monterey peninsula community college district · in 1982-83, monterey peninsula college was...

"

Monterey Peninsula Community College District

Table of Contents

CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER II - METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER 111- ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

The External Environment .......................................................................... 3-2 The Immediate Environment A. Kry Cities o/the District ............................................................................................. 3-2 B. SHPporl InjrasJruclure and Kry Environmental Elements .............................................. 3-7 C. Transporlation and Access ........................................................................................... 3-8 D. Seismic Stability ......................................................................................................... 3-9 E. Prospects for Growth Within the Immediate Environment ............................................ 3-9

The District in Context to the Region' Labor Foree o/the COllnty ........................................................................ : ..................... 3-10 Income and Demographic Markers .................................................................................. 3-11 S ollrns 0/ Empil?Yment ................................................................................................... 3 -12 Cllmnt Conditions ......................................................................................................... 3-12 Labor Trends and Olltlook for the Fllfllre ...................................................................... 3-14 Major Emplf!Jers ........................................................................................................... 3-17 Economic Vitality .......................................................................................................... 3-17

The District in Context to the State Economic Climate .......................................................................................................... 3-18 Prospects for Growth ...................................................................................................... 3-18 Empk?Yment (md Labor ................................................................................................. 3-19 Indllstry Earnings and HOllrs ......................................................................................... 3-20 Edllcation ...................................................................................................................... 3-21

The Internal Environment ......................................................................... 3-23 The Distriict's "Effective Service Area" .......................................................................... 3-23 Enrollment History ........................................................................................................ 3-24 Enrollment S ollrees ........................................................................................................ 3 -25 AnalYsis 0/ the Effective Service Area ............................................................................. 3-27 Overview o/the District's Effective Service Area .............................................................. 3-30 Kry Sflldent Characteristics ................................................ ............................................. 3-32

CHAPTER IV - VISION & PROJECTION FOR THE FUTURE

The Institutional Vision ................................................................................ 4-1

Projections for Growth ................................................................................. 4-7

, "===---¥. -

r-------------------------------------.-----~-~-~ .. "-"- ,

The Quantification of Space Needs ................................................................... 4-12 A. Proftlt of the Cllmnt CIlrTiCIIIll11J ............................................................................. .4-13 B. Cllmnt ClimCIIJII11J 1I11ikalors ................................................................................... 4-15 C. Forecast for Fllfllre Program of I nsfrlldion .................•..........•.................................... 4-21 D. Determination of Spatt Rujllire11Jtnts •................•.... : ................................................. 4-26 E. Projeding Fllfllre ClIpadty ........................................................................................ 4-31

Total District Facility Needs ...................................................................... 4-42

CHAPTER V - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

Facility Planning Assumptions ..................................................................... 5-2

Existing Facilities Conditions and Current Plans ...................................... 5-4 A. Existing Bllildings and Bllilding Use .......................................................................... 54 B. S chedllltd Maintenance .................... ; ........................................................................... 5-5 C. The Five-Year Capital Consfrllction Plan .................................................................... 5-7

Assessment of Key Facility Planning Elements ......................................... 5-8 A. Sense ifPlace ............................................................................................................. 5-8 B. Access ....................................................................................................................... 5-10 C. Camplls Arrhitecfllrr: - Opportunities and Challenges ................................................. 5-10 D. Land Utilization ...................................................................................................... 5-12 E. Support 1rifrasfrllcturt ............................................................................................... 5-13 F. Cllmnt Facility UtiliZation ....................................................................................... 5-14

Facilities Master Plan Issues .................................................................. ~ .... 5-17 A. A Changing Academic Environment ......................................................................... 5-17 B. Defining the Diredion of the Facilities/Bllilding Program ........................................... 5-19 C. I njrasfrlldurr: ............................................................................................................ 5-20 D. Building to the Planning Critena of the State Chancellor's Office ................................ 5-21 E. Maintaining the Relationship with the Program of1nsfrlldion ..................................... 5-21 F. Technological Considerations ............................ , ......................................................... 5-22 G. Design Integration .......................................... : .......................................................... 5-23 H. Operational Efficienry uvels if the Distrid ............................................................... 5-23 I Maintenance 1I1U8S ..................................................................................................... 5-24 j. Consfrllction "Phasing" .............................................................................................. 5-24 K Off-Campus Needs .................................................................................................... 5-24

Proposed Projects ......................................................................................... 5-25

APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................. A-l

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................... B-1

Monterey Peninsula Community College

District

Space Quantification & Facilities Master Plan

SPACE QUANTIFICA nON AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER l' INTRODUCTION It OVERVIEW

CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Plan

The purpose of the 2004 Monterey Peninsula College District Space Quantification and Facilities Master Plan

(hereinafter, the "Plan") is to provide the necessary data and foundation upon which the

instructional and support service facility needs of the District can be addressed and met in the next

sixteen years. Upon review and final approval, the Plan will provide guidelines for decision-making

and action. It will also facilitate the development of other plans for the District, including capital

expenditures, technology, personnel and those of a budgetary and/or fiscal nature.

In the larger perspective, the Plan should be considered as a dynamic and flexible document to be

reviewed each year as new educational trends emerge and the needs of students evolve.

Incorporated in this logic should be the understanding that institutional change takes time; some of

the Plan's components may become outdated or superceded before action can occur.

Recommendations for action contained herein should be reviewed annually for relevancy and/or

possible modification. The overall success of the Plan will depend on a District-wide commitment

to its implementation. Through the consultative and participatory process, it is up to the District,

via the College constituency, to develop the details that will lead to its actualization.

I-I

Monterey Peninsula Community College District January 2004

MAAS Companies

Planning Criteria

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER l' INTRODUCTION &: OVER VIEW

The planning effort was based upon a range of relevant criteria developed in conjunction with the

input of Monterey Peninsula College District via planning committees and planning processes, the

District's current planning documents (the Educational Master Plan and the Strategic Planning

Goals) and further validated through on-campus visits and interviews with faculty, staff,

administration and students. Additionally, the Master Plan consultant team compiled extensive data

and conducted analysis relative to the instructional program, the instructional delivery system and

student support services. Broken down to its simplest form, the criteria was derived from answers to

the following questions:

• Who are the students that attend Monterey Peninsula College? What needs do they have?

• Does the District effectively serve the needs of its service area population?

• Is the current program of curricular offerings adequate in meeting the needs of the service area?

• Is the existing instructional delivery system adequate?

• Do student support services adequately strengthen the instructional program of the District?

• What are the faculty and staff needs - currently and in the future?

• What is the current and projected external and internal environment of the College and/ or its off-campus satellite center? What opportunities and challenges will there be in the future?

• What are the space/facility requirements for the current and projected instructional program and for student support services? What changes will need to be made to accommodate the enrollment demands of the future?

}·2

. Monterey Peninsula Community College District January 2004

MAAS Companies

Glossary of Terms

SPACE QUANTIFICA nON AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCnON &. OVERVIEW

The following glossary is provided as a reference to certain words or terms that are used throughout

the planning document. The glossary is not all-inclusive but captures those words or terms that are

used most. Where a word or term is referenced in sequence or repetition, parenthetical enclosures

may also be used.

District or MPCCD: Shall mean, unless otherwise referred to in a generic sense, the Monterey Peninsula Community College District.

College or MPC: Shall mean, unless otherwise referred to In a generIc sense, the Monterey Peninsula College.

Center or Campus Center: Shall mean, unless otherwise referred to in a generic sense, the Monterey Peninsula College Campus Center at the former Fort Ord Military Base.

Public Safety Center: Shall mean the Monterey Peninsula College Public Safety Center at the former Fort Ord Military Base.

Plan or Master Plan: Shall mean, unless otherwise referred to in a generic or. titled reference, the Monterey Peninsula Community Coiiege District Space Quantification and Facilities Master Plan.

Building/Facilities Program or Program: Shall mean, unless otherwise referred to in a generic or titled reference, the Monterey Peninsula Community College District Building/Facilities Program.

WSCH: Shall mean "weekly student contact hours".

FTES: Shall mean "full time equivalent students".

FTEF: Shall mean "full time equivalent faculty"

ASF: Shall mean "assignable square feet", the measure of "useable" square footage in a given facility.

SPR: Shall mean "student participation rate", the rate of st~dents attending the College per 1,000 population.

1-3

Monterey Peninsula Community CoJlege District January 2004

MAAS Companies

Objecdves of the Plan

The objectives of the Plan were as follows:

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- 1NT1l0DUcnON &: OVERVIEW

• To anticipate courses, programs and services of the College and/or its off-campus satellite centers for the next two decades.

• To project the delivery of a balanced curriculum providing transfer education, occupational certificates and basic skills/developmental assistance.

• To project assignable square feet and facility needs for the District to the year 2020 or when student enrollment generates 128,195 WSCH.

• To produce a space plan that is flexible enough in design to accommodate changes in instructional methodology, technology and delivery systems.

• To put forth a building/facilities program based on the findings that will be a guideline for action for the next 16 years.

• To provide a document (plan) that will serve as a decision-making tool and reference for the future.

• To maximize the efficiency and productivity of the District to a point of qualification for state monies that can augment the successful local bond program.

Overview

OrganizadonaJ Structure of the District

A five-member Board of Trustees elected by the voters In the District governs the Monterey

Peninsula Community College District. The Board of Trustees sets overall standards and academic

policies for the College and its off;.campus satellite centers and guides the development of College

programs and policies. Policies set by the board are implemented on a day-to-day basis by the

Superintendent/President of the District and a well-trained group of administrators, faculty and staff

on behalf of the trustees.

_ 1-4 Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION ANDFACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION &. OVERVIEW

The Monterey Peninsula Community College District Board of Trustees is under the advisory

supervision of the California Board of Governors, which ove~sees higher education in California.

The Board of Trustees is responsible for budgeting funds received from state and local sources for

the benefit of the College and its student body.

History of the District

Monterey Peninsula College commenced operation In September of 1947 on the campus of

Monterey High School, holding classes from 4 to 1 ° p.m. daily. During this first year, 87 acres of

land were purchased on Fremont Street. The following September, classes opened in converted

barracks buildings with 280 students and 20 faculty members.

The campus was originally designed for approximately 1,000 students, but by 1957 the enrollment

had approached this figure and it was evident that new buildings were necessary. The Engineering

Building was constructed in 1958, the Library in 1960, and the Art and Music Center and swimming

pool in 1962.

The College separated from the Monterey Union High School District in 1961 and became a

separate junior college district. With this reorganization, the Carmel Unified School District became

part of the Peninsula-wide junior college district.

The student popul~tion continued to grow as well as the need for additional classrooms. In 1965

the building program was renewed, and the "temporary" buildings of 1948 were replaced with new

buildings for Business, Humanities, Life Science, Physical Education, Physical Science and Social

Science. The Lecture Forum Building, the Theater, and the College Center were part of this campus

renewal. From 1973 to 1993, the College operated a satellite campus at Fort Ord in cooperation

with the U.S. Army, primarily for the benefit of Armed Forces personnel and their family members.

In 1982-83, Monterey Peninsula College was selected as the site for the Maurine Church Cobu~n

School of Nursing, established with a grant from the Maurine Church Coburn Charitable Trust.

The school is operated, in part, ~ith funds from the Community Hospital Foundation. During

August 1988, the Engineering Building was remodeled with funds from the Community Hospital

Foundation to house the School of Nursing. In 1999, further modification of this building was

.-5 Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION.t. OVERVIEW

completed, and the second floor of the International Center was remodeled to meet office and

classroom space needs.

In 2003 the new Library and Technology Center was constructed at the entrance to the campus, and

a new Plant Services Building was erected near the Automotive Technology program site.

Monterey Peninsula College is a comprehensive community college that responds to the educational,

cultural, and recreational needs of community members, insofar as its resources permit. The College

serves the communities of Big Sur, Carmel, Carmel Valley, Del Rey Oaks, Marina, Monterey, Pacific

Grove, Pebble Beach, Presidio of Monterey Annex, Sand City, and Seaside.

Monterey Peninsula College classes are held on the main campus during fall and spring semesters

and during Early Spring and summer sessions.

Mission Statement

The mission statement adopted by the District is as follows:

"Monterey Peninsula College provides a quality learning experience for students by offering a

variety of programs and services which are dedicated to excellence and which meet community

needs. Monterey Peninsula College offers a stimulating, high-quality, low-cost environment for

students desiring to transfer, prepare for emerging job opportunities, and improve their lives.

Monterey Peninsula College provides a positive atmosphere for -learning and supports

opportunities for growth for all members of the community regardless of their circumstances.

Monterey Peninsula College is a community of learners, engaging minds in the active pursuit and

sharing of knowledge by offering courses and programs:

• To encourage achievement of degrees and transfer

• To enable the acquisition of necessary basic skills

• To meet workplace needs

• To nourish the excitement of lifelong learning

• To share our resources, people and facilities with the community.

1-6


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION &: OVERVIEW

Monterey Peninsula College endeavors to assist all who participate in its varied objectives to

realize their rights, freedoms, and responsibilities in the community and the larger society of

which they are a part_"

Philosophy

The educational philosophy of the District is captured in the text that follows:

"Monterey Peninsula College is committed to the ideal of academic freedom derived through

careful and critical appraisal, and in turn, provides a place where students may freely formulate

their ideas and values_ All members of the college community support the ideals of excellence,

human worth, and realization of human potential.

Monterey Peninsula College provides opportunities for development of skills and knowledge

that will enable students of all ages and backgrounds to become, and remain, productive in their

chosen vocations, both for the sake of the individual and society.

Through research, self-appraisal, and institutional planning, Monterey Peninsula College

responds to unmet needs of the community and to changing expectations within the worlds of

education and work. As the College looks outward to the community and finds meaning and

opportunity in its diversity, so it extends its reach to the global community in which its members

may discover a new sense of place.

Monterey Peninsula College opens its doors to all members of the community -- young and

older adults, those who deal with challenges to the quality of their lives or work, the military and

their dependents, the laborer, the merchant, and the artist, in order to engage them as willing

partners in helping to meet their goal of self-fulfillment. At the same time, the College

participates in partnerships with private enterprise, public agencies, and educational institutions

in order to further the academic and work-related aspirations of the community."

1·7


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION"" OVERVIEW

To carry out its Mission and support its Philosophy, Monterey Peninsula College is committed to

and will:

1. Provide excellence in education for students planning to transfer to a four-year college or

university;

2. Provide a high standard of occupational training, enabling students to qualify for jobs in a variety

of career fields, and enabling those already employed to develop their skills or train for another

career;

3. Provide the highest quality of instruction to support students who need to improve learning

skills;

4. Provide meaningful opportunities for adults to continue their education on a life-long basis;

5. Provide support for students through appropriate and necessary services that help them explore

and achieve educational, vocational, and personal goals;

6. Provide the community with special interest, cultural, civic, and recreational programs designed

to enhance the quality of life;

7. Provide a program of general education that allows students to explore potential interests and

abilities and to'develop knowledge and understanding of self, other human beings, and the

environment;

8. Provide a curriculum and an atmosphere that values diversity, a global perspective, and the

language and communication skills that make these possible.

1-8


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTlFlCA nON AND FAcILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2· METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER II - PLAN METHODOLOGY

The Process

The planning process focused on future trends, needs, and sensitivities influencing the long-range

development of the District. Because the Plan will drive other key plans of the District, it was also

developed with sensitivity to the guidelines established by the California Community College

Chancellor's Office. This Master Plan, therefore, can be utilized in the process of applying for state

funds from the capital outlay program for facilities.· In this regard, the documentation presented

herein is designed to accomplish the following:

Be a reflection of the thoughts and observations of students, faculty,

administration, and classified staff members.

Serve as guiding document for the future that will lead to the development and implementation of action measures for the District.

Drive the other planning documents of the District.

Support the development of substantive links between the educational program and the support service needs.

Utilize the knowledge gained through the educational planning process to define the District's facility needs.

Improve the District's position with state agencies and the state legislature so that

a greater share of funds available for the improvement of public higher education

can be directed to the College and its off-campus satellite centers.

Be collaborative and promote wide participation in the process of determining

definitive directions for the future of the district and the community it serves.

2-1


MAAS Companies

Faculty and Staff Input

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2' METHODOLOGY

Interviews were conducted with all units of the College community to determine perceived needs,

goals and objectives. Administrators, deans, directors, faculty, student services and other support

staff, and students were queried as part of the process. These perspectives were considered in the

development of the Plan. They were also referenced in forecasting curricular growth over the next

sixteen years. The extent to which this Plan provides a sense of vision and a guide for multi-year

planning for programs, services and facilities is a tribute to, and the result of, the contributions of

many individuals and educational groups.

Underpinnings of the Planning Process

The foundation for the planning process was built on the District's current and projected internal

and external environments. Elements that represented possible opportunities and/or challenges

were identified and addressed in the context of the District's future instructional program. Impacts

at the local, regional and statewide levels were considered in this analysis. The planning process also

included an analysis of data associated with student enrollments and the academic capacity of the

District. Additionally, the College'S own Educational Master Plan and the long term goals of the

Strategic Planning Steering Committee efforts wer~ referenced, the thoughts and ideas from these

documents being incorporated into the dynamics that ultimately led to space needs being identified

and translated into a building/ facilities program. Conclusions were drawn based on this collective

information and on the initiatives outlined for the future.

A primary objective of the planning process was to unite the trends, analysis, and concepts

articulated by the District, via the College and off campus satellite centers, with quantifiable

measures and state standards used as benchmarks for productivity and efficiency.

.2-2

Monterey Peninsula Community College Di.trict January 2004

MAAS Companies

Planning Activities Utilized

SPACE QUANTtFrCATION AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPl'ER 2' METHODOLOGY

The development of the Plan included the following activities:

• A review of the history and evolution of the College

• An environmentaJ assessment ("environmental scan'') to consider the present and

anticipated impacts both within and outside the District's service area

• The development of a "vision for the future" via qualitative and quantitative

analysis, focusing on creating educational programs and services for the future

• The development of growth and enrollment estimates extending to the year 2020.

• A reView to assure that access and overall success of under prepared and

underrepresented groups within the community were considered in the planning process

• An assessment of the technological improvements that will be needed to provide

alternative instructional delivery strategies, improved record-keeping and record

access, and more responsive information systems for human resources and business services

• An evaluation of current and projected facility needs to support growth and innovation in instruction

• The planning process relied heavily on input provided by many groups and

individuals associated with the academic programs and support services of the District

The results and findings from these inputs provided the foundation upon which the Plan was

constructed. The Plan is presented with the intent that it will serve as a blueprint for the District

over the next sixteen years.

2·3


MAAS Companies

2-4

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2' METHODOLOGY


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 • ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

CHAPTER III - ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

OVERVIEW The Environmental Scan is one of the key elements in the creation of the Space Quantification and

Facilities Master Plan. The scan assists in validating (or invalidating) the current thinking of the

District as well as tests the projected concepts and ideas that will dictate the District's program of

instruction for the future. Information gleaned through the Environmental Scan also provides

insight as to the opportunities and/or challenges that currently exist. More importantly, it identifies

those that may affect the District in the future.

The following agencies, b?ards, and commissions were consulted or referenced as part of the

Environmental Scan process:

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic AnalYsis

U.S. Department of Labor

California Department of Finance, Economic Research Unit

California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division

Center for Continuing Siudy of the California Economy

California Communiry College Chancellor's Office

Additional information was gathered from the following sources:

ESRI BIS Marketing! Data Systems

Monterey Peninsula Communiry College Distrid

Ciry of Monterey

Counry of Monterey

Monterey Salinas Transit

On-campus interviews with college administrators, faculty and staff

Information gained through interactions with college trustees, administrators, faculty and staff

The Maas Companies database (data from 78 community colleges within California)

3·1

Monterey Peninsula Community College District Jan uary 2004

MAAS Companies

The External Environment

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 . ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

Resources, trends and conditions within the immediate service area as well as trends and conditions

that are regional and statewide in scope will influence the future of the District. Combined, these

factors will have a direct bearing on the District's program of instruction and support services over

the next several years.

