campus Districting

Redefine Entry

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Student Hub

There are 9 primary recommendations pertaining to future physical development on campus:

Support Our Students

Renovate Buildings

The major master plan recommendations cover the spectrum of broad to specific projects and have interrelated elements for consideration. The recommendations are not listed in order of priority. The recommendations reinforce the SFCC Strategic Plan.

SFCC Strategic Plan Pillars

Summary

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Project List P1 - 100,200A & 300A RENOVATION P2 - 200B RENOVATION P3 - 300B RENOVATION (lower level - not shown) P4 - 400 RENOVATION P5 - 600 RENOVATION P6 - 500 RENOVATION P7 - ITC/EAST WING RENOVATION P8 - VISUAL ARTS CENTER RENOVATION P9 - FITNESS SECOND FLOOR RENOVATION (upper level - not shown) P10 - HEC FLOORING RENOVATION (remote bldg - not shown) P11A - KIDS CAMPUS RENOVATION P11B - KIDS CAMPUS RENOVATION P12 - GENERAL CAMPUS INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADES P13 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND FIRE SUPPRESSION P14 - INFRA., AWNINGS, OUTDOOR LEARNING SPACES P15 - HVAC AHU UPGRADES CAMPUS WIDE P20 - REDEFINE MAIN ENTRY P21 - KIDS CAMPUS CLASSROOM ADDITION 1 P22 - KIDS CAMPUS CLASSROOM ADDITION 2 P23 - TRANSFORM EXISTING ART GALLERY P24 – HEALTH SCIENCES EXPANSION P25 – WW TREATMENT POND RECLAMATION & RENOVATION P26 – CAMPUS CONNECTIONS 02 P27 – ACTIVATE COURTYARDS P28 – AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY CENTER EXPANSION P29 – ENHANCE TECHNOLOGY IN EXISTING CLASSROOMS P30 – WAYFINDING AND CORRIDORS UPGRADES P31 – STUDENT HUB

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 1. Renovate Buildings

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Program Location Incompatibilities In general, the program locations on campus are established and are working cohesively. The Visioning Summit highlighted some areas which may be considered in which program adjacencies are not ideal. These were: Location 1: Masters Program | Academic Areas above and to the East Issue: Lack of compatibility - acoustical and academic. Recommendation: consider relocation of the Master’s Program spaces on campus or the construction of a separate high school facility on campus. Location 2: Woodshop in 400s area Issue: Noisy, dusty shop area incompatible with Health & Sciences education and potential growth of that program. Consider the woodshop is undergoing upgrades to correct the dust collection system. Recommendation: Relocation of Woodshop to Visual Arts Areas (700s area) Location 3: Testing Center in 600s area Issue: Testing not integrated into new-student integration processes Recommendation: Create student services center in 200s area

2 4

5 3

4 4

Location 4: Secondary Courtyards Issue: Lack of use and lack of maintenance Recommendation: Invigorate these areas with new shared circulation paths – see recommendation for Gateway Gallery later in this chapter. Location 5: Main Entry Issue: Lack of clarity of entry and lack of security control Recommendation: Plan a Main Entry Pavilion – see recommendation for Main Entry Pavilion later in this chapter

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 2. Student Hub

CURRENT SERVICE LOCATION LEGEND

Currently, student services are distributed throughout various areas and wings in the main building, which has resulted in a lack of clarity in where to go and what to do – a cause for anxiety for students, especially during the first days of the semester when new students are registering for classes. During the engagement process, it was identified that the disassociation between these services caused a range of responses including; frustration, lack of time and loss of interest in registering or testing because the of barrier created by the lack of clarity in how to navigate. This is an issue not only within one wing of the building, but also through the exterior courtyard to the next wing.

1. SECURITY 2. INFORMATION DESK 3. CASHIER 4. WELCOME + ADVISING CENTER 5. CAMPUS CENTER 6. CAFETERIA 7. I.T. HELP 8. TESTING CENTER 9. STUDENT ACCESSIBILITY SERVICES 10. OFFICE OF STUDENT DEVELOPMENT DOWNSTAIRS IN WEST WING

5 10

9 7

It is recommended that in order to reduce these factors, a Student Hub should be created in a highly visible and trafficked area which would become a resource for a number of functions and create a more accessible and inclusive environment for students of all backgrounds. The Hub should include storage space to allow for pop-up style events that may “spill out” into adjoining areas during busy times like registration and end of year. The following functions should be colocated to create the Student Hub: • • • • • • •

2 1 8

Security Desk Campus information Center Cashier Advising and Welcome Center I.T. Service Student Accessibility Services Office of Student Development

Student Services are spread across campus

Depending on the final location of the Hub, additional functions and resources would benefit from the adjacency such as: • • • • • • • •

Cafeteria Campus Center Testing Center Language Center Health and Well being desk Student Club Desk Community Partnership Resources Innovation and Entrepreneurship desk Auckland University of Technology - Student Hub

Duke University - Link Teaching and Learning Center

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Ideally, the Student Hub would include ample storage space as this program would serve a vital function during registration and finals, and should be located near areas that would allow these services to “spill out” into adjoining areas. This plan recommends two potential locations for the Student Hub, one at the Northwest corner of the main building, opposite the food service near the Campus Center, and the other as part of a new entry pavilion at the main building entrance to the Southwest corner of the central courtyard.

Each location has potential advantages and disadvantages: 1 – Near the Campus Center. This location takes advantage of the administrative functions already present along the north south corridor at the building entrance and immediate access to spillover space in the Campus Center. Proximity to the food service will encourage students to stay in the area longer, meaning they may be more likely to take advantage of the counseling and advising functions of the Hub. Aside from the winter months, these functions could be encouraged to grow and provide space for students in the main courtyard and the patio to the northwest of the campus center. This location needs to consider the existing building structure and proximity to the existing testing center. It was noted that significant structure may exist in this location which would limit the flexibility of the space. This should be evaluated further with a structural engineer during the programming phase of a future project. This location does not co-locate the testing center with the student hub, but this may not be negative because placement testing is becoming less utilized and the testing center would remain as a destination on campus. 2 – As part of a new Redefined Entry to the college. This location is interesting as this one stop shop would be located as one of the first touch points for all students, visitors and staff as they enter the building. It would be highly visible and would be a physical representation of the college commitment to serving the students. This would require some rework of current administrative functions to the west of the current entry, however, these should be able to be relocated to the north as part of general renovation work in that wing.

While this location is highly visible, it is located far away from the flexible space at the Campus Center and currently, requiring any overflow of space to happen in the front patio of the entrance or in the courtyard, which can be limited due to weather. While a coffee cart or relocation of the East Wing Eatery could be incorporated into this project, the lack of food options in this area will likely mean fewer student hours spent in this immediate vicinity. As part of the future of this work, both locations should be evaluated holistically with special attention paid to what elements of the masterplan have already been completed.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 3. Redefine Entry A major opportunity on campus exists to clarify the entry and wayfinding on the campus, specifically, at the main entry to the core of campus from the drop-off and large parking lots on the southwest corner of campus. It is recommended that SFCC redefine the entry to the core campus through the creation of a new entry pavilion. A transparent, welcoming space would create a number of synergies and opportunities to better serve the SFCC community. 1. Clarity in Wayfinding – as touched on under the Student Hub recommendation, clarity in wayfinding around campus is a major point to address in the next 3-5 years. As the campus has grown, the original buildings have been supplemented and added on to, creating a series of spaces, connected by long, sometimes narrow corridors, that are disorienting, and often times, poorly lit. A new entry pavilion will create a physical connection between the east and west wings of the building and orient students and visitors to the college via a service desk and maps. Also, as part of this effort, it is strongly recommended that SFCC contract with a wayfinding consultant to create clarity and consistency in building signage. This expert can aid the college in signage, as well as other strategies such as color coded wayfinding that will create better circulation across campus. 2. Access Control and Security – currently, the main building on campus contains a large number of entry points which can be difficult and expensive to monitor, especially during late afternoon and evening classes when the campus is not at peak attendance. This new entry is a preferred location for a security desk and would be the preferred check in point for all community members attending extra curricular offerings such as gallery openings, community meetings or any of the other services that SFCC provides. It essentially becomes the place to say “meet me at the entry pavilion”. 3. Interior Connection Between Buildings – on a number of occasions during engagement with the faculty and staff at SFCC it was discussed that at times, students will opt out of classes, tests or completing registration because they are “already outside” and can just go to their car rather than take the next “hard” step in their journey. This pavilion would create the physical connection between the buildings and create an additional opportunity for SFCC staff to touch a student with a smile and a hello, reducing the chances of them leaving before their journey at the college has a chance to begin.

Walker Art

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 4. Activate Courtyards The courtyards of SFCC are not just a defining characteristic of campus, but an opportunity for growth and improvement. Courtyards are, and will continue to be an important part of the architectural language of Santa Fe, and the courtyards of SFCC are a modern part of that language across the city. There are 6 areas that this masterplan defines as “courtyards” for this plan, although some of them are not enclosed on 4 sides as a traditional courtyard would be defined. Each of these have their own character but all of them could be improved and add to the overall cohesion on campus through similar strategies. 1. Create opportunities for outdoor classes or meeting spaces in the courtyards. Historically, courtyards were places that were sheltered from the harsh desert temperatures and could be comfortable places even in the height of summer. At SFCC, there exists a prime opportunity for the courtyards around campus to be used for classes and meetings, not just increasing instructional functions, but also creating flexibility for instruction in future pandemic circumstances. This will require an investment in power, data, and furniture capabilities in the courtyards. 2. Transparency – visual transparency into the courtyards will aid in wayfinding across the campus as these are major reference points for the buildings. Additionally, visual connections with landscape are shown to reduce stress and increase test scores and success rates for students. Many classrooms and circulation spaces have visual access to the courtyards across campus – these should be maintained and enhanced through new energy efficient glazing interventions when renovation projects are taking place in areas of the building as identified in the FCA. 3. Porosity – Accessibility to fresh air in classrooms and circulation corridors should be encouraged during times when the outdoor temperatures fall within the ASHRAE 55 Thermal Comfort range. Additionally, as has been recommended by the Centers for Disease Control, natural ventilation is an effective means for reducing the spread of respiratory viruses, such as COVID-19, and should be encouraged when possible.

Austin Central Library Visual connection between reading room and outdoor spaces

Banner Medical Center, Tucson AZ Entry garden used as circulation and flex space at lobby

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 4. Circulation – The courtyards, specifically the main central courtyard and the eastern courtyard can be enhanced by encouraging new routes of circulation through them. Currently, the main courtyard creates a strong southwest to northeast connection, but its utility could be further enhanced by creating a strong northwest to southeast connection. This would reduce confusion and disorientation as students and visitors connect between the east and west sides of the building. Doors should be storefront style and some rework of current planting and pathways should be undertaken in order to make that connection evident. Thresholds at the entry/ exit points should be protected from the elements and covered to reduce sources of glare to the interior of the building. This recommendation is closely connected to the Campus Connections recommendation and both should be considered together during planning efforts.

Historic Santa Fe Trail Building - National Park Service Traditional Courtyard building in Santa Fe

Hillsdale College - Outdoor Classroom

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 5. Campus Connections Existing Connections Reference Axes organize spatial perception and set up circulation and program organization within the built environment. This report recommends embracing the strength of existing axes and taking cues from them to extend them. A potential new connection between the Main Building and Fitness is an example which is explored later in this chapter. Reference Axes may also serve as important indicators in the planning for future buildings inasmuch as they promote connectivity of the campus. Within the Main Building, main corridors link portions of the building, however, in terms of general circulation as a matter of actual use, the pattern is that of circulation along interior corridors which run around the courtyard. Additionally, a primary exterior passage diagonally through the courtyard enhances connections through and along campus destination points. Replication of this same concept across the other diagonal of the courtyard would enhance the transitions between the interior and exterior, increase the use of the courtyard and add clarity in how to move and circulate through the main building.

Additionally, there is an existing bus stop along this path. As this route becomes reinforced and more traveled, it should encourage the use of public transportation. The new importance placed on this intersection of pathways and adjacent bus stop, implies the need for a future physical intervention at the crossing. Elements such as shade, color, and also a potential prime location for additional bike storage would enhance the importance of this area of campus. The second major opportunity that arises from this circulation route is the potential to better highlight and access the visual arts gallery at the southeast corner of the courtyard. New fully glazed doors into the courtyard will create visual porosity into the gallery, highlighting and important program on campus. Building from this, access point, circulation through or adjacent to the gallery will further expand its contact with the student body. The physical transparency will allow for sculpture and art to spill out into the adjacent courtyards, strengthening an already strong visual arts program on campus.

Future Connections

Building upon utilizing the courtyards for additional circulation paths, these connections should be expanded across the campus. The current connection from the main building on campus to the Fitness Center is circuitous, and lacking in shade and comfort. Additionally, any future physical development, such as phase two of the ATC or new Health Sciences Facilities or innovation partnerships are likely to occur along this eastern edge of the campus loop road. By creating a stronger connection between the main building and the FEC, a new circulation node will be created along the East side of campus, establishing a jumping off point for future development.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Connection to Fitness Building Building on the cross-courtyard connection, a new connection to the Fitness area is recommended. Currently, the pedestrian link between Fitness and the Main Building is not clear and is circuitous. A new connection would link the Main Courtyard directly to Fitness. The advantages of such a connection are numerous: (1) create clarity of access and wayfinding by offering a more direct route (2) create purposeful sequences of space through multiple disciplines which create a sense of shared space for the academic community (3) invigorate secondary courtyard spaces with main campus pedestrian circulation. Building Pedestrian Connections & Reference Axes The use of the courtyard as a spatial connector has great potential on campus. The following diagram demonstrates some of the additional linkages which may be considered as future improvements are considered, especially improvements to doors and glazing. In effect, any of the spaces bordering the courtyard may be equipped with direct access to the courtyard. This access would allow more frequent use of the courtyard and would contribute to the general sense of a shared campus, improving the existing relatively compartmentalized use of space. Connection to HEC The current transportation connection between the HEC and the main SFCC campus is primarily reliant on personal automobiles as bikeways and public transportation between the separate campuses is scant. It is recommended (and further explored under “other opportunities”), that a commuter shuttle be created between the two campus locations to support all students, including dual credit highschoolers. Clarify Wayfinding

As discussed under campus circulation in Chapter 2, it is recommended that SFCC engage a wayfinding consultant to unify and clarify wayfinding throughout campus. This will be essential to ensure the success of proposed relocation and consolidation of services, and potential new developments if the campus physical footprint expands. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Building Pedestrian Connections & Reference Axes This enhanced connection will strengthen connections between the Main Building and the outlying buildings on campus. The team conceives of an approach which would create a new passage from the Main Courtyard to Fitness and ATC Buildings among and showcasing the raised garden beds. The location currently housing the Art Gallery would be reconfigured to house a new student-oriented space focused on informal gathering, collaboration and potentially food and drink options. As a part of the same recommendation, the Art Gallery is proposed to be relocated to reside within the heart of the Fine Arts area. This report recommends a location within the existing Fine Arts courtyard which is also closely aligned with the Fine Arts building entrance. A new enclosed, purpose-built art gallery would be constructed within the courtyard. The new construction would include generous high ceilings providing flexibility for varying installation types and sizes. Ample and diffuse natural light would be integrated into the new structure with a high-volume space for exhibits. Studio spaces north and south of the gallery would be converted as support spaces for the gallery: Office, Storage and Conservation areas.

Art, circulation and landscape become one Desert Botanical Garden, Phoenix AZ

Sustainable Landscapes become a showcase Center for Sustainable Landscape, Phipps Conservatory, Pittsburgh PA

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 6. Sustainable Landscapes An incredibly high bar has been set by SFCC in relation to the sustainability in buildings and electric power retrofits, investment in solar power, and commitment to renewable energy sources on campus. A new commitment to the same ambitions for sustainability in landscape is in order. This recommendation works closely with the landscape design guidelines as described earlier in this chapter, and with the courtyard and connections recommendations. Landscapes have the ability to stitch together buildings and create a holistic aesthetic of the campus. SFCC, sitting on a relatively prominent point in the valley, has a natural connection to the surrounding landscape. Combined with the amount of greenfield acreage under control of the campus, landscape is one of SFCC’s greatest assets. There are a number of aspects to sustainable landscapes that should be considered, many of which are not project specific, but should be overall goals incorporated into future capital projects on campus. Planting Guidelines As defined in the campus design guidelines, SFCC should adopt native/ adapted planting guidelines for all future work on campus. Rainwater Runoff The goal should be set to limit or eliminate all rainwater runoff from campus. Rainwater should be filtered and allowed to percolate into the soil by natural means Arroyo Connection A connection to the arroyo that cuts from the southwest to the northeast of the campus is recommended. This would connect with the Spur Trail, Rancho Viejo Trail, and the Rail Trail, all of which are multi-use paths bordering the campus. This connection is likely best made after the remediation of the former wastewater ponds. Waste Water Ponds Explored further on the next page Solar Arrays It is strongly recommended that any further additions to the solar arrays on campus occur over parking lots, rather than in the landscape. This will also contribute to a reduction of the Urban Heat Island around campus.

Santa Fe Botanical Garden

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Wastewater Ponds Transformation: Sunken Gardens The two ponds, once decommissioned, are transformed into an ecologically functional garden and campus amenity while continuing to infiltrate stormwater from the adjacent Fitness Facility rooftops and parking areas. The transformed ponds become a zone rich with shade trees, grasslands, native vegetation & pollinator-specific species, walking paths, shade structures, outdoor classroom and performance spaces, and areas for revolving art installations. Functioning as a substantial dryland ‘rain garden’, the sunken gardens become a place of respite for students, staff, visitors and wildlife that offers an experience close to nature while highlighting the sweeping views. •

•

The proposed pond decommissioning process includes removing the liners and capping with 1 to 2 ft of clean fill. Instead of filling the ponds to-grade with large amounts of imported and expensive fill material, the hollow nature of the ponds can be harnessed to form an ephemeral zone where stormwater runoff from the Fitness Center roof and parking area is used to support shade trees and native plantings. Although the ponds will no longer feature open water on a consistent basis, they will be places where water is more present within the soils, and purposefully directed so that it can support a diversity of habitat and vegetation features. The ponds will harvest over 1.3 million gallons of water per year. Re-grading of the site will include deeper depressions and meandering stormwater channels surrounded by terraces for shade and native plant species. Utilizing compacted clay within some of the deeper pools and channels can encourage temporary stormwater pooling and spreading following rainfall events. A future option is to redirect the greywater collection piping from within the Fitness Center restrooms (showers, sinks) and swimming pool filter backwash to a greywater treatment unit, and then discharge this water to the sunken gardens to support habitat functions. A discharge permit from NMED

EAST WING BUS STOP

FITNESS EDUCATION CENTER Existing storm drain line

Pedestrian access

Existing electrical main

Event space main entry plaza

WATER TREATMENT POND

Shade tree

DVANCED OLOGY

Existing sanitary sewer pipe

FITNESS CENTER - SECOND FLOOR

Potential area for excavation to gain cut for pond fill and create more gentle slope toward pond.

Event stage Ephemeral waterfall through seating towards stage. Event seating

WATER TREATMENT POND Existing pond equalizer Creative pipe Zone

FITNE

Upland Zone

Ephemeral drainage Mesic Zone NOTES: 1. All vegetation zones will include native plant species that support pollinator habitat. 2. Creative Zones provide opportunities for art+sculptures to be integrated into the trail experience.

Excavate portion of existing berm to create connection between both ponds while keeping existing infrastructure in place.

Create new link to Spur Trail trailhead.

may be necessary for the proposed greywater reuse, but this requirement will be less robust than what is required for wastewater/blackwater treatment.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Wastewater Ponds Transformation: Community and Academic Use •

• •

The ponds are suited to developing a portion of their area into an amphitheater for performance and class instruction. Integrating stormwater, habitat and educational/gathering spaces stacks function and brings people to the space. Cut/fill from zones surrounding, between and within the ponds can be reshaped to form terraced seating, gentler interior slopes, and pavilion/ performance creative spaces. Shade will be a critical element of success; establishment of shade trees as well as constructed pavilions/structures will provide a mix of natural and built shade. If stormwater from additional areas can be directed to the ponds, this will enhance both water management and the nourishment of the landscape and soils.

Images from Chatham University’s Eden Hall Campus: Stormwater Amphitheater serves multiple functions including filtering, holding and infiltrating stormwater and community/event/classroom gathering space. Design by Mithun. Biohabitats participated in Master Planning. Photographs by Dominic Mercier Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations Wastewater Ponds Transformation: Precedence - The Meadows Garden at the Springs Preserve Las Vegas, Nevada •

•

• •

•

A stormwater detention pond, once an eyesore in the middle of a popular cultural and environmental attraction, is transformed into a thriving wetland that improves water quality, provides wildlife habitat and enhances aesthetics. The Meadows Stormwater Detention Basin became the heart of the restoration efforts at the Las Vegas Springs Preserve. Biohabitats recreated a riparian wetland with a stream channel flowing through a series of habitat ponds. Designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of riparian wetlands for treating non-point source pollutants and mitigating stormwater runoff, the project also provides a historical simile with the original Las Vegas Springs by including a cauldron pool spring as a primary water source. A key design challenge was the incorporation of parks and public spaces in the flood control basin. In addition to providing treatment of stormwater, the project created significant habitat and bounty for local flora and fauna, with nearly 100 species of plants and about 150 species of birds, and an opportunity for the Preserve’s 600,000 annual visitors to learn about the relationship of water to the development of the City of Las Vegas. All project goals were accomplished in compliance with requirements to continue to operate this site as a flood control detention basin.

Images from the Las Vegas Springs Preserve stormwater meadows transformation (NV). Design by Biohabitats & Craig Campbell

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 7. Campus Growth Areas As shown in the Utilization Analysis, the projected need for additional physical space on the SFCC campus is limited based on current programmatic and enrollment trends. However, certain high priority programs, such as the Health Sciences programs, the Automotive Technologies programs, Kids Campus/ Child Care space, and other technology based programs are effectively built out and highly utilized. If these programs significantly expand, or new partnerships or grants are sought out and obtained, new physical development will be required to accommodate growth. This plan identifies the 3 most likely expansion zones: 1. The Kids Campus – additional child care options are desired and are likely needed to accommodate the needs of the student body. Currently, the child care programs on campus are at capacity, meaning any growth in this program will require additional space. Expansion of this program could be “modular” in nature, essentially taking the existing footprint of 1 or both of the wings of the existing buildings, mirroring and adding on, increasing the size of the courtyard between them. This development could be easily phased and have little impact on the current service level of these programs.

PLANTER

467 sq ft

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

2. The Automotive Technologies Center – During the initial planning and design phases of the ATC, a second phase of the project was discussed. With the advancements in electric vehicle technology, the development of a phase 2 of the ATC specifically focused on the EV future is a need. This building should either be located directly to the east of the existing ATC or to the south. Each location will have challenges due to topographic changes around this area of campus. 3. The Exterior Running Track – An optimal expansion point for the health sciences programs is the area currently occupied by the running track. Although elevated, this flat graded area is adjacent to the existing health sciences programs, a campus entry point and the leveraging of these minimizes initial site development costs. The latest track renovation provided only for use as a walking track and a further, much more extensive renovation will be needed to make it useful as a running track. A comparison of this renovation cost to starting over to create a new track in another location is a

recommended study. An evaluation of Ethyl the Whale’s relocation would also need to be undertaken. The loss of the running track from a fitness options perspective could be offset by stronger connections to the Santa Fe Trails on the south side of campus and walking trails could be incorporated into the ponds redevelopment.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 8. Hybrid Classrooms The abrupt pivot to distance learning in early 2020 was a major disruption to education. The online learning models experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic have made evident that a combination of remote or distance learning and in-person, on campus learning are not only viable, but offer so much more flexibility and opportunity to students than previously imagined. SFCC has received funding for the renovation of twenty classrooms for hybrid teaching and learning technologies. Nine of which will be upgraded in the Fall 2021 semester. On campus, hybrid classrooms are defined as those where students can attend class in person or via the internet. Pending the further evaluation noted in the Technology Assessment and Plan, it is likely that an AV over IP system will be implemented on campus and will support a more robust infrastructure for integrated classroom technology. These efforts should be coordinated with the renovation work identified in the FCA. Integrated technology and hybrid classrooms can support the following:

Upgraded hybrid classroom locations as of Fall 2021

Promote access to education The barrier is reduced for many students who may have disabilities, who are caregivers or are employed. The flexibility of choosing how to attend class reduces that tangible barrier and promotes inclusion. Enrollment The capacity for class size is dramatically scaled and can help sustain the college with a varied revenue stream. Health and Well-being The hybrid classroom is one aspect of distance learning. While distance learning has many advantages, in person human connection is important for growth, education and health and well-being. SFCC should prioritize on campus opportunities for all students, distant and in-person. Physical Space Considerations Existing classrooms on campus may benefit from incorporating well designed acoustical partitions to expand the flexibility and capacity to accommodate different sized classes.

One Button/ Lecture Capture Studio Arizona State University

Synchronous vs. Asynchronous While hybrid classrooms allow students to choose how to attend their class, the classes are still controlled by the Registrar's schedule. Asynchronous coursework expands on this flexibility in allowing students to choose when to ‘attend’ class. These types of offerings may include recorded lectures or lessons. Lecture capture spaces on campus provide the technology and resources for educators to prepare such material, outside of their offices. Safety When social distancing is required, or for individuals at high risk, access to the classroom virtually permits ongoing coursework.

Hybrid/ Hyflex Teaching Environment NV5

Collaboration The ability to collaborate and share courses within the new ERP framework is enhanced over solely traditional face to face education. More information is available from https://www.sfcc.edu/president-rowley-shares-about-erp/ Training and Support Students and educators rely on a robust training program and require support for technology issues to be successful and to reduce anxiety.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Flexibility and Growth Plan - Recommendations 9. Campus Districting As the campus develops, not just over the next decade, but well beyond, a strategy by which future development is zoned and themed will be essential to create a successful wayfinding and circulation around campus. This exists, to a degree, in the main building, however, as further additions to the original campus building are likely to be difficult, new buildings will eventually need to be built. To whatever degree possible, development should continue to be focused near existing infrastructure, which will greatly reduce costs and will strengthen the “campus” feel of the college, while preserving much of the natural landscape on the east side of the college property. Opportunities may arise in the future for this east side of campus, especially once the SE Connector road is completed, however, unless specific programmatic elements are tied to those opportunities (such as open space for experiments or security and privacy requirements) development in that area should be avoided.

Campus Gateway Campus Gateway

Health Sciences District Core District

Opportunity District

PLANTER

Public Partnership District

PLANTER

467 sq ft

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER

PL ANTER

PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

Campus Gateway

Technology + Innovation District

There exists a significant opportunity to define campus edges and create gateways along Richards Avenue and at the corner of Richards and College. These gateways and edges will create a sense of arrival on campus that is currently lacking. Both of these areas likely have ample acreage/ sf to accommodate future public private partnerships and would highlight the importance of the college to the community. Additional Gateways include the future SE connection to Richards and along the north entry to campus near Health Sciences. Each of these are opportunities for monument signage and artwork.

