|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AccomplishmentsAccomplishments can be divided into four categories:
Departmental self-studies report adequate to excellent facilities. As programs grow, Michigan Tech continues to be able to expand its academic facilities. In 1990, Paulien & Associates of Denver, Colorado, conducted a comprehensive space needs assessment [2.2D1] using guidelines set by the Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education (WICHE). They concluded that space for all colleges and schools was below the guideline values and projected a total need of 195,582 assignable square feet (ASF; see Table 18). TABLE 18. Space Needs Analysis.
Assignable Square Feet (ASF) Needed by Units (Paulien & Associates) compared to ASF added since 1988 a Excluding Physical Education (need met). b 20,000 ASF for the Performing Arts and Education Center. c Does not include the Institute for Wood Research. d This figure represents surplus space. Two new facilities (Minerals and Materials Engineering Building and Dow Environmental Sciences and Engineering Building; see Table 19) and the renovation of Benedict laboratories will meet many of these needs, particularly for the Colleges of Engineering and Sciences and Arts, by dramatically increasing the quantity and also the quality of academic space. These projects added 37% to academic space, raising it from 950,000 gross square feet (GSF) to 1,300,000 GSF. This produced 200,000 ASF, thereby meeting the need projected by Paulien & Associates. The new buildings meet the vision of the Campus Master Plan for architectural continuity and accommodation to the natural environment.
Source: Facilities Management ($ in millions) Michigan Tech has truly benefited from a high level of support from the State of Michigan. A Senate Fiscal Agency analysis indicated MTU received the fourth largest capital outlay appropriations in the 1980s, even though we had the second lowest enrollment of the 15 State universities. This capital outlay support has continued in the 1990s. A new policy on student laboratory fees has improved teaching laboratories (see Chapters 3 and 10). Student laboratory fees are now credited directly to departments that teach the laboratory courses, on a timely basis. Departments can adjust fees, subject to administrative review and approval. This allows academic departments to make multi-year plans for the replacement or upgrade of teaching equipment. As a consequence, few departments cited laboratory space or equipment as a problem in their 1996/97 self-studies. Basic technology in support of classroom instruction is provided centrally by the ETS (Educational Technology Services, a division of Information Technology). Overhead, slide, videotape, and opaque projectors are available on request for every classroom. Because software and hardware requirements differ considerably from one discipline to another, computer projection equipment is the responsibility of the departments. Nearly all classrooms have network connections. A few lecture halls on campus are now equipped with multimedia capabilities, funded jointly by departments and central administration. Departmental self-studies continue to report a need for multimedia classroom facilities. ETS is taking the lead in developing these classroom technology improvements. Departmental self-studies also indicated a need for more classroom space. However, classroom utilization statistics do not support this need. Classroom utilization is only 47% of capacity with laboratories operating at 65%. The felt need for additional classrooms reflects a preference for certain locations and/or meeting times. In addition to funding capital projects, the State has provided $2.2 million since 1988 specifically for major maintenance and renovation. The University has funded an additional $3.1 million, for a total allocation of $5.3 million. This has allowed Facilities Management to meet a major objective of maintaining and upgrading aging facilities, and to minimize the Universitys deferred maintenance [4.6C2]. University physical plants depreciate at a rate of 2% of replacement cost per year, based on a useful programmatic life of 25 years for most facilities. Mechanical, electrical, and architectural components of buildings represent 50% of building costs [2.6H7 and 4.6A]. Michigan Techs calculated depreciation rate is thus $6 million annually ($300 million replacement cost × 50% ÷ 25 years). Over 10 years, this would equal $60 million, yet we have only invested $24.6 million in maintenance and renewal. Even so we have minimal deferred maintenance as a result of the campus being completely rebuilt since 1960. Campus life continues to be supported and enhanced by significant capital improvements and ongoing renewal and maintenance activities. Since 1988, investment in renewal of residence hall, retail, and recreational spaces totaled $6.8 million [2.6H5 and 2.6H10]. University-sponsored housing is near capacity, yet meeting demand. Recreational activities are heavily utilized, and are an integral part of our educational system. The SDC, capable of serving 8,500 students, is in excellent condition. The SDC, Gates Tennis Center, cross-country ski trails, outdoor athletic fields, Mont Ripley Ski Area, and 18-hole Portage Lake Golf Course have all received new equipment and maintenance since 1988 [2.6H5]. In addition, we invested $7.5 million in 1989 to renovate and expand the MUB by 30%, and $1.7 million in 1997 for a new 12,000 ft² facility to house the Career Center, Alumni Association, and Michigan Tech Student Foundation. The Union addition was funded by student fees and the Meese Center by private fundraising. According to a 1996 study by the Parking Task Force [5.6D], sufficient parking is available for current needs. Parking is free for faculty, staff, and resident students; commuting students pay $27 per year. Complaints about parking concern location, not availability, of parking. Future campus expansion will require a significant financial commitment to construct parking decks or support busing. Accessibility on campus has been addressed in accordance with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991. Today, all of Michigan Techs programs are accessible because of adherence to the new building standards and the inclusion of accessibility improvements in all remodeling efforts. The self-evaluation process prescribed by the Acts has been very helpful in directing the improvements. Snow (over 200 inches annually) continues to be the most significant barrier on campus and in our community. On the positive side, building design which responds to the Upper Peninsulas winter snowfall has all but eliminated exterior steps from our campus, which improves accessibility. The University enjoys a relatively safe community. Nonetheless, we evaluated the role of our Public Safety Department and guided its development from a security operation to a Police Department. It has a new office, updated equipment, and a second officer on the most active shifts, and is proactive in crime prevention, community service, and education. Since 1985, we have provided emergency phones and updated all campus exterior lighting. National campus crime statistics indicate MTU has the lowest incidence of crime of Michigan universities. MTU is a relatively safe place to work. The total recorded injury rate at MTU was 1.8 cases per 100 workers in 1995 and 1.9 in 1996. The nationwide average for universities reported by the Department of Labors Bureau of Labor Statistics for 1995 was 3.9 cases. We have renewed our Occupational Safety and Health efforts through the active participation of the Presidential Safety Committee and the recent reassignment of the Occupational Safety and Health Director to the President. The Board of Control initiated an environmental audit in 1993 which resulted in addressing several problems, including a campus-wide clean-up of stored hazardous materials. We also eliminated airborne contaminate problems in the Chemical Sciences and Engineering Building through a major renovation of the ventilation system.
http://www.admin.mtu.edu/admin/nca/report/ch11/ch11p3.htm © 1997. Michigan Technological University. All Rights Reserved. Send comments and questions about this page to nca-comments@mtu.edu. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||