The external factors and considerations that follow were identified as important and/or significant

in their potential to have an impact on the District in the future.

I. THE IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENT

A. Key Cities of the District

Six key cities/towns are responsible for the majority of student (credit) enrollments within the

District. These key cities, Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Marina, Carmel and Carmel Valley have

averaged 65.5% of the total District credit enrollments over the past seven -years. Of the six

localities, the City of Monterey generated the greatest percentage of students over this same time

period, accounting for nearly 20% of all enrollments.

Chart 3.1

Key Cities for Student Enrollment 5 Year Average (1998 - 2002)

Other

34.5%

Carmel Valley

3.1% Carmel'

7.9% Marina

10.0%

Monterey

19.8%

Seaside _/~- 13.6%

Pacific Grove

11.1%

SOHrce: Monterey PeninsHia CommHniry College District, Office ojlnstitHtionai Research; anafyfis ry Maas Companies

Using baseline demographic markers as a basis for comparison, the following is a proflle of these six

key cities and towns:

3·2


MAAS Companies

City of Montcrc)


Monterey is a city of natural beauty with a rich cultural heritage. It is the oldest city in the state,

founded in 1770, and was the state capital for a time. The first California Constitution was signed

there in 1849, and the city was incorporated in 1850. Today, Monterey is an 8.62 sq. mi. center for

tourism, with its unique collection of historic adobes, in addition to many world-known sites

including Cannery Rowand the Monterey Bay Aquarium.

Monterey has a slowly growing population of 30,153 people with a median age of 37.6 years. The

population is predominantly Caucasian, 80.0%, with a median household income of $52,597, almost

exactly the same as that of the state as a whole. Monterey's per capita income of $31,108 is 19.4%

above the state average.

Table 3.1

MONTEREY - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS

AREA POP GROWTH AGE HH $

City of 30,153 1.09% 37.6 $52,597 Monterey

.. Data Source: ESRI BIS Marketzng/ Data Systems. Statzstzcs are for 2003 "'Persons qfHispanic Origin mqy be qf any race

City of Scasidc

PER CAP $ DOM. RACE

Caucasian 80.0%

$31,108 Hispanic* 12.5% Asian 7.4%

African Amer 2.3%

Just north of Monterey is the city of Seaside, a culturally and ethnically diverse city, and the most

populous (31,700) of the key cities. Founded in 1887 as "East Monterey," it was renamed Seaside in

1890, and was incorporated in 1954. Seaside has sixteen parks consisting of recreational trails,

athletic fields, and wildlife habitat. Like the city of Marina, Seaside's growth is largely dependent

upon the development of the property in the former military base, Fort Ord.

Seaside's population of 32,253 is young, with a median age of 29.6 years, and growing at a modest

rate of 1.18% per anum. Seaside is the least affluent of the six key cities but not poor. The median

household income of $45,186 and per capita income of $16,660 are respectively 13.7% and 36.0%

below the state averages.

3·3


MAAS Companies


Table 3.2

SEASIDE - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS

AREA POP GROWTH AGE HH$ ...

City of 32,253 1.18% 29.6 $45,186 Seaside

.. Data SO/lrce: ESRI BIS Marleetzng/ Data Systems - Statzstzcs are for 2003 *Pmons ofHispank Origin m'!] be of any race

City of Pacific Grove

PER CAP $ DOM. RACE

Caucasian 47.8%

$16,660 Hispanic· 40.0% African Amer 10.8%

Asian 9.5%

Pacific Grove is a beautiful, small coastal city, located at the tip of the peninsula between Monterey

and Pebble Beach. This 2.86 sq. mi. town was founded in 1875 as a Methodist retreat, and was

incorporated in 1889. Today, Pacific Grove is a prosperous city with a strong retail center and many

scenic attractions, including Point Pinos Lighthouse, (California's oldest working lighthouse), the

Museum of Natural History, and Asilomar State Beach and Park. The American Tin Cannery,

California's first outlet center, is located in a renovated tinnery, which supplied the cans for the

sardine industry on historic Cannery Row in neighboring Monterey between 1921 and 1946. Pacific

Grove is also known as "Butterfly Town," in honor of the Monarch butterflies that winter there

during their annual migration.

Pacific Grove has a slowly growing population of 15,652 people with a median age of 46.1 years.

The predominantly Caucasian population is wealthy with a median income of $54,972 and per capita

income of $36,335.

Table 3.3 PACIFIC GROVE - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS


City of Pacific Grove 15,652 1.02% 46.1 $54,972

.. Dala S o/lrce: ESRI BIS Marleetzng/ Data Systems· S tatzstzcs are for 2003 *Persons of Hispanic Origin m'!] be of any race

PER CAP $ DOM. RACE

Caucasian 87.4% $36,335 Hispanic· 8.2%

Asian 4.5%

Monterey Peninsula Community College Di8trict January 2004

MAAS Companies

Cit, of ~1arin,1


On 9,000 acres, six miles north of Monterey, is the city of Marina. This coastal town, bordered by

the former Fort Ord and the Salinas River, was once a flag stop for the Southern Pacific Railroad.

Marina State Beach, with its beautiful rolling sand dunes, is a Mecca for hang gliding enthusiasts.

Marina's population of 25,621 is growing quite slowly with a median age of 32.2. Marina is not

economically as well off as several other peninsula cities. Median household income in Marina is

$46,296, 11.6% below the state level, and per capita income is $20,261,22.2% below the state level.

Table 3.4

MARINA - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS


City of 25,621 1.02% 32.2 $46,296

Marina

.. Data Sourre: ESRI BIS Marketing! Data Systems- Statistics an for 2003 *Persons of Hispanic On'gin mqy be of any race

City of Carmel

PER CAP $ DOM. RACE

Caucasian 43.1%

$20,261 Hispanic*25.5%

Asian 15.8% African Amer 13.5%

Carmel-by-the-Sea is known throughout. the world for its pristine white, sandy beaches, fairy-tale

cottage-type architecture, and Mission San Carlos de Bortomeo, the jewel of the California missions.

Local law preserves Carmel's rustic quaintness by prohibiting stoplights, neon signs, live music in

bars, and commercial enterprise on the beach.

This one-square-mile village, with its secluded alleyways and courtyards, is a beehive of small

business activity that includes many fine inns and hotels, over 80 art galleries, and hundreds of

boutiques, small cafes, and gourmet restaurants.

Carmel has a slowly growing population of 4,077 people with a median income of $67,826,29.5%

above the state level, and a per capita income of $61,497, 2.4 times the state level. The city 'is

predominantly Caucasian with a median age of 56.3.

3-5


MAAS Companies


Table 3.5

CARMEL - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS

AREA POP GROWTH AGE HH$

City of Carmel-by· 4,077 0.87% 56.3 $67,826

the-sea ..

Data SOlirce: ESRI BIS Marketzngl Data Systems. Statzstzrs are for 2003 *Persons ofHispanir Origin m'!Y be of a'!Y rare

Town of Carmel Valley Village

PER CAP $ DOM.RACE

Caucasian 94.2% $61,497 Hispanic* 3.5%

Asian 2.3%

Carmel Valley is the warm spot on the Monterey Peninsula. A 30-mile long valley blessed with 250

days of sunshine per year, the valley is protected from the coastal fog so common in the peninsula

communities. Carmel Valley was once the home of a multitude of dairies, ranches and family owned

farms, and to a lesser extent, still is. Most of the properties have evolved into wineries, shopping

villages, golf links and resorts.

The population of Carmel Valley Village is small, very wealthy, and, like the other key cities, growing

slowly. The median income of the 4,760 residents is $83,494 and $53,369 on a per capita basis. The

population is a bit older than the other key cities, except Carmel, with a median age of 49.1.

Table 3.6

CARMEL VALLEY VILLAGE - KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS


Town of Carmel 4,760 1.09% 49.1 $83,494 Valley

.. Data SOllrce: ESRI BIS Marketzngl Data Systems· Statzstzcs are for 2003 *Persons of Hispanic Origin m'!Y be of a'!Y race

3-6

PER CAP $ DOM. RACE

Caucasian 91.4% $53,369 Hispanic* 7.1 %

Asian 2.0%


MAAS Companies


B. Support Infrastructure and Key Environmental Elements

With several of the campus buildings built in the late 1940s and others in the 1950s, it is no surprise

that much of the campus support infrastructure is very old and in many cases needing replacement.

The following is an overview of the infrastructure condition at the District's primary. point of

instructional delivery - Monterey Peninsula Community College.

\\'atcr, Sewer and Storm Draillage

Cal American Water is the primary provider of water to the College. Source water for the future

does not appear to be a major concern at this time, although this condition could change, as the

availability of potable water for urban use is becoming an ever-increasing problem across the state,

particularly along the seacoast areas. The current condition of the on-campus distribution systems

for water, i.e. for drinking, sprinklers and other landscaping needs, are characterized as being old and

in some cases failing. Much of the system depends on antiquated pipes that are inadequate and need

replacing. Lack of an upgraded water distribution system may become a limiting factor for growth

in the future if not addressed The District recently drilled an on-site well and installed a 55,000-

gallon storage tank. This supplemental water source will be used to irrigate the athletic fields.

The infrastructure for the on-campus sewer/wastewater system is also very old and in need of

upgrading. This, too, could be a limiting factor to future growth. The storm drainage system, while

not directly tied to future growth, is a major piece of support infrastructure that is antiquated and in

need of upgrading.

Electric, Gas and Tdecornnll111ications

Constellation New Energy supplies electricity to the campus but it is transmitted via lines owned by

Pacific Gas and Electric. After reaching campus, the internal distribution system is owned and

maintained by the District. The transformers on-campus are very old and near the end of their

useful life. Electrical utility infrastructure is a prime component in the plans for growth of the

College. Future growth cannot be supported with the existing electrical service - the system is

approximately 40 years old.

Telecommunication infrastructure, because of the dire necessity to support an institution that has

become reliant on communication, has received some attention relative to upgrading. The District

has begun converting the telecommunications infrastructure from copper wire to fiber optics. This

new system should be sufficient to support future growth on campus. There remains, however,

3·7


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER3'ENVmONMENTALSCAN

significant infrastructure issues to address, including those of support for the current phone systems

- service and distribution, switches and hubs.

Other Key Support Infrastructure

HVAC

Boilers and air systems serve all campus buildings. Only a limited number of buildings have air

conditioning. A number of the boilers and forced air systems have been replaced over the past six

to seven years but most buildings still have antiquated systems that require a great deal of servicing.

HV AC will be an area that will need to be addressed as a critical to the future of Monterey Peninsula

and a major infrastructure need.

Parking

Aside from two of the newer parking lots, much of the roadways and parking lots have irregular

surfaces, potholes and are crumbling. The lots that were built 40 to 50 years ago were built without

a proper base and are subject to continual attention and repair. The adequacy of parking overall,

both in terms of quantity and quality, will be an issue and concern for the future relative to meeting

new growth demands.

c. Transportation and Access

Monterey Peninsula College is located less . than two miles from the coast, just inland of the

Monterey Peninsula, 60 miles south of San Jose. For ground transportation, California Hwy 1

passes within 250 yards of the campus. It has convenient exit/entry ramps both north and south

that are immediately adjacent to campus. The campus is further served by the major arterial of

Fremont Street. Monterey Peninsula Airport is less than five miles from the College.

MST (Monterey-Salinas Transit) provides public transportation 10 and around the Monterey

Peninsula. The fixed route bus system is quite extensive with 31 routes, extending from Watsonville

to the north, Gonzales to the east and Big Sur to the south. Buses serve all of the key cities and

four of the routes service the College. Many students commute to the College by public bus.

3·8


MAAS Companies

D. Seismic Stability


The College is located within an active seismic area. This will be a factor in the future for the

District. New construction/reconstruction and infrastructure will need to be planned accordingly.

E. Prospects for Growth Within the Immediate Environment

The District serves several geographic areas that include several small and medium sized cities and

small towns in Monterey Peninsula area. The prospects for enrollment growth due to future

population growth will be marginal. Though Monterey County's population is growing at a slightly

faster rate than the state, 1.55% versus 1.50%, the same cannot be said for the key cities. None of

the key cities have a growth rate higher than the state. In fact, the fastest growing of the key cities is

Seaside at 1.18%, a rate that falls short of even the national rate of population growth, 1.20%. The

slowest growth rate of the key cities is in Carmel, growing at 0.87% per year. Carmel's population

actually shrank from 4,081 in 2000 to 4,077 in 2003. Population increase will not be a factor that

dictates and/or drives student enrollment growth in the future, particularly in the College'S

immediate area. The fastest growing portion of the District will be to the north of the College.

The District will also not likely see a significant impact by new development throughout its

boundaries. The peninsula area has a great deal of protected land and seashore that attracts the

millions of tourists to the area. Unlike many areas within the state, the peninsula will not be an area

where new, major development causes a large influx of people to come to the area.

Table 3.7 PROJECTED RATES OF GROWTH THROUGH ')008 -ENTITY POP GROWTH

Key In-District Cities

Monterey 1.09%

Seaside 1.18%

Pacific Grove 1.02% Marina 1.02% Carmel 0.87% CarmelValley Village 1.09%

Monterey County 1.55% State of California 1.50% United States 1.20%

Soum: ESRI BIS Marketing/Data Systems, anafyru Maas Compames

3·9

HH GROWTH FAM GROWTH

1.37% 1.00% 1.12% 1.12% 1.10% 0.83% 1.42% 1.46% 0.95% 0.77% 1.16% 0.92% 1.58% 1.60% 1.20% 1.20% 1.20% 1.10%


MAAS Compania


II. THE DISTRICT IN CONTEXT TO THE REGION

A. Regional Perspective - Monterey County

Monterey County was created in 1850 as one of California's original twenty-seven counties. The

county derives its name from the Bay of Monterey. The word "monterey" comes from the Spanish

words "monte" and "rey," which literally means "king of the forest." Spanish explorer Sebastian

Vizcaino named the bay in 1602 in honor of Conde de Monte Rey, the Viceroy of New Spain.

Monterey occupies 3,324 square miles, including 100 miles of California's coast. The county's

diverse geography includes grasslands and croplands, Los Padres National Forest, Big Sur, Monterey

Bay, and numerous rivers, lakes and valleys. Monterey Peninsula Community College District lies

entirely within the county borders.

Labor Force of the County

3.0%

2.5%

2.0%

1.5%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%

Chart 3.2

Monterey County Relative Percentage Change in Labor Force 1996 - 2002

D D 11 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Source: Labor Market Information, California Emplrryment Develbpment Division,' AnalYsis Maas Companies

• Monterey

o California

The county has an abundant labor force with both seasonal and year round workers. Over the view

period of 1996 through 2002, Monterey County's labor force growth varied greatly but generally

kept pace with the state. The county averaged an annual growth rate of 1.9% versus 1.8% for the

state. This is consistent with the population growth rates discussed previously. The county's growth

rate in labor force peaked in 1997 at 2.7%. Significant growth was recorded in the years 2000 (2.3%)

and 2002 (2.1 %) as well. This data is more fully depicted in chart that follows.

3-10


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3' ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0%

Chart 3.3

Monterey County Relative Change in Unemployment Rate 1996 - 2002

,. • ~ .--4 ' . -. • ......... ; !

+::::---.. ~ i

+=::::::; ; ...-- I

I

i i !

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Sourre: Labor Market Information, California Emp/qyment Development Division

-+- Mon terey

-+- California

With agriculture as one of the larges sources of jobs in the county, it is not surprising that Monterey

County has traditionally high rates of unemployment. Over the view period, the seasonally adjusted

average annual rate of unemployment was 10.2%,4.2 percentage points above the state as a whole.

This differential between the county's unemployment rate and that of the state remained essentially

constant over the view period.

Income and Demographic l'vlarkcrs

Following is a current snapshot of the key demographic and income elements for Monterey County:

Table 3.8'

KEY DEMOGRAPHIC MARKERS - SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY I-A-R-E-A-

Monterey County

POP GROWTH AGE

419,850 1.55% 31.9 $52,273 $22,752

Source: ESRI BIS Marketzngl Data Systems - DemographIC and Income Forerasl- Data t.r for Year 2003 * Persons of Hispanic origin m'!J be of any race

DOM. RACE J Caucasian 54.0% i Hispanic* 50.8% i

Asian 5.6% I African Amer 3.2%

With respect to several of the key demographic markers, Monterey County is a mirror of the state of

California. The county's current population of 419,850 is growing at an annual rate of 1.55%, just a

bit higher than the state's population growth rate of 1.50%. The county's median household income

is $52,273, within a couple hundred dollars of the state level. Per capita income in the county is

3-11


MAAS Companies


$22,752, 12.6% below the state level. The county is a bit younger than the state at 31.9 years versus

34.3 years.

The racial profile of the county shows a falling Caucasian population and growing a Hispanic

population. By 2008, the Hispanic population segment will become the most dominant at 56.7%

The Caucasian population will fall to 51.1 %, the Asian population to 5.0% and the African

American population to 2.5%.

Sources of Employment

In June of 2003, the latest period for which employment data was available, Monterey County's

largest industry employers were the Agriculture, Government and Services industry sectors.

Together these three industries accounted for 61 % of the total industry employment in the county.

Following is a percentage breakdown of industry divisions for Monterey County.

Chart 3.4

Monterey County Employment by Industry 2001 Annual Average

Agricul ture

25.3%

Retail Trade

Finance, Insurance

& Real Estate

3.8%

9.7% //

/ Wholesale Trade // Manufacturing

2.7% 4.6%

Construction &

Mining

3.8%

Transportation &

- Public Utilities

14.3%

Services

17.7%

Government

18.0%

SOHrce: Empl'!Yment Development Department, Labor Market Information, Snapshot for JHne 2003,. AnalYsis Moos Companies

Current Conditions

The most current information available through the Employment Development Department Oune

2003) indicates that the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in Monterey County was 7.9%, up a

half point from last year's level of 7.4%. This is higher than the state (6.7%) and that of the nation

(6.5%). With agriculture as the number one employment industry, unemployment rates are highly

3·12


MAAS Companies


seasonal. May through October are the months in the county with the lowest rates of

unemployment. From December through March, unemployment rates in the county typically

exceed 15%.

Employment in Monterey County fell by 1,600 jobs from June 2002 to June 2003, a decline of 0.9%.

Over this time, six industry divisions had job decreases, two had increases and one remained

unchanged. Gains were realized in Agriculture (200 jobs) and Finance, Insurance and Real Estate

(200 jobs). The gain in the Agricultural sector is noteworthy due to the fact that over the same time

period, the state suffered huge job losses in this sector - more than 78,000 jobs. The county's

industry sectors suffering the greatest number of year-over job losses were Services (700 jobs),

Transportation and Public Utilities (500 jobs) and Wholesale Trade (400 jobs). The other sectors

that experienced job losses were Construction & Mining, Manufacturing and Government.

Employment in the Retail Trade industry sector remained unchanged.

The most current labor data relative to unemployment for key sub areas in Monterey County are

noted in the following table:

Table 3.9 LABOR FORCE DATA FOR KEY SUB AREAS OF THE COUKTY . AREA LABOR FORCE EMPLOYED UNEMPLOYED RATE

Gonzales - city 2,570 2,120 450 17.6% Marina - city 12,410 11,770 640 5.1% Monterey - city 18,640 18,110 530 2.8% Monterey Peninsula 81,610 78,150 3,460 4.2% Pacific Grove - city 11,310 10,910 400 3.6% Salinas - city 67,270 60,260 7,010 10.4% Seaside - city 17,890 16,690 1,200 6.7% Soledad - city 4,320 3,520 800 18.5% Monterey County 205,100 188,900 16,200 7.9%

Source: Emplf!Yment Development Department, Labor Market Information, Snapshot for June 2003,. Data has not been seasonal!J at!Justed

The previous table shows labor force data for some of the sub areas of the county. While Monterey

County has a relatively high rate of unemployment vis-a-vis the state, the Monterey Peninsula has

very low levels of unemployment - currently only 4.2%. Monterey City has a June 2003

unemployment rate of only 2.8%. Marina (5.1 %), Pacific Grove (3.6%) and even Seaside (6.7%)

3·13


MAAS Companies


register rates at or below the state level (6.7%). With tourism driving the economy of the peninsula,

jobs are plentiful and relatively few people are finding themselves out of work.