Opportunity District Campus Gateway

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Recommendations for Future Study

Support Our Students

Partner with our Community

There are a number of opportunities and potential strategic partnerships that the College may address and contemplate while making capital investments and planning for the future. The following topics support the College’s strategic plan and may fall outside of typical funding requests to NMHED but can tangibly impact the planning and development of the physical built environment of Campus. An outcome of the community and student engagement sessions was the identification of several partnerships that could be leveraged to expand the capacity, diversify income models and

Food

Extra Curricular Activities

Health Wellness Counseling

LANL Opportunities

Conference Center

Athletics Fields

Hospitality Partner

Senior Living

On Campus Housing

Sustainability Partners

Film Industry

Innovation Center

Greenhouses

Transportation Opportunities

Build our College Capacity

support the campus as a living laboratory. The physical footprint of the potential partnerships will need further study and evaluation, however, the concepts explored here correspond to the recommendations of this masterplan, regional districting and support long term resilient growth. Moving forward, continued partnerships with community members defined as part of the Community College district will continue to reinforce the strengths of the college.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Recommendations for Future Study Transportation Strategies and Opportunities While the geographic setting of SFCC creates a number of opportunities around growth and symbiosis with the natural landscape, the remote setting of campus in relation to the center of Santa Fe, and the distance between the HEC and the main campus creates a number of challenges related to transportation to and from campus. These issues were identified by students as a major issue contributing to stress in their attendance on campus. Access to campus is currently primarily via Richards Avenue and will be greatly enhanced once the SE Connector project is completed. The campus is also currently served by routes 21 and 22 of the Santa Fe Trails Bus System. There also exists limited bike infrastructure to commute to and from campus. While Richards Avenue has a dedicated bike lane for much of its length, due to the high speeds on the street and the lack of protected bike lane, this can be perceived as a less than desirable way to access campus. Consequently, students and staff are highly dependent on personal vehicles when attending the main campus. This leads to potential inequalities on the campus, effectively de-incentivizing students without access to a vehicle. This subsequently creates the need for large parking lots which have a negative effect on the natural environment of the campus through an increase in urban heat island and increased runoff. Many of these transportation issues are outside of the direct control of SFCC, however, it is recommended that the college continue to be an active community participant and lobby for, or institute the following initiatives where possible. 1. Create a transportation task force to address issues in commuting to and from campus. This task force should include members of SFCC, the local Chamber of Commerce, City and County government, the City of Santa Fe Transit Division, as well as other community and college leaders. This task force should be charged with the creation of a 15 year plan in which to address transportation issues for the college.

2. If possible, invest in a small shuttle bus system that

Santa Fe Bus Map

connects the HEC with main campus. This could operate on a shorter timetable than the Santa Fe Trails system which would allow for students to have more flexibility in attending classes as well as benefit the dual credit students, particularly those at adjacent Santa Fe High School. It is recommended that these shuttle buses be electric vehicles. 3. Concurrent to investment in a shuttle bus system, explore options for increased connections to/from the Railrunner. 4. Leverage the location of the HEC by continuing to offer additional courses, services and collaboration with dual credit students. Given the proximity to the center of Santa Fe this is a major opportunity to provide accessible education and training which promotes collaboration with the high

schools and employers, while exposing students to SFCC for future talent development. 5. Advocate for a protected bike lane along Richards Avenue, creating a safer transportation option for faculty, staff and students. 6. Although not directly related to transportation, ensure all members of the SFCC community are aware of and have access to shower facilities if biking to campus. 7. Invest in secure bike storage, potentially indoors, with adequate access to repair facilities for the SFCC community to utilize.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Recommendations for Future Study Greenhouses Infrastructure The college currently has identified and obtained $150,000 of funding from the state of New Mexico to upgrade infrastructure and equipment related to the greenhouses on campus. These programs are unique in the community college landscape and should continue to be supported and advanced on the campus. As climate change continues to alter typical growing seasons and in most cases, reduce crop yields, especially in the southwest, this research will be essential to the health of the community in the decades to come. Additional grant funding for these programs should be pursued, and, as per the recommendation “Campus Connections” any opportunities to locate these programs in highly visible places should be pursued.

Innovation Center Space Currently, SFCC has a number of partners which make up a loosely defined “Innovation Center”. These partners utilize incubator space on the SFCC campus and are engaged in some student development and workforce placement. These partnerships will continue to be important and could potentially be expanded if funding and space needs arise. If these partnerships grow, and funding through various sources can be secured, to leverage space near the center of Santa Fe, where it would be more readily accessible to both the community and student body. Perhaps redevelopment of a vacant big box store or a location near the HEC would be viable location opportunities. If a location on campus is desired, a new building either in the Public Partnership District or the Innovation and Technology District would be appropriate location options. It is recommended that before a new building design project is started, a full programming and cost estimating exercise should be completed in order to best define scope and identify key opportunities.

On Campus Extracurricular Activities

Film Industry

Students expressed a desire to have additional opportunities to engage in extra curricular activities while on campus. Due to the commuter nature of campus, students can spend a significant amount of time between classes on campus and desire opportunities to engage in other activities. Current student populations have an affinity for gaming and coding. It is recommended that the college engage the students to determine a way to accommodate these extra curricular activities.

The State of New Mexico is the site of many new film initiatives and opportunities. SFCC has a well respected film program that could be further leveraged for this industry, and the program has opportunity for growth, if appropriate partnerships can be developed. Through the masterplan process, ideas for a film backlot, production studio, sound stage, and other related film programs were discussed. These programs would potentially be best located in the opportunity districts as defined on the Campus Districting Recommendations.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Recommendations for Future Study Sustainable Infrastructure Partners

Hotel / Hospitality Partner

Creating partnerships with infrastructure industries can further the sustainable growth of campus, provide educational opportunities and perform 21st century facilities research and development. This approach recognizes the centrality of campus infrastructure and aids in fostering positive social, environmental, and economic outcomes.

As the Community College District continues to grow and develop, it is critical to consider complementary uses that both support the student and benefit the community. As the hospitality industry is a local employer, there is an opportunity to leverage a hotel, retail or restaurant environments for training grounds for the students and income for the college.

Sustainable Infrastructure Partners improve the college’s resilience, by improving the basis for the ability to absorb, recover and prepare for future disruption. A resilient campus also promotes sustainable development, health and well-being and inclusive growth.

On Campus Housing Transportation and housing insecurity are potential barriers to attending community college. Many students are balancing the responsibilities of work, family and education.  On Campus Housing becomes a retention tool to support student success. On Campus Housing provides many benefits to students including: • • • • •

Access to stable, affordable housing Immediate access to campus, assisting the work, life, family responsibilities Develop social connections Access to services, like laundry, internet, cooking or dining facilities. Supports matriculation

Conference Venues/ Center Current conference space on campus is highly utilized, sought after, and tends to be booked the majority of the year. SFCC does offer this space to the community for rent, generating revenue for the college, however, revenues could be increased if there was additional availability on campus. Combined with the presence of a large commercial kitchen on campus, overall growth of Santa Fe and the community need for conference space, a dedicated venue for conferences and meetings may be a viable long term priority for the college. This would best fit in a campus gateway district and could be used by the SFCC community and the larger Santa Fe Community.

Athletics Fields and Partnerships The running track, baseball field, and tennis courts are underutilized amenities on campus. SFCC has multiple opportunities to take advantage of them with possible outcomes raised during engagement:

Senior Living Partnership

•

The life long learner is an integral part of the community college community and there may be mutual benefits for senior living communities within the community college context and developer partner.

•

• • •

Older adults who are physically, cognitively and socially active are less likely to develop a number of illnesses Proximity to healthcare training programs and clinic Multi-generational interaction promotes empathy

Plan these areas for future building development such as health sciences expansion or other public/private partnerships. These facilities are in prime location adjacent to a campus gateway and the land is relatively flat for more economical development. Explore potential partnerships with the city of Santa Fe and local neighborhoods to provide youth sports venues. As the city of Santa Fe expands to the South and West, this infrastructure will be needed to support the greater community and is an opportunity for SFCC to continue to strengthen those community bonds.

Future Opportunities with Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) One of SFCC’s most important relationships is with LANL and providing skills training and job opportunities for graduates of the college. Los Alamos, and other national laboratories, will continue to receive priority funding and will continue to grow their workforce as jobs of the 21st century continue to change. SFCC should look to strengthen those partnerships wherever possible.

Health and Wellness Counseling Although outside the scope of this masterplan and its physical infrastructure focus, the planning team heard from the SFCC community on multiple occasions that the provision for health and wellness counseling on campus is desired. This is a program that could be integrated into the student hub and aid in retention and graduation rates.

Food Healthy food options are an essential part of the holistic approach to campus planning. Although food contracts are outside the scope of this masterplan, it is encouraged that the college explore healthy, nutritious, varied food options for students and staff. Off campus food options are very limited in the area around campus and predominantly require a personal automobile to reach. Student outreach expressed some dissatisfaction with food options on campus.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

Summary Summary Next Steps Cost Estimates

Summary Summary In summary, Santa Fe Community College is well positioned to continue to be a valuable community resource and to provide top quality education to students in the region. Recent decades the college has done the work to create top notch facilities and physical assets that set a high baseline for achievement and success on campus. What this report conveys is that the hard work ahead of SFCC is not in creating more space and physical assets, but in reconfiguring current space to better serve the students and the greater community. This will require shifting programs and services to different spaces which will create a streamlined, efficient, clear, and enjoyable experience for those on campus. It will be of utmost importance that the college think holistically about future capital outlays and projects. The recommendations set forth in this report are often interrelated and individual projects that arise from this work will almost assuredly serve multiple functions. To put it another way, when one project can accomplish multiple goals, you are getting more bang for your buck.

these efforts moving forward. This group should maintain broad oversight of the implementation of the plan and should be responsible for keeping the big picture in focus. However, the planning team does believe that there are projects that have an opportunity for greatest impact and would best serve the college with early implementation. This order, plus a discussion on the importance of combining renovation/ deferred maintenance projects with the transformative projects is discussed on the following pages, which also contain the cost estimates associated with this plan.

Lastly The planning team of Shepley Bulfinch and McClain and Yu would like to extend one last thank you to the Administration, Faculty, Staff, Students and Community of SFCC. We found this a truly enjoyable experience and can’t thank you enough for entrusting us with the opportunity to work with you. We certainly hope that we can continue to work with you as you implement these plans and move your school forward into the future.

Next Steps The 9 broad recommendations set forth in this report create a framework with which to move forward. Upon formal adoption of this document, it is strongly recommended that SFCC form a committee to prioritize

EmpowerStudents, students strengthen Empower Strengthencommunity Community

Cost Estimates Efficient use of Resources Cost estimates have been separated out between the renovation projects as identified in the FCA and the transformative space projects that are discussed in detail in chapter 4. Renovation projects, as identified in the table on the right, were generally broken up into scopes that coincided with building wings and room numbers and attempts were made to keep the projected budgets of these renovations to sizes that would fall into ranges typically approved by the state. It is strongly recommended that SFCC analyze these projects, along with the transformative projects and attempt to simultaneously undertake projects that require work in the same or adjacent areas. For example, any renovation work that occurs in the 100's or 200's areas, that should coincide with the development and design of a new student hub. Where SFCC will find the stewardship of resources will be in the overlap between projects from these two buckets.

RENOVATION

TRANSFORMATION

Shared mobilization + resources - minimized disruption Empower Students, Strengthen Community 100

Cost Estimates

P31 P30 P25 P20 P26 P27 P23 P21,P22 P24 P29 P28

NEW STUDENT-ORIENTED CENTER CAMPUS CONNECTIONS 01 SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPES REBUILD MAIN ENTRY AS ENCLOSED BUILDING RELOCATE ART GALLERY TO VISUAL ARTS AREA SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING COURTYARD AREAS CAMPUS CONNECTION 03 CAMPUS GROWTH AREA 01 CAMPUS GROWTH AREA 02 21ST CENTURY CLASSROOMS CAMPUS GROWTH AREA 03

Partner with our Community

Campus Districting

Build our College Capacity

21st Century Classrooms

Priorities 8,9,10,11 - The remaining projects are more dependent on new space needs (some are ongoing) of growing programs, and should be assessed on an "as needed" basis.

Support Our Students

Campus Growth Areas

Priority 7 - WW Treatment Pond Reclamation and Renovation - Priority is given to this project due to the current analysis and decommissioning of the WWTP on campus.

$1,500,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $7,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $2,000,000.00 $115 PER SQUARE FOOT $2,000,000.00 $265 PER SQUARE FOOT $450 PER SQUARE FOOT $25,000 PER CLASSROOM $325 PER SQUARE FOOT

Sustainable Landscapes

Priority 5 - Activate Courtyards - Once the new circulation and programs are established on campus, tactical courtyard activation can be analyzed to enhance their use.

STUDENT HUB WAYFINDING AND CORRIDORS UPGRADES WW TREATMENT POND RECLAMATION & RENOVATION REDEFINE MAIN ENTRY CAMPUS CONNECTIONS ACTIVATE COURTYARDS TRANSFORM EXISTING ART GALLERY KIDS CAMPUS CLASSROOM ADDITIONS HEALTH SCIENCES EXPANSION ENHANCE TECHNOLOGY IN EXISTING CLASSROOMS AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY CENTER EXPANSION

Priority 6 - Transform Existing Art Gallery - This will unlock additional connective threads throughout campus and create a new purpose built gallery space with better connection to the front of the campus.

PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BUDGET

Campus Connections

Priority 4 - Campus Connections - This will enhance physical connections in the building, and can best take place after the new entry and wayfinding establish new and improved routes around campus.

SCOPE

Activate Courtyards

Priority 3 - Redefine Main Entry - The front door to the school, this will re-enforce the concepts that arise in the wayfinding project and will stitch the main building together.

PROJECT NO

Redefine Entry

Priority 2 - Wayfinding and Corridors Upgrades - Most important of this will be the hiring of a wayfinding consultant to establish the language and direction of wayfinding on campus. The specific corridor and signage upgrades could be incorporated as renovation projects take place around the building.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

PROJECT NAME

Student Hub

Priority 1 - Student Hub - This project will be the keystone in creating new clarity around student services. It will have downstream effects of potentially opening up other pockets of spaces around campus creating flexibility around other space needs.

PRIORITY

Renovate Buildings

While project order will ultimately need to be determined by SFCC and funding availability, the planning team, based on discussions with SFCC and the Governing Board, believe that the following transformative projects should be prioritized by the college.

SFCC STRATEGIC TRANSFORMATION PROJECTS 2022-2032

SFCC Strategic Plan Pillars

Project Priorities

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

101

Student Hub New Entry

Future Health Sciences Expansion Connections to Existing Trails Campus Gateways

ATC Phase 2

Kids Campus Expansion Campus Connections and Art Gallery

Campus Gateways

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 102

Santa Fe Community College Campus Plan - Appendix Issued 10-07-2021

Appendix Index Engagement Meetings Visioning Summit Summary Survey Results Facilities Conditions Index Facilities Condition Assessment Campus Plans

Engagement Meetings Santa Fe Community College (SFCC) was founded in 1983 with state funds appropriated for the creation of a community college in Santa Fe. In its first semesters, SFCC held classes in temporary facilities in Santa Fe. The early curriculum included courses in office tech, business, computing, information systems among others. In 1984 a bond was passed to support the construction of a new college. The Rancho Viejo Partnership made major contributions to this effort. The campus has grown over time with facility additions such as the William C. Witter Fitness Center, Early Childhood Development Center, Fine Arts Center, Instructional Technology Center, Higher Education Center, Trades and Technologies Center and the Health & Sciences Center.

Academic Departments SFCC’s course offerings lead to more than 100 degrees and certificates ranging in subject matter from the natural sciences to building sciences to healthcare to digital arts to advanced technologies. SFCC’s programs are: • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Accounting Adobe Construction Algae Studies Allied Health American Sign Language & Interpreter Preparation Architectural & Interior Design Automotive Technologies Biofuels Biological and Physical Sciences Building Science & Construction Technologies Business Administration Ceramics Controlled Environment Agriculture Creative Writing

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Criminal Justice Culinary Arts Dental Health Distributed Energy Technology & Systems Drawing & Painting Emergency Medical Services Engineering Machining Technology Program Engineering Technologies Entrepreneurship Exercise Science Facility Technologies Fashion Design Film Fine Arts Fine Woodworking Fitness Instructor Training General Studies Hospitality & Tourism Human Services HVAC Information System & Computer Science Jewelry / Metal Arts Leadership Massage Therapy Media Arts Medical Assisting Medical Billing & Coding Nursing Nutrition Paralegal Studies Paramedicine Phlebotomy Photography Plumbing Printmaking & Book Arts Psychology Respiratory Care Sculpture Solar Energy Sustainable Technologies Teacher Preparation The New Mexico Environmental Job Training Program

• • •

Water & Wastewater Operations Welding World Language

List of Engagement Sessions All dates in 2021 1/21 - 1/22 2/1 2/3 2/5 2/9 2/12 2/12 2/18 2/23 2/24 2/25 3/3 3/23 - 3/24 5/12 5/20 5/25 6/2 6/23 7/2 7/6 7/7 7/8 7/8 7/8 7/9 8/4 8/17 9/1

Kickoff Meeting Campus Visit LBAC Meeting Campus Visit Campus Visit Registrar Meeting Campus Visit Campus Visit Campus Visit Strategic Direction Meeting Campus Visit LBAC Meeting Community Visioning Summit LBAC Meeting WWTP Meeting Campus Visit LBAC Meeting Governing Board Meeting Campus Visit Technology Group LBAC Meeting Academic Faculty Group Student Group Sustainability Group Facilities and Campus Plan Group LBAC Meeting Facilities and Campus Plan Group LBAC Meeting

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 105

Visioning Summit Summary

Visioning Summit Summary 2 Days, 8 Hours, 50 Participants The first day of the workshop was focused on establishing the bigger picture of SFCC within the larger higher education landscape. The planning team assembled a group of experts to give a series of short presentations on sustainability, technology, research, and education trends. This was followed by a series of small group activities meant to identify important opportunities around the future state of SFCC.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 107

Visioning Summit Summary Day 2 The second day of the workshop was focused on identifying opportunities for physical changes to the campus that would improve the future state. A series of thought exercises were then transcribed into a physical map of campus where participants were encouraged to sketch or place pictures in relevant areas on the campus to create new opportunities.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 108

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 109

Survey Results

Survey Results Forms(https://www.office.com/launch/forms?auth=2)





LBAC Follow-up - April 2021 SFCC MPMeeting - LBAC Meeting Follow-up 2. The following items have been identified as potential physical improvements to campus. Please rate them on a scale of 1-5 (1 being not desired or a bad idea, 5 being a great idea).

Responses

131:58

Average time to complete

Active Status

1. During the Visioning Workshop the 5 most discussed topics were Space (campus and

organization of space), Flexible Classrooms, Technology, Diversity and Inclusion, and Community Partnerships. Are there items inside these broad categories that are of particular importance? Are there other categories that we missed or other important items that you would like to raise? Latest Responses

Detailed Responses •

• • •

•

"Sounds like a good mix of topics for moving ahead. Seems like we have

5Diversity and Inclusion, would some great spaces, but they could have more of a variety of Under ADA accessibility and

Responses t" general accessibility (including signage and way configurations finding) in so this category? Under Flexible Classrooms, a more 21st "student hubs providing where like minded majors can collaborate on projects, id… century space will be great and I think furnishing the space with better and more comfortable chairs/tables would create a sense of pride and enjoyment. Transportation Student hubs where like minded majors can collaborate on projects, ideas. Sounds like a good mix of topics for moving ahead. Seems like we have some great spaces, but they could have more of a variety of configurations so that they would be used more. Some spaces are used often while others seem to be empty most of the time; also, as a result of the pandemic, seems like the topic of funding might be good to include as I know there are current budget challenges. no

Consolidate Student Functions Improve Wayfinding and Circulation Flexible Classrooms (in person and virtual teaching) Additional Computer Lab Space Multipurpose Spaces Childcare on campus Universal Accessibility Food Options Expand Health Science Programs Expand Workforce Programs Expand the Masters Program

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

111

3. The following items have been identified as potential community partnerships. Please rate them on a scale of 1-5 (1 being not desired or a bad idea, 5 being a great idea). 1

Detailed responses • • • • •

Film Industry Youth/ Community Sports on existing fields

• • •

Campus Housing Campus Hotel/ Restaurant Tech Startups Santa Fe Economic Development Partnership Health Clinic

We will be reviewing potential future uses for our Waste Water Treatment plant and pond areas and I look forward to that conversation and ideas. NA Not right now Active shooter preparation I'm not sure about the computer lab space option. I think optimizing computer access is probably true, but there are computer labs that are barely scheduled as seen in the classroom list. I'm hoping we can do a deeper dive into this idea in the sub groups. no none Some of the items mentioned in community partnerships seem to go against what is typically included in community colleges (housing, startups, sports)-are these components supported by the State and/or are any other community colleges in NM including these types of facilities? Depending on how funded, seems like some of these might compete with SFCC serving it's primary mission unless they come with additional funding options or add to our current funding in some way

Community Partner Meeting Spaces

Community Office Space Incubator Space

4. Are there any other issues/opportunities you would like to discuss in the future?

Responses

Latest Responses

"Some of the items mentioned in community partnerships seem to go … "none" "no"

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

112

3. When thinking about the QUANTITY of specific spaces, what is your opinion on the space/ room types listed below



Too Few

Forms(https://www.office.com/launch/forms?auth=2)



Just Right

Too Many

Academics Faculty Focus - April 2021 Academics and+ Faculty Focus Subcommittee - pre meeting suvey

StandardClassrooms Computer Labs Study Spaces

Responses

35:02

Active

Average time to complete

Status

Student Breakout Rooms Library Space

1. When thinking about the physical space that you have access to or teach in, on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being poor and 5 being great) how would you rate the quality of the space as a whole?

3.67

Responses

Average Number

Quiet Areas Classrooms specifically set up for remote lectures and learning Outdoor space that could be used for teaching/ educational purposes Classrooms with special functionality/utility (i.e. sinks or extra power/data)

2. Any specifics to add regarding the question above?

Responses

Detailed responses • • •

Latest Responses

"classrooms need more whiteboards (multiples in each room where po…

i hear of degraded systems around TATC that never seem to be addressed (Boiler, Water tank leaks, Nanogrid battery not installed) I teach mainly in room 563 (the main film studio) and the roof leaks and the vent system is not up to good standards. The AC does not function very well in that part of the building. And of course there is a shortage of storage space. classrooms need more whiteboards (multiples in each room where possible), improved computer set ups (which should be accessible to faculty with disabilities, and, in some of the older classrooms, more comfortable and flexible furnishings.

4. Any Other Space types that you would like to add?

Responses

Detailed responses

Latest Responses "No"

"Multi-media and function workshop space for interdisciplinary work." "larger classrooms, maybe flexible classrooms that could be two small …

• more adjunct offices • There needs to be a performance space/theater, with proper video projection, 5. Thinking about the physical space on campus, adjacencies of one academic program to another sound, seating, and lighting. It doesn't need to be a huge space, but we need are important. there with adjacencies on campus that work well? Are athere adjacencies on one. AlsoAre dealing workforce development, we very should have larger film campus which not work? opportunities share spaces/ facilities? studio fordotraining. TheAre filmthere industry is a hugetocomponent to the New Mexico Latest Responses economy, and we need to up our game in providing professional training to the film/television industry. This is something that we might be"No" able to work with IAIA 6 in the development of such a facility, since their film program is exploring the "If those adjacencies exist I can't identify them." Responses idea. "We need to develop stronger relationships between sustainability pro… • Classrooms with good hearing and lighting levels • larger classrooms, maybe flexible classrooms that could be two small ones or one large one. • Multi-media and function workshop space for interdisciplinary work. • No Empower Students, Strengthen Community

113

"larger classrooms, maybe flexible classrooms that could be two small …

5. Thinking about the physical space on campus, adjacencies of one academic program to another are important. Are there adjacencies on campus that work very well? Are there adjacencies on campus which do not work? Are there opportunities to share spaces/ facilities? Latest Responses

"No"

"If those adjacencies exist I can't identify them."

Responses

Detailed responses •

• • • • •

"We need to develop stronger relationships between sustainability pro…

trades has rooms that share lab and lecture space. sometimes these work but sometimes hard to teach a class in a functional lab. Greenhouse has space that can be shared with other programs. No interest has been shown from other programs. I think the film department area works pretty well as we are away from much of the campus, so our impact is not heavy on other areas. The cafeteria and student lounges that are centered in the building works very well.Wha We need to develop stronger relationships between sustainability programs and science programs and between engineering and trades, and between computer science and media arts. If those adjacencies exist I can't identify them. No

6. When thinking about the past year and how COVID has affected academics on your campus, what factors on a scale of 1-5 (1 being least impactful, 5 being most), have had the largest influence on your teaching? 1

Technology Requirements

Internet Bandwidth

7. Student OtherInteraction Items you wish to add?

Interaction with fellow faculty

Responses Student Retention

Student Interaction Interaction with fellow faculty

"No"

"Easy and streamlined access to necessary information and documents… "student's need for space to study and interact with other students. Stu…

Knowledge Retention

8. WhatDetailed Lessons have you learned from remote work/ teaching that you think are valuable to carry responses Grading/ Assessing Student Performance forward?• flexibility or acceptance on both ends (students and faculty) for internet/OIT hiccups! Latest Responses • Nearly all of what I teach is hands on. Not being able to teach in person has 6have a HUGE negative impact on both teaching and"No" enrollment. We tried many culture doesn't work." different and none worked"An all oral thatwork well. 7. Other Items you wishapproaches, to add? Responses "a lot more can be done remotely than we thought. We need to be flex… • What about Teacher/Professor's/Adjunct Instructor's Interaction. Latest Responses • student's need for space to study and interact with other students. Student's "No" 6needs for technology resources and training, "Easy and streamlined access to necessary information and documents… • Easy and streamlined access to necessary information and documents for Responses "student's need for space to study and interact with other students. Stu… students and for academics. • No 8. What Lessons have you learned from remote work/ teaching that you think are valuable to carry forward?

Responses

Latest Responses "No"

"An oral work culture doesn't work." "a lot more can be done remotely than we thought. We need to be flex…

Detailed responses • •

Technology Support

Internet Bandwidth

Latest Responses

• • • •

students want online classes and it works for many, but some completely fall out. We need to make exceptions for hand-on learning. There are some classes that simply cannot be taught online. We tried to hold classes in person, but the word really never got out to the public that some of the departments are able to work safely in a hands on format. The lack of broad-band and WIFI resources in Tribal Nations a lot more can be done remotely than we thought. We need to be flexible and creative going forward. An oral work culture doesn't work. No

Student Retention Knowledge Retention Grading/ Assessing Student Performance

7. Other Items you wish to add?

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

114

Completely Online

9. Given the opportunity, how would you PREFER to teach or see your colleagues teach? Completely in Person

Hybrid - some days physically …

Completely Online

Responses

"the best way to teach varies greatly by discipline, student level, and fa…

11. Thinking about HOW you will actually teach in the future, which of these options seems most 10. applicable? Additional thoughts related to question 9?