Labor Trends and Outlook for the Future

The California Employment Development Department, projects that between 1999 and 2006

nonfarm employment at firms located in Monterey County will grow by 17,100 jobs. This

represents an average annual growth rate of about 1.9%. This is good news since job growth will

outpace population growth by 3.5 percentage points.

The Services industry sector will account for just over 40% of the job gains over the seven-year

projection period, adding 7,000 new jobs. Nearly a fourth of this expansion will occur in business

services, such as temporary employment agencies, guard services, computer and data processing

services and janitorial services. The next largest portion will be in health services followed by hotel

and other services.

The Government industry sector will increase by 3,600 jobs. More than 90% of these new public

sector jobs will occur at the local level. Local education will add 1,800 jobs; while other local

agencies will add 1,500.

Retail Trade will expand by 2,900 jobs led by restaurants, bars and. food stores. The remaining

sectors will register smaller gains (see details on the following chart).

CIl .0 o ..,

10,000 7,000

Chart 3.5

Key Nonfarm Industrial Divisions Growth Through 2006

Source: Emplqyment Development Department, Division of Labor Market Information

)·14


MAAS Companies

Occupational Demands


Occupations that exhibit the greatest demand potential for the next five years are listed below. It

should be noted that demographic trends, shifts in demands for products or services, technological

innovations and the way business is conducted are variables that will finally determine employment

demand. Occupational potential will, likewise, be closely linked to occupations that have high

employment and simultaneously high turnover rates. Monterey County is projected to have the

following occupation profile.

Table 3.10 OCCUPATIONS WITH GREATEST ABSOLUTE GROWTH THROUGH 2006

EDUCATION OR OCCUPATION 1999 2006 #Jobs % TRAINING

Cashiers 3,470 4,060 590 17.0% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Salespersons, Retail 5,270 5,790 520 9.9% Short-Term On-The-Job Train General Office Clerks 3,370 3,880 510 15.1% Short-Term On-The-Job Train General Mgrs, Top Executives 3,230 3,660 430 13.3% Work Exp + Bachelor Or Higher Teacher Aides, Paraprofessional 1,360 1,750 390 28.7% Associate D~gree Guards & Watch Guards 1,550 1,940 390 25.2% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Teachers, Elementary School 2,830 3,200 370 13.1% Bachelor's Degree Instructional Coordinators 1,190 1,540 350 29.4% Bachelor's Degree Registered Nurses 1,830 2,180 350 19.1% Associate Degree Waiters & Waitresses 3,220 3,550 330 10.2% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Maids & Housekpng Cleaners 1,860 2,180 320 17.2% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Laborers-Landscaping 1,740 2,050 310 17.8% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Correction Officers, Jailers 1,550 1,840 290 18.7% Long-Term On-The-Job Train Janitors, Cleaners, Except Maids 1,960 2,190 230 11.7 Short-Term On-The-Job Train Receptionists, Info Clerks 1,400 1,620 220 15.7 Short-Term On-The-Job Train Food Preparation Workers 2,230 2,430 200 9.0 Short-Term On-The-Job Train Teachers, Secondary School 860 1,040 180 20.9 Bachelor's Degree Nurse Aides, Orderlies, Attndts 940 1,120 180 19.1 Short-Term On-The-Job Train Truck Drivers, Light 950 1,130 180 18.9 Short-Term On-The-Job Train ...

SOHrce: Emp~ment Development Department, DIVtS10n of LAbor Market Informahon

Over the next five years, occupations in Monterey County that will exhibit the fastest rates of

growth relative to percentage change are listed in the table that follows.

3·15


MAAS Companies


Table 3.11 OCCUPATIONS WITH THE FASTEST RATE OF GROWTH THROUGH 2006 OCCUPATION 1999 2006 #Jobs %. EDUCATION OR TRAINING

Paralegal Personnel 70 110 40 57.1% Associate Degree Computer Engineers 150 220 70 46.7% Bachelor's Degree Comp Support Specialists 200 290 90 45.0% Bachelor's Degree Person! & Home Care Aides 100 140 40 40.0% Short-Term On-The-Job Train Medical Records Technicians 80 110 30 37.5% Associate Degree

Sheriffs & Deputy Sheriffs 200 270 70 35.0% Long-Term On-The-Job Train

Sys AnaIst, Elec Data Process 420 560 140 33.3% Bachelor's Degree

Speech Pathol, Audiologists 120 160 40 33.3% Master's Degree

Pest Controllers & Assistants 90 120 30 33.3% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train

Sheet Metal Workers 90 120 30 33.3% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train

Medical Assistants 420 550 130 31.0% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train

Food Servers, Outside 100 130 30 30.0% Short-Term On-The-Job Train

Phys Therapy Assis & Aides 100 130 30 30.0% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train

Teachers, Special Education 440 570 130 29.5% Bachelor's Degree

Instructional Coordinators 1,190 1,540 350 29.4% Bachelor's Degree Bill & Account Collectors 240 310 70 29.2% Short-Term On-The-Job Training

Teacher Aides, Paraprofs 1,360 1,750 390 28.7% Associate Degree

Dental Assistants 280 360 80 28.6% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train

Police Patrol Officers 510 650 140 27.5% Long-Term On-The-Job Train

Demonstrators & Promoters 110 140 30 27.3% Moderate-Term On-The-Job Train ...

S ouree; Emplqyment Development Department, DtvlSton of Labor Market I njormallon

Occupations in Monterey County that will exhibit the greatest declines relative to employment for

the next five years are listed below.

Table 3.12 OCCUPATIONS WITH THE GREATEST DECLINES THROUGH 2006

OCCUPATION 1999 2006 #Jobs %

Typists - W d Process 570 470 -100 -17.5% Comp Ops-Ex Periph Equip 160 120 -40 -25.0% Cannery Workers 190 160 -30 -15.8% Traffic, ShipjReceivng Clks 710 690 -20 -2.8% Postal Mail Carriers 340 320 -20 -5.9% Announcers-Radio & TV 150 130 -20 -13.3% Elec, Electronic Assemblers 160 140 -20 -12.5% Refuse Collectors 70 50 -20 -28.6% ... Souree: Emplqyment Development Deparf1llent, DtvlSton of Labor Market lnjormallon

3·16

EDUCATION OR TRAIN

Moderate-Term On-The-Job Training

Moderate-Term On-The-Job Training

Short-Term On-The-Job Training



Long-Term On-The-Job Training




MAAS Companies

:\lajor Elllpl()~ cr~


The major employers of Monterey County are listed below. These companies and organizations

represent the key industry divisions that are prospering in Monterey County and/or that find the

county most suitable relative to their needs for an available labor pool, access to the markets and

quality of life.

Table 3.13 MAJOR EMPLOYERS OF MONTEREY COUNTY

Employer Name Location Industry

Arroyo Labor Contracting Svc Gonzales Personnel Supply Services Bud of California Soledad Groceries & Related Products Community Hospital of Monterey Carmel Hospitals D'Arrigo Brothers Co Salinas Groceries & Related Products Foothill Packing Inc Salinas Services, All Other Household Credit Svc Salinas Business Credit Institutions Integrated Device Technology Salinas Electronic Components & Accessories Mc Graw-Hill-CTB Monterey Misc. Publis~g Monterey Peninsula College Monterey Colleges & Universities Naval Postgraduate School Monterey Public Administration (Government) Norcal Harvesting Salinas Farm Labor Contractors Pebble Beach Co Pebble Beach Misc. Amusement, Recreation Services Premium Harvesting & Packing Salinas Farm Labor and Management Services Source; Ammca's Labor Market Information System/Info USA

Economic Vitalit\,

The outlook for Monterey County's economic future is generally positive. As the population grows,

jobs will be added in a variety of industry sectors, further diversifying the economy. Though

unemployment is likely to remain high relative to the state, it will continue to be mitigated by the

extremely low rates of unemployment that exist in the peninsula communities. Most of the county's

population growth will occur to the north of Monterey, the greatest of which will be in the Salinas

metropolitan area.

Future job growth will be a mixed bag in terms of pay rates. Approximately 25% of the occupations

listed as having the greatest growth through 2006 are low wage jobs including cashiers, retail

salespersons, food servers, security guards and laborers. The bulk of the growth however, will be in

higher skilled occupations with higher pay. Overall, the county will maintain a high median

household income as it grows.

On the peninsula the tourism driven economy is not expected to change radically. High property

values, high incomes and low population growth will all contribute to maintaining the status quo.

3-17


MAAS Companies


III. THE DISTRICT IN CONTEXT TO THE STATE

A. State of California

Economic Climate

California is the only state that competes economically with other nations in the world. In terms of

economic clout, it ranks as the world's sixth largest economy. Despite the current economic lag and

the state's problems, particularly its current fiscal condition, California's economy has been

surprising resilient during the recent economic downturn.

The prime drivers of the economy - consumer and government spending - continue to hold their

own despite the demise of the technology sector (that began in 2000). A combination of increased

government spending on defense, travel/tourism within the state and a buoyant consumer spending

dynamic, has kept the California economy afloat for the past three years.

The construction and housing markets have remained relatively healthy over this period. The state's

Asian and Hispanic segments of the population continue to play an increasingly significant role in

the economy; there is still a pent-up demand, if not an insatiable appetite, for housing and consumer

products. Over the next several years, California's economic prosperity will continue to be driven

by those industries that were responsible for pulling the state out of the recession of the early 1990's.

The state can expect a rebound from High Technology Manufacturing, the state's perennial stalwarts

of Entertainment and Tourism to remain strong, and the growth of Professional Services

(management, software, multimedia and engineering) to lead the way.

Prospects for Gro\\ th

Most of California's future population and income growth will occur in the state's existing large

regions through the year 2010 and beyond. More than 80% of all of California's growth will be in

the major counties, i.e. Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego and Sacramento regions. These will

be the areas where new jobs are created and where people elect to live. Most of the state's ten

fastest growing counties are located next to these major job-generating regions.

Projections for growth through the year 2010, as made by the Center for Continuing Study of the

California Economy (CCSCE), indicate the following:

3·18


MAAS Companies


Table 3.14

KEY COUNTIES FOR GROWTH IN THE STATE 2000-2010

COUNTY POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS Los Angeles 1,307.2 283.0

San Diego 669.6 216.1 Orange 569.5 176.4

San Bernardino 500.2 143.4 Riverside 615.2 178.7

Santa Clara 266 . .4 91.7 Alameda 193.2 67.1

Sacramento 243.9 91.6 Contra Costa 201.5 69.1

Fresno 152.6 17.8 caBromia

Raw Numbers 6,765.7 1,977.2 Rate or Growth 20.2% 17.6%

S ouree: Center for Connnumg S tu4J of the CalifornIa Economy, CalifornIa County Projemoni, 2000 Numbers "prmnted are in thouiandi; raw numbers "preient artual growth projected

Employment and Labor

TAXABLE SALES 26.3 14.9 13.9 10.3 6.7 9.2 8.1 5.1 3.2 4.5

132.0 36.8%

In the first five months of 2003, California created 100,500 jobs - 20,100 per month. This

compares with average monthly job growth of 7,867 during 2002~ In May 2003, nonfarm industry

employment in California was up by a healthy 169,000 jobs (10.4%) versus a year ago.

California's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 6.6 percent in May. This was down 0.2

percentage point from the rate in April and was unchanged from one year ago. In comparison, the

U.S. unemployment rate was 6.1 percent in May. This was up O.1-percentage point from April, but

up 0.3 percentage point from the previous year.

Table 3.15 CALIFORNIA LABOR FORCE DATA'2003

May 03 Apr 03 Mar 03 Civilian Labor Force 17,554,700 17,630,800 17,627,900

Total Civilian Employment 16,392,000 16,429,300 16,448,600 Unemployment 1,162,700 1,201,500 1,179,400

Unadjusted Rate % 6.6% 6.8% 6.7% ...

Soum: Enrp/~ment Development Department, DIIJlSlon of Labor Market biformallon, June 2003 "'Labor foree by place of residence

May 02 17,363,000

16,222,700 1,140,300 6.6%

Civilian employment fell by 37,000 persons in May to 16.4 million, following a 20,000-person loss in

April. On a year-over basis, civilian employment was up 169,000 jobs (1.0 percent). This was better

than the year-over change in nonfarm payroll employment, which was down by 0.5 percent.

3·19


MAAS Companies


Unemployment roles fell by 39,000 persons in May to 1,163,000. This more than offset an increase

of 23,000 persons in April. The number of unemployed was coincidentally up 23,000 persons (2.0

percent) from May of 2002.

There were 14,439,000 jobs in total nonfarm industries (seasonally adjusted) in May, down 21,500

jobs versus April. Nonfarm payrolls have fallen in four consecutive months with losses totaling

54,300 jobs. However, year-to-date in 2003, California's total nonfarm employment has fallen

25,900 jobs, for an average monthly loss of 5,200 jobs. This is worse than the average monthly gain

of 600 jobs in 2002, but much better than the average monthly loss of 18,300 jobs in 2001.

With nonfarm industries, six sectors had month-over job gains and five sectors had month-over job

declines. Job increases were recorded in leisure and hospitality (13,400), construction (11,700),

trade, transportation and utilities (5,000), other services (1,700), financial activities (1,600), and

natural resources and mining (800). Job losses were recorded in professional and business services

(4,800), government (4,600), information (2,300), educational and health services (2,200), and

manufacturing (800).

Industry Earnings and Hours

Average hourly earnings for California production workers in manufacturing were $14.94 in May.

Average weekly earnings were $591.62, an increase of $3.77 from April. Average weekly hours

increased 0.2 of an hour to 39.6 hours, and average weekly overtime hours was 3.7, increasing 0.2 of

an hour from the prior month.

The industry oudook for new job creation in the future is captured in the following table. Over the

view period 2000 to 2010, California is projected to add 3,221,000 new jobs, an annual average rate

of growth of 2.2%.

3-20


MAAS Companies


Table 3.16 WAGE AND SALARY EMPLOYMENT FORECAST BY INDUSTRY SECTOR

INDUSTRIAL DIVISION 2000 2010 ABSOLUTE % CHANGE CHANGE

Total Non-Farm 14,488.1 17,709.2 3,221.1 22.2% Mining 23.5 24.4 900 3.8% Construction 726.9 891.7 164.8 22.7% Manufacturing 1,947.8 2,019.4 71.6 3.7% Transportation/Utilities 743.6 850.4 106.8 14.4% Finance/Insurance/RE 819.9 965.4 145.5 17.7% Services 4,612.9 6,268.3 1,655.4 35.9% Goverrunent* 2,318.1 2,736.4 418.3 18.0% Retail Trade 2,511.1 2,499.4 2,454.1 2.3% .. . .. SOllrce: Employment Development Department, Dzvllton of Labor Marleet Injormal1on. Statul1cs are lor AllgNSt 2002 *IndJldts aU

civilian employees of federal, state and local governments. AbsolJlte amollnts are in the thoNSands.

'."';liMij Several key issues will be on the "front burner" for California community colleges over the next ten

years. Six of the most significant of these key issues are listed below:

Preparation oj Students to Perform at the College Level

The task of providing remedial educational programs that prepare students for college level

academics will fall squarely on the shoulders of the state community colleges. Community colleges

will be expected to prepare students in English and mathematics proficiencies, as well as other

college level disciplines. More financial resources will be needed for on-campus student support

services, e.g. tutoring, counseling and prescriptive education.

Greater Ethnic Diversity

A more ethnically diverse student will populate the state community college system in the future. At

the current growth rates, demographers project, by the year 2050, that Hispanics, Asians and all

other ethnic minorities will comprise 80% of the state's population. Community colleges can expect

to see increasing numbers of ethnic minorities entering the cl~ssroom.

Technology

Technology will drive post secondary education institution in the future. Electronic commerce,

distance education and campus portal services will become standard on the campuses of California's

community colleges. While this trend opens many new possibilities, it also creates a dilemma.

3·21


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER3·~ONMENTALSCAN

Administrators and faculty will be hard pressed to compete economically for talented personnel in

'this field; equally they will find it difficult to keep current with the rapid evolution of hardware,

software and standardization. Use of technology will command a great deal of attention.

Technology will need to be goal driven and specific to the needs of each institution.

The Funding oJEducation

Caught between the financing demands of the K-12 public school systems and the state's post

secondary four-year state colleges and universities, community colleges will be in competition for

state education dollars. Community colleges will have to develop non-traditional funding strategies

to augment the financial support they receive from the state. The identification of "external funding

sources" will need to receive a high priority. Many community colleges will find it necessary,

particularly when it comes to new facilities and/or renovation projects, to bring their case directly to

the districts they serve.

Training oJthe StateJ- Workforce

Developing a "trained workforce" will be the state's greatest challenge over the next 20 years. The

limited availability of trained and skilled labor has been identified by California industries as being

the biggest deterrent to growth and expansion in the future. Industries, particularly those in the

advanced technology sector, will grow where there is a skilled and trained workforce.

The vast majority of today's unemployed, in both the urban and rural areas served by community

colleges, lack sufficient skills to· secure employment in the job market. This is true, as well, for most

of the students who are coming out of the K -12 public school systems to enter the workforce.

Community colleges will be given the first opportunity to fill the current gap that exists between the

needs of business and industry and the skill level of the workforce.

The Need for Post Secondary Education That Is Affordable and Accessible

Occupational surveys conducted by the Employment Development Department and by California

industries confirm that mid-size and small companies are creating the bulk of new jobs in the state.

The vast majority of these new jobs will require some measure of formal training and education

beyond high school. Thus, the high demand for post-secondary education will continue. At the

same time, it will need to be affordable and in close proximity to the home and workplace.

3·22


MAAS Companies

The Internal Environment


An internal environmental assessment of the District was conducted. as a means to 1) identify key

elements or factors that currently ~xist and 2) determine which, if any, of those elements or factors

will impact the District in the future. Both a quantitative and qualitative perspective is provided as

part of this process.

I. QUANTITATIVE OVERVIEW

The Quantitative Overview is a "by the . numbers" perspective. Its purpose is to identify trends of

the District, both positive and negative, that are both characteristic of and important to the planning

process. Analysis presented for the quantitative review is based on data obtained from the Monterey

Peninsula Community College District, Office of Institutional Research.

For the purpose of the Space Quantification and Facilities Plan, the elements of "unduplicated, credit

enrollment" as defined by "end of semester data" and further defined by "total enrollments - both

on and off-campus", will be used to depict the current c~ndition of the District relative to student

trends. Deviations from this format may be used to relate certain student tendencies. When this is

done, it will be noted in the source description.

fhc District's "Effective Service Area"

Historically, the District has drawn approximately 65.5% of its enrollments from six key cities and

towns. These cities and towns all lay within a is-mile radius of Monterey Peninsula College. This

area constitutes the "effective service area" of the District. As such, demographic and income

forecast data relative to annual growth rates for population and households, median and per capita

income levels, race and ethnic ratios and age group segmentations was pegged to this target area, all

of which lies within Monterey County. A more detailed analysis of this service area is provided

beginning on page 3-28 of this chapter.

3·23


MAAS Companies

Enrollment Histon


The chart below describes the enrollment trends for the District over the past five-year period.

Enrollments for the fall semesters of 1998 to 2002 were used for comparison purposes. The data

presented depicts unduplicated student enrollment viewed from the perspectives of credit

enrollment, noncredit enrollment and total enrollment. It includes both on and off-campus

enrollments.

Chart 3.6

Un duplicated District Enrollments

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

o

• Noncredit 2,635

liD Credit 8,220

4,954 6,323 4,911

11,150 9,401 9,406

Soum: Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Office of Institutional Research; AnalYsis Maas Companies. Data is for fall semesters, unduplicated, credit and noncredit enrollment (i.e. totalundupllcated enrollment), end of semester. Enrollment includes both on and o.ff-camjJus students.

Overall, the District has seen growth over the past five years in terms of total enrollments but

that growth has been somewhat unsteady. It has come from different sources each year, not

being balanced or linear from either of the enrollment sources - i.e. credit or non-credit. It

suggests that the District has had a degree of difficulty in identifying and maintaining a clear

enrollment source. Minus the spike in 2001, when 11,150 students were recorded as credit

enrollments, growth in this area has been flat. This spike, however, is largely responsible for

producing a healthy average rate of growth over the five-year period of 4.7%. Non-credit

enrollments over this same time, demonstrated at an annual average growth rate of 29.7%,

peaking in 2002 at 6,323. Of the two enrollment sources, non-credit, despite a small decline in

2001, showed a more robust growth pattern and growth potential.

3·24


MAAS Companies

Enrollment Sources

1. AnalYsis By Zip Codes


The following tables provide insight as to the zip code areas of the "six key cities and towns"

responsible for credit-student enrollment.

Table 3.17 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF ZIP CODE AREAS

AREA ZIP 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 AVG

CODE

Monterey 93940 1,881 1,985 1,763 1,883 ! 1,794· 1,861 Seaside 93955 1,187 1,220 1,245 1,392 : 1,335 ! 1,276

Pacific Grove 93950 996 1064 1026 1,082 1,056 : 1,045 Marina 93933 902 920 953 932 1,001 i 942 Carmel 93921 714 760 687 863 897; 742

Carmel Valley 93924 287 271 283 569 546! 294

Total Six Key Cities 5,967 6,220 5,957 6,404 6,250 : 6,160 % of Enrollments 72.6% 66.3% 67.1% 57.4% 66.5% 65.5%

All Other 2,253 3,157 2,926 4,746 3,151 3,247 % of Enrollments 27.4% 33.7% 32.9% 42.6% 33.5%1 34.5%

Total Enrollment 8,220 9,377 8,883 11, 150j 9,401J 9,406

Sourre: Monterey Pemnsula CommunI!} Colkge Dz.rtnd, Office of InstitutJonal Researrh; Ana/yJ1J by Moos Compames. Data IS jor fail semesters, "end of semester'; unduplicated credit-enrollment. Enrollment includes both on and oJf-campus students.

Zip codes from the Monterey area have provided the District with the greatest number of credit

enrollments over the past five years, averaging 1,861 per year (19.8% of total enrollments). The

next largest producers of credit-enrollments are zip codes from Seaside (13.6%), Pacific Grove

(11.1%), Marina (10.0%), Carmel (7.9%) and Carmel Valley (3.1%). On average, just over one

third of total credit-enrollments came from outside of these 6 key cities.

Over the view period, credit-enrollments grew for all of the key cities except Monterey. The bulk

of new enrollment growth came from outside of these key cities ("All Other"). With the low

population growth rates in the peninsula area, the District might have to continue to look outside

the immediate area for its future enrollment growth.

3·25


MAAS Companies

Student (to area) Participation Rates


An analysis of student participation rates (SPR) provides insight relative to in-District enrollment

productivity. Student participation rates are measured in terms of the number of students from a

given geographic area (e.g. zip code area) per 1,000 population. In the analysis that follows, total on

campus and off-campus, non-duplicated, credit-enrollments have been used to measure

participation. The rates for 2001 and 2002 were 51.6 and 43.1 respectively. Student participation

rates for on-campus only (both credit and non-credit), the measure used to determine facility need at

MPC, ranged right at the statewide average - 37.5 (statewide average is 37/1,000 population). A

graphic illustration was not included for this particular measure.

Table 3.18

STUDENT PARTICIPATION RATES BY ZIP CODE AREAS

2001 2002

CITY/AREA POP ENRL PR POP ENRL PR

Monterey 33,007 1,883 57.0 33,229 1,794 54.0 Seaside 32,143 1,392 43.3 32,329 1,335 41.3

Pacific Grove 15,535 1,082 69.6 15,577 1,056 67.8 Marina 28,124 932 33.1 28,322 1,001 35.3 Carmel 16,677 788 47.3 16,762 761 45.4

Carmel Valley 6,648 327 49.2 6,701 303 45.2 Key Cities Total 132,134 6,404 48.5 132,920 6,250 47.0

All Other 83,864 4,746 56.6 85,158 3,151 37.0 Total· 215,998 11,150 51.6 218,078 9,401 43.1

Source: MonttT!Y Peninsula Community College Dumct, Office ojlnstttutlOnal Research; ESRI BIS Markettng/ DataSemce, CalifornIa ChanceHor's Office; AnalYsis by Maas Companies. Data is for end oj semester, unduplicated, credit enrolbnent, fall Jemesters. Enrolbnenl includes both on and offcampus students. Population numbers have been derived.from ifp code areas listed for each municipality.

In 2002, the District had an SPR of 43.1 for unduplicated credit-enrollments attending both on

and off-campus - i.e. above the state average of 37. The city of Marina was the only key city with

a student participation rate below the statewide average of 37 (SPR of 35.3). Pacific Grove zip

codes yielded the highest participation rate (67.8), followed by Monterey (54.0), Carmel and

Carmel Valley Gust over 45), and Seaside (41.3). All of the key cities analyzed experienced

decreases in participation rates from 2001 to 2002 except Marina, which increased from 33.1 to

35.3. The District is doing a good job of attracting students from its service area.

3·26


MAAS Companies

Anah"sis of the Effective Sen icc Area

Sl'ACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 • ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

A comprehensive overview is offered relative to the "effective service area", i.e. all areas within a 15-

mile radius of the College. The data presented herein will primarily be used as the baseline for

comparison and for forecasting with regard to student enrollment projections of the future.

980 Fremont St Monterey. CA 93940

.c.iooJ ESRI. GOT

SOIlITe: ESRI BIS

Site Map

July 20. 2003

C----+IHl-ni1les

3·27

Latitude: 36.593867 Longitude: -121.884334

0_


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 . ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

8- Demographic and Income Profile 'nto"" •• " --.

.:mill LaUtude: 36.593867

980 Fremont St Longitude: ·121.88-4334 Montorey. CA 113040 Sit. Type: Radius Radius: 15.0 milos

Summary 2000 2003 2008 Pq)uIation 213.818 220.157 234.661 HtIA8holds 74.814 76.086 81.680 Families 48,888 49.472 52.937 Avllrage Household Size 2.6 2.64 2.64 oWner Occupiod HUs 38,551 40.040 43.870

RInIor OCCUpied HUs 36.263 36.047 37.816 Median Age 35.9 36.4 37.2

Tronds: 2003·2Q08 Annual Rate Area State National

Pqlulation 1.26% 1.47% 1.16" Hrusoholds 1.43% 1.18% 1.37%

Families 1.3S% 1.18% 1.31% OwnerHHs 1'.84% 1.20% 1.53% Modian Household Income 3.32% 22% 3.11%

2000 2003 2008 HOU$&hold5 by Income Number Porconl Number Pl'ICent Number Percent

< $15.000 8.200 10.0% 7.267 0.6% 6.108 7.S% $15.000 • $24 .goO 8.140 10.0% 7.29S O.S% 6.340 7.8% $25.000· $34.go0 8.715 11.6% 7.895 10.4% 7.115 8.7% $35 .000 • $49.go0 12.611 16.8"1,; 12.4Q5 16.4% 11.368 13.0% $50.000 • $74.go0 15.474 ;!l.S% 14.798 10.4% 15.328 18.8% $75.000 - $OO.goO 8.703 11.6% 0.340 12.3% 10.773 13.2% $100.000 - 5149.000 7.918 10.S% 10.113 13.3% 13.542 16.6%

$150.000·5109.000 2.204 2.0% 2.742 3.6% 4.566 5.6% $200.000+ 2.966 4.0% 4.140 5.4% 6.458 7.0%

Median HOUSl9hold Income $49.710 $54.172 $63.768 Awrage Household Incane $68.517 $70.812 508,042 Per Capita Income $25.371 $20.118 536.027

2000 2003 2008 Population by Age Number Percent Numb&r Perc&nt Number Percent

0-4 13,408 6.3% 13.442 6.1% 14.149 6.0% 5-14 28.045 13.1% 28.278 12.8% 28.036 11.0% 15-10 13,603 6.4% 14.951 6.8% 16.512 7.0% 20-24 15.306 7.2% 16.081 7.7% 10.069 8.5% 25-34 33,430 15.6'1'. 31,712 14.4% 31.602 13.5% 35·44 34.370 16.1% 33.658 15.3% 32.783 14.0% 45-54 29.452 13.8% 30.942 14.1% 33.122 14.1% 55-64 17.928 8.4% 21.193 0.6% 26.909 11.5% 65-74 14.241 6.7% . 14.157 6.4% 15.391 6.6% 75-84 10.444 4.9% 10.735 4.9% 11.026 4.7% 85+ 3.594 1.7% 4.109 1.9% 5.073 2.2%

2000 2003 2008 Race and Ethniclty Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

White Alone 137.427 64.2% 136.170 62.8~~ 141.218 602% Black Alone 12.306 5.8% 11.113 5.0~~ 0.615 4.1% American Indian Alone 1.844 0.9% 2.110 1.0% 2.736 1.2% Asian Alone 16.070 7.5% 15.835 7.2% 15.654 6.7% Pacific Islander Alone 1.346 0.6% 1.210 0.5% 1.025 0.4% Some Other Race Alone 33.963 15.0% 36.809 17.6% 47.805 20.4% Two or MoI9 Races 10.873 5.1% 12.910 5.0% 16,607 7.1% Hispanic Origin (My Race) !Q.278 'ZT.7% 68.817 31.3% 81.020 37.1%

0.", NoIIt: Inoom. i. "",""~ in CIJTIIII cbIIal1l.

Source: U.S. Bur.au d III. C.nt .... 2000 c. ..... of Population and Halling. ESRI SIS foreeslli br 2003 an:l2001l.

3·28


MAAS Companies

D80 Fremont SI Monterey. CA 1I3D40

I 16

1.

I 12

! 10

~ 8

~ 6 I

I • 2

0

.74K t1aA"".~'

S OUTre: ESRI BIS

0;4 4 lS01 0:

2003 Housohold Income


Demographic and Income Profile

Lltitudf: 36.593861

Longltudf: .121.884334

Site Typo: Radius Radius: 15.0 mlln

Trends 2003·2008

Population by Agt

34 Ss:&I 65'74

(0.6%)

r1 84 a;.

_ /l(oa _ State

CJ U.S.

I I I

~ _ 2006

2003 Popul~tion by Race

2:)03 Percent Hispanic Origin: 31.3%

3·29


MAAS Companies

0\ en'iew of the District's Effective Service Area


The 2003 population within the District's effective service area was 221,546. This population base is

projected to grow to 240,657 by 2010, and to 273;297 by 2020. The annual rate of growth in the

service area is projected to remain below that of the state, 1.29% versus the state's 1.50%.

Households and families are projected to grow at faster rates, 1.43% and 1.36% respectively.

Income statistics for the service area show a region that is wealthier than the state as a whole. Per

capita income is currently $29,097, 11.7% above the state's average of $26,044. Presently, the

median household income in the service area is $54,075,3.2% higher than the state level of $52,387.

Over the next five years, median income is forecasted to grow to $63,626 and per capita income to

$35,924. The indicators suggest that income levels in the service area will remain high and will grow

faster than the state as a whole.

The proftle for the effective service area indicates a median age of 36.3, 2.5 years older than the state

as a whole. The data reflects a slightly older, stable population base that will not change dramatically

over the next ten years. The fastest growing percentage of the population will be 55 to 64 years of

age. Over the next five years, this segment will experience a gain of 1.8 points (from 9.6% to 11.4%)

as a percentage of the overall population. All other segments will remain fairly steady as to the

percentage share that they currently command. The median age of the population will increase

modestly to 37.1 by 2008.

Race and ethnicity characteristics of the service area show a predominant White/Caucasian base. At

present, this segment comprises 62.6% of the total population. The Hispanic segment commands

the next greatest percentage, 31.5% of the overall population, followed by the Asian population

segment, 7.2%, and the African American population segment at 5.0%. (Nott: Persons ofHispanir origin mery

be of any race.) The trends for the future indicate gains in the Hispanic population and declines in the

White/Caucasian, Asian and African American populations, all as percentages of the overall

population. In 2008 the ethnic breakdown of the population is projected to be as follows:

White/Caucasian 60.1 %, Hispanic 37.3%, Asian 6.7% and African American 4.1 %.

These changes in the segmentation percentages resemble those taking place statewide.

3-30


MAAS Companies

Age Distribution AnalYsis


The table below is presented as a comparison of age distribution that exists within the effective

service area. The shaded portion represents those individuals most likely to attend college over the

next five years.

Table 3.19 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF SERVICE AREA

SERVICE AREAAGE % PO'PULATION % POPULATION % POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 2000 2003 2008

<5 6.3% 6.1% 6.0%

5-14 13.1% 12.8% 11.9% 15-19 6.4% 6.8% 7.0% 20-24 7.2% 7.7% 8.5% 25-34 15.6% 14.4% 13.5% 35-44 16.1% 15.3% 14.0% 45-54 13.8% 14.1% 14.1%

55-64 8.4% 9.6% 11.5% 65-74 6.7% 6.4% 6.6% 75-84 4.9% 4.9% 4.7% 85+ 1.7% 1.9% 2.2%

Median Ae:e 35.9 36.4 37.2

Data Sourer: Cmsus of Popular ion and Housing; ESRl BIS MarketinglData Sysrans. Forecasts for 200112006; Analysis by Maas Companies

A review of the service area demographic data indicates that the age gro~ps most likely to attend

college over the next five years, those between the ages of 15 and 64 years old (shaded area of the

table), will grow as a portion of the overall population through the year 200S. Presently, the

population between 15 and 64 years of age comprises 67.9% of the total population. In 200S

their share will increase to 6S.6%. In other words, these population segments are anticipated to

grow faster than the population as a whole. The exception to this trend will be the population

between 25 and 44 years old. This portion will decrease by 2.1 percentage points relative to the

overall population. The largest gains will be in the 55 to 64 year old segment, which will increase

from 9.6% of the population to 11.5%.

3·31


MAAS Companies


Based on the demographic projections for those age groups most likely to be entering the post

secondary educational market in the next five years and the next decade, there will likely be a

small natural ''bulge'' in the population and a corresponding enrollment growth opportunity for

the District. The most significant growth opportunity will be among those over the age of 55

years old. Given the low population growth rates in the key cities, this anomaly provides one of

the few demographic bright spots as a future growth opportunity for the District.

Key Student Characteristics

The following data is presented as a current-day snapshot that characterizes the students in the

District. A five-year window was used to generate this perspective. The information is a

comparison of the fall semesters for each respective year.

Chart 3.7

Enrollments by Gender 70.0% ,---______________________________________________ --,

i 60.0% +-__ ~----------------------------------------------~

50.0% +---~====::~~======~==~~~~~~==~------~:~__1

40.0% +---~----------------------------~

30.00/0 +---------------------------------------------------~

20.00/0 +---------------------------------------------------~

10.00/0 +---------------------------------------------------~

0.0% ~------~------------------------------------------~

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

I

I

I " --'---F-e-m-a-Ie~1 i

:-.-Male I

I

Sourre: Mont~ Peninsula Community College District, Office of Institutional Rmarrh,' Anafysis by Moos Companiu. Data is for end of semester unduplicated credit and noncredit enrollment, foil semesters. Enrollment includes both on and olf-r:ampus students.

The data for gender enrollment within the District reflect a slightly dominant female student population

that has averaged 53.8% of the student body over the past five years. In 2001, the District gender

breakdown was nearly 50:50. Over the five-year view period, the District is closer to gender parity than

most California community colleges, where the female to male ratio is closer to a 60-40 breakdown.

3·32


MAAS Companies


Headcount by "time-of-day" is an analysis of duplicated enrollments both on and off-campus.

Using this measure, a student taking a night class and a daytime class is counted once in each

category. Additionally, the data counts a student taking three night classes the same as a student

taking only one. Notwithstanding these limitations, the analysis assists in determining the current

condition of the District relative to enrollment and enrollment growth potential.

Chart 3.8

Headcount by Time of Day

60.00/0 ~-------------------------------------------------.

50.00/0 t-----~----~~-.----=~~------------------------~.~-j 40.0% +-----------------------~~~======~----------~ 30.00/0 +---------~"~,--=-~----"-"----------------------------------~

20.0% r----.-"---- -----------------------------------------~ 10.00/0 +---------__________________________________________ ~

0.0% +-------~----------------~------------------------~ 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

i -------~l

I ~Day !

Evening I'

Other '---------- i

I I I

Source: Monterry Peninsula Community College District, Office oflnstitutional &search; AnalYsis by Maas Companies. Data isjorend of semester, duplicated credit and noncredit enrollments, foIl semesters.

() I'e rtJieu'

Over the past five years, the District has experienced a significant decline in the proportion of

students attending classes in the daytime (from 56.2% to 43.6%). Interestingly, there has also

been a decline, albeit more gradual, in the proportion of students attending classes in the evening

(from 23.4% to 16.9%). The "Other" category refers to courses that are on a "To Be Arranged"

basis. Over the view period, the "Other" category has increased sharply from 20.5% to 34.1 %.

This indicator ("Other") would suggest a change in the nature of the District's instructional

program as well as the methods used to deliver it - one that could be characterized as less

traditional in nature. It further underscores the perception relative to present and future

enrollment growth, i.e. that while the District has met its "cap apportionment", it has had to rely

on creative programmatic measures to do so.

3-33


MAAS Companies


Chart 3.9

Enrollmen ts by Age 30.00/0 .-------------------------------------------~

25.0% t=~--;~;;~~-*-~~~§~~~==~~ :!" ... •

20.0% ~ ---'r __ ~ ~ 15.0% t--~~-=,="-'---="='-'---..-===~"""""'==~==-+-----.-_j

10.00/0 +-----------------------------------------------~

5.00/0 +-----------------------------------------------~

0.0%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

i ~---~! :-+-<20 II i If

!_20-29Ii ! II i -.- 30-39 1

1, i I 1-- 40-49 I'! r I i--- >50 II

S oum: Mont~ Peninsula Communiry College District, Office of Institutional Research; AnalYsis I?J Maas Companies. Data is for end of semester, unduplicated mdit enrollment, foil semesters. Enrollment includes both on and oJf-campus students.

Over the past five years, the age proftle of students in the District has been changing. As a

percentage of credit-enrollments, the two upper age categories have increased, the two lower age

groups have decreased and the middle group remained about the same. The greatest growth was

realized in the over 50-year-old student population, which increased from 24.2% to 27.8%. The

greatest drop was in the under 20-year-old group,. which dropped from 17.9% to 15.1 %.

These trends are due, in part, to outside demographic factors. The service area is experiencing

high growth in the over 50-year-old population segment. The under 20-year-old population

segment, though growing in its proportion of the total population, is growing quite slowly. The

middle segment, the 30 to 39 year old group, is the largest segment in the service area and is

declining in proportion to the overall student population.

The opportunity for the District will be in "growing" enrollments among those over 45 years of

age and in slowing the decline in the younger age segments.

3-34


MAAS Companies

ETHNICITY 1998

White 65.7%

Other/Unreported 7.7%

Asian/Pac lsI. 12.2%

Hispanic 9.0%-

African American 5.3%


Table 3.20 ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION

1999 2000 2001 2002 AVE

59.9% 60.9% 58.4% 59.3% 60.8% 16.1% 16.1% 16.7% 16.8% 14.7% 10.5% 9.7% 9.1% 9.8% 10.3%

9.3% 9.3% 11.6% 10.1% 9.9%

4.3% 4.0% 4.2% 4.0% 4.3%

Source: Monterey Peninsula Community College Distrirt, Offire of Institutional Research; AnalYsis by Maas Companies. Data is for end oj semester, unduplirated mdit and nonmdit enrol/ment, faU semesters. Enrol/ment inrlude.r both on and off-rampus students.