Latest Responses

Completely in Person

"No"

Hybrid - some days in person,…

"I would prefer that my colleagues always teach hybrid classes. Even if …

Completely Online

Responses

10. Additional thoughts related to question 9?

"the best way to teach varies greatly by discipline, student level, and fa…

11. Thinking about HOW you will actually teach in the future, which of these options seems most Latest Responses "No"

"I would prefer that my colleagues always teach hybrid classes. Even if … "the best way to teach varies greatly by discipline, student level, and fa…

responses 11. Detailed Thinking about HOW you will actually teach in the future, which of these options seems most • each specific class would have a different answer above applicable? • This question is not an either/or answer. Some classes need to be taught in person. Some can be taught in a hybrid format. And others can be taught Completely in Person online. As 2 for my colleagues, it should be how THEY feel about it. completely For me personally, I prefer to teach in person. Plus, there are students who need Hybrid - some days in person,… 3 access to equipment. They will need access to campus in order to either check Completely Online 1 specialized resources that are only on the campus itself. out equipment or use • At least give or offer the options to do so for the teaching staff at SFCC • the best way to teach varies greatly by discipline, student level, and faculty skill set--courses like math and science are often better taught at least to some degree in person, andtotrades classes 12. Additional thoughts related question 11? must be taught to some degree in person. Hyflex--where some students are in the classroom and others are online is also Latest Responses an important modality to consider. We need to look at data on best practices and "No" consider 6 faculty development and student needs. "At this time, I am scheduled to teach onlineEven in the if fall and I hope to d… • IResponses would prefer that my colleagues always teach hybrid classes. instruction time is not during online classes I would still that it be "I think I will use all recommend these modes plus hyflex" hybrid so that there is access to the documentation and materials for students and current and new instructors to follow. Additionally, given our status as an HSIaspects and anyofcurrent researchthat about bestincorporate supports students an HSI13. Are there online teaching youwhat will now moving in forward in an in designated institution, it would make the most sense for our school to assertively person or hybrid teaching method? construct as much technological know-how, updating, usage, and consistency Latest Responses as possible. Hybrid classes allow for students to have independent time to "No"be a necessity synthesize information, to translate information should that 6 or a wish, and fosters the critical thinking process inside outside of theaccess for stu… "Attendance freewrite check-ins andand as close to universal Responses classroom. "more extensive support sites with video of lectures and other support … • No

applicable?

12. Additional thoughts related to question 11?

Latest Responses

6 Hybrid - some days in person,…

2 3

"At this time, I am scheduled to teach online in the fall and I hope to d…

Completely Online

"I think I will use all these modes plus hyflex"

Completely in Person

Responses

Detailed responses

"No"

• each specific class would have a different answer above 13. Are there of online teaching that you now incorporate forwardsafely in an in in • aspects There are several classes that arewill hands on and needmoving to be taught or hybrid teaching method? person. That being said, there 12. person Additional thoughts related to question 11?are certainly classes that can successfully be taught partly online or completely online. Latest Responses Latest Responses • Completely in Person is a good way but we learned"No" by the COVID-19 Pandemic "No" 6 has to have a back-up plan too! 6that teaching in the future"Attendance freewrite check-ins and as close to universal access for stu… "At this time, I am scheduled to teach online in the fall and I hope to d… • I think I will use all these modes plus hyflex Responses Responses "more supportin sites with video ofIlectures anddo other support … • At this time, I am scheduled to extensive teach"I online the and hope think I will use allfall these modes plus to hyflex" so again in the spring. However, my plan is to follow what students need. • No

13. Are there aspects of online teaching that you will now incorporate moving forward in an in person or hybrid teaching method?

Responses

Detailed responses • • • • •

•

Latest Responses "No"

"Attendance freewrite check-ins and as close to universal access for stu… "more extensive support sites with video of lectures and other support …

more use of LMS There are. Some aspects of MOST classes can be taught online, such as theory and research. By using more power-points presentation and updating the computer/audio/ video resources with accurate higher educational topics that have revelevency to the course material and contents. more extensive support sites with video of lectures and other support materials. Attendance freewrite check-ins and as close to universal access for students to materials as possible and as close to universal access for instructors to materials and information as possible. I am not the best person to ask because I've been teaching online since 2013. No Empower Students, Strengthen Community

115

14. Are there specific programs or services that you believe will be or should continue to be remote in the future?

class/ teaching time?

Latest Responses

"No"

Responses

"Many Liberal Arts prgrams"

Responses

Average Number

"advising and tutoring should remain available remotely"

Detailed responses

• depends on a specific class more than a program 15. On a scale of 1-10 (1 not willing, 10 very willing), how willing are you to change your physical • Very good question. I can only speak for my department as program experts teaching space fromsuggestion semester totosemester? you would teach a different classroom should make their own(i.e. departments. I feel in film studies and theoryor a 14. Are there specific programs or services that you believe will be or should continue to be different part of the building as semesters change) classes could remain online. Editing and other computer based film classes can remote in the future? be done as a hybrid. Latest Responses • All of them 6 8 • advising and tutoring should remain available remotely "No" 6 Liberal Arts prgrams Responses Average Number • Many "Many Liberal Arts prgrams" Responses • No "advising and tutoring should remain available remotely"

16. Why would you feel that way? 15. On a scale of 1-10 (1 not willing, 10 very willing), how willing are Responses you to change your physical Latest

teaching space from semester to semester? (i.e. you would teach in a different classroom or a "Flexibility is necessary." different part of the building as semesters change) "I prefer to teach close to my department if I'm teaching in person so t…

Responses

"As a person who teaches general education courses, I feel that it is in …

Responses

Average Number

17. On a scale of 1-10 (1 not willing, 10 very willing), how willing are you to be flexible with your class/ teaching time?

16. Why would you feel that way?

Responses

8 Latest Responses

AverageisNumber "Flexibility necessary."

"I prefer to teach close to my department if I'm teaching in person so t…

Responses

"As a person who teaches general education courses, I feel that it is in …

18. Detailed What are issues that would hinder your flexibility in times? responses

• like mostsequence colleges, I5 would be fine moving to any available room on campus to Course curriculum 17. On a scale of 1-10 (1 not willing, 10 very willing), how willing are you to be flexible with your teach my students. Personal Schedule 0 class/ teaching time? • Most of the classes I teach need specific equipment that con only be used in of the campus. Roomcertain Availabilityrooms and areas 2 • To better connect with the different classroom or a different part of the building Student Availability 4 6 to bonding with 8 relating human beings Other 0 Responses Average Number • As a person who teaches general education courses, I feel that it is in the best interest of the college for me to be flexible in the spaces I use. Faculty in other areas often need dedicated spaces. • I prefer to teach close to my department if I'm teaching in person so that I may 18. What are issues that would your flexibility in times? access myriad thingshinder related to classes. • Flexibility is necessary. Course curriculum sequence 5 Personal Schedule

17. On a scale of 1-10 (1 not willing, 10 very willing), how willing are you to be flexible with your

18. What are issues that would hinder your flexibility in times? Course curriculum sequence

Personal Schedule

Room Availability

Student Availability

Other

19. During which of the following windows of time do you desire to teach classes? 8AM - 10AM

10AM - Noon

Noon - 2PM

2PM - 4PM

After 4PM/ Evenings

20. Last question - and totally different from all of the others. What does "Campus as a Living Lab" mean to you?

Responses

Detailed responses • • • • •

•

Latest Responses

"Inclusivity, engaged, diversity, and evolving." "Opportunities for multi-media, interdisciplinary, collaborative, experie… "Using the campus itself--outdoor space, its position in the community,…

using campus facilities as learning tools for students entering specific fields. A campus that provides real-world experiences to the students. Areas that can be used to allow students to explore their interests and explore NEW ideas. A sense of community between human beings (living ones). Using the campus itself--outdoor space, its position in the community, the campus community--as a learning resource. Opportunities for multi-media, interdisciplinary, collaborative, experiential learning that is not heavily mediated and allows for a thorough group critical thinking process and engagement. If the room is used by multiple people and programs it would be great if there were reasonably sized shelves or lockers for instructors to keep materials there if it is an option. As well it would be great if teachers other than in fine arts and media arts could easily access artistic supplies. Inclusivity, engaged, diversity, and evolving. Empower Students, Strengthen Community 116

2. In regards to technology, what issues in the beginning of the pandemic required your rapid 

Forms(https://www.office.com/launch/forms?auth=2)



Technology Subcommittee - pre meeting survey

Responses

Technology Subcommittee - April 2021

Responses

58:05

Active

Average time to complete

Status

1. When thinking about technology infrastructure on your campus, on a scale from 1-5 (1 being poor, 5 being best in class) how would you rate the infrastructure at SFCC?

Responses

3.4

Average Number

2. In regards to technology, what issues in the beginning of the pandemic required your rapid response(s)?

Responses

response(s)?

Latest Responses

"Many users did not have portable devices that they could easily take … "Being able to work from home effectively. Having enough bandwidth …

Latest Responses

"Many users did not have portable devices that they could easily take … "Being able to work from home effectively. Having enough bandwidth … "Our department was responsible for assisting teachers in converting t…

3. In addition to the question above, what were some of the new solutions or adaptations in technology that your campus has adopted?

Responses

Latest Responses

"Additional training/ instructions/ knowledge base. Utilizing third part… "The effective use of Teams, Avaya phone software, VPN to access driv… "Training in QM Standards for faculty and staff, hotspot availability, de…

Detailed responses

online conferencing platforms 4. Do• you see remote teaching and learning persisting into the future and if so, what is the • Handing out laptops, headsets andand other equipment. Just in time training. Cloud additional support needed or both faculty students? service software. Latest Responses • Training in QM Standards for faculty and staff, hotspot availability, device "Yes, I do see remote classes in the future. Many classes can work in a f… rentals. 5 "I dophone see it assoftware, being more prevalent the future and technology • the effective use of Teams, Avaya VPN to in access drives. The drivin… Responses use of Zoom to teach synchronously was very important and integrating it intoyear, will o… "I think distance learning is here to stay, and after this past the LMS. • Additional training/ instructions/ knowledge base. Utilizing third party software. Provided additional WiFi coverage on campus in parking lots etc. Laptop check out for staff and students.

"Our department was responsible for assisting teachers in converting t…

Detailed responses

• internet access ... equipment for faculty and students 3. In addition to the question above, what were some of the new solutions or adaptations in • SFCC was an on-site campus. Very few people worked remotely and so the technology campus has to adopted? needthat for your use was limited a few faculty, staff and IT employees. We were Latest Responses therefore not trained to work remotely. Many people didn’t have laptops, cameras, headphones. Many people did not know how toknowledge use VPN (Still don’t). "Additional training/ instructions/ base. Utilizing third part… 5 We relied heavily on paper forms, manualusesignatures etc.phone Faculty were notto access driv… "The effective of Teams, Avaya software, VPN Responses prepared to teach online even though the tools were available. "Training in QM Standards for faculty and staff, hotspot availability, de… • Our department was responsible for assisting teachers in converting their physical courses to online courses, and ensuring quality standards were met. • Being able to work from home effectively. Having enough bandwidth from 4. Do youmy seeISP remote teaching and learning persisting intoworking the future if access so, whattois the to accompanying the needs of remote butand also additional support needed or both students? information from home as Ifaculty did at and SFCC. Responses • Many users did not have portable devices that theyLatest could easily take home for work. We have a dated PBX phone It classes took ainwhile to get users "Yes, I dosystem. see remote the future. Many classestrained can work in a f… 5 to use the soft client etc. on how and OIT had to install it remotely on company "I do see it as being more prevalent in the future and technology drivin… Responses owned and personal machines. User training for VPN Lack of reliable and "I think distance learning is here todidn't stay, and after this past year, will o… affordable internet in rural areas. Provided WiFi hotpots provide adequate internet. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

117

"Training in QM Standards for faculty and staff, hotspot availability, de…

4. Do you see remote teaching and learning persisting into the future and if so, what is the additional support needed or both faculty and students?

Responses

Latest Responses

5. What projects or upgrades to campus technology that are planned or that you would like to see?

"Yes, I do see remote classes in the future. Many classes can work in a f… "I do see it as being more prevalent in the future and technology drivin… "I think distance learning is here to stay, and after this past year, will o…

Latest Responses

"New phone system that integrates with our Microsoft platform. Less o…

Responses

"Cellphone coverage has improved on Campus due to using WiFi trans…

Detailed responses • •

•

• •

yes More communication from admin to faculty on how to prepare courses, what materials and how to use them in class. 1 to 1 access to technology resources. Computer labs are for specific needs or those who can’t afford a laptop. Let’s figure out how to get technology into every students hands consistently. For those students who have laptops get them access to the software they need. I think distance learning is here to stay, and after this past year, will only become more prominent. I think that faculty need more training and accountability in regards to maintaining robust courses online and even when in-person and blended courses are offered. The better the courses presented to students, the far less likely the students will need support. However, there are some things, such as the lack of stable internet and personal devices that prevents students from being able to access courses. In this case, we can step in making more resources or space available to students, but ultimately, that is a state infrastructure issue. I do see it as being more prevalent in the future and technology driving it. Unfortunately, there is the problem of technology inequity, whether lack of resources or lack of skill using it. Yes, I do see remote classes in the future. Many classes can work in a full online or hybrid class room, given both faculty and students are tech savvy enough. Besides additional training, we would need appropriate tools such as cameras (tracking, zoom-able etc)

"I am content with the level of access to technology available to me, b…

Detailed responses

• Hi-Flex classes where students can attend ether face-to-face or online. • ERP/SIS Migration Project Investment in classroom technology including hybrid 6. Are you familiar with AV over IP technologies? and hyflex rooms. I’d like to see investment in a better program for online forms. Our tech poorlytechnology secured and needs VPN fororaccess. 5. What projects orcurrent upgrades to is campus that are planned that you would like to Yes 3 • I am content with the level of access to technology available to me, but I am not see? a common denominator in this situation. FromLatest listening to others, it seems like No 2 Responses there is a greater desire for cell service at the college, but I don't believe that I have no idea you are ta… a service we0should be "New obligated to perform as students focusing 5iswhat phone system that integrates with ourshould Microsoftbe platform. Less o… on work not communications. Also, landline phones are available around the Responses school. "Cellphone coverage has improved on Campus due to using WiFi trans… • Cellphone coverage has improved on Campus due to using WiFi transmission, waswould a workaround of not having an infrastructure in very place. "I am content theactual level of cellular access technology to me, b… 7. On a scale ofwhich 1-5 how you rate the speed ofwith internet access ontocampus? (1available being • New phone system that integrates with our Microsoft platform. Less on prem slow, 5 being extremely fast) technology products.

6. Are you familiar with AV over IP technologies? Responses

4.4

Average Number

Yes

8. Have faculty, orare students I have no idea staff what you ta… 0 complained about access to internet in the past while on campus? this could be related to dead zones for wi-fi, loss of cell phone signals etc?

7. On Yes a scale of 1-5 how would5 you rate the speed of internet access on campus? (1 being very slow, No 5 being extremely fast) 0

4.4

Responses

Average Number

8. Have faculty, staff or students complained about access to internet in the past while on campus? this could be related to dead zones for wi-fi, loss of cell phone signals etc?

Yes

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

118

"Particularly in classrooms and the downstairs areas reception is poor …

8. Have faculty, staff or students complained about access to internet in the past while on campus? this could be related to dead zones for wi-fi, loss of cell phone signals etc?

Yes

Responses

Latest Responses

"There should be sufficient WiFi coverage which is -65dbm or better ac… "Areas on Campus were the WiFi covereage was weak." "Particularly in classrooms and the downstairs areas reception is poor …

10. Detailed Switching responses gears and thinking about the spaces on campus, how are the computer labs on • Lowe-level areas a spotty wit wi-fi as well as other areas on campus. Bandwidth campus currently used? Primarily for scheduled classes? What are the strengths and is always drained. weaknesses of the labs? • Cell service is notoriously bad in Santa Fe. We recently installed equipment to Latest Responses increase cell signal in areas for safety reasons. It was not intended to provide "3 people open labscould the restdial is for911. scheduled classes. Mix of desktops and Thin… a 5G experience, but to ensure People confuse the two. 5 Our wi-fi is brand new so I’d love to hear about wi-fi dead zones. "I like the labs where students have access to a reliable computer and … Responses in classrooms and the downstairs areas reception is poor for cell • Particularly "There are some labs for student use and some for public use. The labs… phone signals. Wi-fi has since been upgraded. • Areas on Campus were the WiFi covereage was weak. • There should be sufficient WiFi coverage which is -65dbm or better across all 11. From a technology perspective, what classrooms do you see as the most important on campus learning spaces on campus per vendor heat map.. Some users may not be and how are they aware they used? have to onboard their devices and get stuck in a walled garden. WiFi time sensitive applications like Teams seems to have issues when roaming. Latest Responses Cell phone signal is non existent in some areas such as Health and Sciences 4 "Openlabs - by everyone Labs that support successful programs" due to building material. The 300 lower level has similar issues - a cell phone Responses boosters were installed "It's hard to identify the classrooms that take more priority over others.… extenders/ with little improvement. (WilsonPro) 12. If you had a perfect scenario, considering teaching and learning goals only (and not budgetary limitations) what technology would be included in classrooms?

Responses

campus currently used? Primarily for scheduled classes? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the labs?

9. If you answered yes to question 7, please give us additional detail.

10. Switching gears and thinking about the spaces on campus, how are the computer labs on

Latest Responses

"3 open labs the rest is for scheduled classes. Mix of desktops and Thin… "I like the labs where students have access to a reliable computer and … "There are some labs for student use and some for public use. The labs…

11. From a technology perspective, what classrooms do you see as the most important on campus Detailed responses • are The current and how they used?labs have desktops that sometime take longer to boot. Sometimes they go on updates in the middle of a class and this affects students using them. Responses They are big and clunky and when a faculty isLatest teaching at the front of the class 4the monitors cover the field of"Openlabs everyone Labseye thatcontact support successful programs" vision -tobyhave good with faculty or even the board. Responses "It's hard to identify the classrooms that take more priority over others.… • I think focusing on the 1 to 1 laptop to student relationship is important and is a relatively new concept at SFCC. It can even the playing field for low income students or those who have families and can’t hang out in a lab for hours. 12. If you had aMaking perfectthe scenario, considering teaching andvirtual learning goals only (and not budgetary technology available through tools/licensed options is limitations)important. what technology be machines? included in classrooms? Laptopwould vending But on to labs..I think there are probably too many and some of them are too small. I think it is important to review usage Latestthan Responses and even get into the usage of a computer, rather a room. If you don’t have 4that data you are just guessing. "OptionalPerhaps Cameras for remote classes, faster in machines, interacti… increasing access some more areas is Responses important. One of the constant issues is the whole “ownership” of a lab. Labs "Better projectors and speakers. Ability to connect laptops, tablets, orare p… built for one program and if they only have three classes the lab sits empty. We have deployed vdi to alleviate the stress of managing so many machines. • There are some labs for student use and some for public use. The labs 13. Are there areas whereto students the ability to plug and work? Think madearound it easycampus for students work onhave campus and print on in campus. As far as of these as hub areas with accesslabs to seating, power and strong wifi access. If so, where are those weaknesses...the used for classrooms frequently experienced problems and is the curent number sufficient? with the projectors. Not turning on, not connecting to computers, remotes disconnected. If using the projectors could be Latest moreResponses streamlined, that would be amazing. "There are many open spaces around campus that would allow studen… • 5 I like the labs where students have access to a reliable computer and network "The open labs are good for hardware access. A place for using your o… to do their homework and study. The classroom labs are important for some Responses number these locations throughout the campus. They a… courses being taught, but"There I am are nota sure if of they are properly utilized. • 3 open labs the rest is for scheduled classes. Mix of desktops and ThinClients/ VDI Longer login times. Some software is only available in class rooms that have high end PCs

Latest Responses

"Optional Cameras for remote classes, faster machines, more interacti… "Better projectors and speakers. Ability to connect laptops, tablets, or p…

13. Are there areas around campus where students have the ability to plug in and work? Think of

these as hub areas with access to seating, power and strong wifi access. If so, where are those and is the curent number sufficient?

Latest Responses

"There are many open spaces around campus that would allow studen…

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

119

"There are some labs for student use and some for public use. The labs…

10. Switching gears and thinking about the spaces on campus, how are the computer labs on campus currently used? Primarily for scheduled classes? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the labs? and how are they used?

11. From a technology perspective, what classrooms do you see as the most important on campus

5 4 Responses Responses

Latest Responses

"3 open labs the rest is for Latest scheduled classes. Mix of desktops and Thin… Responses "It's hard identify more priorityuse. over others.… "There aretosome labsthe forclassrooms student usethat andtake some for public The labs…

• ?? 11. From a technology perspective, what classrooms do you see as the most important on campus 12. If you had a perfect scenario, andspot. learning goals only (and not budgetary • Pre-pandemic the openconsidering lab was a teaching happening I’m not particularly and how are they used? knowledgeable about would well used classrooms. The mixed use rooms are popular. limitations) what technology be included in classrooms? • t's hard to identify the classrooms that take more priority over others. As a Latest Responses Latest Responses student and as a worker, there is a balance among the classrooms I have 4 "Openlabs - by everyone Labs that support successful programs" 4 and how, with no one or"Optional Cameras for remote classes,others. faster machines, utilized handful sticking out above Some more are interacti… Responses "It's hard to identify the classrooms that take more priority over simply lecture halls and others"Better haveprojectors computers and/or Ability a single podium withtablets, a others.… Responses and speakers. to connect laptops, or p… projector. Faculty have been adaptable or rented others as needed. • Openlabs - by everyone Labs that support successful programs

12. If you had a perfect scenario, considering teaching and learning goals only (and not budgetary 13. Are there areas around campus where students have the ability to plug in and work? Think of limitations) what technology would be included in classrooms? these as hub areas with access to seating, power and strong wifi access. If so, where are those and is the curent number sufficient? Latest Responses

Responses Detailed responses

these as hub areas with access to seating, power and strong wifi access. If so, where are those and is the curent number sufficient?

"Openlabs by everyone support programs" "I like the labs -where studentsLabs havethat access to a successful reliable computer and …

Detailed responses

4 Responses 5

13. Are there areas around campus where students have the ability to plug in and work? Think of

Latest Responses "Optional Cameras for remote classes, faster machines, more interacti…

Responses

"There are many open spaces around campus that would allow studen… "The open labs are good for hardware access. A place for using your o… "There are a number of these locations throughout the campus. They a…

Detailed responses • •

•

"There are many open spaces around thatlaptops, would allow studen… "Better projectors and speakers. Abilitycampus to connect tablets, or p… "The open labs are good for hardware access. A place for using your o…

are aare number of these locations throughout the campus. They a… • Cameras to project the faculty"There as they lecturing. 13. Are• there areas around campus where students have ability to plug and work? Think of Upgraded equipment. Many classrooms don’tthe have hdmi, usb-cinconnectors. these as hubofareas withon access to seating, and strong wifi access. If so, are those More a focus wireless accesspower for projectors would alleviate thewhere connector issues. We’ve never had great access to smart boards etc, but they haven’t and is the curent number sufficient? been well used either. We may need cameras andLatest microphones Responsesin classrooms. We are deploying 10 test labs to see if faculty will make use of the technology "There are many open spaces around campus that would allow studen… we’ve 5 purchased. "The open labs are good for hardwaretablets, access. Aor place for using your o… • Better projectors and speakers. Ability to connect laptops, phones Responses with minimal cord interference."There Andare thea number trainingof for these resources becampus. They a… these locations throughouttothe seamlessly used by faculty. • Optional Cameras for remote classes, faster machines, more interactive options vs teacher just showing video/ slides. More power outlets for laptops etc

Latest Responses

•

Mot enough places. The nooks on hallways have seating but not enough power strips for laptops or even phones. If you think of airports, we should have something similar for students to charge and work. I think access to electricity is a broad issue, but I couldn’t say for sure. I live in my office. It could always be better. I have seen furniture with charging stations built-in. That would be amazing. Wi-if was upgraded 2 years ago…it should be strong in all buildings and main courtyard. There are a number of these locations throughout the campus. They are nested in every hallway I can think of, with the least amount available in the ARTS area before TATC (beyond the studios). I believe these locations are sufficient as I have never seen them completely full. The open labs are good for hardware access. A place for using your own device would be the Library, where wifi is accessible, seating is adequate, and provides noise restriction. The Campus Center is good if a student does not mind the distractions. There are many open spaces around campus that would allow students to work, such as campus center, study areas, library, library rooms, open lab area, court yard. Power outlets may be limited. WiFi signal is strong across campus.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 120

"Contact OIT to rent a laptop and/or hotspot. Not that I can recall, oth…

14. Please describe what the current practices are for lending or borrowing technology hardware (laptops etc). Did those policies change during the pandemic? Do you forsee these changing again moving forward?

Responses

Detailed responses

15. Please describe the student onboarding process from a technological perspective. What steps must a student complete to gain access to campus technology and where do they have to physically go to complete that process?

Latest Responses

"Default 2 weeks for faculty/ staff. Unsure about students. During the … "I saw that there were more laptops students could borrow as well as s…

Responses

"Contact OIT to rent a laptop and/or hotspot. Not that I can recall, oth…

• Laptops and hotspots are available through library/IT. We also have some 15. Pleaseheadsets, describe the studentetc. onboarding process from a technological perspective. What cameras We are allowing students to check out for semester. I’dsteps us tocomplete find moretoways ensure all students have aand laptop through a lease must alike student gain to access to campus technology where do they have to program. But also maybe day checkout laptops. physically go to complete that process? • Contact OIT to rent a laptop and/or hotspot. Not that I can recall, other than Latest Responses more devices being available. I foresee they will decrease as campus visits a student is enrolled/ accepted, they are emailed their usernam… increase, We do still have a population of students who 5 but I am not positive."Once "A measuring to inventory the skill level and resources to succeed … would benefit from these technologies astool they live in remote locations of NM. Responses • I saw that there were more laptops could well as supporting "Attend students the NSO > visit OITborrow and OTL as booths > sign in with assistance f… faculty/staff • Default 2 weeks for faculty/ staff. Unsure about students. During the pandemic I believe it changed to the length of the semester for degree seeking students. • ?

Latest Responses

"Once a student is enrolled/ accepted, they are emailed their usernam… "A measuring tool to inventory the skill level and resources to succeed … "Attend the NSO > visit OIT and OTL booths > sign in with assistance f…

Detailed responses • •

•

• •

Not sure that this exists. The onboarding is usually in the FYS class and this doesn't include a lot of the technology as faculty concentrate in other areas for academic success. They fill out a student application. Welcome and advising accepts them and their ERP/SIS account is then created, which creates their email, login etc. They are then sent an email inviting them to claim their SFCC account. They claim their account and have access. They don’t physically need to go anywhere, but if they have difficulty they go to the OIT Service Desk - which is poorly designed (physically)when you have a line of students. Attend the NSO > visit OIT and OTL booths > sign in with assistance from department to the MySFCC portal and Canvas. Optionally, attend Canvas trainings to explore the LMS with guidance. Can access Canvas Orientation from the MySFCC portal. A measuring tool to inventory the skill level and resources to succeed in a college environment. Know how to access MySFCC and the resources in it including the LMS. Once a student is enrolled/ accepted, they are emailed their username. They onboard themselves either on campus or offsite and setup recovery questions with their personal info. Once that is done, they can register for classes etc. With the same account they can access computer labs etc. The OIT service desk can assist remotely or onsite.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

121

Fall 2021 - SFCC Student Survey

198

33:06

Responses

Average time to complete

Active Status

Student Survey - September 2021

1. Have you attended in person classes on the SFCC campus in the past?

4. In thinking about your time on campus, how would you rate the quality your experience in the following spaces/activities on a scale of 1-5 (1 being a poor quality, 5 being amazing)?