Overview

The race and ethnic data of the District indicates a predominantly White/Caucasian student body.

Over the past five years, this student segment has averaged 60.8% of the student body.

Consistent with the demographic data gathered for the service area, this segment is falling as a

percentage of the overall on-campus population, i.e. from 65.7% in 1998 to 59.3% in 2002. The

next largest group is the Asian/Pacific Islander segment, averaging 10.3% over the view period,

falling from 12.2% to 9.8%. The Hispanic student segment increased over the view period from

9.0% to 10.1%. These are roughly the same trends observed in the overall population of the

service area.

The "Other/Unreported" category increased dramatically over the five-year view period. In 1999

this category more than doubled - from 7.7% to 16.1% of total enrollments in one year. It

maintained this percentage share through 2002. The inordinate recording of

"Other/Unreported" is most likely related to the large increase in the number of noncredit

students and incomplete data obtained for some of the "To Be Arranged" classes.

According to the District's office of institutional research, 53% of the students who did not

report their ethnicity in the fall of 1999 were noncredit students. In 2002, 64% of the students

who did not report their ethnicity were noncredit students.

3·35


MAAS Companies


Comparative trends for the most dominant race/ethnic enrollment distributions within the District

by absolute values are yet another indicator that speaks to the composition dynamics of the student

body. In the chart that follows, the distribution trends for each ethnic/race segment are depicted as

"real numbers".

Chart 3.10

Most Dominant Race/Ethnic Distribution Trends

10,000 -r----------------:--------, , ;

8,000 +-___ -=..-....-~ ________________ __ji r--+---W-h-ite-------,I~

..--- :_other/unreported!; 6,000 +---------------------------j Asian/Pac lsl.

4,000 i -.:... Hispanic

l-______ ~-d~========-=~==~~~-::~~::~-~:~Black 2,000 __ . ___ .... '-------------" ~==---.• ------,.~---)I( lC

ol--~====~====~==~==~~~ 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

50urre: Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Office ojlnstitutional Researrh; Ana!Jsis by Maas Companies. Data is for end oj seme!ter, unduplicated credit and noncredit enrollment, fall semesters. Enrollment includes both on and oifcampus students.

While there is a declining trend among the White/Caucasian student population as a percentage

of the total district enrollments, the absolute values for this ethnic/race segment show increases

over the past five years. Overall, this segment demonstrated the greatest gain, increasing by 2,192

students over the view period. The next largest gain was from the "Other/Unreported" segment,

which went from 847 in 1998 to 2,642 in 2002 - a gain of 1,795. This measure appears to have

been impacted by a significant increase in non-credit students and course accounting procedures

that did not accurately track ethnic/race origin. The remaining segments - Asian/Pacific

Islander, Hispanic and African American - also showed positive increases in terms of absolute

values even though their respective relative values decreased. Enrollments of Asian/Pacific

Islanders gained 217 students, Hispanics, 611 students, and African Americans, 54 students.

3·36


MAAS Companies

100.0%

80.0% ....

60.0%

40.0%

20.0% -0.0%

1998

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 • ENVIRONMEjI,'TAL SCAN

Chart 3.11

Full Time/Part Time Student Enrollment

.... ....

-+-Part Time: -Full Time!

-- ..... -1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

SOllrre: Monterey Peninsllia Commllnity College District, Office of lnstillltional Researrh; AnalYsis by Maar COflljJanies. Da/4 is for end of semester, IIndlljJJicated credit enroUtnent, JaU semesters. EnroUment incllldes both on and ojf-complls sllltUnts.

The predominant student within the District is part time, i.e. a student taking fewer than twelve

credits per semester. On average, over the past five years, 80.6% of credit enrollments were

classified as part time. This proportion was fairly steady over the view period - i.e. the part time

to full time ratio averaged roughly 4:1.

It would appear that a large majority of students are gainfully employed in the local workforce, i.e.

working at a job, while also attending classes within the District. This may explain the trend for

students taking longer to complete their courses of study - transfer, degree or certificate - and

move on to their next educational or employment venue.

This trend, student populations that are predominantly part-time and gainfully employed in the

workforce, is consistent with the trend at most California community colleges.

3·37


MAAS Companies


Chart 3.12

Student Distribution for Number of Units Earned

450/0 ~---------------------------~--------------------~ 40%+----------------------~~~~~~~--------------4

350/0 +------------~~--------~~~--------~~~--------~.--~ 300/0 +---.a~~~~~~~~::==~~~~~--------------:!--------~--~ 25% +---~.~====~~==~==~~~~~~--~~====~~r-------~.--~ 200/0 +-__ ~s-~~ __ ~_=_~=;;;~~~---=-~-_____ -=~~~L-.------~~--~ 150/0 +-------------------------~~~~-----------------~ 10% .j-----,.:-•.. -.,_-.-__ -_-_._-_-,-_,-~-. ,-, --,-__ -----,------------------~---,-,. ---------:-)'---,---1 -----.... ,_.-----

50/0 .j-------------------------------------------------------I Oo~ ~----------------__ --------------------------------~

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

-+-0.1 - 2.9 ;1

-3.0-5.9 ii

6.0 - 8.9 Ii [i

--0-9.0 - 11.9 Ii Ii

---12.0+ if ___________ --11!

I 1

Source: Monterey Peninsula Community College Disma, Office of Institutional Research; AnalYsis by Maw Companies. Data is for end of semester, unduplicated mdit cfIT'OlIment, fall semesterr. Enrollment includes both on and r1f-campus students.

For Fall Semesters 1998 to 2002, the greatest percentage of students attending classes in the

District earned between 0.1 and 2.9 credits per semester. The trend for this segment was found

to be increasing. This group includes roughly one-third of all credit-enrollments over the five

year view period. The next largest group earned between 3.0 and 5.9 credits per semester,

averaging 25.7% of credit-enrollments. Students considered full-time, i.e. 12 credits or more per

semester, averaged 19.4% of all credit-enrollments. Full time students exhibited a slight

downward trend over the view period, falling from 21.9% in 1998 to 15.9% in 2001 and

rebounding to 19.4% in 2002.

The data reaffirms some of the previous observations, showing that 72.3% of all credit

enrollments carried a course load of fewer than 9 credits per semester, i.e. fewer than three

courses on average for the semester.

3-38


MAAS Companies


Chan 3.13

Enrollments by GPA

30.0% 1

I :-+-<1.0 !, 25.0% I . ! .

:! ! I, !: I 'I I _1.0-1.49 i! 20.0%

I + 1.5-1.99 11

~ 2.0-2.49:1 15.0%

I ::If- II! II! liE )I( x

;-.-2.5-2.9911 ~ ~~ ~, 10.0% ,.: :,.-, i_3 .O-3 .49jl I

I

1--<-3.5>3.991 5.0% I I !~4.0 I I ; I ; I I -I • 0.0% !

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave.

Source: Monterry Peninsuia Communiry CoIJege District, Office ojlnstitutional &search,- Ana!ysis by Maas Companier. oj semerter, unduplicated credit enrollment, jail semesters. Enrollment includes both on and oifcampus students.

Dala is for end

Over the five-year view period, the data shows that students attending the instructional programs of

the District performed very well from an academic perspective. The greatest percentage of students

(25.4%) carried a cumulative GPA ranging between 3.0 and 3.49. The next largest group (24.3%)

recorded cumulative GPA's of 3.5 to 4.0. Combined, 50% of the students attending the College

attained GP A's of 3.0 or better. What was equally impressive was that these two groups maintained

that level of academic productivity over the five years.

Under-performing students, academically speaking, i.e. those with GP A's of under 2.00, combined

to account for only 3% of all students on campus. Again, this performance level was fairly

consistent over the view period, fluctuating only slightly in terms of a variance.

3-39 Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companiel

I

600

500

400

300

200

100

-

-.-Associate

-.-Certificate ,


Chart 3.14

Five Year Prome of Degrees and Certificates I ,

r- -- -

• I I I I I

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ave. ,

475 I 514 I 522 I I 499 488 I 500

85 I 72 ! 69 1 43 I 34 i 61 !

Source: California Community CoUeges Chancellor's Office, Data Mart; AnalYsis by Maas Companies. Data is for foil academic year

()Ycrvic\\'

Over the past five years, the District, through MPC, awarded an average of 500 Associate's Degrees

and 61 Certificates annually.

Associate degree awards peaked in 2000, when 522 were awarded. There has been a decline since

that time to 488 in 2002, a mark that was only 13 degree awards more than the 475 awards made in

at the beginning of the view period in 1998.

Certificates have seen a steady decline since 1997-1998, when the College issued Certificate awards

to 85 students. From this starting point to the 2002-2003 academic year, Certificate awards have .

dropped by 60%.

Data obtain from the Office of Institutional Research, indicates that disciplines/programs with the

most awards over the view period were Interdisciplinary Studies (869), followed by Foreign

Languages (684), Health Sciences (501), and Business and Management (378).

3-40


MAAS Companies

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0


Chart 3.15

Trend for High School Graduation Rate Projections in the MPCCD Service Area

;::::::=== • ................ . ---. • ~ • • . ----a •

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Source: Monterry Peninsula Commlmity College District, Office ojlnstitutiona/ Research; AnalYsis by Ma(IJ Companies.

The number of high school graduates in the District's service area is projected to peak in 2003.

The numbers, thereafter, drop slowly through 2010. After this point in time, the decline becomes

more dramatic. Through the 16-year projection period, the number of overall high school

graduates will drop by an average annual rate of 1.3%.

Historically, the percentage of students entering as freshmen that come from service area high

schools is fairly small - under 5%. Nevertheless, the decline in the numbers of high school

graduates in the service area will have an impact on future enrollments at MPC.

3-41


MAAS CompaniCl

SPACE QUANITIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 • A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

CHAPTER IV - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Sumnl;l1Y

This Chapter, Vision and Projections for the Future, identifies considerations and assumptions that are

important to the planning process. It also takes the Plan one quantum step forward, converting

conceptual beliefs into quantifiable measures.

Seven important components that are the vision-oriented are noted below. In addition to providing

form for the Plan, they are meant to provide direction to and support for forecasting a program of

instruction and identifying the space needs that will be required for the District over the next

sixteen-year period.

The Institutional Vision

District Structure and Organization

For the future, MPCCD will remain as a single college district, supported by its main campus off of

Aguajito and Freemont Roads, i.e. Monterey Peninsula College. Because most new growth will

occur to the north of the main campus, a Campus Center will be established on property that was

formerly the Fort Ord Military Base. This location (Fort Ord) will also be home to the Public Safety

Program. Combined, these two facilities are projected to be of sufficient size to meet the state's

requirements for qualifying as an official "educational center" of the District. The District may also

make use of other smaller off-campus sites to meet its projected growth rates for enrollments and

weekly student contact hours.

4' 1 \i!'flif'rl'\ l'I'IIII)~ll:;1 C'lUlInullit\" Cllllo1!~' IhMI'I~t

.ianuary 2004

\1.\·\~ ('0101'''"1<'

SPACE QUANITIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 . A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Over the next ten years, the District will have significant changes in its upper-level administrative

management positions as a result of reorganization, turnover and retirements. Thls will cause the

present organizational structure of the District to be modified and augmented, particularly as student

enrollment increases and the span of control for academic and support services becomes unwieldy.

The assimilation of additional state-mandated programs will also impact the curtent organizational

model and create the need for review and change. The existing organizational structure will serve as

a base from which all of the needed changes can occur.

Also impacting the District, from an organizational perspective, will be the fact that a substantial

number of faculty and classified staff retirements will occur over the next ten to fifteen years. A

majority of this workforce is 50 years of age or older. Replacing experienced faculty and classified

staff will be a serious challenge for the District, as the cost of living on the Monterey Peninsula has

escalated significantly in the past twenty years. New faculty and classified staff may find it difficult

to transition to the area.

Program of Instruction

The future instructional delivery system of the District will need to keep pace with the constant

challenge of change. Pressures from learners, demographic changes, the needs of business and

industry and the economic reality of accelerated competition for every tax dollar will be the drivers

of change.

Instructional delivery in the next decade will need to change significantly to accommodate various

learning styles and needs. A vision for 2004 and beyond should include computer technology that

can be integrated more widely across the curriculum. The vision should also place learning

outcomes ahead of teaching, as instructional delivery will focus on the adaptation of the teaching

methodology to match the new requirements for learning.

The District will need to incorporate strategies that reengineer its instructional delivery system, its

vision and its commitment to education at the community college level. These strategies should

include:

.\111(;-"(1'.- h'nl!l;..~ ... l ComlJltl1lj~T Clllk1!t! J)i~n"ll'l .)anu.try 200";

j\·1 i\A:-- (~Omjl:Ulh.~:-.


o Instructional RBlevancy and PetjOrmance: Performance standards will be developed to

assess course content, operational efficiency, relevancy and applicability. Programs

not performing to set standards will be aeleted and replaced with new programs.

o Innovative Instruction: The development of inter-disciplinary courses and programs that

promote connections between the disciplines will be a part of the district's future.

Innovative instruction will be encouraged and rewarded through programs of

recognition.

o Alternative Instructional Delivery Strategies: Leaming strategies such as service learning,

linked courses, learning communities, work experience, tutorials, distance delivery

methods, and specialized laboratories will enhance student access and success.

o Accessibility: A continued emphasis will be placed on working students, non

traditional students and life-long learners. Intersession classes, accelerated courses

and modular courses, some offered as open-entry / open-exit classes, should be

expanded. Short-term, high-intensity learning experiences will be more in demand

and, consequently, increased at the College. Greater emphasis will be placed on students succeeding at their academic experience through the expansion of tutoring,

counselling and mentoring programs.

o Technology: The District will need to become a leader and regional resource for

distance learning telecourses, video conferencing, interactive television and computer

technology if it is to stay current with the competition. Distance learning, as an

instructional delivery system, will be particularly valuable to individuals who cannot come to a central campus for a variety of reasons. Electronic access, literacy and

competency, for students, faculty and staff, will be an important component of the

technology program. "Smart classrooms", interactive computer hardware and

software and computer assisted, instruction should be part of the College's basic infrastructure plan.

o Workforce Development: The District will need to continue to develop a strong

technical and occupational education component for the future. This program will

not necessarily be a two-year linear process, but flexible so as to accommodate the demand of short term, high intensity programs that provide entry-level or careeradvancement skills for workers in weeks or months in partnership with business and public service agencies.

4'3 )'l"rJkrl": 11"nIlJ:o.I:i:1 CnlJllnllm'Y C"jl(~:.!I· Ih..:,tI1t;[

.Ianu.lry 2{)()4

\1-\ -\ ~ C "'"I'"n;<,

Curricular Offerings of the District


The District, through the College and its Centers, will offer a balanced curriculum that is rooted in

substantive, core general education courses but that also offers. current and relevant vocational and

technical programs as well as instructional programs in developmental education. Non-credit

enrollment will continue to expand and become a more significant component of the overall

curriculum of the District.

New curricular offerings will be introduced within the District. The District will prepare for

expansions particularly in the Taxonomy of Program (fOPS) code areas of Public Safety,

Mathematics, Humanities, the Arts and Biological Science. All core general education courses will

expand consistent with increases in student enrollment.

The District will examine and evaluate all course offerings, i.e. both new and existing curricula, for

operational efficiency and productivity. Each curricular offering will meet pre-determined standards

for excellence and performance. Evaluations will be conducted to determine applicability, relevancy

and quality. Under-performing curricular offerings will be terminated and replaced ill reengineered

and conditionally reintroduced.

Support Services

Support services within the District will need to be upgraded and made more flexible to meet the

changing needs of. a diverse student body as part of·the overall vision. This will include such

changes as making it easier for students to register, obtain assistance, access records and receive

fmancial assistance. The vision should also include the ability of students to access the College

and/or its Centers from both the home and/or the workplace. Additionally, current technology will

be brought on-line to assist students with the admissions process.

The vision for Student Services will see counseling, assessment and registration that is part of one

interactive process and facilities that are integrated for and dedicated to this purpose. The District

will also address a growing numbc::r of students with special needs and/or learning disabilities that

will access the College and/or its Centers for their education.

:\j"flf,'rp\- Ilq)11)~t:i:J Cfltnmllllity Cnjj(H!I.' I>i:;;tl"wt

.Jallu'lry 2()()~

\i1., .. ,~ C 01n1>"'1I,·,

SPACE QUANmFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 . A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

In supporting the academic process, it is anticipated that counseling will assume a greater diagnostic

and prescriptive function in student success. Tutorial support will also be increased and improved

to assist students who are under-prepared for college level academics.

Overall, the primary purpose of support services will remain to augment the academic mission of

the College.

Human Resources

In concert with the budgetary realities of the District, the hiring and retaining of full time faculty will

be set as a priority and goal for the future. Additionally, a commitment to educational excellence

will require that new faculty be hired as curricular offerings expand and! or are newly created. The

hiring of new faculty will be based ~n established guidelines that are driven by program need.

Attention will be given to meeting the full requirements of Assembly Bill 1725.

Additionally, the District will make a strong commitment to on-going staff development. This will

be true with regard to new technology, particularly as it becomes entrenched as part of the

pedagogical process. It will be imperative that all new and existing faculty members be

technologically literate and technologically current. Over the next ten years, faculty and staff will

become both more knowledgeable and more flexible on the job. Cross training of faculty and staff

will be a high priority for the effective delivery and support of the instructional program.

Facilities

As technology is incorporated into instructional delivery, the definitive line that has traditionally

separated lecture and laboratory space will become more difficult to discern. New construction

should, therefore, permit the maximum amount of structural and infrastructure flexibility.

Instructional facilities should be deVeloped with the idea that within five years they will need to be

adapted.

Significant changes in instructional delivery of the future may, at some point, translate to a decrease

in the significance of the large community college campuses that have been developed in the past.

Building large numbers of classrooms and traditional laboratories may be less important than

developing technology-based learning resource centers and outreach (satellite) centers. Traditional

4'5 \1"Jlt • .'r{'~· j'l'ntubL:i.1 CommUIlITY Ct'lJf~~e I>I",niet

.Iallll.try Z004

\-1.\ .. \ S C mnp""'c,


campus structures (e.g. library/learning resource center) will change in both space allocation and

function.

Infrastructure to support the College and its Centers will be a high priority. This will include

improvements ranging from telecommunications infrastructure to current laboratory equipment that

is sufficient to conduct experiments that are relevant in today's world.

A complete Building/Facilities Program will be developed that addresses the needs of all academic

and support services. Particular attention will be given to the upgrading of campus infrastructure at

Monterey Peninsula College, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, consolidation of student

services, facility use and reuse as well as needed campus renovations and new building construction.

Operational Accountability

To ensure that the College and its Centers are receiving the maximum financial support and benefit

from the state, the District will make a commitment to operating at maximum operational efficiency.

A plan for this purpose will be adopted. Overall, the plan will focus on moving the College and/or

its satellite educational centers closer to or ahead of the statewide averages for such managed

elements as weekly student contact hours (WSCH) per class section offered, enrollments per class

section offered, and student participation rates per 1,000 residents. In the vision for the future, the

District will also improve upon its current level of WSCH per full time equivalent faculty (FTEF), a

mark that is currently well below the statewide standard.·

The District will effectively manage change to remain viable and competitive in the educational

. marketplace. Because the District will face increased competition for students from other

community colleges and post secondary educational institutions, it will need to embark upon a

proactive program of placing the College and the Centers competitively in the marketplace.

Additionally, as operational costs rise and the uncertainty of public funding becomes more severe,

the District will locate and secure new sources of revenue to accomplish its academic mission.

~\;1rIJl!"n"; l'f>nI1lSni;l COmlJ\l1ll:~'; C .. 1Jc~~\! Distl1el .!aIlUilry 2()()4

~1 ,\ .. \ ~ (~mnl*nh.· ..


PROJECTIONS FOR GROWTH

Sum1nary

The degree to which the District will grow in the future is predicated on expanded student

enrollment. The model used for projecting this enrollment growth, through the year 2020, is

presented in this section. For the purposes of projecting growth, and ultimately space needs, both

on-campus credit and non-credit enrollments were taken into consideration. Off-campus credit and

non-credit enrollments were included under separate assessment.

Based on the analysis conducted and the historic trends of the District, Monterey Peninsula College

will experience on-campus enrollment growth of 1.98% through 2010 and 2.69% through 2020.

Simultaneously, WSCH will grow at 2.78% through 2010 and 2.92% through 2020. Through the

year 2020, it is projected that Monterey Peninsula College will require 49,750 additional assignable

square feet of space for instruction and support services. The following table summarizes the

fmdings in this section.

Table 4.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

MONTEREY PENINSULA COLLEGE

CATEGORY 2002* 2010 On-campus Enrollments 8,153 9,604 On-campus Enrollment Growth - 1.98% WSCH 77,092 96,136 WSCHGrowth - 2.78% Total Sections 831 918 Total Space Needs (ASF) 292,658 277,963 Additional Space Needs (ASF) - 0

2020 12,524 2.69%

128,195 2.92% 1,117

342,408 49,750

" These are actual ftgum for fall stme!ler 2002; on-campus mdlt and non-mdlt enrollments; analYsis by Maas Companies

Growth rate projections for the proposed Fort Ord Site, for Public Safety and the Campus Center

have also been forecasted. They indicate annual rates of WSCH growth of 5.30% and 5.25%

respectively. Detail of the translations and timing of that growth is more fully disclosed in the

projections included on pages 36 to 41 of this section.

}1!1rll,·rp..,' l'·"nlln,l;:.l C(,ml1lltllit\· Code:,!!" Ih"itl-ll.'t

#JunWlrj ~004

\:1 '\ ,'~ (~omIHUll\.'~

Overview


Because the main portion of student enrollment will be at the College and facilities proposed for the

Fort Ord Site not yet formally approved, the main focus of the data presented herein will be

primarily directed to MPC. The vision for future enrollment potential and capacity in the future at

the College is predicated on the following assumptions:

Population growth in the is-mile service of Monterey Peninsula College will be modest -

1.28% on an annual basis through 2010.

The cities of Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Marina, Carmel and Carmel Valley will

continue to be the key cities and towns from which the greatest percentage of student

enrollments are derived.

The population base within the 15-mile service area will reach 240,657 by 2010 and 273,297

by 2020.

The rate of enrollment growth at the College will outpace the rate of population growth in

the service area.

For the next sixteen years, the ratio of students per 1,000 population (i.e. the 'student

participation rate) will continue to exceed the statewide average and move closer to the

Chancellor's office target of 78 students per 1,000 population.

Enrollment at Monterey Peninsula College will reach a level of 12,500 by the year 2020.

WSCH growth will reach a level of 128,200 by the year 2020.

Growth Projections

The measure that most accurately reflects the degree of use received by a given learning facility at a

given educational institution is the number of weekly contact hours (WSCH) generated within that

space. While enrollments are most often used to measure growth or capacity, alone, they do not

provide an accurate picture of the number of hours a given facility space is utilized or whether that

space is being used to a measurable level of efficiency. WSCH is also the measure used by the

Chancellor's Office to determine state funding eligibility. For the purposes of projecting growth

within the District, WSCH will be used as the primary measure.

Because WSCH is the foundation for determining instructional, support services and facility needs

by the state, it is important that the planning process consider all of the influencing factors that

.\I!1f1!I'r('\< l"·nlll. ... lI1.' C:omlJl1ll)jt~· C'I!j(~U" Di:,-fnn .Jalluary 2()()"~

\·1.\ :\S (~OInpallk ...

- --------------

SPACE QUAN1TIFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 • A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

might have an impact on this growth. Historical trends only paint an accurate picture of what has

already occurred. Forecasting for the future must also include and rely upon those current and

anticipated factors identified in the external and internal environmental scans (Chapter 3).

Three growth-projection models for MPC are presented for consideration. They are elaborated

upon more fully in the narratives that follow. These models are driven by the annual rates of growth

forWSCH.

Model 1: WSCH Growth Based On Current (llistoric) Trends: Using the 2002 Fall Semester

as a baseline and assuming that student enrollments will continue to grow at the annual average of

the past six-years (2.96% annual average), an on-campus enrollment of 9,604 could be projected for

the year 2010 and 12,524 for the year 2020. Taking this a step further - assuming a constant WSCH

per enrollment or student unit load of 9.46 - 2.96% historical enrollment growth rate can be applied

to the baseline WSCH for fall 2002 to project future WSCH. The results are WSCH projections of

96,811 for 2010 and 129,601 for 2020.

Model 2: The State Chancellor's Forecast Planning Model: The 2002 Long Range Enrollment

and WSCH Forecast issued by the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, projects

enrollment and WSCH growth through the year 2015. The growth projections are not linear -

rather, different rates are projected for each year. Specific data for the Monterey Peninsula

Community College District discloses an average annual growth rate of WSCH of 0.6% through 2010

and 1.2% through 2015. Applying these rates of-growth to the baseline WSCH of the 2002 Fall

Semester, an on-campus WSCH of 80,419 could be achieved by the year 2010 and 90,607 by the

year 2020.

Model 3: Consultant's (Demographic-based) Model: Given the annual population growth

projection of 1.28% for the service area, the District is not projected to maintain the level of growth

it has been given by the State Chancellor's Office over the past three years for its "cap

apportionment". To meet "cap apportionment", the College has had to rely on a number of creative

programming and instructional delivery techniques. However, this model presented, has taken into

consideration a combination of influencing factors, including data derived from the external and

internal scans. Indicators for the future point to students taking slightly higher unit loads per

semester, expansion of programs in the Arts, Humanities, Mathematics and Developmental

:\·1I1Jlt •. 'rpy 1't'nlIlSlli.J. Cotnlnllnirr Cllll(!~l! Di:"lU1Ct .!nIlWIr)' 2004

:\1 '\ .'\~ C nmp,u.i<,


Education, and increases in student participation rates (students per 1,000 population). Overall, this

model is projected to yield a two-tiered annual WSCH growth rate for MPC of 2.78% through 2010

and 2.92%, thereafter, through 2020. These growth rates w~)Uld generate on-campus WSCH of

96,136 by the year 2010 and 128,195 by the year 2020. The rates of growth for the models are

compared in the chart that follows.

Chart 4.0-1

Monterey Peninsula Community College District Annual WSCH Growth Rate Forecast

4.00% -r--------------------------, 2.96% 2.96% 2.78% 2.92%

0.00%

Current Trend Chancellor's Forecast Consultant's Forecast

1i12002-2010 i

.2011-2020

Source: Monterey Penin.rula Community College District, Office of Institutional Research, 2002 Long Range Enrollment and WSCH Forecast, State Chancellor's Office, Moos Companies projections

Chart 4.0-2 provides a comparison of the three planning models vis-a-vis the projected WSCH

yields.

Chart 4.0-2

WSCH Growth Model Comparisons

140,000

:t 120,000 u o Current Trend

~ 100,000

B. 80,000 • Chancellor's Forecast

E .. 60,000 'f c: 40,000 0 OConsultant's Forecas~

20,000 L ______________ ~

2002 2010 2020

Source: Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Office ofInstitlitional Research, 2002 Long Range Enrollment and WSCH Forecast, State Chancellor's Office, Maa.r Companies projections

4' 10 \f"n'.'rp~, l'j'ntllhuLJ. Commullllv C1I)h!:.no DiAtrtt:'l

.Ialluary 2004

\,1.\ ,\S ('ompa"",;!'!


Achieving the Growth Rate Goals

Overall, the District has done a good job in attracting students from its service area. This is

demonstrated by the student participation rate (SPR), which was 37.5 in 2002, slightly above the

statewide average of 37 students per 1,000 population. Based on the current zip code analysis of the

cities and unincorporated areas within the District's effective service area and the forecasted

population gains, 240,657 by 2010 and 273,297 by 2020, the District will need to reach SPR's of 39.9

by 2010 and 45.8 by 2020 for its combined on-campus credit and non-credit enrollments at MPC to

meet the forecast targets. These targets are achievable with a solid enrollment management plan.

The following chart compares the current and projected student participation rates with statewide

averages and the Chancellor's office goals.

100 u .. 80 ('CI

=: c 60 0 .... ... ('CI

t:l.. 40 '0 .... 1:: 20 ('CI

~

0

Chart 4.0-3

Student Participation Rates Required to Meet Future Enrollment Projections

e MPC Overall (projected)

• Current State Average

I

I I

o Chancellor's Office I Goal

2002 2010 2020

Source: Monterry Peninsula Community College District, Office of Institutional Research; ana!Jsis I?J Maas Companies

A vision for achieving enrollment growth should also include greater attention to recruiting efforts

aimed at high school graduates and to attracting students who are either going outside the District

or, perhaps, not attending college at all. In particular, there appears to be an opportunity to bring

more Hispanic students to the campus. This student population segment represents 31.3% of the

service area population but only 9.9% of the College's student body.

4' 11 ~·1,'rll.'rc>\" t'pnll)~IILI C(J1nlnlJl)j~, .. (">lIt:).!I' Di . ..,tl"wt

.Jallu,lry 200~

'\1·\ .. \~ COlnpa",",


The District will also have to become more creative in addressing the needs of the less-traditional

student - reorienting its curricular offerings and class schedule to attract these groups. This will be

particularly true for the age group segment between 55 and 64 years of age, which will grow by

nearly two percentage points by 2008. Of some encouragement relative to enrollment growth will

be the fact that the more traditional college-bound age group, the 20 to 24 year old segment, will

grow at a faster rate than the overall population. This group's percentage of the District's student

body has fallen over the past five years. A rebound should present an opportunity to capture

additional new enrollment, ultimately leading to the attainment of the target objectives for growth of

the student body and WSCH.

The Quantification of Space Needs

Overview:

The quantification of space needs begins with an analysis of the existing program of instruction -a

viewing of the current health and status of the curriculum. For the purpose of this assessment,

Monterey Peninsula College, as the District's only existing institution, will be the point of focus.

The program of instruction at the College was used as the foundation for determining space needs.

Without it (i.e. the program of instruction), there would be no student enrollment, no need for

providing the myriad of support services that are such a vital part of the institution. This initial

process of assessment gives way to the construction of a forecast for the future. Projections for the

future rely upon WSCH generation as the navigational device .. From WSCH, assignable (useable)

square feet can be determined for all space needs. This section culminates with a projection of space

needs for the future.

For purposes of quantifying space needs at MPC, only on-campus course offerings, both credit and

non-credit, were included in the data. Off-campus programs, such as those offered by the Public

Safety instructional division will be addressed apart from the needs of the main campus. It should

be noted that the College has a large number of off-campus course offerings that do not rely on the

College Campus facilities and infrastructure.

:'\·'ttJlkr('~· l'j'nlll~H!a Cotnl11lillit~· CItH(~~l: DiMricl .lanU.lry 2()()~

\1 ,\.'\~ Cumpan;"

SPACE QUANmFICATION AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 • A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

A. Profile of the Current Curriculum

The program of instruction is indigenous to the institution it serves. In this regard, the program of

instruction evolves - over time, over the history of the institution. It is not only reflective of the

needs of a particular service area but is also the direct result of the interest and talent of the faculty.

Such is the case with the curriculum origin and present day program of instruction at Monterey

Peninsula College. Characteristics of this current program of instruction, by instructional division of

the College, are captured in the breakdown that follows.

Table 4.2

PROGRAM OF INSTRl..1CTION BY COLLEGE INSTRl!CTIO="AL DIVISIONS

COLLEGE SEC WSCH FTES LEC LAB %OF DIVISION HRS HRS CURR

Creative Arts 118 9,465.45 315.52 108 328 14.0%

Business & Tech 78 5,439.86 181.33 120 101 9.3%

Humanities 154 18,507.88 616.93 484 233 18.3%

Library 2 58.8 1.96 3 1 0.2%

Life Sciences 104 7,839.66 261.32 190 178 12.4% NurSing 14 3,437.43 114.58 22 112 1.7% Physical Sciences 85 11,139.87 371.33 273 102 10.1% Physical Education 113 7425.4" 247.51 23 303 13.4% Social Science 104 10,131.85 337.73 265 8 12.4% Student Services 41 2,094.39 69.81 59 102 4.9% Other 28 1,014.60 33.82 19 29 3.3% Work Experience 0 537.00 17.90 0 ° 0.0%

TOTAL 841 77,092 2,569.74 1,566 1,497 100.0% Sourre: Monterry Penznsula Communzty College Duma, Office 0/ Inshtutzonal Research,. analYSIS i?Y Maas Companzes Off-campus, canceled class sections, combined class sections and c/ass sections with zero attendance have all been omitted.

Translation of the Current Curriculum to State Standards

%OF WSCH

12.5% 7.0%

23.9% 0.1%

10.1% 4.4%

14.4% 9.6%

13.1% 2.7% 1.3% 0.7%

100.0%

So that the data can be benchmarked against statewide averages andlor standards, disciplines and·

programs of the College have been coded to the state's Taxonomy of Programs and Services

(TOPS) format per the table that follows.

:\:l"nt"rp\' l'i'nIlJ;-'\::;1 COUHY':l1l1lr\' c..j}(~~., 1>i..;tt1et .J,,,,,,, .. ), ;!004

~V1,\.\:-. (·OlOpaJlh'..,


Table 4.3 SUMMARY OF INSTRUCTIONAL DISCIPLINES BY TOPS CODE

Administration of Justice 2100 Agriculture 0100 Allied Health 1200 Anatomy 0400 Anthropology 2200

Geology 1900 German 1100 Guidance & Counseling 4900 History 2200 Journalism 0600

Art & Design 1000 Ubrary Science 1600 Astronomy 1900 Athletics 0800

Mathematics/Basic Skills 1700/4900 Media Arts 0600

Automotive 0900 Basic Skills 4900

Microbiology 0400 Music 1000

Biological Sciences 0400 Business Administration/Real Estate 0500

Nursing 1200 Ornamental Horticulture 0100

Business Education Technologies 0500 Chemistry 1900 Child Development 1300 Child Development 27 A 2100

Philosophy 1500 Photography 1000 Physical Education 0800 Physical Science 1900

Computer Information Systems 0700 Physics 1900 Computer Integrated Des. & Graphics 0700 Physiology 0400 Construction & Manufacturing Tech 0900 Political Science 2200 Construction Tech Public Works 0900 Construction Technology 0900

Psychology 2000/4900 Religious Studies 1500

Economics 2200 Education 2100 Electronics & Computer Tech 0900

Respiratory Therapy 0400 Restaurant Management 1300 Sociology 2200

English 1500 Spanish 1100 ESL 1500 Speech Communication 1500 Fire Technology 2100 Theatre Arts 1000 French 1100 Welding 0900 Geography 2200

Source; State Chancellor's Office, Title 5 and the Maas Companies Database

A reassemblage of the disciplines and programs of the College into the TOP code instructional

divisions used by the state is provided in the table that follows. Again, the data presented is from

the 2002 Fall Semester and included both on-campus credit and non-credit WSCH counts.

4' 14 .J,,"uotry 20{)'(

\-1;\ ·\S C·olripalllr.· ..

SPACE QUANnACAnON & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER" - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Table 4.4 PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION

BY TOPS CODE INSTRUCTIONAL DIVISIONS

TOPS DIVISION SEC WSCH FTES LEC LAB %of %of HRS. HRS. CURR WSCH

Agriculture 6 418.9 13.96 13.5 6 0.7% 0.5% Biological Sciences 32 3,641.2 121.37 41.75 93 3.9% 4.7% Business & Mgmnt 41 3,389.1 112.97 75 49 4.9% 4.4% Communication 2 179.4 5.98 4 6 0.2% 0.2% Computer & Info Sci 29 2,022.8 67.43 50 52 3.5% 2.6% Education 87 6,770.5 225.68 64 260 10.5% 8.8% Engin & Indus Tech 11 1,054.5 35.15 27 24 1.3% 1.4% Fine and Applied Art 157 11,234.6 374.49 104 381 18.9% 14.6% Foreign Language 26 4,136.0 137.87 103 51 3.1% 5.4% Health 31 4,337.2 144.57 52.5 140 3.7% 5.6% Cons & Family Studies 37 1,759.2 58.64 75 9 4.5% 2.3% Humanities 91 9,979.1 332.64 228 93 11.0% 12.9% Library 2 58.8 1.96 3 1 0.2% 0.1% Mathematics 43 6,906.5 230.22 209 19 5.2% 9.0% Physical Sciences 40 4,165.9 138.86 60 81 4.8% 5.4% Psychology 18 2,022.9 67.43 48 0 2.2% 2.6% Public Affairs/Servs 16 727.7 24.26 19 24 0.7% 0.9% Social Sciences 53 6,166.3 205.54 177 3 6.4% 8.0% Interdisc Studies 119 7,584.7 252.82 212 204 14.3% 9.8% Other 537.0 17.90 0 0 0.0% 0.7%

TOTAL 841 77,092 2,569.74 1,566 1,496 100% 100%

Source: MonterI!Y Peninsula Community Coilege District, Office ojlnslifJIlional R£searchi analYsis i!Y Maos Companies Off-campus, canceled class sections, combined class sections and class sections with zero attendance have al/ been omitted

B. Current Curriculum Indicators .

The cumulative tables that follow provide a snapshot of key elements that indicate the current status

of the instructional program at Monterey Peninsula College. For purposes of assessing the total

facilities needs of the Campus, credit and non-credit WSCH generated on-campus was used as the

measure of need. The snapshot is based on data obtained for the 2002 Fall Semester as provided via

the Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Office of Institutional Research.


MAAS Companies

Seat Count Analysis

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Using the TOPS Code format, five of the nineteen instructional divisions (public Services,

Interdisciplinary Services, Mathematic, Social Sciences and Humanities) meet or exceed the state

standard of 35 students per class section. The overall product of this measure depicts an average

class section size of 29.2 students.. Combined with the percentage ratios of seats enrolled at the

College, the table provides a more graphic illustration of key TOPS divisions as they presently exist.

Table 4.5 SEAT COUNT ANAL YSIS/ COMPARISON

TOTAL AVE CLASS +/- STATE % ENROLLED TOPS DIVISION SECTIONS SEATS SIZE STANDARD SEATS

Agriculture 6 130 21.7 (-13.3) 0.5% Biological Sciences 32 859 26.8 (-8.2) 3.5% Business & Management 41 1,224 29.9 (-5.1) 5.0% Communication 2 41 20.5 (-14.5) 0.2% Computer & Info Science 29 556 19.2 (-15.8) 2.3% Education 87 2,379 27.3 (-7.7) 9.7% Engin & Indus Tech 11 208 18.9 (-16.1) 0.8% Fine and Applied Art 157 3,076 19.6 (-15.4) 12.5% Foreign Language 26 775 ·29.8 (-5.2) 3.2% Health 31 663 21.4 (-13.6) 2.7% Cons & Family Studies 37 700 18.9 (-16.1) 2.9% Humanities 91 3,287 36.1 + 1.1 13.4% Library 2 28 14.0 (-21.0) 0.1% Mathematics 43 1,714 39.9 +4.9 7.0% Physical Sciences 40 1,176 29.4 (-5.6) 4.8% Psychology 18 604 33.6 (-1.4) 2.5% Public Affairs/Services 16 323 53.8 +18.8 1.3% Social Sciences 53 1,930 36.4 +1.4 7.9% Interdisciplinary Studies 119 4,856 40.8 +5.8 19.8%

Total 841 24,529 29.2 (-16.7) 100.0% SOIlTre: Monte~ Penmsula Communzty College DlSlnel, Office oflnstztutzonal RmaTrh,' anaIYm by Maas Companm Off-campus, canceled class sections, combined class sections and c/ass sections with ~ro attendance have been omitted. Data is from 2002 F~U Semester and indudes on-campus mdit and non-mdit WSCH onlY.