Yes

126

Classrooms Computer Labs

2. Are you attending classes in person in the Fall 2021 Semester?

Yes

Library Cafeteria/Food Service

Student Recreation Center Outdoor Spaces

3. How many credit hours are you currently taking in person on campus? 1-5

Total hours

6-10

11-15

16-20

20+

Ease in Navigating between Classes Ad Hoc Study Space Transportation to/from Campus Registration/ New Student Orientation Testing Center

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 122

5. What spaces would you like to see more of on campus? What spaces could be improved? Latest Responses

Insights

126

"The art studios have defective equipment (broken easels) and sink in …

Responses

"Fine art workshops and work spaces, more space devoted to 3D printi…

19 respondents (15%) answered classrooms for this question. open space work spaces parking spaces Indoor spaces campus classes outdoor spaces fitness center study rooms study areas windows in such spaces spaces would be good

classrooms campus

building quiet spaces space would be great

classes

study spaces

spaces are fine spaces in labs

Detailed responses

• Access to computers,software,audio and video gear. • Additional designated study areas/pods within ALL academic buildings; Cafeteria - higher qualityspaces and more nutrientand dense food options; Annex food service at 6. What are your favorite on campus why? the east end of campus (such as the previous EastLatest WingResponses Eatery); remodeling of Insights  lecture - classrooms that are used my multiple disclipines on the second floor 126 "The vegetable garden - nice to see people caring and tending to the g… of the Fitness Education Center; installation of at least one universal restroom Responses "Fine art workshop/studio spaces, especially sculpture, printmaking, ph… on the second floor of the Fitness Education Center (there are presently NO restrooms on the second floor!); and consideration of another computer lab, in the Main Campus (near the Cafeteria, Bookstore and Jemez rooms). 20 respondents place for this question. • As a(16%) fine answered arts student, I would like to see larger, better art studios. I feel the school could also use more and better gallery space. I do wish the bookstore spaces are to very quiet and be bigger and improved. I feel the cafeteria could be return campus favorite studios improved and made larger. I always felt the indoor eatingspaces area was one- spaces big study spaces study areas classes bland space. The furniture could be made more comfortable and it could nice arts building be a study space to eat. All the restrooms could be upgraded. morequiet attractive arts spaces the study • Better cafeteria, better lighting (Outside H&S going fine to parking lot,itsand ALWAYS Outdoor spaces fitness center dark there. outdoor areas spaces on campus courtyard • better lighting in the classroomsoutdoor are needed Space by the cafeteria • better seating for group chats • Cafeteria seating could be improved • Cafeteria, East Wing Eatery opened, Good Water Restored with filtration. • Campus cafeteria/better prices and better food. • Can't think of any right now • Charging station can be improved, and study spaces would be good to have more. • Classrooms in a more line of sight configuration. e.g. Media Arts rooms have students with backs to presenter. • Coffe shops in more places. • Computer labs. Showers! • Continue updating the campus beautifully and artistically. Main building and west wing are outdated but familiarly loved!!

library

place

art

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Designated outside study/assignment area. A partially enclosed area outside would be great. Just hearing the sounds of nature, helps to relax, stay focused, and be calm. Due to bad weather at times makes it difficult to do this. Do many of the areas included above are not places I ever ever use. Why is there not an option n/a Don't know. Eating Eating area and coffee shops agine . Fine art workshops and work spaces, more space devoted to 3D printing, laser cutting, electronics and other STEM types activities. going back to classes on campus Group Study Spaces I am attending art classes and I would like to have one more room equipped with audio/visual technology, so we can discuss images of artwork. So far, we only have one room for the entire art department and it is always booked. I am taking classes in fine woodworking. I would like to see the woodworking shop be available to students on weekends or days other than days in class. I haven't been able to Check the spaces, we limited to our classroom because of the pandemic. I love the library but would like more private study rooms and a closer bathroom. The tutoring center could be more central and more functional I really don't have a comment here. I really enjoy spaces that act as small group meet ups. I think maybe more study spaces for students to get together to study, so that way they won't have to go to a restaurant or someplace else that is not a good environment for studying. I think that all space could be improved and the improvement over the years has been wonderful to see. I think the quality of the internet would be a big plus. I think we need to update the culinary labs with more storage space and better equipment. Also I'd like to see more space for studying and better access to classrooms as it's not easy to navigate where classes are currently. I would like to see more of the outdoor spaces because they are so unique to SFCC. I also want to see more in person classes because they are more important and necessary than online. they help with understanding of the subject and make things more comfortable for us. I would like to see more outdoor seating choices for classes and study. Many of the classrooms are really tight with limited air circulation. I wish we could open windows in classrooms and offices. Most windows are sealed so it's not possible to open them. Perhaps, an upgrade would allow one or two windows in such spaces to be able to open. Our restrooms could use an upgrade. Many are cramped and the drainage pipes in the floors smell moldy. Also, it seems like in the Main building we could use more restrooms, since women particularly have to wait in line to use a restroom. That's not a great situation when you're on a class break or running late for class. In general, I'd prefer less carpeting in closed spaces. I think additional new spaces should be constructed without carpeting -- floors would be cleaner and more environmentally friendly. Like everyone, I'd like to see some sort of food service return. Even grab and go items would be welcome. I would like to see more parking at the health and science building. Instead of a track field or a dirt lot, a parking lot would be nice. Also the weight room in the fitness center needs more space and equipment. I would love to see the cafeteria actually be open and not closed since some people are taking classes that last until 3 pm, so it would be ideal for the cafeteria to be open for those who didn’t bring their own lunch and need to eat before they continue their classes. I’d like to see the library open every day; normal hours. Empower Students, Strengthen Community 123

• •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Improving your classrooms AC (I have autoimmune and have nearly passed out in your classrooms multiple times because of it being hot) and ensuring more spaces for quiet, socially distanced alone time would be ideal. In the past, almost all the spaces have been awesome. Right now (Fall 2021) I really wanted to come back to campus, but it feels like a ghost town. I don't think my classrooms or computer labs have been cleaned since the date of the tag on the door (2pm 3/01/31), so I'm a little nervous about using the computers. Also, there's no trash can in any of my classes, and I got a "Fast Pass" because I thought you would be screening people, but you're not--so even with masks & distancing I'm nervous on campus. Individual, quiet spaces, Relaxation and meditation room. Indoor quiet study areas Isolated study spaces for 1 to a few people. It would be great to have more class rooms for the jewelry department to allow for more classes to jewelry. It would be nice to have more individual study spaces where large groups can study. Also, it would be nice to have more seating outdoors where studying / eating can take place. It would improve the weight room in the Fitness Center if the requirement to wear masks properly (covering nose and mouth fully) were enforced. Just be able to attend class Landscaping creating more and private study areas in courtyard Locker rooms are falling apart - ceilings falling in, shower heads never cleaned/descaled, plumbing overflows regularly. It is sad to see such low regard for the money our community puts into these facilities. More classes in the fitness center. Especially in the pool. More classes for adults, youth programs, and swim team. "More outdoor spaces with shade " More places to study quietly and eat; more furnished rooms. More private areas with outlets. More private study rooms & a coffee shop (Starbucks) More quiet spaces to study. More space for studying with semi privacy. Classrooms in main building are sterile and need some updates. Newer buildings are more comfortable. More study spaces More study spaces and improve outdoor spaces. More study spaces; could improve/add more individual and quiet study spaces Most of the spaces I marked 1 are ones I haven't used. A silly way to run a survey. N/A N/A n/a N/a N/A No Answer no comment. Non judgmental napping spaced none none None none that I can think of

•

• •

• • •

"NOTE: all responses marked with a 3 in Question 3 above indicate that I do not use the spaces. To absolutely require a response and not allow for a ""not applicable"" response is not a good survey design methodology. It should not be assumed that every student uses every facility. RESPONSE TO QUESTION 4: The parking for accessing the health sciences and fine woodworking departments is horrid! There are often no spaces available which then requires a very long walk from another parking lot. As a person who is 75 years old, it is very frustrating .... especially when there are places that could be open for parking and where there are always open spaces but restricted to staff only." "Note: While I have taken in person on campus classes, I have not taken in person on campus classes since the pandemic began (Online only at the moment). From what I can remember and what I've seen of late, I believe that there's more than plenty of most things that I've never found myself inconvenienced. From what I recall, pretty much every space is more or less up to date, say some classrooms here and there. There's nothing that I can i think of right now to improve spaces." Open hours in the shop classes would be very advantageous as it's a large reason many older individuals take the classes. Our class must meet in two separate classrooms because there is not a large enough classroom available that allows us to stay under the 50% capacity. This is very difficult because our professor has to teach to one classroom then run to the other classroom and teach the same thing again. Outdoor classrooms, not just for COVID, but for fresh air, in the courtyard or other places like between the wings. Outdoor spaces "Outdoor spaces that could be improved could be the outdoor track, outdoor field, and ball field by the tennis courts. Access to these areas could be improved. I am not sure if we can access the outdoor track to walk on without going through the Fitness Center. Indoor spaces that could be improved could be software applications on the computers in the Library. The computer lab in the Trades Building is closed but this is where I accessed AutoCAD, Sketchup, and other software applications. Also, I don't believe I can access Adobe software applications on the computers in the Library.

• • • • • • •

One space that could be definitely improved is the classroom in the Trades Building where solar courses are taught. It is very cluttered. " Outdoor with protection from wet and cold weather for studying, eating, class meetings. Parking and Loading Spaces next to Art building. Parking closer to buildings Parking closer to buildings for people with disabilities. On the East side of campus, the parking spaces for the Disabled are far enough away from the building entrances to create problems for some people with disabilities. Parking... I would like to see more trees or panels. Places where we can park our car and have shades. Car ports, or something. During summer and winter are hard to have our cars parking in the hot and the snow. If we have car ports it will help a lot. Please make jewelry studio larger. "Quadrangle… add a fountain outside… relaxing sound Few more shade trees" Empower Students, Strengthen Community

124

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

• •

Reinstate routes 21 and 22 bus line. Transportation to/from campus is severely lacking see below SFCC is a very nice campus. It has a very "cozy" feel especially after attending UNM for so long. I definitely appreciate the open space areas. I'm not sure if they need improvement, but more shaded areas are always appreciated. Shaded outdoor spaces Since 2011 the facility looks great! Small but not too small eating areas/lounge spaces where classmate can safely congregate during breaks in long classes Softer lighting in classrooms. Spaces where the Internet works. Very little connection in the Fine Arts wing Spaces with internet access. Many buildings, hallways, and classrooms do not have Internet or Wi-Fi access. Student art studios "Student spaces to rest/nap because sometimes I can't go home and I have to wait hours before my next class. Soft chairs more of a comfortable student center. Open labs or tutoring so I can get help quickly without an appointment. " Studios Study areas study places Study spaces study spaces in labs to be socially distanced. Study spaces, access to FEC, better way finding Study spaces. Classrooms could use updated furniture. The art studios have defective equipment (broken easels) and sink in one of the rooms is clogged. The seating block and the ground behind classrooms have been covered with gesso (there should be a separate location for gesso application. It's really sad to see the art dept disintegrate like this. The cafeteria The cafeteria needs to be open. We are sometimes on campus all day, with no food. The cafeteria please The campus feels like it was dropped from the sky onto the parking lot of a mall. The chairs in computer labs and classrooms should be more comfortable. We spend a lot of time sitting there and it gets really uncomfortable after a while. Classrooms that don’t get natural lighting can be a little brighter, it’s usually too dark inside. The eating area and bookstore The exterior spaces The indoor spaces are fine. No problems. Outdoor comfortable sitting areas are not adequate in the Arts Building area. The Library. There aren't enough places to study in there, a place where someone might want a quiet space. Plus, the few tables in the back are next to someone's office who keeps the door open and talks, making it hard to study at those tables. Elsewhere, maybe there could be more covered outdoor areas to sit, whether under a portal or individual seating areas with a sun covering, like the benches that can be seen outside Salvador Perez park lining Alta Vista St. The library: the computers are often not working (though the librarians are amazing), study rooms are few, more study space would be great, more outlets, etc. The outdoor spaces could use a little attention

•

• • • • • • •

The outdoor spaces could use some more tables and areas to be outside. The security guards could also not profile and let students wander around campus (just a little bit). They have profiled my husband picking me up at Wednesday night after my 9:00 pm physics class. Not okay. He should be able to pick me after my class ends at night without getting harassment from the sercurity guards. He works for LANL and is not a covered in tattoos nor drives a vehicle that is "suspicious." I walk around the whole campus before my class on mondays and wednesdays for a 1.1 mile walk but during the pandemic the sercurity guards stopped letting me. This is also what happened when using the stairs by the fitness center and outside track. I only feel safe in my car or in the library. "Walking paths " Water availability We need food on campus again! More private study areas We need more classrooms that support online and live students at the same time. The outdoor furniture is peeling and uncomfortable. There doesn't seem to be enough tables and chairs in shady areas outside. We need more parking space by the healthcare wing What I need is available. woodworking shop

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

125

6. What are your favorite spaces on campus and why? Insights

126

Latest Responses

"The vegetable garden - nice to see people caring and tending to the g…

Responses

"Fine art workshop/studio spaces, especially sculpture, printmaking, ph…

20 respondents (16%) answered place for this question.

spaces are very quiet study areas quiet study

classes

library

outdoor areas

Space by the cafeteria

study spaces

place

favorite spaces studios - spaces

art

nice

arts building

fine arts spaces and the study

Outdoor spaces fitness center spaces on campus outdoor courtyard

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Detailed responses • • •

• • • •

• • • • • • • • •

Health & Sciences, Bio Wall and Court yards. They provide a modern and beautiful place to study and read. Trades and Tech center due to the cool displays and tranquility. The classroom spaces and the spots where you can study, pull up your laptop and do work. My reasons being they are very roomy, plus my teachers are very nice and considerate especially since we’re still in a pandemic. Also, the studying spaces are very quiet and peaceful. The photography lab complex is an exceptional and meets all of my needs (I am getting a certificate in photography) courtyard The library, because it offers a place where I can do my school work. Really the whole campus. I was a student here in the early '90s and the physical space of the campus has grown in a thoughtful and aesthetic manner. I love the outdoor areas. There are plenty of "tucked away" places to be found both indoors and outdoors. LOVE the fitness center! The Computer labs Outdoors because it the space is nice to work in. Outdoor spaces are well maintained. Courtyard. Well kept and is tranquil. Cafeteria seating could be improved Green spaces outside in the shade because they're usually cooler and being outside is a nice break from fluorescent lights and masks The outdoor spaces and the study spaces in the hall, the spots with chairs and tables were helpful to do homework or study between classes. Quiet study places and the walking path. The Cafeteria when it was open because could look out of the windows and unwind. "1. Sculpture department inside wood, metal, and fabrication classrooms, and outdoor sculpture yard. This is a great facility compared to other campuses, including compared to UNM. 2. The new building with sustainability programs, agricultural spaces, and fabrication labs."

•

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Cafeteria & Office of Student Development Art Walking around outside. Lots of nice spaces and art Fine Arts. Where my classes are. I love the study rooms in the library. Gives you time to spend studying with your classmates. Quiet spaces because they are quiet The library is comfortable. The cafeteria is decent. The Rec center is awesome. I prefer the Health / Sciences lecture halls that are tiered. The science labs are amazing. Studio The entire campus I guess I really like the art studios because they are where I have had the best class experiences. Open studios. Because of the ability to work in a socially connected setting. Also the courtyards in the arts building Space by the cafeteria East Wing Eatery and Cooking Lab (I'm hungry!) Of all of it. The Media Arts Computer Labs. As a Media Arts student, I naturally spent more time there overall. I find that it's the place were most of my homework needs were met. It's also nice to get familiar with the tools you'll use in class nearly anytime of a regular day. My favorite places are the cafeteria, the gym, and the medical institute. I like the cafeteria, because the food is amazing. I like the gym, because it allows me to let off stress after class. I like the medical institute, because it's the only part of campus I have ever taken classes at other than my English classes, my public speaking class, and my math classes. art studios - spaces to work Swimming pool, fitness center and outdoor space. The physical fitness center! I love it! The pool is the best and I love the swimming class! Outdoor spaces because we can take our masks off and eat, but I’m not sure what spaces will be available for this when the weather turns colder. I like the outdoor courtyard. It feels safe and open. Its a nice place to study, do homework, or nap in the grass. Pre-pandemic it was the main cafeteria. A great place to study around others while enjoying lunch. TRI, They are VERY helpfull. Love all the sculpture The gallery area as it shows student input. The roof of Trades for the view. Improve the roof of any new buildings to allow usage for classroom discussions. My favorite places to study or hang out are the outdoor areas and the library. Fitness Center and library. Both well designed and congenial. Library is peaceful and quiet. Some of my favorite spaces on campus include spaces that include demonstrations, exhibits, and examples of what is taught in classrooms. These include growing spaces, art and the Library. Outside. It's a beautiful campus!! classroom and photo labs Courtyards NONE woodworking shop - hands on experience "Quadrangle - outdoors Campus Center - energetic, near coffee shop

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 126

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

•

• • • • • • •

Library - access to info, computers, printers, quiet study spaces (need a few more desks on upper level)" cafeteria student space" Student center, cafeteria due to good lighting Greenhouse. Get to work with fellow students while working with plants. The main courtyard was my favorite space to study. I also enjoyed the lobby to the Trades building when they were doing the aquaponics in the front. I'm teaching in the CEA program now and would love to see more landscaped or study spaces between the edge of the building to the greenhouses. This would help cut down on weeds but also make a really nice place to hang out. N/a Sofa areas , but lack electric outlet , can we have USB plucks too? Sitting outside in shady area but chair hard. coffee shops becaus they served the best coffe and chi tea. Men's Room I like the quad area the best as it's nicely maintained. That being said the outdoor areas like the greenhouse, the culinary garden path, etc... Need updating and better ease of access. I'm not in campus often, but I really like the set up of the admissions center. I enjoy being inside the classes, makes it easier for me to learn. the outdoor atriums located around the art department; they are nicely protected and shaded and they are just the right size - i.e. not intended for groups of more than 10. quiet study areas near classes Fitness Education for exercise/movement/indoor walking breaks; the Main Campus Courtyard for social events and/or enjoying the wonderful outdoor weather days, and the Main Campus west wing cafeteria - has beautiful natural lighting for studying. I like the lobby/gallery space as you enter the fine arts building. I like that there is comfy furniture there to hang out and look at the art. I like the media arts area, where the media arts classes take place. I think those classrooms are also comfortably furnished and nicely equipped. I like the outdoor space between the cafeteria and the fine arts building. It makes for a pretty walk, it's nicely landscaped. "1)Library for the kind, friendly, and genuinely care about my homework and projects. The library staff works the hardest at SFCC by far. I worked for the Fitness Center and have to deal with Financial Aid Offices so I know what I am talking about when it comes to hard work ethics. I also love that I used to be able to check out a private study room before COVID-19, along with a laptop. 2) Testing Ceneter is loyal and trustworthy, I have left my belongings with them to take tests and nothing was ever taken. They have ear plugs and cough drops which made the world of a difference in providing ease and comfort. Sandy's team is very respectable, polite and kind. They also need a raise. Sadly, I cannot eat in the library or the testing center so I eat in my car..." courtyard and library are beautiful I used to love the cafeteria. Its very sad to see there is nothing there any longer. None The library is always welcoming and available. They seem to really care about students. There's a room in the main building that has floor to ceiling windows and chairs and tables as well as outlets! Under a tree, if there were any. Outside patios

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • •

The study areas all around campus that are close to the classrooms they allow us to get some study time in before class The letterpress and photography class and studio rooms. That’s where I spend most of my time, and have met most of my friends. "the living wall is my favorite because it feels like outdoor but I can still work at a desk it would be nice to have a media center where we can have a more relaxed place to " Library because of how spacious it was. Outdoors or in quiet areas For me the kitchen for culinary arts is amazing, I had the opportunity to go to the green house and it is so interesting. outdoor areas, very peaceful Photography Labs, Gallery The Court Yard because it is beautiful and a nice place to study Science building, next to the water plant wall because it is peaceful to study The woodworking labs are super. I’m mostly in the west wing and i really enjoy going to the cafeteria and relaxing or going to the outdoor areas and do homework. I love the Campus Center and the nooks you call the "Ad Hoc Study Space" upstairs. The open atrium downstairs is ok, but the carpet is ugly & dirty, and the space would get noisy before Covid. I also love the library and the central plaza and the green wall of plants in the health building. "Small areas to gather. Art gallery. " The Campus Courtyard is welcoming and a great place to meet with people. Also, I like the outdoor space by the East Wing coffee shop. I liked the Campus Center prior to Covid because it allowed a lot of people to gather together. Spaces that address the above concerns (very few on campus) plant wall...very relaxing Ceramics studio. That is the reason I take classes at SFCC. The cafeteria, I like to eat my lunch and do homework or study. Fine woodworking class and shop. The shop has very good equipment and work space. Library and the art display place Outdoor spaces because they are calm and relaxing I like the outdoor seating area. The fact that we are able to study, eat, or just regroup outside is something I love. Library… it’s very functional and the garden wall … it’s a lovely place to sit. "The outdoor courtyard & grassy areas - I often eat lunch and lay under the trees when it's warm. The space feels inviting and beautifully laid out. Also the wall of plants near health & sciences used to be one of my favorite places to hang out, but I often wish the seating there was more accessible (rather than those seats with the built in desk, maybe something more like low tables and chairs?)" I enjoy sitting outside at the tables with chairs. I focus better to studying and homework. When inside I am easily distracted by everything going on around me. my favorite spaces on campus are the library and the tutoring center because I go there to do my homework and get some help when I have problems of understanding. Central large quad, small quad in fine arts building. The library since it's not too quiet but good place to study and the health building on weekends to study since no one is there. Empower Students, Strengthen Community

127

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • •

Center of campus because that is where everything happens central courtyard due to plantings and sculpture with tables and chairs Health and sciences classrooms, the brick walls make for a more welcoming space. The student areas face an outdoor courtyard which is lovely. The computer labs - very useful and clean. Also the outdoor bench/banco areas - very relaxing and nice to be outside. The food program's garden Courtyard, FEC, walking track, nature wall Plaza with the trees. Cafeteria. Lots of people meet there. Gardens. It is a place I can visit to renew. The fitness center is excellent because it has everything that I need and look for in a fitness facility. The central courtyard is especially nice because it is big, there is lots of space for everyone, and because it is a shared space. I have been taking jewelry classes at the college for several years and the space that has been allowed for this program is my favorite space. The landscaping is beautiful to sit in and relax. "1) Cafe near the art wing -- nice seating areas (indoors & outdoors) plus great tasting/reasonably priced food 2) Phys Ed building and swimming pools and hot tubs -- clean, spacious, great classes 3) Sculpture garden next to art studios. Sliver of land feels private, nice benches, attractive sculptures" I love the fitness center. I like the modern, updated wing that I never go too. I can't think of what programs are based over there. Outside The study areas in the health sciences and fine woodworking areas as well as the outdoor quads for the building. They are very conducive to both quiet study as well as small group gatherings and places to take meals and breaks. Displayed student work for inspiration. All sections should do this more often in a creative way. Fitness Center Fine art workshop/studio spaces, especially sculpture, printmaking, photography. The sculpture spaces inside and out are superior to UNM's spaces. They are a hidden gem in Santa Fe. The vegetable garden - nice to see people caring and tending to the garden

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 128

7. What are your least favorite spaces on campus and why?

Latest Responses

Insights

126

"None"

Responses

"Entry is hard for disabled students, not that there isn't legal access, bu…

22 respondents (17%) answered space for this question.

campus classrooms

food on campus

parking lots large spaces building parking spots

area

spaces on campus

cafeteria

Detailed responses

favorite space

Campus Center spaces too close

space campus Main Campus class

classrooms

comfortable in those spaces

Open space study areas

• Main Hall and Entrance, they are not inviting. • Liberal arts area. Feel very crowded and gloomy. • The cafeteria because it is not open. 8. In thinking about your time on campus, which of the following spaces do you wish that there • I am not sure how to make it better but the cafeteria/eating area seems weak were a larger quantity of or better accessshaded to? and unattractive. May be more eating spaces outside? • All the study areas by culinary and media arts because of no circulation of air. • The cafeteria because there are no outlets to plug into • Offices no windows. Computer Labs and rooms with 29 • East wing eartery Small Group Study Spaces 38 • The classrooms because they are uninviting and very plain. Individual Study Spaces especially 62 • Classrooms, TMP area, are gloomy and make it hard to focus. • Eatery, cafeteria. Loud and hard to study there, however there are not very Charging Stations 52 many study areas around with connectors for computers. Outdoor Seating • The outdoor seating69is good but can be improved • I don't have one 30 Other • none • Parking lots are too far from everything • Downstairs classrooms in the West wing of the main campus, and portable classrooms. 9. Did •youN/A complete virtual/online courses through SFCC over the past year? • None so far Insights • Parking.it seems to be forgotten. There are so many more ways to put some on campus including stopping large trailers and trucks (non-construction vehicles) Yes taking up valuable spots. 125 • Hallways. Very confusing set-up. No 73 • Im not a fan of the cashier’s office it’s very public. • ? • I don’t care for the basement classroom. • The buildings are cold and rigid and the exterior is a wasteland.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Common areas makes it difficult for me to study quietly without any background noise. I have no comment on this as I spend most of my time on campus in class. dreary little eating spaces not large enough to accommodate more than A few people. What are those for? Exit are by the business class rooms is very secluded and not very well lit at night. Track. Needs upgrade. Honestly, it was the library. I don't hate going to the library, but I've hardly ever needed to. That and I find it nicer to have a little bit of noise around when I study. I don't think I have any food service - its non existent Inside classrooms. Too constricted and boxed in. The main entrance, it just feels like wasted space, kind of odd space. Any of the spaces that have the bar height tables and chairs. Too difficult to get up and down out of the chairs to reach your bag on the floor to get your books. Dont really have a least favorite space at the moment. I have none the cafeteria; most workers were not very cordial. Not a problem The hallways could use a little more color reflecting student body. Downstairs feels confining. The cafeteria because it’s always so crowded. N/A My least favorite spaces on campus are the spaces used to access the campus (roads, parking lots, intersections) due to speeding, reckless and careless driving. I believe Security needs more help from the College (cameras, speed bumps) to identify people who do not obey traffic regulations on campus. On Friday, August 20th, I witnessed a car speeding on the main driveway to the campus. At that time, there were small children from the Kid's Campus on the sidewalk along the driveway. The security officer on duty had no way to identify the car or driver. Campus Center. Previously, when classes were mainly in person, it was noisy and messy. don't have any Art gallery Generally,I find the campus sterile and uncomfortable. bathroom with no paper towles Open space outside, between library area and health sciences area no where to sit, no shade trees n/a classrooms without natural light or windows None The giant parking lot because it seems unnecessarily large and is an eyesore. N/a Computer labs... ergonomics baaad. Not very adaptable, would like space with plants and sitting . testing ceter some of the faculty is rude and unheplful can't think of any I don't like the parking lots being so far away from campus buildings and difficult to maneuver for students with disabilities or lots of materials to carry in that are required for courses. I don't have any. Do not have one

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 129

• • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

"The basement in the fitness center is horrible and obviously was neglected during the recent upgrading of the main levels of the building. It is depressingly drab, and students still must take classes there! cafeteria - too loud and noisy; basement classrooms are dirty "the Main Campus Courtyard - sometimes needs a ""wind -shield barrier because on certain days the wind funnels through (SW-> NE) this beautiful courtyard area, and the Main Campus west wing cafeteria - the acoustics is sometimes unbearable for study purposes. The cafeteria and bookstore always seemed cramped to me. The indoor eating area always seemed to need decoration and better furniture. "1) Outdoor spaces (not enough tables and places to sit). 2) Classroom are to close together in times for exchangng classes (got the dirtest look from the biology class for staying late because of a quiz in Chemistry 08/30/2021. And I could not get past them when trying to walk out, just like if they didnt see me) I do not know these ladies nor have met them but they do not care about soical distancing when it comes to their class time... Sadly this could be resolved by spacing out class times more or in the different rooms... 3)What student recreation center? First time hearing about such a space 4)Smoking area is too close to the cafeteria, it reeks of second hand smoke. Cafeteria is way too loud, food options for vegetarians are sadly limited so I have rarely gotten food from school. Also the food options are lacking in nutrient density. 5)Computer labs are way to loud and packed. It really sucks to be sitting there trying to do homework when someone is coughing up a storm or playing video games. 6)Ad Hoc Study Space? First time hearing about such a space. 7)Transportation to/from Campus? Frist time hearing about such a program. I have been trying to finish college since 2013 and is becasue of lack of transportation and funding. I spend $364.00 in gas every month to make to class. How odd there is a survey now.." lower floor is creepy. walking past the closed cafeteria is depressing. Now cafeteria. Outdoor seating..its too hot or cold outside...seating is dirty Campus center. There's furniture stacked in the halls. It looks like a garage sale. Having no food on campus makes it hard to be here. Classrooms, the lower levels don't get wifi. Barren courtyards. Library not available None that I can think of Anywhere there’s a paper towel holder none of them on campus ever work right. campus center is my least favorite because it's just chairs and tables and you can really be comfortable -- no couch -- you can't really relax Liberal art rooms since they were too crowded. Where people commune because the majority of my classes are hybrid or asynchronous. I do not have any. dont have one Cafteria Small Classrooms - too small n/a N/A. i honestly love all of campus, it is so pretty and unique to New Mexico that there is nothing bad to say. i do wish that the cafe and cafeteria would open because i want to experience that!