MAAS Companies

WSCH per FTEP

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER" - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

The state standard used for determining optimal productivity is based on WSCH generated per each

full time equivalent faculty (FfEF). The state standard is a ratio of 525 WSCH per each FTEF.

Only the instructional divisions of Foreign Language and Psychology were found to be performing

at a level that was above the statewide standard of 525 WSCH/FTEF. The College'S overall

productivity measure (414.20 WSCH/FTEF) currently operates at less than an 80% efficiency level.

The following table provides a summary of the WSCH generated per each FTEF by TOPS Division

for the 2002 Fall Semester.

Table 4.6 WSCH PER FULL TIME EQUIVALENT FACULTY

ANALYSI S/CO MPARISOr-.;

WSCH/ +/- STATE % OF TOTAL TOPS DIVISION FTEF WSCH FTEF TARGET 525 WSCH

Agriculture 0.97 418.9 431.9 (-17.7%) 0.5% Biological Sciences 8.01 3,641.2 454.58 (-13.4%) 4.8% Business & Management 7.4 3,389.1 457.98 (-12.8%) 4.4% Communication 0.5 179.4 358.7 (~31.7%) 0.2% Computer & Information Science 5.5 2,022.8 367.78 (-29.9%) 2.6% Education 15.29 6,770.5 422.81 (-15.7%) 8.8% Engineering & Indus Tech 3.27 1,054.5 322.49 (-38.6%) 1.4% Fine and Applied Art 31.31 11,234.6 358.82 (-31.7%) 14.7% Foreign Language 7.22 4,136.0 572.85 +9.1% 5.4% Health 11.88 4,337.2 365.08 (-30.5%) 5.7% Consumer & Family Studies 5.32 1,759.2 330.68 (-37.0%) 2.3% Humanities 20.09 9,979.1 496.72 (-5.4%) 13.0% Library 0.43 58.8 136.67 (-74.0%) 0.1% Mathematics 15.45 6,906.5 447.03 (-14.9%) 9.0% Physical Sciences 8.37 4,165.9 497.72 (-5.2%) 5.4% Psychology 3.2 2,022.9 632.14 +20.4% 2.6% Public Affairs/Services 3.49 727.7 208.52 (-60.3%) 1.0% Social Sciences 11.99 6,166.3 514.28 (-2.0%) 8.1% InterdiSCiplinary Studies 25.13 7,584.7 301.82 (-42.5%) 9.9%

Total 184.82 76,555.2 414.2 (-21.1%) 100.0%

State Target: WSCH/FfEF: 525.0 SOllrce: Monterey Peninrllla Commllniry College Dirtrict, Office ojlnrJiI1lJional Re.rearch, 2002 FaU Seme.rter rt.-.. Maa.r Companies databare,' ana/y.ri.r Iry Maar Companie.r


MAAS Companies

WSCH per FTEF per SECTION

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Current productivity is also measured via WSCH per FfEF per section. While section SlZe

represents a relationship between the number of students enrolled in the section and the section

itself, WSCH/FfEF / section represents the relationship between the average section size vis-a-vis

the faculty load (FfEF) assigned to each section.

Table 4.7 WSCH PER FTEF PER SECTION Ai"'lAL YSIS

BY TOPS DIVISIONS

TOPS DIVISION WSCH FTEF WSCH/ WSCH/FTEF/ FTEF SECTION

Agriculture 418.9 0.97 431.9 28.76 Biological Sciences 3,641.2 8.01 454.58 30.28 Business & Management 3,389.1 7.4 457.98 30.50 Communication 179.4 0.5 358.7 23.89 Computer & Information Sci 2,022.8 5.5 367.78 24.49 Education 6,770.5 15.29 422.81 28.16 Engineering & Indus Tech 1,054.5 3.27 322.49 21.48 Fine and Applied Art 11,234.6 31.31 358.82 23.90 Foreign Language 4,136.0 7.22 572.85 38.15 Health 4,337.2 11.88 365.08 24.31 Consumer & Family Studies 1,759.2 5.32 330.68 22.02 Humanities 9,979.1 20.09 496.72 33.08 Library 58.8 0.43 136.67 9.10 Mathematics 6,906.5 15.45 447.03 29.77 Physical Sciences 4,165.9 8.37 497.72 33.15 Psychology 2,022.9 3.2 632.14 42.10 Public Affairs/Services 727.7 3.49 208.52 13.89 Social Sciences 6,166.3 11.99 514.28 34.25 Interdisciplinary Studies 7,584.7 25.13 301.82 20.10 Other NA NA NA

TOTAL 76,555.2 184.82 414.2 27.58

% STATE STD -17.8% -13.5% -12.9% -31.7% -30.0% -19.5% -38.6% -31.7%

9.0% -30.5% -37.1% -5.5%

-74.0% -14.9% -5.3%

·20.3% -60.3% -2.1%

-42.6%

-21.2%

Source: Monterry Peninsula Community College District, Office ojlnstitutional Research,' 2002 Fall Semester, on campus credit and non-credit,- analYsis by Maas Companies .

4' 18 Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANnflCAnON & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Percentage of Lecture and Laboratory WSCH: College vs. Statewide Average

Table 4.8 compares benchmark ratios for lecture and laboratory WSCH percentages using averages

for community colleges across the state and the actual percentage ratios of Monterey Peninsula

College. The data used for comparative purposes is derived from the 2002 Fall Semester and is

reflective of course content, facility usage and the current trends of the College. Comparative data

for the state was derived from the Maas Companies data base which includes data from 78

community colleges across the state.

Table 4.8 COMPARISON OF CURRENT

LECTURE AND LABORATORY WSCH RATIOS WITH STATE AVERAGES

COLLEGE AVE STATE AVE

TOPS DIVISION CODE %LEC %LAB %LEC % LAB Agriculture 0100 68 31 85 15 Biological Science 0400 32 67 45 55 Business I Mgt. 0500 67 32 75 25 Communications 0600 62 37 75 25 Computer Info. Systems 0700 49 50 25 75 Education IPE 0800 18 81 5 95 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 43 56 25 75 Finel Applied Arts 1000 28 71 40 60 Foreign Language 1100 66 33 75 25 Health Science 1200 18 81 30 70 Consumer Edl Child Dev 1300 86 13 60 40 Humanities 1500 72 27 85 15 Library 1600 50 50 50 50 Mathematics 1700 74 25 90 10 Physical Science 1900 42 57 40 60 Psychology 2000 100 0 95 5 Public Affairsl Services 2100 58 41 80 20 Social Science 2200 100 0 95 5 Interdisciplinary 4900 43 56 50 50

Source: Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Office oflnstitutional Research, 2002 Fall Semester was used. It indudes on campus credit and non-credit WSCH onlY; Maas Companies data base


MAAS Companies

WSCH Lecture and Laboratory Breakdown

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER" - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Table 4.9 provides a breakdown, by TOPS Code instructional division, of actual lecture and

laboratory generated WSCH for the 2002 Fall Semester.

Table 4.9 LECTURE AND LABORATORY WSCH 2002

Tops Division TOPS SECTIONS LEC WSCH LABWSCH TOTWSCH

Agriculture 0100 6 286.6 132.3 418.9 Biological Sciences 0400 32 1,190.8 2,450.3 3,641.2 Business & Management 0500 41 2,289.5 1,099.6 3,389.1 Communication 0600 2 112.1 67.3 179.4 Computer & Info Science 0700 29 1,001.6 1,021.2 2,022.8 Education 0800 89 1,243.6 5,526.9 6,770.5 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 11 461.4 593.2 1,054.5 Fine and Applied Art 1000 169 3,212.7 8,021.9 11,234.6 Foreign Language 1100 26 2,766.3 1,369.7 4,136.0 Health 1200 32 812.1 3,525.0 4,337.2 Cons & Family Studies 1300 37 1,515.2 244.1 1,759.2 Humanities 1500 91 7,277.8 2,701.3 9,979.1 Library 1600 2 29.4 29.4 58.8 Mathematics 1700 43 5,131.4 1,775.2 6,906.5 Physical Sciences 1900 40 1,754.1 2,411.8 4,165.9 Psychology 2000 18 2,022.9 - 2,022.9 Public Affairs/Services 2100 29 424.5 303.2 727.7 Social Sciences 2200 53 6,166.3 - 6,166.3 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 119 3,300.8 4,284.0 7,584.7

Total 831 40,998.8 35,556.4 76,555.2 Source: Monterey Peninsula Communiry College District, Office of Institutional Research, 2002 Fall Semester, on campus cmJit and noncredit; Ana!Jsis I?Y Maas Companies

Note: WSCH per class section was pro/ected on the basis of "net" number of sections. Off-campus work experience, combined courses, and sections with zero attendance were discounted to arrive at the calculations.


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTlFICA TlON & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

c. Forecast for Future Program of Instruction

Overview

The projections that follow provide a guideline for the instructional program of the future. These

projections take into account the current and past trends of the District relative to curricular

offerings, anticipated changes in the instructional delivery methods and balance in the curriculum.

Data for the instructional program has also been keyed to other colleges throughout the state vis-a

vis the Maas Companies database.

The projections use weekly student contact hours (WSCH) as the primary criterion for developing

the instructional program of the future. As previously noted, WSCH represents the only real data

that can accurately be apportioned and traced to each course, discipline and division, regardless of

the nuances of the curriculum. The projections consider all on-campus WSCH generation for both

credit and non-credit course offerings.

For MPC, program forecasts were generated for points in time when WSCH generation reaches

96,136 and student enrollment 9,604 (estimated to be the year 2010) and when WSCH generation

reaches 128,195 and student enrollment 12,524 (estimated to be 2020). The projections generated

used the 2002 fall semester as a starting-point, when WSCH generation was 77,092 and on-campus

credit and non-credit student enrollment 8,153. The application of growth in the various

instructional disciplines was forecasted at varying rates. External and internal factors, demographics,

past performance, projected n~ed, and curriculum balance caused each instructional discipline to

respond differently to the forecasting process. The growth forecast is, therefore, not linear or

relational in terms of its application.

The following references and resources were used in the forecasting process:

1. 2003 Monterey Peninsula Community College District. Report 17 ASF/OGSF Summary and the

Capacities Summary, an inventory of facilities that is recorded with the State Chancellor's Office.

2. The 2002 Weekly Student Contact Hours (WSCH) Comparison Report for all state community colleges

(published by the State Chancellor's Office).

3. A myriad of enrollment and perf~rmance data provided via the Monterey Peninsula Community College

District, Office of Institutional Research.

4. The Maas Companies database that is comprised of information from 78 community colleges within the

state for which Maas Companies has completed educational and facility master plans.


January 2004

MAAS Companies

WSCH and FTES Profile

Projected WSCH 96,136 - Year 2010


At a time when WSCH reaches 96,136, active class sections for a given semester at Monterey

Peninsula College are projected to be 918. FrES (for a given semester) are projected to be 3,204.5

(6,409 for a traditional academic year), enrollment 9,604 and WSCH per enrollment, 9.9.

Table 4.10 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM 2010: 96,136 WSCH

TOPS DIVISION CODE

Agriculture 0100

Biological Sciences 0400

Business & Management 0500

Communication 0600

Computer & Information Science 0700

Education 0800

Engineering & Indus Tech 0900

Fine and Applied Art 1000

Foreign Language 1100

Health 1200

Consumer & Family Studies 1300 Humanities 1500 Library 1600 Mathematics 1700

Physical Sciences 1900

Psychology 2000

Public Affairs/Services 2100

Social Sciences 2200

Interdisciplinary Studies 4900

Other

Total SOIlTre: Maas Compames Pro.;emons

4' 22

SECTIONS

6

37

47

2

30

93 12

166 30 33 39

102 2

49

47 23

6 61

133

918

. WSCH FTES/ SEMESTER

523.2 17.44

4,549.2 151.64

4,226.1 140.87

224.0 7.47

2,527.9 84.26

8,509.4 283.65 1,375.6 45.85

13,416.7 447.22 5,247.7 174.92 5,422.9 180.76 2,090.8 69.69

12,491.6 416.39 71.8 2.39

8,631.5 287.72 5,289.3 176.31 2,749.7 91.66

887.2 29.57 7,718.8 257.29 9,511.8 317.06

671.0 22.37

96,136 3,205


MAAS Companies


SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER ~ - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

When WSCH of 128,195 is attained at Monterey Peninsula College, the number of class sections for

a given semester is projected to be 1,117. Enrollment, at this time, is forecasted to reach 12,524 and

WSCH per enrollment 10.2. Operating at a higher productivity level and moving closer to

statewide averages, the forecast illustrated on Table 4.11 calls for the College to attain semester

FfES of 4,273 (8,546 for a traditional academic year).

Table 4.11 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM 2020: 128.195 WSCH

TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS

Agriculture 0100 8

Biological Sciences 0400 45

Business & Management 0500 59

Communication 0600 3

Computer & Information Science 0700 34

Education 0800 106

Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 14 Fine and Applied Art 1000 190 Foreign Language 1100 37 Health 1200 42 Consumer & Family Studies 1300 44 Humanities 1500 129 Library 1600 2 Mathematics 1700 66 Physical Sciences 1900 59 Psychology 2000 28 Public Affairs/Services 2100 8 Social Sciences 2200 80 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 163 Other Total

1,117

SOIl1"&ll: Mom ComponieJ Prr!fections

WSCH FTES/ SEMESTER

713.6 23.79

5,774.2 192.47

5,684.1 189.47

293.8 9.79

3,305.2 110.17

10,864.4 362.15

1,819.3 60.64 19,062.4 635.41

6,657.3 221.91 7,280.9 242.70 2,732.3 91.08

16,777.0 559.23 96.4 3.21

11,810.6 393.69 6,983.5 232.78 3,478.6 115.95 1,260.1 42.00

10,036.3 334.54 12,684.4 422.81

881.0 29.37

128,195 4,273.2


MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANnFICAnON & FAclLmes MASTER PLAN . CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Lecture and Laboratory WSCH Profile


The following table provides a perspective for lecture and laboratory WSCH ratios at a point when

the total WSCH for on-campus credit and non credit at Monterey Peninsula College reaches 96,136

and student enrollment reaches 9,604. Broken down, WSCH generated from lecture hours are

projected to be 51,325 while WSCH generated from laboratory hours are forecasted to reach 44,140.

Table 4.12 PROJECTIONS FOR

LECTURE VERSUS LABORATORY WSCH 2010: 96,136 WSCH

TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS LEC WSCH LAB WSCH TOT

WSCH Agriculture 0100 6 355.8 167.4 523.2 Biological Sciences 0400 37 1,501.2 3,048.0 4,549.2 Business & Management 0500 47 2,873.7 1,352.4 4,226.1 Communication 0600 2 82.9 141.1 224.0 Computer & Info Science 0700 30 1,264.0 1,264.0 2,528.0 Education 0800 93 1,365.5 7,144.0 8,509.5 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 12 605.2 770.3 1,375.5 Fine and Applied Art 1000 166 2,683.3 10,733.4 13,416.7 Foreign Language 1100 30 3,516.0 1,731.7 5,247.7 Health 1200 33 1,030.4 4,392.5 5,422.9 Cons & Family Studies 1300 39 1,798.1 292.7 2,090.8 Humanities 1500 102 9,118.8 3,372.7 12,491.5 Library 1600 2 35.9 35.9 . 71.8 Mathematics 1700 49 6,991.5 1,640.0 8,631.5 Physical Sciences 1900 47 2,221.5 3,067.8 5,289.3 Psychology 2000 23 2,612.2 137.5 2,749.7 Public Affairs/Services 2100 6 514.6 372.6 887.2 Social Sciences 2200 61 7,332.9 385.9 7,718.8 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 133 5,421.7 4,090.1 9,511.8 Other 671.0 Total

918 51,325 44,140 96,136

Source: Maas Companies Projerlions * Note: Lecture/Lob WSCH of 6 71.0 has not been assigned/ included for Work Experience


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER ~ - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE


Lecture and laboratory WSCH ratios are projected to a point in time (estimated to be 2020) when

Monterey Peninsula College attains a semester WSCH generation of 128,195 and a student

enrollment of 12,524. The lecture to laboratory ratio is forecasted to be approximately 1.2 to 1, as

noted in the following table.

Table 4.13 PROJECTIONS FOR

LECTURE VERSUS LABORATORY WSCH 2020: 128,195 WSCH

TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS

Agriculture 0100 8 Biological Sciences 0400 45 Business & Management 0500 59 Communication 0600 3 Computer & Info Science 0700 34 Education 0800 106 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 14 Fine and Applied Art 1000 190 Foreign Language 1100 37 Health 1200 42 Cons & Family Studies 1300 44 Humanities 1500 129 Library 1600 2 Mathematics 1700 66 Physical Sciences 1900 59 Psychology 2000 28 Public Affairs/Services 2100 8 Social Sciences 2200 80 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 163 Other

Total 1,117

SOI/rce: Maas Companies Projections

LEC WSCH LAB WSCH TOT

WSCH 485.2 228.4 713.6

1,905.5 3,868.7 5,774.2

3,865.2 1,818.9 5,684.1

185.1 108.7 293.8

1,652.6 1,652.6 3,305.2

1,773.1 9,091.3 10,864.4

800.5 1,018.8 1,819.3 3,812.5 15,249.9 19,062.4 4,460.4 2,196.9 6,657.3 1,383.4 5,897.5 7,280.9 2,349.7 382.5 2,732.2

12,247.2 4,529.8 16,777.0 48.2 48.2 96.4

9,566.6 2,244.0 11,810.6 2,933.1 4,050.5 6,983.6 3,304.7 173.9 3,478.6

730.9 529.3 1,260.2 9,835.6 200.7 10,036.3 7,230.1 5,454.3 12,684.4

881.0

68,570 58,745 128,195

· Monterey Peninsula Community College District January 2004

MAAS Companies

D. Determination of Space Requirements

Overview:

SPACE QUANnFICAnON & FACILInES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

In order to qualify for state funds to construct new facilities, the State Chancellor's Office requires

the District to demonstrate a "space need". This space need is determined when the total space

requirements for the academic program of instruction and the support services are compared to the

current space holdings of the District. The state standards for calculating square footage

requirements are derived from the generation of weekly student contact hours (WSCH) and from

prescribed formula based upon various measures of student enrollment. The following sections

provide a definition of space requirements and capacity, a listing and explanation of the utilization

and planning standards used to determine space needs, and the determined net space allowances for

all categories of space within the District.

Facilities Inventory

The California Community Colleges Facilities Inventory Manual includes descriptive data on buildings and

rooms for each college district. Construction projects, the development of capital outlay plans, the

determination of future facilities and the assessment of existing space utilization are tasks that rely

heavily on this document. The "space inventory" is essential for generating the annual Five-year

Capital Construction Plan and for scheduling and controlling campus space. Suffice it to say that

the "space inventory" is one of the most important tool in planning and managing District facilities.

For the purposes of this Plan, the 2003 Monterey Peninsula Community College District Report 17

ASF/OGSF Summary and Capacities Summary (as amended October 2003), was used as the basis

for determining future space requirements and arriving at a Building/Facilities Program for the

District.


MAAS Companies

Space Category Elements

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Several key facility elements were considered in the assessment of the space needs. These facility

elements or space categories are presented in Table 4.f4. They represent the majority of the total

educational and general facility space that is contained at the District's primary facility, MPC.