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Downstairs 300 area because of dirty carpet. Parking lots Our restrooms feel cramped and often smell moldy. Also, I'm not keen on the designated smoking areas. I wish we either eliminated them or moved them out of the range of where people gather. Hot classrooms, spaces that are very noisy and offer no socially distanced space. none The basement for some exercise classes, I would prefer it if they had natural light. I don't have a least favorite. I just want to be on campus. Most of the spaces other than the woodworking classes and shops are closed so I don’t know. Outside where there’s no shade I don’t think I have a least favorite space on campus I dont really have a least favorite area. I love this school. Down stairs where the high school kids are. They are obnoxious and make a mess … cafeteria seating area - it's always so loud. The library, though I love libraries, never feels very inviting... What I have experienced I enjoy. Do not yet have a least favorite space. my least favorite spaces on campus is campus center because I sometimes didn't feel comfortable being there in the past. "Small parking areas for disabled persons. A lot of space is wasted by leaving large spaces between designated parking places, especially at fine arts building and fitness center. (Is this what the author of this exercise meant rather than student recreation center?). The parking area for the disabled on the west wing parking lot is beyond the end of the west wing and is a long distance from the central campus. I think the VIP parking area should be for disabled, and no VIP paking lot should exist. Whoever the VIPs are, they should experience what the students experience as they look for parking and walk long distances to class The parking situations and the whale and clinic since people take away parking spots from those who need it. outside of the courtyard does not have shade or places to sit parking lots: spaces too close together and often too far from buildings (multi-level parking with wider spaces would be a big help) Main campus classrooms and open space are not as welcoming to me. There's not much a don't like... but I do like the more "modern" or newer areas more than the older areas in general - like the newer buildings just have more light and much more inviting space. The space b/n the parking and the building - lack of paths/walkways, ugly Campus Center and Main Hallway. It’s hard to feel comfortable in those spaces. Space seems designed for gathering but not for studying and comfort. Jemez Rooms: these can be improved, additional conference space is needed N/A Hallways. Bathrooms need hot water. None Classrooms can be a little glum. I feel like the parking lots and the handicap ramps on the outside during the fall time change when the lights are not substantial enough to be safely lit for me is my least favorite spaces. N/A

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 130

• Computer labs -- never have people to help me with problems • The classroom for jewelry making could use more space. I really don'tleast havefavorite any. I love theoncampus. 7. • What are your spaces campus and why? • Classroom Insights Latest Responses  • Parking! 126 "None" • Parking. Mostly unprotected from the elements. Responses "Entry is hard for disabled students, not that there isn't legal access, bu… • No Answer • Entry is hard for disabled students, not that there isn't legal access, but the distances to handicap parking spots are tricky. The easiest access is at the Fine Art department entrance, or 22 respondents (17%) answered space for this question. at the new sustainability building. The handicap parking near the entrance to the sports facility is ok, but parking there and walking down to the classrooms on the East side of campus is a onincluding campus registration, cafeteria, etc. are also a long haul trek. Theclassrooms other buildings and food offices campus Campus Center spaces too close lots favorite for the disabled. I'veparking found myself having tospace plan when to use those parts of the building when spaces building my large stamina is high enough to make it back to my classroom or carMain afterwards. CampusThis is especially area true for thespots main entrance and classrooms in the main building. I'm not sure how to fix this since parking Open space this is an overall campus design issue, but I have learned, since becoming disabled, that the spaces on campus cafeteria class classrooms distance from parking to the door, especially if you have to carry books or other materials is a study areas big deal. People who aren'tcomfortable disabled have no idea how exhausting it is to try to carry stuff and in those spaces walk a distance with a cane, crutches, etc. when you are already struggling to move your body across a distance. • None

space campus

8. In thinking about your time on campus, which of the following spaces do you wish that there

10. How many credit hours did you complete virtually/online in the past year? 1-5

6-10

11-15

11. In completing virtual coursework over the past year, what were some things that you missed the most from being on campus?

Insights

125

Small Group Study Spaces

Individual Study Spaces

Charging Stations

Outdoor Seating

Other

9. Did you complete virtual/online courses through SFCC over the past year? Insights Yes

125

Latest Responses

"Ability to see artwork in person and get input from instructors " "Access to the Fine Art classrooms and workshops. Some instruction ca…

Responses

"The actual meaning of face to face."

21 respondents (17%) answered students for this question.

student interaction SFCC online courses person classes

asynchronous classes

Attending SFCC 29

20+

Total Hours

were a larger quantity of or better access to?

Computer Labs

16-20

people

online and in-person

students online person to person access

online classes SFCC campus fellow students students & teachers online school person interaction instructor in person face to face

Detailed responses • •

In person instruction. None. You need to offer more online choices. I will not return to campus until the pandemic is over. I will transfer to another school first. 12. In thinking about the past year, on a scale of 1-5 (1 being not difficult, 5 being very difficult) • This is a hard question to answer because last year it was supposed to be what did you in your in time at SFCC? myfind firstmost year difficult at the college person but then Covid19 hit and my first year of college was online. 1 2 • 3The 4cafeteria, 5 and snacks. • Being able to have a conversation with my professors and the lifetime experience they offer. IT/ Tech Support • Interaction with people. Access to equipment/facilities. • The cafeteria and the east wing eatery Communication with Faculty/Instructors • Not too much, I really love going to school online. I do miss the library and the computer lab. Communication fellowspaces students • with Study • Good conversation in class/. Some faculty do not engage with discussions very Completing virtualwell. assignments • Interacting with other students and having both audio/visual experiences of

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

131

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • •

students (one class only had a discussion board in writing, other one met only w/instructor); seeing instructor face to face (one online class had in person meetings w/instructor, but other was just in writing--both were writing classes) Talking to my professors. none Having a study space and in person learning. Also using the gym. I did not miss as much as I thought I would. Physical access to studio equipment and studio time for art students. Socializing with students & teachers Getting walked through each section with examples on the work, participating in person and interacting with eachother Virtual coursework really doesn't work for art studio classes. Technology! I had trouble taking tests with respondous and proctoru. Printing in the digital photo lab. Displays of other people's work. The pool wasn't available. Studying with other people!! I missed seeing professors face to face. I find it CRIMINAL that some professors turned traditionally in person classes in asynchronous classes where NO lecture took place and it was basically : teach yourself. For shame. Going into the lad and have a face to face conversation with teachers. Use of studio art facilities such as printmaking, letterpress, etc. Use of cafeteria, studying on campus, library hours. The people interaction Interacting with my professors in person. Being with other human beings in a human space I missed the interaction with the instructor and the in-person lessons. The energy of zumba in person with other dancers I miss the person to person contact. While synchronous classes do their best to be a decent substitute to traditional in person classes, lectures have less meaning. Especially in Media Arts, it's harder to critique a peer's work when not everyone can afford the standard programs. Asynchronous classes a bit worse on this end. I also find getting homework done and being very productive most days is a fair bit harder when I'm home 80% of the week. Honestly, I always at least try to get the majority of my homework done on campus. It's almost too distracting for me to do any homework at home. The immediate transition was fine at first, but it has definitely been a fair bit harder lately. I missed the face to face with the instructors, as well as being able to ask more in depth questions and have them explained in a way we could all understand. demos in lab Seeing other students and the instructor in person. Honestly, nothing. The online classes have made it possible for me to attend college at this time in my life. The professor does not know how to facilitate a Zoom meeting nor has the camera even facing her correctly. Very difficult environment to learn in. I don’t know Being able to directly get feedback from teachers and fellow students. Even with Zoom this was not always possible online. Individual Math help and Photoshop in person class. Availability of equipment and hands on assistance While I prefer online ease of the asynchronous class, there was an aspect missing of social interaction. Meeting my instructors and my peers. Missing the access at the hands on material. Seeing faces and doing hands on activities.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

I missed lectures from teachers and having face to face interaction where we can ask questions as we are learning. Things I missed most were the "hands-on" of some trades classes and access to the Library. Seeing friends, teachers and interacting in class. being in class; access to photo labs Access to in person hours with teachers. Quality access to software. "Student-teacher and student-student interaction; access to library; access to film editing bays" personal interactions student interactions Being with instructors and fellow students The experience of being on campus and having access to the greenhouse for teaching. Live student interaction. Everything human interaction Online might be fine for some courses (such as English), but we learn many things through 'hands on.' We also need the in-person interaction with instructor, and fellow students. My instructors did the best they could, but the overall learning suffered greatly. Access to physical materials for class like handouts and books The discussions are just not the same over zoom as they would be in a love classroom. In-class discussion A teacher, and a different learning structure. Not being able to be lectured especially in Science classes was really rough. None, I like online learning Seeing, hearing, and interacting with instructors and classmates. Meeting my classmates and instructors; access to the cafeteria and West Wing Eatery. live student-teacher interractiom Feeling isolated; adequate band width and reliable, regional internet services; casual impromtu social gatherings and events. Meeting other people in person. Having more interaction with professors. Absolutely nothing. My bathroom, my food, and reducing my carbon footprint. Now I have to go back to waste time, money and never feel safe. I have already gotten sick with documentation of the stomach flu from school. Nothing. I liked the online classes. I missed being instructed face to face and getting the chance to do hands on work. Meeting people in person Being able to get a quiet place to study and having a safe common space for study groups food pantry In-person classes. Being able to interact with my classmates being in a face to face classroom i missed the in person learning and the in person help because i struggled online. i misunderstood most of my assignments Clear instructions from teachers, seeing people on campus, and being able to walk around to different spaces and offices instead of doing everything via phone or email. Spontaneity of in person discussions, getting to know classmates. I missed stronger interaction and connection with class members. people Empower Students, Strengthen Community

132

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Ability to ask questions during the lecture Everything. Virtual learning is very difficult and unfulfilling. I graduated from high school during the pandemic and I was supposed to be at a university out of state however I changed my plans because the protocols students had to follow at that University was not what I wanted to experience at all and did not want to risk my health because and cause stress to my parents, so I joined the SFCC family to do my basics for my major because it was all online for my freshmen (2020-2021) year of college which was such a great thing. I thank SFCC for letting me transfer at last minute I'm grateful to this point. I had never done online school so I was stressed out but SFCC was on point all the time by providing student with help. I then thought it's not bad doing online. I enjoy taking my courses online because I feel like I'm less anxious and I can relax more. I like how SFCC has a variety of classes online and in-person of the same subject. I think online is great for those students like me who would need to commute everyday which can be a little stressful. Thanks SFCC I route for you for opening doors to me when I transferred here in the Fall 2020. Being physically there with teachers Teacher’s in person explanations, classmates connectivity and participation Just being able to go to school. Having the option to go to school and be in a new environment and be around people is what I missed the most. The library and the hot/affordable food Interacting with classmates and instructor's. Not enough one one on one with instructors. getting help from the tutoring center and using the library. I decided to switch major because I was not able to attend any of hands on classes for film production. With my new major, it is not a problem. Being focused and having an actual learning environment. Just socializing in the off times Shop access for sculpture and casual interaction with fellow students Ease of in-person communication. Especially ease of resolving technical issues like software setups to be honest, nothing is really convenient for people that are busy doing more stuff maybe for people that are only going to school is good to go on campus but I'm in heaven in my bubble this is great. Interaction with students and teachers I have not been able to attend a class on campus at SFCC yet. It has always been virtual since I started classes in January 2021. "Some things I miss about in a campus is it felt like I would have less homework. I've actually never been to SFCC campus this is my second year at SFCC since graduating high school with class of 2020 during the pandemic. Attending SFCC was not in my plans. The pandemic was so bad I then decided to not go to my other college in which I would be living in campus during a pandemic and it sounded like something I wanted to avoid. I then saw SFCC announce that fall 2020 semester would all be online I changed my mind and decided to be part of SFCC family. In the past I heard great things about I said why not begin my basic core classes for my major and then transfer in my junior year to get my 4 year degree. This year I am thankful SFCC offers a variety of online and in-person classes which helps many students feel more relaxed like me!" Questions during classes Person to person interaction. In person art critiques. Teacher interaction while making art. I had been to the campus before, not for classes, and thought that it was a beautiful space. I missed not being able to attend the campus in-person as a student, as it was something that I had been looking forward to. The work/lounge areas, especially, were something that I really

• • •

• •

• • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

wished I could've utilized. interacting with the teacher and classmates Being able to work in a studio "I was unable to do the virtual coursework on my own. If I had not had another student from my class who was able to significantly help me with the computer work I would have been unable to do the online classes. I take in person classes because I don’t like doing computer and am unable to do computers except for the very basic stuff. In was so very challenging and stressful to try to do the classes online. I take the classes first to learn the skills but more to have the company and presence of the other students and their input. N/A I missed seeing people and professors. I really like how SFCC is offering in-person and online courses for the same subject so it's really nice to have that opportunity. For example taking a chemistry class SFCC offers you to schedule for an in-person or online option for the term as well as most other subject. I find being so helpful for students who can't attend an in-person class during the day or there far away from Santa Fe and getting to school can be a challenge. I thank the college for having this opportunity for many students! Having lunch with classmates during breaks I travel for work and I can only take classes now because they are virtual. The great silver lining of Covid for me and I am so grateful. I missed seeing people in person. Hearing conversations and socializing. The stimulating conversations in the classroom, bouncing ideas off one another, talking about the field. The better understanding of materials Access to the instructor in person and also to my fellow students in person Well I've never been to the SFCC campus before however I do miss seeing people in general and interacting with real people. I feel when I return to back to campus I will feel anxious and nervous because I have not had the feeling of pressure to talk to people since March 2020. I do appreciate SFCC having online courses for the subjects. I think it balances things many student like if have job, You live far away from Santa Fe, or your just a parent who's life is busy. I really hope SFCC keeps Online courses as an option till the pandemic is over. This is one of the reasons why I am attending SFCC for having online courses it does not stress me because I don't have to drive hours to get to my school everyday. I am sure many students appreciate SFCC for having online course as an option on all subjects. Thank YOU SFCC!! I miss seeing humans and interacting with humans. I have not felt the pressure of socializing which sounds like I will feel anxious when that time comes for me. I miss being around my teachers and students like me. I also miss having a routine however the pandemic still scares me so having online course really evens out my stress levels. In the completion of doing virtual college I miss interacting with humans. I felt like there was more homework online than in person at first then I adjusted to it and it did not feel like there was a lot of homework. I like SFCC having online courses as an option. I miss socializing with people as well as seeing professors. Seeing people however I like doing online school I feel like SFCC has great control with online courses. I aslo love canvas it's a great place to do assignments. Social intersaction The actual meaning of face to face. Access to the Fine Art classrooms and workshops. Some instruction can't successfully be done entirely online. Ability to see artwork in person and get input from instructors Empower Students, Strengthen Community 133

12. In thinking about the past year, on a scale of 1-5 (1 being not difficult, 5 being very difficult) what did you find most difficult in your time at SFCC?

Detailed responses • • • •

IT/ Tech Support

•

Communication with Faculty/Instructors

• • •

Communication with fellow students Completing virtual assignments

•

13. If SFCC offered a new course option where you can take a course but switch between face-toface or online modality, depending on your needs, how interested would you be? 1 being not interested and 5 being very interested.

Insights 197

3.57

Responses

Average Number

• • • • • •

14. Anything else that you would like the planning team to consider as we move forward? Latest Responses

Insights

197

"Have food available on campus. Even vending machines with more o… "Depending on the course, online interaction can be inadequate. Cours…

Responses

"no."

• • •

30 respondents (15%) answered students for this question.

classes on campus

classes to be in person face to face options for students

class instructors online classes student recreation

campus

students

asynchronous classes

offered online

art classes line classes

option

person classes online courses

students the option

person or online

course online online options

• • • • •

No Include more in-person instruction options. None. I would say have more things in the bookstore, but then again, Barnes and Noble owns it, so they’re just remodeling. It is critical that all studio art classes have the ability to be offered on campus-on line classes are really worthless in this field. More online courses. I should be able to get my degree in digital media without having to be face to face. No, I do not have anything else to say. Nope I wish I knew for sure I could complete my degree online. I am concerned that there is lack of fresh air circulating in the building and prefer to take my courses on-line. The lack of window that can allow for fresh air disturbs me campuswide. Get rid of Terry Tewart. She’s a failure at communicating with students; online and in person. If there is one person I would recommend replacing it’s her. N/A I would love a vendor take over the cafeteria like subway or a Panda Express or chick fil a Definitely more online courses. I live so far away that I found it very hard to go to campus. I love the campus but the drive was very hard on me and my children. Couches and more student artwork would be a great addition to classrooms. None Make sure here is enough broadband for when everyone is back. If classes are moving back to campus, would be good to have some food options there... as I work full-time on campus and would be attending in conjunction w/work, it can be difficult to always have time to prepare and bring my own food; do appreciate the continued requirement for masks, but having areas to use with good social distancing while the pandemic is still an issue is also important; also seems like the campus could have better options for study spaces--have seen pictures of more modern campuses that have some pretty cool spaces, both for individuals and for group collaboration; outside options with some protection from weather might also be nice More opportunities for student employment No I enjoy being online learning because I learn better at my own pace. I feel like online courses work best for me because I am busy in my day to day life. N/a no Please keep us safe, but good work in keeping us safe and offering classes n/a Some courses lend themselves to online or hybrid formats; some don't. For Studio Art classes, or any lab classes (science classes), staggered access could be an option. Since we know this virus is airborne, and that surfaces are less of a factor in transmission, good ventilation or open windows, staggering class access, etc could be an option.

15. As part of the survey we would like to collect some demographic information to better interpret our results. Please answer these questions as your comfort allows. Are You?

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 134

• • • •

• • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Adding an equal & diverse variety of classes offered & taught in both English, Spanish, & other languages for each degree/certificate online & on campus that accommodates each students need for education. No, I think you're doing a GREAT job No I hope if you plan to ask for mo way, it goes to the most requested and needed spaces. I like using the facilities but wish they felt maintained. It takes people to clean and maintain so get people. Don’t just take community funds and build more. I don’t see SFCC taking care with what we have entrusted to them. I don’t want to give SFCC more tax dollars until I see care cleaning and maintenance - provided to existing buildings Getting WiFi to the Fine Arts Dept. This is the 21st century. How hard can it be? no Better vending machines around campus. I do not live in Santa Fe, I live in Albuquerque. The courses I do best with are the courses offered on line that I am am able to log into at my time frame. In person classes are invaluable to some of us either due to subject matter or personal learning style. Apparently, faculty for fall class was able to switch from being on-campus, to less on-campus based on her whim. The description changed from early sign-ups to near the beginning of campus For a class where facilities cannot be duplicated at home (large color printers) you should consider switching faculty rather than unannouncedly redefining the class. DO NOT allow teachers to teach heavy classes online asynchronous. Furthermore, when students express the need for lecture … grant them the education they purchased. Seems rather logical and common sense, doesn’t it? Can’t believe I have to tell anyone this, but alas…. You have required me to answer questions about facilities I don't use. I can't answer the questions which don't apply. That's not a real survey. "Nope Thank you for allowing me back to SFCC! I have a dog I need to bring with me to campus and leave in the car. So, some solar covered parking areas would be great. NA There are certain advantages to online classes, but they also can have significant drawbacks. Strongly remind instructors that sitting in a Zoom class requires more breaks than sitting in a real classroom. They are radically different experiences Nothing at this time. Nope. Honestly, I don't know. If this pandemic continues for much much longer, I'd suggest having more synchronous classes than asynchronous. I hope that being able to switch from being face-to-face to being online is helpful for those of us that have been scheduled to work during class and can not get out of going to work. more in person classes No Parking is always an issue for on-campus courses! More aquatic classes with all ages programming including youth and swim team. There are great instructors there who are qualified to provide these services. I also attend CNM and they have enacted a policy for all on campus to have the Coronavirus vaccine by October 1st and to fill out daily health assessments before coming into a building on campus. This makes me feel like there's less risk in attending in-person classes. I would hope SFCC adopts a similar policy.

• • • • • • •

• •

• • • • •

When we do go back to in person, make online options still available for those who can't attend due to the pandemic or other obstacles they may face. Lots of students find online classes extremely flexible. I am one of those students. More maps of campus should be posted on walls because it can be very difficult to figure out where you are going. Possibly options for students who like smaller class sizes. I prefer classes to be in person, but I'm still not full comfortable being in a room with a larger number of people. So far its been okay, but I do prefer smaller class sizes. Nothing "Getting in contact with transportation dept. about creating a bus schedule. Currently buses are request only. This is not dependable and can make you late to in person classes. At least a fixed morning and evening bus schedule would be helpful." Cant think of any, I think that giving the students the option to move between virtually or face to face is great! It allows students that learn better physically still an option to do face to face with safety measures in place, and students that are out of state or everyone else still have the option to do it either virtually or face to face. The website is increasingly difficult to navigate..a simple straightforward way to access class schedules without going through multiple levels. Ie class schedules ,touch and voila the list pops up. "Perhaps split out questions for certain areas in the next survey as depending on the area of study, a student may not visit all areas of campus so ""required"" answers would be a guess in order to submit the survey or the survey could be abandoned and not submitted. Please keep us updated on next steps. Good luck! Thanks!" nothing else Wider parking spaces. More rooftop classes. A student recreation space, not the gym. NA More greenery and plantings out doors, such as shade trees, would be nice — if feasible. "I would like the planning team to consider mixed modality classes. For example, a course with a lab, studio, field, etc. could be offered where the lab or studio is taught in-person and on-campus, but the lectures would be online. Also, more asynchronous classes could be considered. There are few if any schedule conflicts with asynchronous classes. In the Spring 2021 semester, I was able to take five courses at 4 different colleges and universities because the courses were online, some were asynchronous and I didn't have to commute.

•

At SFCC, I have one course left to complete for a degree, but the instructor said he didn't want to teach the course online and it hasn't been offered. I am now looking at other schools and colleges to find the course online. The planning team needs to consider instructors who can, will and do teach online. I realize it can be difficult finding qualified instructors who want to teach online, but again, I am able to take online courses at different colleges and universities and I value that more than some courses only being taught in-perso.n " Adding additional services to campus, besides vending machines and the East Wing when we are back in person.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 135

• • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • •

•

I think you might do a better job with ALL your surveys. Get an older student to review the questions before you put it out Studios in drawing and painting department are very dirty, and maintenance is needed Change the general policy about access to the gym. dust collection for the woodworking shop Regarding questions for categories of tech-support, testing center, orientation, and student recreation center, I put a one because I did not have interaction with them. It would have been great for the survey to have included a category “not applicable”, or “not used” or something similar to better reflect answers for those questions. N/A "hybrid instruction - face to face and online NA no Please keep the student store from being completely replaced by a corporate entity. Nothing for now. Unsuspend public transit system at the college. Transportation need huge improvement.... no This strikes me as a phony survey, that the Powers have already made up their mind. So this is mostly for show. "The virtual bookstore is not stocking most course materials required which is a problem as students shouldn't have to pay their own funds for books if they can avoid it. Also if you switch to more online experiences for students please ensure instructors understand the need to respond to students virtually; they usually never respond to emails which makes online classes more difficult. Also for online classes if you choose to continue to offer them; if they are online asynchronous you should make them truly asynchronous: it is really difficult to have due dates multiple times a week for online classes with little help from instructors and sometimes no syllabus for the class. It's be better to have just a list of assignments and coursework all due at the end of the semester. Then students could truly complete work at their own pace and not have to be in a rush because the professor literally made five assignments due one week and ten due the next week. Can't think of anything. Just can't wait to be able to take classes on campus again. My classes must be conducted in person so my responses may not be very relevant to this survey No no nothing at this time Create a more uniform structure for instructors and students. For example, an online course must have lectures recorded by the instructor if an in person option is not available. If a power point prevention is provided for in person presentation, the same is available for online instruction, etc. When we return to "normal" attendance, the parking lot near the fitness center on the west side is too small for the amount of classes/activities being held there. People have had to park in the area where equipment is stored.

•

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• •

"Not necessarily facilities-related, but... 1) Online classes are MUCH MORE WORK than in-person, more than double. Why is that? 2) Some online class instructors are almost completely ABSENT and the students are left to have a discussion on their own without ever being corrected 3) Your survey (question 15, below) shows ageism: why are there 5-year increments up to 40 years old, but not above that? 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75... all viable age groups that are learning. This is a Community college, not a Youth to Middle age college. 4) Why am I paying a student government fee and a technology fee for every class? This seems like a big rip-off. Does the student government do that much more for me if I take more classes? Does your technology infrastructure change depending if I take 6 credit hours or 12? The whole point of being fiscally sound is the ability to scale some services. More fair might be one fee for part-time and a bit more for full-time students. #12 sounds intersting and worth exploring. Nothing Please consider offering more courses online. N/A No one follows the "two person per restroom" sign. Just something to think about. the library should be expanded and remodeled parking and cafeteria. Landscaping No In person classes tend to make things easier especially for the visual and slower learners that can get help or answers right there in the classroom, makes kids feel more confident and less stressed. I don't think so. NA I think it would just be best to send out another survey for us to fill out (at least once every month/ few months) where we can choose in person or online. Make it feel less like it was dropped from a great height in the middle of a mall parking lot. It has no relationship to where it is. More available eatery Not that I can think of I really appreciate the opportunity to do online asynchronous classes, but do miss in-class interaction. Improve Wi-Fi and Internet access please! make on campus areas more comfortable with charging stations and areas for small group gatherings, create a media center to easily print or use monitors N/A Keep up the remarkable work; I am elated to be back after "many Moons" ago. Nothing. no My preference is to take classes online since I live close to Taos NM. I have taken 2 years of online classes in the past and I love it! Once students get used to online classes I think they realize how much better they really get to know fellow students, professors, and the subject matter. No No

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 136

•

• • • • • • • • •

• • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

I prefer in-person classes. I realize that with Covid-19, we need to be safe; however, for most of my classes I do not learn as much on-line as I do in-person. It is nice to have on-line classes for those juggling work and childcare obligations though, so I would be supportive of having both methods for each class when possible. Air Filtration Systems to keep everyone safe n/a I am happy with the facilities although last year may not be the best year to serve as a reference. N/A in person learning is more important than online. I would want to be in the classroom face to face, but I know some students who just can't come to campus right now and would want online access to what's happening in a class that's on campus at SFCC. Aesthetics. Parking close to buildings. I would like the college to consider offering more in-person classes at sites in other parts of the community. For example, it's a long drive for state workers and other full-time employees to travel to the main campus. Also, to consider scheduling evening classes when people could actually leave a work place at 5 p.m. and arrive on campus -- either at 5:30 or 6 p.m. Include spaces for solo study, outdoor spaces and please be considerate with the overly hot classrooms. no No I will only take online courses as long as the pandemic is happening due to the risk, I currently can't take any as none of my higher level classes are offered online or are even being offered at all My Adobe class is meeting outdoors in person this semester, I think the mask requirement could be lifted for outdoor meetings as many studies have shown that social distancing when outdoors is adequate. Doing physical labor while wearing a mask in hot weather is not ideal. Still worth wearing a mask to be able to meet in person but that’s just a consideration. Open the cafeteria please. I think that we should be able to eat our lunches inside the buildings, with appropriate social distancing. Please please keep Online courses as an option for students who would need to commute everyday like me. Please SFCC you are such a great school!! I am so grateful of this school for having so many options for students I am sure many student appreciate too! no Just making in person classes as soon as possible. Everything is great! No Comment I would love to see the solar program reinstated. N/A None I want dress and unrestricted to the gym again and to be able to stay in the library as needed … no Instructors really need to give students more of their teaching time. They are slowly drifting away from students and not doing what an instructor should do. Instructors are leaving students to doing more on their own. We need them just as much as face to face, or more with on line schooling.

•

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

"1. Fix the turn-off lane on College Dr. to enter the campus, it gets flooded because of poor drainage. Trenching the edge would alleviate the problem and allow it to flow into the existing drainage. 2. Survey has questions that don't apply to the individual and should have an option to use nonapplicable. I have to answer questions 3 and 11 that I don't use and will give a 3 to give a neutral response." n/a there isn't more information Could you please offer SFCC students support in a form of control over your staff. It became impossible to graduate even if you earned more than enough credits!!! Some of SFCC employees could just ignore student's emails. nope, good work y'all. It was a huge mistake tokill the solar energy program. Plan better parking. No I don’t have any suggestions! No your survey covered my concerns no nada esta bien Better access to wifi and internet on campus: school options not easy or helpful quiet spaces to think and contemplate. "*The 2nd question on this survey (2.How many credit hours are you currently taking in person on campus?) does not give the option for ""ZERO"" hrs. **I am currently taking ALL of my credit hours (6 hrs; 2 courses) ENTIRELY ONLINE, specifically to support the remote learning efforts and our overall campus/student/faculty/staff safety until the local vaccine numbers are higher and the local positive COVID case numbers are lower. ***The 12th question (about interest in being able to SWITCH BETWEEN in-person and online)... I need to be very clear on this item: I am a HUGE fan of SFCC online courses, and I am also a HUGE fan of in-person SFCC courses (when they are safe and comfortable and convenient for all parties involved). HOWEVER, it is absolutely NOT FAIR and NOT REALISTIC at all to ask teachers to accommodate both these options at once. They are way too different, and any combination or ""student option"" for switching back and forth during a course would just create way more problems and distractions for everyone in the class. I am 100% against supporting or even considering this option. (In other/simpler words: I really don't see how this option could possibly benefit either students or teachers - I can only see how it would be a huge disservice to both.) ****I also 100% do support the proposed rules for returning to campus in person: that proof-ofvaccination and face masks for no-proof-of-vaccination is a firm requirement for every individual on campus.

• • •

Thank you." n/a we can do everything virtually No

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

137

• • • • • •

•

• •

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Contact information sometimes needs to be updated on the website It would be terrible if/when we enter back into in-person classes that a virtual option would not be available. It has been essential for me to attend class from home when sick, traveling or without childcare. As well, the fact the teachers record the lesson is really great. I strongly think SFCC should continue to offer online courses as well as in-person until the pandemic is officially over. Thank you all for the work! Flexibility of scheduling, primarily represent by the current online asynchronous model has always been the most important factor for me. I would appreciate the option to attend class and person or take class online. Transportation time can be tricky sometimes. I enjoy taking classes in person to ask questions live, but having the option to attend class online occasionally would be convenient. Asynchronous classes are much easier for students working full-time or participating in conflicting events. "Better and faster internet. Sometimes my internet was too slow to watch videos. I need access to course materials after the course is completed. I don't have a printer to print materials for long term referral. " no The most vital thing, in my opinion, that was missing from online classes (synchronous, or asynchronous) was the "classroom environment." Essentially, everything was functional, but the biggest difference was not being able to casually talk with classmates/my instructor. Even though my instructors were accessible, through email, etc, it felt very formal, and like a big deal, to utilize that. I did not interact with my classmates in any way that wasn't part of an assignment, and this is again part of it not feeling casual to communicate with them online. This is all resolved with an in-person classroom, and that was the biggest difference that I noticed. Virtual learning is easy and convenient, but I only learn a fraction of what I could learn in a live class. There are a lot of options when it come to classes at SFCC but there can always be more. Its pretty good now. not now I would like to say that I love being able to spend time with my friends and classmates. I find that it really helps give me a purpose and reason be helpful. I donate my time, also when ever I can I try to help out with what I can. open hours for shop classes and make the bubbles questions on this optional as all don't apply and your data will be skewed. I hope SFCC keeps the online classes as an option for many students until the pandemic is over over. I would also say that the team should consider in giving student id's because like me I would love to have my student id to keep a record of my college. Improve HVAC systems in art studio spaces Again- I can only participate in virtual classes so I dearly hope they continue. What would the planning team like to do? What is their mission? People are missing out on social interaction, which is stimulating to the learning process, as well as seeing other students projects. Maybe there is a way to submit assignments so that everyone can see, or they can choose to share with classmates if they feel comfortable. No The on-line classes are an excellent way to learn if: 1. the subject matter is conducive to this learning modality, and 2. the instructor can be easily accessed (by appointment of via scheduled office hours) via Zoom or other equivalent

• • •

• • • • • •

•

Please KEEP ONLINE courses as an option on all subjects. It really relieves stress for many students. I hope SFCC keeps the option of taking online courses on most subjects. "Hey Planning Team please consider in keeping online courses as an option for all subjects like Math, English, psychology and many more. I find it to be less stressful but also have an in person classes too for those students who learn better in that form. Also Planning Team I wish you could plan in handing down student ids because for me I want to keep my collection of ids of the schools I have attended PLEASE PLEASE give us our student Ids. THANK YOU SFCC YOU ARE AWESOME!!" Please keep Online courses as an option until the pandemic is over. Somethin I would say to SFCC planning group is that please keep the online option for courses. I find it like it's less stressful for me since I live outside of Santa Fe, NM. Online helps me feel less stressed at least while the pandemic is still a thing. I wish SFCC could work on ways staff treat students especially the Financial aid staff they are so rude and unprofessional at their job. I hope SFCC keeps online courses as an option while being in a pandemic still. I feel unsafe going back because I have an autoimmune disease and I feel safer. Planning team please work on the staff sometimes they tend to be rude with students. The financial aid office is the one I find most rude when it gets to helping students. Also, I hope you plan to keep online courses as an option till the pandemic is officially over or in better control. Tech tech tech! Throughout the campus outside classroom. None Let the students know about EVERYTHING...like the Fast Pass green card needed for our proof of the corona vaccine - so we can get a refund. I did not know about this and can sure use the extra money. no. "Depending on the course, online interaction can be inadequate. Courses using laboratories, workshops or studios, and that teach hands-on, tool-based, or technical subjects requiring physical skills will never be adequate or worthwhile if taught entirely online. There is no replacement for hands-on learning in some topic areas such as art and science. Other courses are fine online and I've enjoyed online classes, but the art classes that offer hand on instruction are irreplaceable." Have food available on campus. Even vending machines with more options would be good.

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 138

15. As part of the survey we would like to collect some demographic information to better interpret our results. Please answer these questions as your comfort allows. Are You? Male

Female

125

Transgendered

Non Binary

Prefer not to answer

16. Your Age 16 or younger

17-25

26-30

31-35

35-40

40 and up

Prefer not to answer

17. How would you describe yourself? White

Hispanic or Latino

Native American

Black or African American

Asian

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Isla…

Two or more races

Other

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 139

Facilities Conditions Index Facilities Conditions Index Data SFCC Masterplan Unit Costs Condition Assessment Categories

Facilities Conditions Index ITEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

ZONE

100 200A 200B 300A 300B 400 PPA 400 500 S (A) 500 S (B) 600 700 HEALTH & SCIENCE ITEM ATC ZONE HEC FITNESS 01 100 LA FAMILIA 02 200A KIDS 200B CAMPUS 03 TATC300A 04 CHILLER 05 300BPLANT ADD 06 400 PPA TOTALS 07 400 08 500 S (A) 09 500 S (B) 10 600 11 700 12 HEALTH & SCIENCE 13 ATC 14 HEC 15 FITNESS 16 LA FAMILIA 17 KIDS CAMPUS 18 TATC 19 CHILLER PLANT ADD

BUILDING NAME

YEAR OF DESIGN

P1-UNIT A P1-UNIT B, EAST PORTION P3 UPPER FLOOR WEST ADDITION P1 UNIT H LOWER LEVEL P3 LOWER FLOOR WEST ADDITION PHYSICAL PLANT ADDITION (JEMEZ, BOOKSTORE) P1-UNIT C, PROJECT C P1-UNIT E,F ITC EAST WING P1-ITC EAST WING VISUAL ARTS CENTER HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY CENTER BUILDING NAME HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER P2 PHYSICAL P1-UNIT AEDUCATION & INSTRUCTIONAL CENTER HEALTH SCIENCES P1-UNIT B, EASTCENTER PORTION P4 EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT P3 UPPER FLOOR WEST ADDITION CENTER TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY CENTER P1 UNIT H LOWER LEVEL P4 CHILLER ADDITION P3 LOWER FLOOR WEST ADDITION PHYSICAL PLANT ADDITION (JEMEZ, BOOKSTORE) P1-UNIT C, PROJECT C P1-UNIT E,F ITC EAST WING P1-ITC EAST WING VISUAL ARTS CENTER HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY CENTER HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER P2 PHYSICAL EDUCATION & INSTRUCTIONAL CENTER HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER P4 EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT CENTER TRADES & ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY CENTER P4 CHILLER ADDITION

1986 1986 1993 1986 1993 1990 1986 1986 2000 1986 1998 2009 2020 2013 1991 2009 1995 2009 1994

TOTALS

Facilities Conditions Index Data

YEAR OF DESIGN 1986 1986 1993 1986 1993 1990 1986 1986 2000 1986 1998 2009 2020 2013 1991 2009 1995 2009 1994

TOTAL GSF 18,918 16,222 46,658 21,206 49,703 22,319 56,477 31,215 41,427 20,272 51,428 36,458 17,484 34,067 127,843 8,212 29,772 44,235 3,825 673,916.00

BLDG COMPOSITE SCORE

TOTAL GSF 18,918 16,222 46,658 21,206 49,703 22,319 56,477 31,215 41,427 20,272 51,428 36,458 17,484 34,067 127,843 8,212 29,772 44,235

673,916.00

2.667 2.822 2.822 2.774 2.759 2.912 2.903 2.750 2.770 2.848 2.788 4.263 4.998 3.456 2.794 4.263 2.825 3.543 2.282

R & R COST

REPLACE $/SF

$ 1,228,464.76 $ 1,071,203.12 $ 3,133,908.75 $ 1,393,564.31 $ 3,237,109.12 $ 1,462,469.62 $ 3,726,285.69 $ 2,065,188.08 $ 2,664,333.59 $ 1,409,292.84 $ 3,600,273.03 $ 670,997.37 $ BLDG COMPOSITE 1,081.58 CONDITION SCORE $ 480,296.71 $ 11,065,120.30 2.667 $ 136,992.27 2.822 $ 2,784,235.70 2.822 $ 2,008,424.12 2.774 $811,618.19 2.759 2.912 2.998 $ 42,139,240.97 2.903 2.750 2.770 2.848 2.788 4.263 4.998 3.456 2.794 4.263 2.825 3.543

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

2.998 $

375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375

FACILITY REPLACEMENT COST $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

R & R COST

1,228,464.76 1,071,203.12 3,133,908.75 1,393,564.31 3,237,109.12 1,462,469.62 $ 3,726,285.69 2,065,188.08 2,664,333.59 1,409,292.84 3,600,273.03 670,997.37 1,081.58 480,296.71 11,065,120.30 136,992.27 2,784,235.70 2,008,424.12

42,139,240.97

FCI

7,094,250.00 17.32% 6,083,250.00 17.61% 17,496,750.00 17.91% 7,952,250.00 17.52% 18,638,625.00 17.37% 8,369,625.00 17.47% 21,178,875.00 17.59% 11,705,625.00 17.64% 15,535,125.00 17.15% 7,602,000.00 18.54% 19,285,500.00 18.67% 13,671,750.00 4.91% 6,556,500.00 REPLACEMENT $/SF0.02% 12,775,125.00 3.76% 47,941,125.00 23.08% 375 $ 3,079,500.00 3754.45% $ 11,164,500.00 24.94% 375 $ 16,588,125.00 12.11% 375 $ 1,434,375.00 56.58% 375 $ 375 $ 254,152,875.00 16.58% 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $ 375 $

FCI RATING

FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR FAIR EXCELLENT EXCELLENT FACILITY REPLA EXCELLENT FAIR EXCELLENT FAIR GOOD POOR FAIR

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

141

Facilities Conditions Index SFCC MASTERPLAN UNIT COSTS

INCLUDE SUBCONTRACTOR OH&P ONLY - NO GC OH&P, NO NMGRT SMALL QUANTITY PRICING LISTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE

DIVISION

DEMO UNIT COST

NEW UNIT COST

TOTAL UNIT COST

DIVISION 02

SELECTIVE DEMOLITION

DIVISION 03

CONCRETE DEMO EXISTING RESILIENT FLOOR FINISH & POLISH CONCRETE FLOOR -FULL AGGREGATE EXPOSURE DEMO AND REPLACE 4" UNREINFORCED CONCRETE SIDEWALK/PAVING DEMO AND REPLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION DEMO AND REPLACE STRUCTURAL COLUMN

SF SF SF SF

$2.50 $2.44 $250.00 $250.00

$5.85 $8.00 $650.00 $800.00

$8.35 $10.44 $900.00 $1,050.00

DIVISION 04

MASONRY REPAIR/REPLACE EXISTING FLAGSTONE PAVING

$5.00

$35.00

$40.00

DIVISION 05

METALS DEMO AND REPLACE EX STAIR GUARD AND GUARD RAIL DEMO AND REPLACE STEEL HORIZONTAL SPANNING STRUCTURE

PER FLOOR SF

$368.00 $250.00

$4,320.00 $450.00

$4,688.00 $700.00

DIVISION 06

WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES DEMO AND REPLACE PLAM 3-0 COUNTER TOP WITH SOLID SURFACE DEMO AND REPLACE LOWER CABINETS WITH PLAM BASE CABINETS DEMO AND REPLACE UPPER CABINETS WITH PLAM UPPER CABINETS

LF LF LF

$15.00 $35.00 $30.00

$185.00 $320.00 $285.00

$200.00 $355.00 $315.00

DIVISION 07

THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION EIFS WALL REPAIR EXTERIOR CAULKING (BASE OF EIFS/MOW CURB) DEMO AND REPLACE EX EXT WOOD SOFFIT TPO MEMBRANE REPAIR REPAIR PARAPET CAP / ROOF EDGE REPAIR FLASHINGS/CURBS REPAIR DRAINS SCUPPERS DOWNSPOUTS REPAIR WOOD SOFFIT REPLACE JOINT SEALANT AT WALL BASE EIFS FINISH COAT ONLY MTL ROOF REPAIR BLEND OF REPAIRS - EIFS FINISH COAT, EIFS WALL REPAIR

SF LF SF SF SF SF SF SF LF SF EA SF

$5.00 $1.00 $5.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $10.00 $8.00 $0.50 $0.00

$30.00 $2.60 $24.00 $12.00 $13.00 $15.00 $45.00 $32.00 $11.00 $4.00 $15.00

$35.00 $3.60 $29.00 $14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 $40.00 $11.50 $4.00 $1,600.00 $16.00

DIVISION 08

OPENINGS CLEAN 3-0 X 7-0 WD VENEER SOLID CORE INTERIOR DOOR REFINISH 3-0 X 7-0 WD VENEER SOLID CORE INTERIOR DOOR PROVIDE NEW 3-0 X 7-0 WD VENEER SOLID CORE INTERIOR DOOR DEMO AND REPLACE EXISTING EXTERIOR WINDOWS WITH STOREFRONT (451T) STD COLOR, 1" IGU LOW E DEMO AND REPLACE EX LOCKSETS (NO HINGES) NO KEYING INCLUDED R& R EXTERIOR WINDOW & DOOR FLASHING/CAULKING DEMO AND REPLACE EXISTING EXTERIOR DOORS WITH STOREFRONT (451t) STD COLOR 1" IGU LOW E DEMO AND REPLACE INTERIOR GLAZING WITH ALUM STOREFRONT

EA EA EA SF EA SF SF SF

$0.00 $184.00 $150.00 $12.00 $25.00 $2.50 $12.00 $12.00

$85.00 $276.00 $2,115.00 $65.00 $425.00 $28.00 $95.00 $46.00

$85.00 $460.00 $2,265.00 $77.00 $450.00 $30.50 $107.00 $58.00

DIVISION 09

FINISHES DEMO AND REPLACE EX ACOUSTICAL PANEL CEILING SYSTEM DEMO AND REPLACE EX TILE FLOORING DEMO AND REPLACE EX RESILIENT BASE PATCH EX WALL AND REPAINT DEMO AND REPLACE EX RESILIENT FLOORING DEMO AND REPLACE EX CARPET TILE DEMO AND REPLACE EX RUBBER TILE FLOORING DEMO AND REPLACE EX GYPSUM BOARD CEILING SYSTEM, INCLUDE TAPE TEXTURE & PAINT PRIME AND REPAINT EX WALL

SF SF LF SF SF SF SF SF SF

$1.25 $2.50 $0.25 $1.50 $2.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $0.00

$5.75 $14.00 $3.50 $15.35 $4.27 $4.44 $6.00 $9.15 $1.35

$7.00 $16.50 $3.75 $16.85 $6.27 $5.44 $8.00 $12.15 $1.35

SFCC MASTERPLAN UNIT COSTS

$1.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

142

SFCC MASTERPLAN UNIT COSTS

INCLUDE SUBCONTRACTOR OH&P ONLY - NO GC OH&P, NO NMGRT SMALL QUANTITY PRICING LISTED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE

DIVISION 02 DIVISION 10 DIVISION 03

DIVISION 11

DEMO UNIT COST SELECTIVE DEMOLITION SPECIALTIES INSTALL 3 GRAB BARS FOR TYPICAL HCAP TOILET STALL, INCLUDE BACKING AND PATCH GYP BD WALL SURFACE CONCRETE DEMO EXISTING RESILIENT FLOOR FINISH & POLISH CONCRETE FLOOR -FULL AGGREGATE EXPOSURE DEMO AND REPLACE 4" UNREINFORCED CONCRETE SIDEWALK/PAVING DEMO AND REPLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION EQUIPMENT DEMO AND REPLACE STRUCTURAL COLUMN

NEW UNIT COST

TOTAL UNIT COST

$0.00

$414.00

SF SF SF SF

$2.50 $2.44 $250.00 $250.00

$5.85 $8.00 $650.00 $800.00

$8.35 $10.44 $900.00 $1,050.00

$5.00

$35.00

$40.00

$368.00 $250.00

$4,320.00 $450.00

$4,688.00 $700.00

DIVISION 04

MASONRY REPAIR/REPLACE EXISTING FLAGSTONE PAVING

DIVISION 12 DIVISION 05

FURNISHINGS METALS DEMO AND REPLACE EX STAIR GUARD AND GUARD RAIL DEMO AND REPLACE STEEL HORIZONTAL SPANNING STRUCTURE

PER FLOOR SF

06 DIVISION 13

WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION DEMO AND REPLACE PLAM 3-0 COUNTER TOP WITH SOLID SURFACE DEMO AND REPLACE LOWER CABINETS WITH PLAM BASE CABINETS DEMO AND REPLACE UPPER CABINETS WITH PLAM UPPER CABINETS CONVEYING EQUIPMENT ELEVATORS REPLACE EXISTING ELEVATOR

LF LF LF EA

$15.00 $35.00 $30.00 $20,000.00

$185.00 $320.00 $285.00 $125,000.00

$200.00 $355.00 $315.00 $145,000.00

$0.50

$2.50

$3.00

THERMAL PLUMBINGAND MOISTURE PROTECTION EIFS WALL REPAIR PLUMBING FIXTURES EXTERIOR CAULKING (BASEDRAINS OF EIFS/MOW FLOOR / FLOORCURB) SINKS DEMO AND REPLACE EX EXT WOOD SOFFIT DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION TPO MEMBRANE REPAIR WATER HEATERS REPAIR PARAPET CAP / ROOF EDGECAST IRON, INSULATED HORIZ RUNS, NOT INCLUDING ROOF REPAIR ROOF DRAINS, REPAIR FLASHINGS/CURBS REPAIR DRAINS SCUPPERS DOWNSPOUTS REPAIR WOOD SOFFIT REPLACE JOINT SEALANT AT WALL BASE MECHANICAL EIFS FINISH COAT ONLY MTL ROOF REPAIR BLEND OF REPAIRS - EIFS FINISH COAT, EIFS WALL REPAIR

SF EA LF EA SF SF EA SF EA SF SF SF LF SF EA SF

$5.00 $250.00 $1.00 $250.00 $5.00 $1.00 $2.00 $250.00 $2.00 $500.00 $2.00 $10.00 $8.00 $0.50 $0.00

$30.00 $3,500.00 $2.60 $2,800.00 $24.00 $10.00 $12.00 $1,800.00 $13.00 $3,800.00 $15.00 $45.00 $32.00 $11.00 $4.00 $15.00

$35.00 $3,750.00 $3.60 $3,050.00 $29.00 $11.00 $14.00 $2,050.00 $15.00 $4,300.00 $17.00 $55.00 $40.00 $11.50 $4.00 $1,600.00 $16.00

DIVISION 08

EA EA EA SF EA SF SF SF

$0.00 $184.00 $150.00 $12.00 $25.00 $2.50 $12.00 $12.00

$85.00 $276.00 $2,115.00 $65.00 $425.00 $28.00 $95.00 $46.00

$85.00 $460.00 $2,265.00 $77.00 $450.00 $30.50 $107.00 $58.00

DIVISION 09

FINISHES DEMO AND REPLACE EX ACOUSTICAL PANEL CEILING SYSTEM DEMO AND REPLACE EX TILE FLOORING DEMO AND REPLACE EX RESILIENT BASE PATCH EX WALL AND REPAINT DEMO AND REPLACE EX RESILIENT FLOORING ELECTRICAL DEMO AND REPLACE EX CARPET TILE BRANCH POWER DEMO AND REPLACE EX RUBBER TILEDISTRIBUTION FLOORING INCLUDING RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER BOARD DISTRIBUTION AND TAPE TRANSFOMERS DEMO AND REPLACE EX GYPSUM CEILINGINCLUDE SYSTEM,MDP INCLUDE TEXTURE & PAINT PRIME AND REPAINT EX WALL

SF SF LF SF SF SF SF SF SF SF SF

$1.25 $2.50 $0.25 $1.50 $2.00 $1.00 $0.50 $2.00 $0.25 $3.00 $0.00

$5.75 $14.00 $3.50 $15.35 $4.27 $4.44 $5.25 $6.00 $2.75 $9.15 $1.35

$7.00 $16.50 $3.75 $16.85 $6.27 $5.44 $5.75 $8.00 $3.00 $12.15 $1.35

SF SF SF

$0.50 $0.50 $0.50

$11.00 $1.40 $14.00

$11.50 $1.90 $14.50

$0.00

$414.00

$0.25

$1.85

$2.10

DIVISION 14

DIVISION 21

FIRE PROTECTION SPRINKLERS WET PIPE FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM

DIVISION 07 22

DIVISION 23

DIVISION 26

LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EX BLDG MNTD LIGHTING FIXTURES DIVISION 10

SPECIALTIES INSTALL 3 GRAB BARS FOR TYPICAL HCAP TOILET STALL, INCLUDE BACKING AND PATCH GYP BD WALL SURFACE

FIRE ALARM DIVISION 11

EQUIPMENT

$1.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 143

Facilities Conditions Index DIVISION 26

ELECTRICAL

BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCLUDING RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DISTRIBUTION INCLUDE MDP AND TRANSFOMERS

SF SF

$0.50 $0.25

$5.25 $2.75

$5.75 $3.00

LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EX BLDG MNTD LIGHTING FIXTURES

SF SF SF

$0.50 $0.50 $0.50

$11.00 $1.40 $14.00

$11.50 $1.90 $14.50

FIRE ALARM

$0.25

$1.85

$2.10

SF LF

$1.00 $1.00

$2.00 $2.00

DIVISION 31

EARTHWORK

DIVISION 32

EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS PATCH EXISTING ASPHALT PAVING DEMO AND REPLACE EXISTING CURBING

DIVISION 33

UTILITIES

SFCC MASTERPLAN UNIT COSTS

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 144

INTERIOR MECHANICAL

Facilities Conditions Index CONDITION ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES STRUCTURE

ENVELOPE

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

ROOF

EXTERIOR MATERIALS

EXTERIOR WINDOWS

EXTERIOR DOORS

INTERIORS

ELEVATORS

MECHANICAL

INTERIORS

ELEVATORS

EXTERIOR MECHANICAL

INTERIOR MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

DOMESTIC PIPING

FIXTURES

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

DOMESTIC PIPING

FIXTURES

23 00 00

HVAC

DUCT WORK SYSTEM CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

23 00 00 25 00 00

HVAC CONTROLS

HOT/COLD PIPING DISTRIBUTION SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM

22 00 00 22 00 00

PLUMBING PLUMBING

WATER CLOSETS LAVATORIES FLOOR DRAINS MOP SINKS PLUMBING EQUIPMENT DRAINS FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE (STEEL ASSUMED) POWER DISTRIBUTION HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE (STEEL ASSUMED) RECEPTACLES EMERGENCY POWER MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES LIGHTING FIXTURES FLASHINGS/CURBS CONTROLS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURES MATERIAL - BRICK/CONC/STONE/EIFS AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM CONDITION AT GRADE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM GLAZING FRAMES FLASHINGS GUARDS/GUARDRAILS RAMP SURFACES DOOR & FRAME GLAZING SIGNAGE HARDWARE ACCESSIBLE PATH ACCESSIBLE COUNTERTOPS ACCESSIBLE RESTROOM(S) WALLS ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCES FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS & HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

22 00 00 PLUMBING 22 00 00 PLUMBING 22 00 00 PLUMBING 22 00 00 PLUMBING 22 00 00 SECTION PLUMBING SPECIFICATION 03 00 00 05 00 00 2600 00 00 05 00 26 00 00 26 00 00 07 00 00 07 00 00 2600 00 00 07 00 2600 00 00 22 00 26 00 00 07 00 00 2100 00 00 07 00 28 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00 VARIES VARIES 08 00 00 08 00 00 VARIES 08 00 00 VARIES VARIES VARIES 09 00 00 VARIES 09 00 00 09 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00 03 00 00

CONCRETE METALS ELECTRICAL METALS ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION ELECTRICAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION FIRE ALARM OPENINGS OPENINGS OPENINGS

CAB CONTROLS & HALL LANTERNS LIGHTING, CEILINGS, FLOORS EQUIPMENT

14 00 00 14 00 00 14 00 00 14 00 00

CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

ROOF TOP UNITS FURNACES PACKAGE UNITS EVAPORATIVE COOLING UNITS

23 00 00 23 00 00 23 00 00 23 00 00

HVAC HVAC HVAC HVAC

DUCT WORK SYSTEM CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

23 00 00 25 00 00

HVAC CONTROLS

HOT/COLD PIPING DISTRIBUTION SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM

22 00 00 22 00 00

PLUMBING PLUMBING

WATER CLOSETS LAVATORIES FLOOR DRAINS MOP SINKS PLUMBING EQUIPMENT DRAINS

22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00

PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING

CONDITION ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES SPECIFICATION SECTION

STRUCTURE ELECTRICAL

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE (STEEL ASSUMED) HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE (STEEL ASSUMED)

03 00 00 05 00 00 05 00 00

CONCRETE METALS METALS

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

07 00 00 07 00 00 07 00 00 22 00 00

THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION

LIGHTING

MATERIAL - BRICK/CONC/STONE/EIFS CONDITION AT GRADE

07 00 00 07 00 00

THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION

FIRE

GLAZING FRAMES FLASHINGS

08 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00

OPENINGS OPENINGS OPENINGS

DOOR & FRAME GLAZING HARDWARE

08 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00

OPENINGS OPENINGS OPENINGS

ENVELOPE

WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS & HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

09 00 00 09 00 00 09 00 00 08 00 00 08 00 00 03 00 00

FINISHES FINISHES FINISHES OPENINGS OPENINGS CONCRETE

CAB CONTROLS & HALL LANTERNS LIGHTING, CEILINGS, FLOORS EQUIPMENT

14 00 00 14 00 00 14 00 00 14 00 00

CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

ROOF TOP UNITS FURNACES PACKAGE UNITS EVAPORATIVE COOLING UNITS

23 00 00 23 00 00 23 00 00 23 00 00

HVAC HVAC HVAC HVAC

DUCT WORK SYSTEM CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

23 00 00 25 00 00

HVAC CONTROLS

HOT/COLD PIPING DISTRIBUTION SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM

22 00 00 22 00 00

PLUMBING PLUMBING

WATER CLOSETS LAVATORIES FLOOR DRAINS MOP SINKS PLUMBING EQUIPMENT DRAINS

22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00 22 00 00

PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING PLUMBING

POWER DISTRIBUTION RECEPTACLES EMERGENCY POWER

26 00 00 26 00 00 26 00 00

ELECTRICAL POWER

ROOF LIGHTING

EXTERIOR MATERIALS FIRE PROTECTION FIRE ALARM EXTERIOR WINDOWS

RAMPS EXTERIOR DOORS INTERIOR

ELEVATORS

MECHANICAL

INTERIORS EXTERIOR

ELEVATORS

EXTERIOR MECHANICAL

INTERIOR MECHANICAL

PLUMBING

DOMESTIC PIPING

FIXTURES

ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

ACCESSIBILITY

INTERIORS

CONDITION ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES LIGHTING

PLUMBING

EVAPORATIVE COOLING UNITS

LIGHTING

ELECTRICAL POWER

POWER DISTRIBUTION RECEPTACLES EMERGENCY POWER

OPENINGS OPENINGS OPENINGS

FINISHES FINISHES FINISHES OPENINGS OPENINGS CONCRETE

26 00 00 ELECTRICAL Empower Students, Strengthen Community 145 26 00 00 ELECTRICAL 26 00 00

ELECTRICAL

Facilities Condition Assessment Building Data

600 Wing - Main Building

100s Wing - Main Building

700 Wing - Main Building

200a Wing - Main Building

Health & Science Wing - Main Building

200b Wing - Main Building

Automotive Technologies Center (ATC)

300a Wing - Main Building

Higher Education Center (HEC)

300b Wing - Main Building

Fitness - Main Building

400PPA Wing - Main Building

La Familia - Main Building

400 Wing - Main Building

Kids Campus - Main Building

500a Wing - Main Building

TATC - Main Building

500b Wing - Main Building

Chiller Plant Addition - Main Building

Facilities Condition Assessment ITEM

ZONE

BUILDING NAME

YEAR OF DESIGN

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

100 200A 200B 300A 300B 400 PPA 400 500 S (A) 500 S (B) 600 700 HEALTH & SCIENCE ATC HEC FITNESS LA FAMILIA KIDS CAMPUS TATC CHILLER PLANT ADD

1986 1986 1993 1986 1993 1990 1986 1986 2000 1986 1998 2009 2020 2013 1991 2009 1995 2009 1994

TOTALS

GSF - BASEMENT

GSF -1ST FLR

GSF - 2ND FLR

GSF - 3RD FLR

TOTAL GSF

PLMB FIXTURES

EXT DRS

ROOMS

INT DRS

HARDWARE NOT ADA

BLDG EXT PERIMETER - LF

BLDG HEIGHT - FT

BLDG EXT. OPENING - SF

EXT SURFACE - SF

0 0 0 21,206 49,703 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,555 0 0 0 0

18,918 16,222 46,658 0 0 22,319 56,477 31,215 41,427 20,272 51,428 36,458 17,484 17,185 83,770 8,212 29,772 36,067 3,825

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,882 26,518 0 0 8,168 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

18,918 16,222 46,658 21,206 49,703 22,319 56,477 31,215 41,427 20,272 51,428 36,458 17,484 34,067 127,843 8,212 29,772 44,235 3,825

29 13 32 20 29 10 66 2 54 24 62 53 13 38 106 29 56 27 0

8 3 5 0 2 9 11 3 6 7 31 13 9 10 28 2 34 24 3

66 26 116 47 120 35 80 97 59 45 141 83 27 115 116 39 89 73 3

64 25 127 46 107 37 91 66 99 43 130 82 22 104 107 30 73 58 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 5 46 0 13 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0

510 190 925 0 950 635 990 710 800 610 1,795 1,515 663 900 1,600 240 1,550 1,400

20 24 20 0 15 20 20 20 20 20 20 17 0 31 32 17 14 24

2,211 1,704 1,431 0 1,608 1,554 3,150 2,943 1,833 2,142 9,075 6,762 0 4,378 6,233 1,005 7,104 11,727

7,989 2,856 17,069 0 12,642 11,146 16,650 11,257 14,167 10,058 26,825 18,993 0 23,522 44,967 3,075 14,596 21,873

88,464

537,709

51,568

677,741

663

208

1,377

1,314

15,983

64,860

257,685

*Reference the "Full Scale Drawings" appendix for a map identifying zones of campus

Building Data

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

147

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 100S WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

18,918 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

29 8 64 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

9.459 9.459 9.459

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.345 3.345 3.345 3.345

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

283.77 283.77 283.77 283.77

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

40.000 40.000 40.000

3.345

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

2.450

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

1.500

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

2.900

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

5.000

35.000

0.000

$25,066.35

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

2 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 2

35.0450% 10%

2,800 50 51

SF SF LF

1.5 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5.00% 5.00%

111 111

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

1.6

$77.00 $30.50

$44,795.92 $2,000.00 $586.50 $47,382.42

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$3,972.78 $4,256.55 $4,824.09 $15,607.35 $28,660.77

R&R COST

0.5%

425.6175 168.58875 $594.21

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$8,513.10 $9,931.95 $6,621.30

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$720.00 $720.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.322 3.298 3.500 3 3 3 0

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 0

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

946 946 946 10 10 946 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$11,492.69 $5,930.79 $6,621.30 $816.00 $4,320.00 $54,862.20 $0.00 $84,042.98

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 100s Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 148

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 59.00%

18,918 17,972 946 946 17,972 11,162

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

4.35 20 18,918 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$2,446.88 $15,250.00 $20,809.80 $6,150.00 $516.00

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$1,228,464.76

17.32%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

1891.8 14188.5

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$10,877.85 $92,225.25

2.000

$103,103.10

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

18918 18918 18918

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$45,172.68

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$581,055.02

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$118,226.15 $53,916.30 $13,242.60 $15,134.40 $341,469.90 $39,065.67

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$245,934.00 $35,944.20 $28,377.00 $310,255.20

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

472.95

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

472.95

100.00%

$1,418.85 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,418.85

$993.20 $993.20

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.667

__________________

$7,094,250.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 100s Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 149

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 200A WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

16,222 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

13 3 25 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

8.111 8.111 8.111

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.214 3.214 3.214 3.214

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

243.33 243.33 243.33 243.33

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

40.000 40.000 40.000

3.214

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

3.093

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

3.000

35.000

0.000

$21,494.15

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

84.1500% 10%

2,403 0 19

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

85 85

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

0.6

$77.00 $30.50

$38,453.18 $0.00 $218.50 $38,671.68

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$3,406.62 $3,649.95 $4,136.61 $13,383.15 $24,576.33

R&R COST

0.5%

$328.02 $129.93 $457.95

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$7,299.90 $8,516.55 $5,677.70

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$270.00 $270.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.228 3.241 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

811 811 811 4 4 811 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$9,854.87 $5,085.60 $5,677.70 $318.75 $1,687.50 $47,043.80 $0.00 $69,668.21

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 200a Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 150

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

16,222 15,411 811 811 15,411 15,411

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

1.95 20 16,222 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$1,096.88 $15,250.00 $17,844.20 $6,150.00 $516.00

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$1,071,203.12

17.61%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

1622.2 12166.5

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$9,327.65 $79,082.25

2.000

$88,409.90

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

16222 16222 16222

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$40,857.08

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$518,688.72

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$101,377.77 $46,232.70 $11,355.40 $12,977.60 $292,807.10 $53,938.15

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$210,886.00 $30,821.80 $24,333.00 $266,040.80

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

405.55

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

405.55

100.00%

$1,216.65 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,216.65

$851.66 $851.66

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.822

__________________

$6,083,250.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 200a Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

151

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 200B WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

46,658 1993 28 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

32 5 127 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

23.329 23.329 23.329

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.214 3.214 3.214 3.214

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

699.87 699.87 699.87 699.87

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

47.000 47.000 47.000

3.214

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000 2.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000

2.500

30.000

2.000

3.093

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

22.000 -18.000 -8.000 22.000 22.000 2.000 22.000

3.000

35.000

7.000

$61,821.85

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

40.4600% 10%

6,906 1760 93

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

72 72

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

$77.00 $30.50

$110,497.88 $70,400.00 $1,063.75 $181,961.63

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$9,798.18 $10,498.05 $11,897.79 $38,492.85 $70,686.87

R&R COST

0.5%

$275.47 $109.11 $384.58

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$20,996.10 $24,495.45 $16,330.30

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$450.00 $450.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.228 3.241 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 51.00% 5.00% 0.00%

2,333 2,333 2,333 19 65 2,333 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$28,344.74 $14,627.28 $16,330.30 $1,619.25 $29,146.50 $135,308.20 $0.00 $225,376.27

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 200b Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 152

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

46,658 44,325 2,333 2,333 44,325 44,325

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

4.80 20 46,658 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000

30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-8.000 -8.000 -18.000

3.800

35.000

7.000

3.800

10.000

-18.000

$3,133,908.75

17.91%

1.600

$2,700.00 $15,250.00 $51,323.80 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.850

$75,939.80

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

4665.8 34993.5

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$26,828.35 $227,457.75

2.000

$254,286.10

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

46658 46658 46658

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

-8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000

$1,491,861.56

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$291,584.51 $132,975.30 $32,660.60 $37,326.40 $842,176.90 $155,137.85

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$606,554.00 $88,650.20 $69,987.00 $765,191.20

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1166.45

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1166.45

100.00%

$3,499.35 $2.10

R&R COST

$3,499.35

$2,449.55 $2,449.55

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.822

__________________

$17,496,750.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 200b Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 153

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 300A WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

21,206 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

20 0 46 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

10.603 10.603 10.603

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.949 2.949 2.949 2.949

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

318.09 318.09 318.09 318.09

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

40.000 40.000 40.000

2.949

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

2.907

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

3.000

35.000

0.000

$28,097.95

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

24.8000% 0%

3,135 0 0

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

0% 0%

0 0

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

$77.00 $30.50

$50,163.46 $0.00 $0.00 $50,163.46

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$4,453.26 $4,771.35 $5,407.53 $17,494.95 $32,127.09

R&R COST

0.5%

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$9,542.70 $11,133.15 $7,422.10

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$0.00 $0.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.817 2.684 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,060 1,060 1,060 7 7 1,060 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$12,882.65 $6,648.08 $7,422.10 $586.50 $3,105.00 $61,497.40 $0.00 $92,141.73

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 300a Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 154

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

21,206 20,146 1,060 1,060 20,146 20,146

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

3.00 20 21,206 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$1,393,564.31

17.52%

1.600

$1,687.50 $15,250.00 $23,326.60 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.850

$46,930.10

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

2120.6 15904.5

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$12,193.45 $103,379.25

2.000

$115,572.70

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

21206 21206 21206

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

$678,049.13

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$132,524.78 $60,437.10 $14,844.20 $16,964.80 $382,768.30 $70,509.95

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$275,678.00 $40,291.40 $31,809.00 $347,778.40

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

530.15

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

530.15

100.00%

$1,590.45 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,590.45

$1,113.32 $1,113.32

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.774

__________________

$7,952,250.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 300a Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 155

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 300B WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

49,703 1993 28 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

29 2 107 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

24.8515 24.8515 24.8515

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.949 2.949 2.949 2.949

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

745.545 745.545 745.545 745.545

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

47.000 47.000 47.000

2.949

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000 2.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000

2.500

30.000

2.000

2.832

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

22.000 -18.000 -8.000 22.000 22.000 2.000 22.000

3.000

35.000

7.000

$65,856.48

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

58.2100% 10%

7,359 0 95

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

80 80

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

0.4

$77.00 $30.50

$117,742.53 $0.00 $1,092.50 $118,835.03

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$10,437.63 $11,183.18 $12,674.27 $41,004.98 $75,300.05

R&R COST

0.5%

$309.54 $122.61 $432.15

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$22,366.35 $26,094.08 $17,396.05

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$180.00 $180.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.817 2.684 3.000 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

2,485 2,485 2,485 16 16 2,485 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$30,194.57 $15,581.89 $17,396.05 $1,364.25 $7,222.50 $144,138.70 $0.00 $215,897.96

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 300b Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 156

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

49,703 47,218 2,485 2,485 47,218 47,218

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

4.35 20 49,703 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$2,446.88 $15,250.00 $54,673.30 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000

30.000 30.000

2.000 2.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-8.000 -8.000 -18.000

3.800

35.000

7.000

3.800

10.000

-18.000

$3,237,109.12

17.37%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

4970.3 37277.25

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$28,579.23 $242,302.13

2.000

$270,881.35

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

49703 49703 49703

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$79,036.18

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000 -8.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$1,589,223.60

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$310,613.93 $141,653.55 $34,792.10 $39,762.40 $897,139.15 $165,262.48

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$646,139.00 $94,435.70 $74,554.50 $815,129.20

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1242.575

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1242.575

100.00%

$3,727.73 $2.10

R&R COST

$3,727.73

$2,609.41 $2,609.41

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.759

__________________

$18,638,625.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 300b Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 157

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 400PPA WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

22,319 1990 31 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

10 9 37 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

11.1595 11.1595 11.1595

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.794 3.794 3.794 3.794

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

334.785 334.785 334.785 334.785

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

44.000 44.000 44.000

3.794

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-11.000 -11.000 -11.000 -11.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-1.000 -1.000 -1.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-1.000 -1.000

2.500

30.000

-1.000

3.323

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

19.000 -21.000 -11.000 19.000 19.000 -1.000 19.000

5.000

35.000

4.000

$29,572.68

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

29.5900% 10%

3,298 3500 64

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

78 78

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

1.8

$77.00 $30.50

$52,769.62 $140,000.00 $730.25 $193,499.87

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$4,686.99 $5,021.78 $5,691.35 $18,413.18 $33,813.29

R&R COST

0.5%

$299.15 $118.49 $417.64

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$10,043.55 $11,717.48 $7,811.65

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$810.00 $810.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.805 3.815 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,116 1,116 1,116 2 2 1,116 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$13,558.79 $6,997.01 $7,811.65 $157.25 $832.50 $64,725.10 $0.00 $94,082.30

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 400ppa Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 158

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

22,319 21,203 1,116 1,116 21,203 21,203

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

1.00 20 22,319 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$375.00 $6,100.00 $24,550.90 $6,150.00 $516.00

-1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000

30.000 30.000

-1.000 -1.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-11.000 -11.000 -21.000

3.800

35.000

4.000

3.800

10.000

-21.000

$1,462,469.62

17.47%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 60.00%

2231.9 13391.4

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$12,833.43 $87,044.10

2.000

$99,877.53

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

70.00% 70.00% 70.00%

15623.3 15623.3 15623.3

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$37,691.90

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-11.000 -11.000 -11.000 -11.000 -11.000 -11.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$713,636.63

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$139,480.36 $63,609.15 $15,623.30 $17,855.20 $402,857.95 $74,210.68

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$203,102.90 $29,684.27 $23,434.95 $256,222.12

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

557.975

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

557.975

100.00%

$1,673.93 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,673.93

$1,171.75 $1,171.75

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.912

__________________

$8,369,625.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 400ppa Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 159

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 400 WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

56,477 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

66 11 91 5

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

28.2385 28.2385 28.2385

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.666 3.666 3.666 3.666

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

847.155 847.155 847.155 847.155

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

40.000 40.000 40.000

3.666

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

3.307

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

5.000

35.000

0.000

$74,832.03

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

49.9800% 10%

8,322 1200 99

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

158 158

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

2.2

$77.00 $30.50

$133,146.72 $48,000.00 $1,138.50 $182,285.22

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$11,860.17 $12,707.33 $14,401.64 $46,593.53 $85,562.66

R&R COST

0.5%

$606.38 $240.19 $846.56

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$25,414.65 $29,650.43 $19,766.95

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$990.00 $990.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.741 3.815 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

2,824 2,824 2,824 14 19 2,824 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$34,309.78 $17,705.54 $19,766.95 $1,160.25 $8,392.50 $163,783.30 $0.00 $245,118.32

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 400 Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 160

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

56,477 53,653 2,824 2,824 53,653 53,653

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

9.90 20 56,477 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$3,726,285.69

17.59%

1.600

$5,568.75 $15,250.00 $62,124.70 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.850

$89,609.45

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

5647.7 42357.75

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$32,474.28 $275,325.38

2.000

$307,799.65

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

56477 56477 56477

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

$1,805,818.19

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$352,947.36 $160,959.45 $39,533.90 $45,181.60 $1,019,409.85 $187,786.03

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$734,201.00 $107,306.30 $84,715.50 $926,222.80

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1411.925

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1411.925

100.00%

$4,235.78 $2.10

R&R COST

$4,235.78

$2,965.04 $2,965.04

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.903

__________________

$21,178,875.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 400 Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

161

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 500A WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

31,215 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

2 3 66 46

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

15.6075 15.6075 15.6075

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.255 2.255 2.255 2.255

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

468.225 468.225 468.225 468.225

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

40.000 40.000 40.000

2.255

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

2.824

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

5.000

35.000

0.000

$41,359.88

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

41.0500% 10%

4,621 100 71

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

147 147

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

0.6

$77.00 $30.50

$73,935.98 $4,000.00 $816.50 $78,752.48

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$6,555.15 $7,023.38 $7,959.83 $25,752.38 $47,290.73

R&R COST

0.5%

$566.53 $224.40 $790.93

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$14,046.75 $16,387.88 $10,925.25

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$270.00 $270.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.476 2.697 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,561 1,561 1,561 10 56 1,561 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$18,963.11 $9,785.90 $10,925.25 $841.50 $25,155.00 $90,523.50 $0.00 $156,194.27

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 500a Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 162

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

31,215 29,654 1,561 1,561 29,654 29,654

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

0.30 20 31,215 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$168.75 $15,250.00 $34,336.50 $6,150.00 $516.00

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$2,065,188.08

17.64%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

3121.5 23411.25

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$17,948.63 $152,173.13

2.000

$170,121.75

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

31215 31215 31215

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$56,421.25

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$998,080.90

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$195,075.02 $88,962.75 $21,850.50 $24,972.00 $563,430.75 $103,789.88

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$405,795.00 $59,308.50 $46,822.50 $511,926.00

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

780.375

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

780.375

100.00%

$2,341.13 $2.10

R&R COST

$2,341.13

$1,638.79 $1,638.79

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.750

__________________

$11,705,625.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 500a Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 163

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 500B WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

41,427 2000 21 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

54 6 99 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

20.7135 20.7135 20.7135

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.255 2.255 2.255 2.255

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

621.405 621.405 621.405 621.405

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

54.000 54.000 54.000

2.255

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

9.000 9.000 9.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

9.000 9.000

2.500

30.000

9.000

2.824

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

29.000 -11.000 -1.000 29.000 29.000 9.000 29.000

5.000

35.000

14.000

$54,890.78

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

43.2800% 10%

6,131 290 80

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

92 92

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

1.2

$77.00 $30.50

$98,103.64 $11,600.00 $920.00 $110,623.64

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$8,699.67 $9,321.08 $10,563.89 $34,177.28 $62,761.91

R&R COST

0.5%

$352.85 $139.77 $492.62

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$18,642.15 $21,749.18 $14,499.45

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$540.00 $540.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.476 2.697 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

2,071 2,071 2,071 15 15 2,071 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$25,166.90 $12,987.36 $14,499.45 $1,262.25 $6,682.50 $120,138.30 $0.00 $180,736.77

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 500b Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 164

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 90.00% 5.00% 5.00% 90.00% 90.00%

41,427 37,284 2,071 2,071 37,284 37,284

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

8.10 20 41,427 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$4,556.25 $15,250.00 $45,569.70 $6,150.00 $516.00

9.000 9.000 9.000 9.000 9.000

30.000 30.000

9.000 9.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-1.000 -1.000 -11.000

3.800

35.000

14.000

3.800

10.000

-11.000

$2,664,333.59

17.15%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1.5

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

4142.7 31070.25

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$23,820.53 $201,956.63

2.250

$225,777.15

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

41427 41427 41427

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$72,041.95

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000 -1.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$1,271,784.04

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$258,893.89 $111,852.90 $28,998.90 $33,141.60 $708,401.70 $130,495.05

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$538,551.00 $78,711.30 $62,140.50 $679,402.80

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1035.675

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1035.675

100.00%

$3,107.03 $2.10

R&R COST

$3,107.03

$2,174.92 $2,174.92

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.770

__________________

$15,535,125.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 500b Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 165

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 600 WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

20,272 1986 35 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

24 7 43 13

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

10.136 10.136 10.136

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

3.599 3.599 3.599 3.599

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

304.08 304.08 304.08 304.08

SF SF SF SF

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

29.8300% 10%

3,000 1700 61

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00

SF SF LF

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

107 107

SF EA

$77.00 $30.50 R&R COST

2.5

100%

20.00%

1.4

$4,257.12 $4,561.20 $5,169.36 $16,724.40

3.599

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

$48,004.82 $68,000.00 $701.50

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

2.500

30.000

-5.000

2.946

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

15.000 -25.000 -15.000 15.000 15.000 -5.000 15.000

5.000

35.000

0.000

$116,706.32 $412.34 $163.33 $575.66

$450.00 R&R COST

$630.00 $630.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.066 2.533 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,014 1,014 1,014 6 19 1,014 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$12,315.24 $6,355.27 $7,095.20 $548.25 $8,752.50 $58,788.80 $0.00 $93,855.26

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 600 Wing

40.000 40.000 40.000

$30,712.08

R&R COST

0.5%

INTERIORS

75.000 75.000 75.000

$26,860.40

R&R COST

HARDWARE

INTERIORS

4.500

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

$9,122.40 $10,642.80 $7,095.20

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 166

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

20,272 19,258 1,014 1,014 19,258 19,258

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

3.60 20 20,272 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$2,025.00 $15,250.00 $22,299.20 $6,150.00 $516.00

-5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000 -5.000

30.000 30.000

-5.000 -5.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-15.000 -15.000 -25.000

3.800

35.000

0.000

3.800

10.000

-25.000

$1,409,292.84

18.54%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1.5

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

2027.2 15204

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$11,656.40 $98,826.00

2.250

$110,482.40

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

20272 20272 20272

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$46,240.20

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000 -15.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$648,185.04

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$126,687.84 $57,775.20 $14,190.40 $16,217.60 $365,909.60 $67,404.40

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$263,536.00 $38,516.80 $30,408.00 $332,460.80

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

506.8

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

506.8

100.00%

$1,520.40 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,520.40

$1,064.28 $1,064.28

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.848

__________________

$7,602,000.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 600 Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 167

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: 700 WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

51,428 1998 23 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

62 31 130 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

25.714 25.714 25.714

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.659 2.659 2.659 2.659

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

771.42 771.42 771.42 771.42

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

52.000 52.000 52.000

2.659

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-3.000 -3.000 -3.000 -3.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

7.000 7.000 7.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

7.000 7.000

2.500

30.000

7.000

2.934

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

27.000 -13.000 -3.000 27.000 27.000 7.000 27.000

5.000

35.000

12.000

$68,142.10

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

100% 10%

26,825 0 180

SF SF LF

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

454 454

$16.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

2.5

100%

20.00%

6.2

$77.00 $30.50

$429,200.00 $0.00 $2,064.25 $431,264.25

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$10,799.88 $11,571.30 $13,114.14 $42,428.10 $77,913.42

R&R COST

0.5%

$1,746.94 $691.97 $2,438.91

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$23,142.60 $26,999.70 $17,999.80

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$2,790.00 $2,790.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.787 2.914 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 15.00% 15.00% 5.00% 0.00%

2,571 2,571 2,571 20 20 2,571 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$31,242.51 $16,122.68 $17,999.80 $1,657.50 $8,775.00 $149,141.20 $0.00 $224,938.69

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: 700 Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 168

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

100.00% 90.00% 5.00% 5.00% 90.00% 90.00%

51,428 46,285 2,571 2,571 46,285 46,285

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$6.2494 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

9.30 20 51,428 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

7.000 7.000 7.000 7.000 7.000

30.000 30.000

7.000 7.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-3.000 -3.000 -13.000

3.800

35.000

12.000

3.800

10.000

-13.000

$3,600,273.03

18.67%

1.600

$5,231.25 $15,250.00 $56,570.80 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.850

$83,718.05

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

5142.8 38571

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$29,571.10 $250,711.50

2.000

$280,282.60

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

51428 51428 51428

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

-3.000 -3.000 -3.000 -3.000 -3.000 -3.000

$1,578,808.74

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$321,394.14 $138,855.60 $35,999.60 $41,142.40 $879,418.80 $161,998.20

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$668,564.00 $97,713.20 $77,142.00 $843,419.20

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1285.7

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1285.7

100.00%

$3,857.10 $2.10

R&R COST

$3,857.10

$2,699.97 $2,699.97

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.788

__________________

$19,285,500.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: 700 Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 169

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: HEALTH & SCIENCE WING - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

36,458 2009 12 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

53 13 82 5

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

18.229 18.229 18.229

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/STONE/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.740 3.740 3.740 3.740

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

63.000 63.000 63.000

3.740

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

4.000

30.000 30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000 18.000

4.000

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

4.500

30.000

18.000

4.280

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

38.000 -2.000 8.000 38.000 38.000 18.000 38.000

5.000

35.000

23.000

$48,306.85

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

546.87 546.87 546.87 546.87

SF SF SF SF

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

4 4 4

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

10% 10%

1,899 4130 152

SF SF LF

4 4

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

338 338

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

4.5

100%

5.00%

0.65

$77.00 $30.50

$66,475.50 $165,200.00 $1,742.25 $233,417.75

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$7,656.18 $8,203.05 $9,296.79 $30,077.85 $55,233.87

R&R COST

0.5%

$1,301.69 $515.60 $1,817.29

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$16,406.10 $19,140.45 $12,760.30

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$292.50 $292.50

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.870 4.000 4.250 4.5 4.5 4.5 5

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,823 1,823 1,823 4 9 1,823 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$22,148.24 $11,429.58 $12,760.30 $348.50 $4,095.00 $105,728.20 $0.00 $156,509.82

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: Health & Science Wing

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

170

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

4 4 4 4 4 4

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

5.00% 5.00% 2.50% 2.50% 5.00% 5.00%

1,823 1,823 911 911 1,823 1,823

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 1.00%

1.06 20 36,458 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$79.50 $1,220.00 $8,020.76 $246.00 $516.00

18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

5.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

8.000 8.000 -2.000

4.500

35.000

23.000

4.500

10.000

-2.000

$670,997.37

4.91%

4.500

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

4 4.5

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

5.00% 5.00%

1822.9 1822.9

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$10,481.68 $11,848.85

4.250

$22,330.53

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

5 5 5

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

1822.9 1822.9 1822.9

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

4.000

$10,082.26

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$108,462.55

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$34,635.10 $5,468.70 $12,760.30 $14,583.20 $34,635.10 $6,380.15

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$23,697.70 $3,463.51 $2,734.35 $29,895.56

1.00% 4.5

100%

2.50%

911.45

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

4.5

100%

2.50%

911.45

100.00%

$2,734.35 $2.10

R&R COST

$2,734.35

$1,914.05 $1,914.05

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

4.263

__________________

$13,671,750.00

BUILDING FCI EXCELLENT

Building Name: Health & Science Wing

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

171

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: ATC DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

17,484 2020 1 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

13 9 22 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

5 5 5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0 0 0

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

MEMBRANE / MTL ROOF PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0 0 0 0

SF SF SF SF

5 5 5

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

0% 1%

0 0 7

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00

SF SF LF

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

5 5

85% 15%

3 2

0.00% 0.00%

0 0

SF EA

$77.00 $30.50 R&R COST

100%

0.00%

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

4.976

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

19.000 19.000 19.000 19.000

$0.00 $0.00 $76.25

5.000

30.000 30.000 30.000

29.000 29.000 29.000

5.000

30.000 30.000

29.000 29.000

5.000

30.000

29.000

4.997

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

49.000 9.000 19.000 49.000 49.000 29.000 49.000

5.000

35.000

34.000

$76.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$450.00 R&R COST

$0.00 $0.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

4.988 5.000 5.000 5 5 5 5

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: ATC

74.000 74.000 74.000

$0.00

R&R COST

0.5%

INTERIORS

75.000 75.000 75.000

$0.00

R&R COST

HARDWARE

INTERIORS

5.000

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

172

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

5 5 5 5 5 5

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0 0 0 0 0 0

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

19.000 19.000 19.000 19.000 19.000 19.000

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

29.000 29.000 29.000 29.000 29.000

30.000 30.000

29.000 29.000

5.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

19.000 19.000 9.000

5.000

35.000

34.000

5.000

10.000

9.000

4.998

$1,081.58

0.02%

__________________

5.000

$0.00

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

5 5 5 5 5

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0.00 20 17,484 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00 R&R COST

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

5.000

$0.00

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

5 5

50% 50%

3 1

1.00% 0.00%

174.84 0

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$1,005.33 $0.00

5.000

$1,005.33

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

5 5 5

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

0 0 0

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

1.00% 5

100%

0.00%

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

100%

0.00%

100.00%

$0.00 $2.10

R&R COST

$0.00

$0.00 $0.00

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

$6,556,500.00

BUILDING FCI EXCELLENT

Building Name: ATC

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

173

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: HEC DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

34,067 2013 8 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

38 10 104 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

17.0335 17.0335 17.0335

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - EIFS ACCENT MATERIALS BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

3.740 3.740 3.740 3.740

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

511.005 511.005 511.005 511.005

SF SF SF SF

4.25 4.25 4.25

50% 25% 25%

1 1 1

10% 10%

2,352 0 90

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00

SF SF LF

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

4.25 4.25

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

219 219

SF EA

$77.00 $30.50 R&R COST

4.25

100%

2.50%

0.25

$7,154.07 $7,665.08 $8,687.09 $28,105.28

3.740

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.000 12.000 12.000 12.000

$82,327.00 $0.00 $1,035.00

4.250

30.000 30.000 30.000

22.000 22.000 22.000

4.250

30.000 30.000

22.000 22.000

4.250

30.000

22.000

4.118

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

42.000 2.000 12.000 42.000 42.000 22.000 42.000

4.000

35.000

27.000

$83,362.00 $842.77 $333.82 $1,176.59

$450.00 R&R COST

$0.00 $112.50 $112.50

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.870 4.000 4.250 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

1.50% 30.00% 2.50% 5.00% 5.00% 1.50% 0.00%

511 10,220 852 5 5 511 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$6,208.71 $64,080.03 $5,961.73 $442.00 $2,340.00 $29,638.29 $0.00 $108,670.75

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: HEC

67.000 67.000 67.000

$51,611.51

R&R COST

0.5%

INTERIORS

75.000 75.000 75.000

$45,138.78

R&R COST

HARDWARE

INTERIORS

4.500

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

$15,330.15 $17,885.18 $11,923.45

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

174

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

2 2 4 4 2 2

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

1,703 1,703 1,703 1,703 1,703 1,703

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

12.000 12.000 12.000 12.000 12.000 12.000

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

22.000 22.000 22.000 22.000 22.000

30.000 30.000

22.000 22.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

12.000 12.000 2.000

3.800

35.000

27.000

3.800

10.000

2.000

$480,296.71

3.76%

2.400

$126,899.58

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 1.00%

3.80 20 34,067 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00 R&R COST

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

$1,425.00 $6,100.00 $18,736.85 $615.00 $516.00

2.850

$27,392.85

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 2.5

50% 50%

3 1

1.50% 1.50%

511.005 511.005

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$2,938.28 $3,321.53

2.750

$6,259.81

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

1703.35 1703.35 1703.35

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$32,363.65 $5,110.05 $23,846.90 $27,253.60 $32,363.65 $5,961.73

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$22,143.55 $3,236.37 $2,555.03 $27,934.94

1.00% 3.8

100%

1.00%

340.67

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

1.00%

340.67

100.00%

$1,022.01 $2.10

R&R COST

$1,022.01

$715.41 $715.41

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

3.456

__________________

$12,775,125.00

BUILDING FCI EXCELLENT

Building Name: HEC

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

175

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: FITNESS - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

127,843 1991 30 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

106 28 107 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

63.9215 63.9215 63.9215

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

3.110 3.110 3.110 3.110

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

1917.645 1917.645 1917.645 1917.645

SF SF SF SF

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

100% 10%

44,967 0 160

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00

SF SF LF

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

3 1.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

312 312

SF EA

$77.00 $30.50 R&R COST

2.5

100%

20.00%

5.6

$26,847.03 $28,764.68 $32,599.97 $105,470.48

3.110

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-10.000 -10.000 -10.000 -10.000

$1,573,845.00 $0.00 $1,840.00

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

0.000 0.000 0.000

2.775

30.000 30.000

0.000 0.000

2.500

30.000

0.000

2.971

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

20.000 -20.000 -10.000 20.000 20.000 0.000 20.000

3.000

35.000

5.000

$1,575,685.00 $1,199.85 $475.27 $1,675.12

$450.00 R&R COST

$2,520.00 $2,520.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

2.978 2.846 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 20.00% 20.00% 5.00% 0.00%

6,392 6,392 6,392 21 21 6,392 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$77,664.62 $40,078.78 $44,745.05 $1,819.00 $9,630.00 $370,744.70 $0.00 $544,682.15

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: Fitness

45.000 45.000 45.000

$193,682.15

R&R COST

0.5%

INTERIORS

75.000 75.000 75.000

$169,391.98

R&R COST

HARDWARE

INTERIORS

4.500

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

$57,529.35 $67,117.58 $44,745.05

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

176

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

95.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

121,451 121,451 6,392 6,392 121,451 121,451

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

-10.000 -10.000 -10.000 -10.000 -10.000 -10.000

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

30.000 30.000

0.000 0.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-10.000 -10.000 -20.000

3.800

35.000

5.000

3.800

10.000

-20.000

$11,065,120.30

23.08%

1.600

$5,596,327.33

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

15.90 20 127,843 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00 R&R COST

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

$8,943.75 $15,250.00 $140,627.30 $6,150.00 $516.00

2.850

$171,487.05

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

12784.3 95882.25

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$73,509.73 $623,234.63

2.000

$696,744.35

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

127843 127843 127843

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$2,307,566.15 $364,352.55 $89,490.10 $102,274.40 $2,307,566.15 $425,077.98

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$1,661,959.00 $242,901.70 $191,764.50 $2,096,625.20

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

3196.075

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

3196.075

100.00%

$9,588.23 $2.10

R&R COST

$9,588.23

$6,711.76 $6,711.76

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.794

__________________

$47,941,125.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: Fitness

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

177

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: LA FAMILIA - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

8,212 2009 12 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

29 2 30 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

4.106 4.106 4.106

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/STONE/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

3.740 3.740 3.740 3.740

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

123.18 123.18 123.18 123.18

SF SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

63.000 63.000 63.000

3.740

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

4.000

30.000 30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000 18.000

4.000

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

4.500

30.000

18.000

4.280

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

38.000 -2.000 8.000 38.000 38.000 18.000 38.000

5.000

35.000

23.000

$10,880.90

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

4 4 4

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

5% 10%

154 0 24

SF SF LF

4 4

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

50 50

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

4.5

100%

10.00%

0.2

$77.00 $30.50

$5,381.25 $0.00 $276.00 $5,657.25

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$1,724.52 $1,847.70 $2,094.06 $6,774.90 $12,441.18

R&R COST

0.5%

$193.46 $76.63 $270.09

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$3,695.40 $4,311.30 $2,874.20

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$90.00 $90.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.870 4.000 4.250 4.5 4.5 4.5 5

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 20.00% 20.00% 5.00% 0.00%

411 411 411 6 6 411 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$4,988.79 $2,574.46 $2,874.20 $510.00 $2,700.00 $23,814.80 $0.00 $37,462.25

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: La Familia

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

178

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

4 4 4 4 4 4

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 10.00% 10.00%

821 821 411 411 821 821

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5

ELECTRICAL

ELECTRICAL POWER

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

2.00% 5.00% 5.00% 10.00% 1.00%

0.58 20 8,212 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

5.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

8.000 8.000 -2.000

4.500

35.000

23.000

4.500

10.000

-2.000

$136,992.27

4.45%

4.000

$43.50 $3,050.00 $4,516.60 $1,230.00 $516.00

4.500

$9,356.10

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

4 4.5

50% 50%

3 1

5.00% 5.00%

410.6 410.6

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$2,360.95 $2,668.90

4.250

$5,029.85

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

5 5 5

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

410.6 410.6 410.6

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

$48,861.40

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

12.00%

PLUMBING

LIGHTING

$15,602.80 $2,463.60 $5,748.40 $6,569.60 $15,602.80 $2,874.20

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$5,337.80 $780.14 $615.90 $6,733.84

1.00% 4.5

100%

0.50%

41.06

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

4.5

100%

0.50%

41.06

100.00%

$123.18 $2.10

R&R COST

$123.18

$86.23 $86.23

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

4.263

__________________

$3,079,500.00

BUILDING FCI EXCELLENT

Building Name: La Familia

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

179

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: KIDS CAMPUS - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

29,772 1995 26 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

56 34 73 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

14.886 14.886 14.886

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

METAL ROOF PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.873 2.873 2.873 2.873

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

20 446.58 446.58 446.58

EA SF SF SF

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

49.000 49.000 49.000

2.873

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-6.000 -6.000 -6.000 -6.000

3.350

30.000 30.000 30.000

4.000 4.000 4.000

2.850

30.000 30.000

4.000 4.000

2.500

30.000

4.000

3.055

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

24.000 -16.000 -6.000 24.000 24.000 4.000 24.000

5.000

35.000

9.000

$39,447.90

$1,600.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 3.8 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

100% 10%

14,596 184 155

SF SF LF

3 2

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

355 355

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF SF

2.5

100%

20.00%

6.8

$77.00 $30.50

$510,860.00 $7,360.00 $1,782.50 $520,002.50

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$32,000.00 $6,698.70 $7,591.86 $24,561.90 $70,852.46

R&R COST

0.5%

$1,367.52 $541.68 $1,909.20

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$13,397.40 $15,630.30 $10,420.20

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$3,060.00 $3,060.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.065 3.256 3.500 2.5 3 3 3

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 20.00% 20.00% 5.00% 0.00%

1,489 1,489 1,489 15 15 1,489 0

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$18,086.49 $9,333.52 $10,420.20 $1,241.00 $6,570.00 $86,338.80 $0.00 $131,990.01

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: Kids Campus

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 180

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

1 1 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

95.00% 95.00% 5.00% 5.00% 95.00% 95.00%

28,283 28,283 1,489 1,489 28,283 28,283

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3 2 3 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

15.00% 25.00% 10.00% 50.00% 1.00%

8.40 20 29,772 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$4,725.00 $15,250.00 $32,749.20 $6,150.00 $516.00

4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000

30.000 30.000

4.000 4.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-6.000 -6.000 -16.000

3.800

35.000

9.000

3.800

10.000

-16.000

$2,784,235.70

24.94%

2.850

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 1

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

10.00% 75.00%

2977.2 22329

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$17,118.90 $145,138.50

2.000

$162,257.40

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

29772 29772 29772

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

1.600

$59,390.20

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-6.000 -6.000 -6.000 -6.000 -6.000 -6.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$1,303,269.30

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$537,384.60 $84,850.20 $20,840.40 $23,817.60 $537,384.60 $98,991.90

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$387,036.00 $56,566.80 $44,658.00 $488,260.80

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

744.3

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

744.3

100.00%

$2,232.90 $2.10

R&R COST

$2,232.90

$1,563.03 $1,563.03

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.825

__________________

$11,164,500.00

BUILDING FCI FAIR

Building Name: Kids Campus

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

181

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: TATC - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

44,235 2009 12 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

27 24 58 0

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

22.1175 22.1175 22.1175

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

3.849 3.849 3.849 3.849

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%

663.525 663.525 663.525 663.525

SF SF SF SF

3.8 3.8 3

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

100% 10%

21,873 0 140

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00

SF SF LF

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

3 3.5

85% 15%

3 2

5% 5%

586 586

SF EA

$77.00 $30.50 R&R COST

3.5

100%

1.00%

0.24

$9,289.35 $9,952.88 $11,279.93 $36,493.88

3.849

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

$765,555.00 $0.00 $1,610.00

3.600

30.000 30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000 18.000

3.075

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

3.500

30.000

18.000

3.786

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

38.000 -2.000 8.000 38.000 38.000 18.000 38.000

4.500

35.000

23.000

$767,165.00 $2,257.45 $894.18 $3,151.63

$450.00 R&R COST

$108.00 $108.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

3.912 3.974 4.250 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 2.00%

2,212 2,212 2,212 6 6 2,212 8

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$26,872.76 $13,867.67 $15,482.25 $493.00 $2,610.00 $128,281.50 $37,504.00 $225,111.19

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

4.5

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: TATC

63.000 63.000 63.000

$67,016.03

R&R COST

0.5%

INTERIORS

75.000 75.000 75.000

$58,611.38

R&R COST

HARDWARE

INTERIORS

4.500

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

$19,905.75 $23,223.38 $15,482.25

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 182

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

2.5 2.5 4 4 4 2.5

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

40.00% 40.00% 2.50% 2.50% 40.00% 40.00%

17,694 17,694 1,106 1,106 17,694 17,694

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

3.5 3 3.5 3 3

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 10.00% 1.00%

1.35 20 44,235 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000 18.000

30.000 30.000

18.000 18.000

3.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

8.000 8.000 -2.000

3.800

35.000

23.000

3.800

10.000

-2.000

$2,008,424.12

12.11%

3.250

$253.13 $3,050.00 $24,329.25 $1,230.00 $516.00

3.325

$29,378.38

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

3 3

50% 50%

3 1

2.50% 2.50%

1105.875 1105.875

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

R&R COST

LIGHTING

$6,358.78 $7,188.19

3.000

$13,546.97

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

3 3 3

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

2.50% 2.50% 2.50%

1105.875 1105.875 1105.875

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE PROTECTION

8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000 8.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$820,559.25

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$336,186.00 $53,082.00 $15,482.25 $17,694.00 $336,186.00 $61,929.00

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$14,376.38 $2,101.16 $1,658.81 $18,136.35

1.00% 3.8

100%

2.50%

1105.875

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

3.8

100%

2.50%

1105.875

100.00%

$3,317.63 $2.10

R&R COST

$3,317.63

$2,322.34 $2,322.34

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

3.543

__________________

$16,588,125.00

BUILDING FCI GOOD

Building Name: TATC

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 183

Facilities Condition Assessment SANTA FE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT BUILDING NAME: CHILLER PLANT ADDITION - MAIN BUILDING DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CONDITION ASSESSMENT

COMPONENT

COMPONENT WEIGHT

STRUCTURE

CONDITION RATING 1-5

AREA (GSF) YEAR CONSTR. BUILDING AGE

3,825 1994 27 HARDWARE NOT ADA

% WEIGHT

PRIORITY RATING 1-5

PLMB FIXTURES EXT DRS INT DRS

REPAIR QUANTITY

10 4 6 10

REPAIR AREA

UNIT TYPE

R&R UNIT COST (NO GC, NO OHP, NO NMGRT)

FOUNDATION VERTICAL STRUCTURE HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

4.5 4.5 4.5

35% 35% 30%

5 5 5

0.05% 0.05% 0.05%

1.9125 1.9125 1.9125

SF SF SF

$900.00 $1,050.00 $700.00 R&R COST

ENVELOPE

ROOF

MEMBRANE PARAPETS/ROOF EDGES FLASHINGS/CURBS DRAINS/SCUPPERS,DOWNSPOUTS

MATERIAL - CONC/EIFS WOOD SOFFIT BASE CONDITION / MOW CURB, JOINT SEALANTS

SYSTEM USEFUL LIFE

LIFE REMAINING

2021

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - HARDWARE

2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000

4.500

75.000 75.000 75.000

48.000 48.000 48.000

2.000

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

-7.000 -7.000 -7.000 -7.000

2.900

30.000 30.000 30.000

3.000 3.000 3.000

2.000

30.000 30.000

3.000 3.000

2.000

30.000

3.000

1.500

50.000 10.000 20.000 50.000 50.000 30.000 50.000

23.000 -17.000 -7.000 23.000 23.000 3.000 23.000

4.500

35.000

8.000

$5,068.13

50% 15% 15% 20%

5 5 5 5

50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00%

1912.5 1912.5 1912.5 1912.5

SF SF SF SF

$14.00 $15.00 $17.00 $55.00 R&R COST

3.8 2 2

50% 25% 25%

3 2 1

30% 100%

3,825 0 1,400

SF SF LF

2 2

85% 15%

3 2

30% 30%

3,518 3,518

$35.00 $40.00 $11.50

SF EA

100%

100.00%

$77.00 $30.50

$133,875.00 $0.00 $16,100.00 $149,975.00

R&R COST

HARDWARE

$26,775.00 $28,687.50 $32,512.50 $105,187.50 $193,162.50

R&R COST

0.5%

$81,268.11 $32,190.62 $113,458.73

$450.00 R&R COST

INTERIORS

$1,721.25 $2,008.13 $1,338.75

18.00%

EXTERIOR OPENINGS - GLAZED DOORS & WINDOWS 5.5% GLAZING & FRAMES FLASHINGS

INTERIORS

DO NOT EDIT DO NOT EDIT EDIT IN FIELD DO NOT EDIT

12.00%

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

EXTERIOR

COMPONENT COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

REPAIR COST

CATEGORY OFFICE ENTRY SITE INVESTIGATION FORMULA

$1,800.00 $1,800.00

20.00% WALLS FLOORS CEILINGS DOORS HARDWARE INTERIOR GLAZING INTERIOR STAIRS

1.500 1.500 1.500 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

25% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10%

3 3 3 3 3 3 1

35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 75.00% 100.00% 25.00% 0.00%

1,339 1,339 1,339 5 16 956 8

SF SF SF EA EA SF EA

$12.15 $6.27 $7.00 $85.00 $450.00 $58.00 $4,688.00 R&R COST

ELEVATORS

$16,265.81 $8,393.96 $9,371.25 $382.50 $7,200.00 $55,462.50 $37,504.00 $134,580.03

1.00%

ELEVATORS

CAB & EQUIPMENT

4.5

100%

0.00%

$145,000.00 R&R COST

Building Name: Chiller Plant Addition

$0.00 $0.00

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 184

REPAIR DAM R&R RESILIE REPLACE WI

HARDWARE REPLACE WI REPLACE GU

Facilities Condition Assessment MECHANICAL

22.00%

AREA MECHANICAL (EXCLUDES CAMPUS LOOPS) AIR HANDLING UNITS INC FANS & FRESH AIR INTAKE CAMPUS H/C LOOP VALVES CHILLERS BOILERS DUCT WORK/ DAMPERS/ DIFFUSERS GRILLES CONTROLS / THERMOSTATS

2.5 2 4 4 1 1

40% 5% 10% 10% 30% 5%

1 1 1 1 1 1

40.00% 50.00% 2.50% 2.50% 80.00% 80.00%

1,530 1,913 96 96 3,060 3,060

SF SF SF SF SF SF

$19.00 $3.00 $14.00 $16.00 $19.00 $3.50 R&R COST

PLUMBING

PLUMBING FIXTURES FLOOR DRAINS / FLOOR SINKS DOMESTIC H|C DISTRIBUTION WATER HEATERS ROOF DRAINS

2 2 2 2 2

35% 15% 30% 5% 15%

1 2 1 1 1

25.00% 40.00% 40.00% 25.00% 20.00%

2.50 20 3,825 6 12

EA EA SF EA EA

$3,750.00 $3,050.00 $11.00 $2,050.00 $4,300.00

$2,343.75 $24,400.00 $16,830.00 $3,075.00 $10,320.00

3.000 3.000 3.000 3.000 3.000

30.000 30.000

3.000 3.000

1.000

20.000 20.000 10.000

-7.000 -7.000 -17.000

1.000

35.000

8.000

1.000

10.000

-17.000

$811,618.19

56.58%

2.000

8.00% BRANCH POWER DISTRIBUTION INCL RECEPTACLES MAIN POWER DIST & TRANSFORMERS

2 2

LIGHTING

50% 50%

3 1

5.00% 5.00%

191.25 191.25

SF SF

$5.75 $6.50

$1,099.69 $1,243.13

2.000

$2,342.81

6.00% LIGHTING FIXTURES LIGHTING CONTROLS EXTERIOR BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES

1 1 1

70% 20% 10%

2 3 2

45.00% 45.00% 45.00%

1721.25 1721.25 1721.25

SF SF SF

$13.00 $1.90 $1.50 R&R COST

FIRE

FIRE ALARM

30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

2.250

$56,968.75

R&R COST

FIRE PROTECTION

-7.000 -7.000 -7.000 -7.000 -7.000 -7.000

12.00%

ELECTRICAL

LIGHTING

20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000 20.000

$106,526.25

R&R COST

ELECTRICAL POWER

$29,070.00 $5,737.50 $1,338.75 $1,530.00 $58,140.00 $10,710.00

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM

0.5%

$22,376.25 $3,270.38 $2,581.88 $28,228.50

1.00% 1

100%

100.00%

3825

$3.00 R&R COST

0.5%

100%

100.00%

3825

100.00%

$11,475.00 $2.10

R&R COST

$11,475.00

$8,032.50 $8,032.50

BLDG COMPOSITE CONDITION SCORE

2.282

__________________

$1,434,375.00

BUILDING FCI POOR

Building Name: Chiller Plant Addition

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 185

Facilities Condition Assessment

SFCC FCA Renovation Projects

*Reference MP Document page 76 or full scale drawing appendix for project map

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 186

Campus Plans ADA Conditions

Floor Condition

Assessment Areas

Instructional Technology

Ceiling Condition

Levels

Circulation Corridors

Overall Campus Projects

Circulation Walking Distance

Renovation Projects By

Exterior Building Conditions

Building

FCI By Building

Site Conditions

FCI Overall Campus

Site Utilities

Campus Plans

ADA Conditions

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 188

Campus Plans

Assessment Areas

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 189

Campus Plans

Ceiling Condition

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 190

Campus Plans

Circulation Corridors

Empower Students, Strengthen Community

191

Campus Plans

Circulation Walking Distance

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 192

Campus Plans

Exterior Building Conditions

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 193

Campus Plans

FCI By Building

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 194

Campus Plans

FCI Overall Campus

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 195

Campus Plans

Floor Condition

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 196

Campus Plans

Instructional Technology Levels

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 197

Campus Plans

Overall Campus Projects

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 198

Campus Plans

Renovation Projects By Building

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 199

Campus Plans

Site Conditions

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 200

Campus Plans

Site Utility Plan With Master Plan Recommended Utility Corridors

Empower Students, Strengthen Community 201