Table 4.14 STANDARD SPACE CATEGORIES USED FOR CAMPUS ASSESSMENT

Classrooms Non-class Laboratories Teaching Laboratories Library /Leaming Resources Offices Instructional Media

Prescribed State Space Standards

Lounge Bookstore Health Services Teaching gym Food service

Theatre Meeting Room Data Processing Physical Plant Assembly /Exhibition

Title 5 of the California Administrative Code (Sections 57000-57140) prescribes standards for the

utilization and planning of most educational facilities in public community colleges. These standards

are summarized in Table 4.15. For lecture and laboratory space, these standards are further

elaborated upon on the page that follows (fable 4.16)

Table 4.15 PRESCRIBED SPACE STANDARDS

CATEGORY FORMULA

Classrooms ASF /Student Station Station utilization rate Ave hrs room/ week

Teaching Labs ASF / student station * Station utilization rate Ave hrs room/ week

Offices/Conference Rooms ASFperFTEF Library/Leaming Resource Center Base ASF Allowance

ASF 1st 3,000 DGE ASF /3001-9,000 DGE ASF>9,000

Instructional Media A V /fV /Radio Base ASF Allowance ASF 1st 3,000 DGE ASF /3001-9,000 DGE ASF>9,OOO

* Reference Table 4.16

RATES/ ALLOWANCES

15 66%

53 *

85% 27.5 140

3,795 3.83 3.39 2.94

3,500 1.50 0.75 0.25


MAAS Companies

Standards for Lecture Space


The determination of lecture assignable square feet (ASF) is deri:ved from a mathematical calculation

based on the size of the college. Most colleges are allowed a factor of 42.9 ASF/I00 WSCH

generated.

Standards for Laboratory Space

Listed in the following table are the Title 5 state standards used to determine assignable square feet

(ASF) for laboratory space. The standards offer measures in both ASF / student station and in

ASF /100 WSCH generated.

Table 4.16 STATE STANDARDS

ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FEET FOR LABORATORY SPACE

TOPS DIVISION CODE ASF/STATION ASF/100 WSCH

Agriculture 0100 115 492 Architecture 0200 60 257 Biological Science 0400 55 233 Business j Mgt. 0500 30 128 Communications 0600 50 214 Computer Info. Systems 0700 40 171 EducationjPE 0800 75 321 Engineering Tech/Industrial Tech 0900 200 856 Fine/ Applied Arts 1000 60 257 Foreign Language . 1100 35 150 Health Science 1200 50 214 Consumer Ed/ Child Development 1300 60 257 Law 1400 35 150 Humanities 1500 50 214 Library 1600 35 150 Mathematics 1700 35 150 Physical Science 1900 60 257 Psychology 2000 35 150

. Public Affairs/Services 2100 50 214 Social Science 2200 35 150 Commercial 3000 50 214 Interdisciplinary 4900 60 257

SOHrn: MaaI Companies. CalCHlationI baIed on California Code ofRegHlationS Title 5, Chapter 8 Section 57028


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFlCATION & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISlON FOR THE FUTURE

Non-State Space Standards

The state provides standards for utilization and planning for more than 60% of all types of spaces

within the District. Capacity estimates for those remaining spaces - representing approximately

40% - are based on a combination of factors including the size and/or nature of the institution.

Standards for these types of spaces are presented in Table 4.17. The guidelines presented were

determined based on a national study of space standards and discussions with colleagues in the

California Community Colleges and the Chancellor's Office.

Table 4.17 ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR

NON-STATE STANDARD CAMPUS BUILDINGS

CATEGORY OF SPACE BASIS

Non-Class Laboratory 0.095ASF per head count student Teaching Gym Greater of 2.5 ASF per FTES or 35,000 ASF Assembly/Exhibition ASF Equal to Student Headcount Food Service 0.60 ASF per Student Headcount Lounge 0.67 ASF per FTES Bookstore 1,500 ASF plus 0.67 ASF /Student Headcount Health Service ASF Allowance Meeting Room 0.333 ASF per Student Headcount Childcare Greater of 0.4 ASF per Headcount or 6,000

ASF (Also, See State Child Care Standards) Data Processing ASF Allowance Physical Plant ASF Allowance All Other Space ASF Allowance

Source: Maas Companies & State Chancellor's Office

ASF/FACTOR

0.095 2.5-35,000

100% 0.60 0.67 0.75

1,200 0.333

0.40 - 6,000

5,000 5% of Total

2.5% of Total

Ultimately the need for space is determined via the relationship of the existing space available, listed

by type and use, the number of hours for which that space is currently utilized, and the number of

hours it is projected for use in the future.


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANnFICAnON & FACIUnES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Computation of FTE Instructional Staff

The sample worksheet in the following table is required to be completed by the District with the

submission of the Five-Year Capital Construction Plan. This worksheet must be updated and

submitted each subsequent year. For long-term planning purposes, this worksheet is used to project

future staffing for the instructional program at the College.

Table 4.17A WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING FTE INSTRUCTION STAFF*

NON PROFESSIONIONAL NET TOTAL CATEGORY INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL & STATUTORY

PORTION FTE STATUTORY STAFF FTE STAFF FTE Instructors Counselors Department Admin

ij)~~® Ubrarians Instructional Admin ~ Totals

S OHm: MatIS and Companies and State Chancellors Office *Plrase note that fhiJ chart must be completed prior /0 completing Five-Year Capital Constnlction Plan

The five categories of Full Time Equivalent (FIE) staff are specified and defined as follows:

•

•

•

• •

Instructors: Included are the professional instructional staffs for day, extendedday, and adult education, except those whose offices are located off campus.

Counselors: Includes the professional counseling staff, special programs

coordinators, extended opportunity program coordinators, statutory and Title 5

required staff.

Department Administrators: Includes professional staff responsible for

coordinating or supervising departmental activities. This category is dependent

upon the organizational structure of the college, but is generally defined as the department chair for an instructional or support service area. Ubrarians: Professional librarians and directors of media services. Institutional Administrators: Professional administrators with responsibilities covering the entire institution such as a President, Vice President, Deans, Business

managers, etc. This category generally covers all administrators above the

department level.

4· so Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

E. Projecting Future Capacity

SPACE QUANTIFICA liON & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION fOR THE FUTURE

The quantifiable calculations for assignable square footage for MPC begin with the current

curriculum baseline (2002 Fall Semester) depicted in Table 4.2 and continue through Table 4.13,

projected lecture and laboratory WSCH for the year 2020, i.e. WSCH of 128,195. The WSCH

information generated provides the foundation for projecting future facility requirements (capacity)

for the College.

Current Campus Inventory

Included in the following table is a current facilities inventory for MPC as taken from the 2003

Monterey Peninsula Community College District Report 17 ASF/OGSF Summary and Capacities

Summary (as amended October 2003). This report is fued annually with the State Chancellor's

Office as the official space inventory of the District. A categorical breakdown of the current

inventory is provided below using the numeric coding system of the state.

Table 4.18 FACILITIES INVENTORY - YEAR 2002

ROOM USE DESCRIPTION ASF CATEGORY

000 Inactive Area 13,869 100 Classroom 20,585

210-230 Laboratory 69,801 235-255 Laboratory Service 1,763

300 Office/ Conference 33,125 400 Library 35,820

510-515 Armory / Armory/Service 201 520-525 Physical Education (Indoor) 38,713 530-535 Instructional Media (A V /TV) 9,222 540-555 Clinic/Demonstration 4,719

580 Greenhouse 1,327 610-625 Assembly /Exhibition 28,159 630-635 Food Service 8,857 650-655 Lounge/Lounge Service 3,105 660-665 Merchandise Facility/Bookstore 5,355 670-690 Meeting /Recreation 3,057 710-715 Data Processing/ Comp 1,499 720-740 Physical Plant 13,341

800 Health Service 140 TOTALASF 292,658 . . ... SOIlrr:e: Montmy Penznsllla Commllntty College Dutnel, Space Inventory and Blllldmg Fanizlm Report


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Required Academic Space for 2010 - 96,136 WSCH

The following table provides an assignable square footage allocation by TOPS Code division for

lecture and laboratory space to meet the instructional program needs when 96,136 WSCH are

achieved by MPC. The data presented is based on the State Chancellor's Office requirements for

lecture/laboratory space as calculated per Title 5 standards.

Table 4.19 ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FEET FOR ACADEMIC

PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION - YEAR 2010

TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS LEC ASF LAB ASF TOT ASF Agriculture 0100 6 168.3 823.7 992.0 Biological Sciences 0400 37 710.1 7,101.8 7,811.9 Business & Management 0500 47 1,359.3 1,731.0 3,090.3 Communication 0600 2 39.2 301.9 341.1 Computer & Info Science 0700 30 597.9 2,148.7 2,746.6 Education 0800 93 645.9 1,579.5" 2,225.4 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 12 286.3 2,965.7 3,252.0 Fine and Applied Art 1000 166 1,269.2 27,584.8 28,854.0 Foreign Language 1100 30 1,663.0 2,597.6 4,260.6 Health 1200 33 487.4 9,400.1 9,887.5 Consumer & Family Studies 1300 39 850.5 752.3 1,602.8 Humanities 1500 102 4,313.2 5,059.1 9,372.3 Library 1600 2 17.0 53.8 70.8 Mathematics 1700 49 3,307.0 2,460.0 5,767.0 Physical Sciences 1900 47 1,050.8 7,884.2 8,935.0 Psychology 2000 23 1,235.6 206.2 1,441.8 Public Affairs/Services 2100 6 243.4 797.4 1,040.8 Social Sciences 2200 61 3,468.4 578.9 4,047.3 InterdiSciplinary Studies 4900 133 2,564.5 10,511.5 13,076.0 Total 918 24,277 84,538 108,815

S ollree: Maas Companies Projections

* P.E. laboratory spaee is .ahlated as a separate item, as different Title 5 criteria applies. ASF for this category is found in the Building Requirements Section


January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Required Academic Space for 2020 -128,195 WSCH

A projection for the assignable square footage required to meet the lecture/laboratory space needs at

Monterey Peninsula College for the Year 2020 is provided in the following table. The data is

predicated on a time when WSCH reaches 128,195 and student enrollment reaches 12,524.


PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION - YEAR 2020

TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS LEC ASF LAB ASF TOT ASF

Agriculture 0100 8 208.2 1,123.5 1,331.7 Biological Sciences 0400 45 817.4 9,014.1 9,831.5 Business & Management 0500 59 1,658.2 2,328.2 3,986.4 Communication 0600 3 79.4 232.6 312.0 Computer & Info Science 0700 : 34 709.0 2,809.4 3,518.4 Education 0800 106 760.6 2,011.7 2,772.3 Engineering & Indus Tech 0900 14 343.4 3,922.4 4,265.8 Fine and Applied Art 1000 190 1,635.6 39,192.3 40,827.9 Foreign Language 1100 37 1,913.5 3,295.4 5,208.9 Health 1200 42 593.5 12,620.7 13,214.2 Consumer & Family Studies 1300 44 1,008.0 983.1 1,991.1 Humanities 1500 129 5,254.0 6,794.7 12,048.7 Library 1600 2 20.7 723 93.0 Mathematics 1700 ·66 4,104.1 3,366.0 7,470.1 Physical Sciences 1900 59 1,258.3 10,409.7 11,668.0 Psychology 2000 28 1,417.7 260.9 1,678.6 Public Affairs/Services 2100 8 313.5 1,132.6 1,446.1 Social Sciences 2200 80 4,219.5 301.1 4,520.6 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 . 163 3,101.7 14,017.5 17,119.2 Total 1,117 29,416 113,888 143,305

SOllrre: Maos Companiu Pro/ecliol1s . * P.E. laboratory ipace is calclliated as a separate item, as diffirrllt Title 5 criteria appliel. ASF for this category is folll1d ill the Blliltiing Reqllirements Section


January 2004

MAAS Companies

Total Net Building Requirement - Year 2010

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & fAcllmes MASTER PLAN CHAPTER" - A VISION FOR THE fUTURE

Using data from the previous tables and calculating the formulas for both Prescribed and Non

prescribed State Space Standards, Table 4.21 provides a net analysis of assignable square footage for

rul campus facilities at Monterey Peninsula College. The data provided is formatted to be consistent

with the state Chancellor's office facilities space coding system. The forecast is based on a target

year of 2010 or whenever the target semester WSCH level (96,136) is reached.

Table 4.21 TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS - YEAR 2010

SPACE DESCRIPTION

CURRENT ASF FOR ASF CATEGORY ASF 2010 DIFFERENTIAL

000 Inactive Area

13~ 0 (13,869)

100 Classroom 20,585 24,277 3,692 210-230 Laboratory 69,80 84,538 14,737 235-255 Laboratory Service 1,76 912 (851)

300 Office/ Conference 33,1 31,260 (1,865) 400 Library 35,820 37,401 1,581

510-515 Armory / Armory Service 201 - (201) 520-525 Phys Education (Indoor) 38,713 35,000 (3,713) 530-535 Instruct Media (A V /TV) 9,222 12,651 3,429 540-555 Oinic/Demonstration 4,719 3,842 (877)

580 Greenhouse 1,327 - (1,327) 610-625 Assembly /Exhibition 28,159 9,604 (18,555) 630-635 Food Service 8,857 5,762 (3,095) 650-655 Lounge/Lounge Service 3,105 2,147 (958) 660-665 Bookstore 5,355 7,935 2,580 670-690 Meeting /Recreation 3,057 3,198 141 710-715 Data Processing/ Comp 1,499 5,000 3,501 720-770 Physical Plant 13,341 13,236 (105)

800 Health Service 140 1,200 1,060

TOTAL ASF 292,658 277,963 (14,695)

SOHrre: SOHrre: Monler!Y Penin!Hia CommHnity College District, Space Inventory and BHiiding Faa'litie! &port; Maa! Companies Projection!

4' 34 Monterey Peninsula Community College Diatrict

January 2004

"'- MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIfiCATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER" - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Total Net ASP Required for the 2020 Instructional ProgrJUn

As in the previous table, Table 4.22 provides a net analysis of assignable square footage for all

campus facilities at Monterey Peninsula College at a point in time when semester WSCH reaches

128,195 and student enrollment 12,524 (projected to occur in 2020).

SPACE CATEGORY

000 100

210-230 235-255

300 400

510-515 520-525 530-535 540-555

580 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800

Table 4.22 TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS - YEAR 2020

MONTEREY PENINSULA COLLEGE

DESCRIPTION CURRENT ASF FOR

ASF 2020 Inactive Area 13,869 ° Classroom 20,585 29,416 Laboratory 69,801 113,888 Laboratory Service 1,763 1,190 Office/ Conference 33,125 39,070 Library 35,820 45,986 Armory/Armory Service 201 -Phys Education (Indoor) 38,713 35,000 Instruct Media (A V /TV) 9,222 13,381 Clinic/Demonstration 4,719 5,010 Greenhouse 1,327 -Assembly /Exhibition 28,159 12,524 Food Service 8,857 7,514 Lounge/Lounge Service 3,105 2,863 Bookstore 5,355 9,891 Meeting /Recreation 3,057 4,170 Data Processing/ Comp 1,499 5,000 Physical Plant 13,341 16,305 Health Service 140 1,200

TOTALASF 292,658 342,408

ASF DIFFERENTIAL

(13,869) 8,831

44,087 (573) 5,945

10,166 ·(201)

(3,713) 4,159

291 (1,327)

(15,635) (1,343)

(242) 4,536 1,113 3,501 2,964 1,060

49,750

Sourre: Soum: Monterry Peninsula Community College District, Space Inventory and Building Facilities Report,· Maas Companies Projections

4' 35 Monterey Peninsula Community College Di.trict

January 2004

MAAS Companies

District Facilities at Fort Drd

Public Safct\ Instructional Di\ isioll

SPACE QUANnFICATION & FACILmES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Between the years 2004 and 2006, the District is projected to develop the fIrst phase of a Public

Safety Facility at the former Fort Ord Military Base. This facility will have a targeted and specific

purpose, addressing the needs of Administration of Justice, Fire Protection Technology, Fire

Academy, Emergency Medical Services, parks and Recreation and other related public service

programs projected for the future. It will consolidate programs that are currently offered both on

campus and at various off-campus sites into one comprehensive location. The facility is projected

to have 2020 space needs of 67,700 assignable square feet with start-up space needs in 2004-2006 of

26,500 ASF. A breakdown of instructional and support space required, based on 2020 WSCH

production of 24,446 and an enrollment of 2,719 is provided in the table below:

SPACE CATEGORY

0 100

210-230 235-255

300 400

510-515 520-525 530-535 540-555

580 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800

Table 4.23 TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES - YEAR 2020


ASF 2020 Inactive 0 -Classroom 0 3,622 Laboratory 0 42,457 Non Class Laboratory 0 267 Office/ Conference 0 3,281 Library 0 1,250 Armory/Armory Service 0 5,500 Physical Education (Indoor) 0 2,400 Instructional Media (A V /TV) 0 1,250 Child Care, Clinic 0 -Greenhouse 0 -Assembly/Exhibition 0 1,400 Food Service 0 850 Lounge/Lounge Service 0 750 Bookstore/ Merchandizing 0 -Meeting /Recreation 0 850 Data Processing/Comp 0 600 Physical Plant 0 3,224 Health Service 0 -

TOTALASF 0 67,701

ASF DIFFERENTIAL

-3,622

42,457 267

3,281 1,250 5,500 2,400 1,250

--

1,400 850 750

-850 600

3,224 -

67,701 ..

501lrr:e: Moos Companzes P1TJjemons

4 - 36 Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

Monterey Peninsula College - Campus Cenle

SP~CE QUANTIFICATION & FAclLmes MASTER PLAN CHAPTER .. - A VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Also projected, by the year 2010, is the addition of a new Campus Center at the Fort Ord facility.

The Campus Center will have an instructional program prome that is basic in scope, offering a

selected range of general education and developmental education courses. Overall, the facility has

been planned for a buildout for 23,350 assignable square feet by the year 2020, based on WSCH

production of 11,372 and an enrollment of 2,057 at that time. Facility requirements are projected to

be 12,550 ASF in the initial, opening year (estimated to be between 2008 and 2010)

A pro me of the 2020 academic program of instruction by TOPS Code divisions follows.


PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION - YEAR2020

DIVISION CODE SEC

Biological Sciences 0400 4 Business & Management 0500 17 Computer/Info Science 0700 10 Education/Phys Ed 0800 5 Fine and Applied Arts 1000 5 Foreign Language 1100 5 Cons & Family Studies 1300 6 Humanities 1500 30 Mathematics 1700 23 Physical Science 1900 2 Psychology 2100 3 Social Science 2300 11 Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 15

TOTAL 136

SOlirce: Maas Companies Projections

WSCH

480 1181

720 396 386 460 408

2459 2395 220 267

1048 952

11,372

4' 37

LEe ASF LAB ASF TOT ASF

82 671 753 420 258 678 139 612 751 98 549 647

129 . 220 349 132 228 360 152 111 263 958 339 1297 888 835 1723 69 152 221

115 0 115 450 0 450 156 1511 1667

3,788 5,486 9,274


MAAS Companies


Based on the anticipated WSCH production and enrollment, total facility needs for the Campus

Center by the year 2020 are depicted in the table that follows. Again, realization of these projected

facility needs are based on attaining WSCH of 11,372 for a given academic semester, or 22,744 for a

given academic year.

SPACE CATEGORY

0 100

210-230 235-255

300 400

510-515 520-525 530-535 540-555

580 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800

Chart 4.25 TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

CAMPUS CENTER FACILITIES - YEAR 2020


ASF 2020 Inactive 0 0 Classroom 0 3,788 Laboratory 0 5,486 Non Class Laboratory 0 195 Office/ Conference 0 3,737 Library 0 1,800 Armory/Armory Service 0 -Physical Education (Indoor) 0 800 Instructional Media (A V /TV) 0 800 Child Care, Clinic 0 -Greenhouse 0 -Assembly /Exhibition 0 1,200 Food Service 0 800 Lounge/Lounge Service 0 350 Bookstore/Merchandizing 0 850 Meeting /Recreation 0 650 Data Processing/ Comp 0 250 Physical Plant 0 2,200

Health Service 0 450 TOTALASF 0 23,356

ASF DIFFERENTIAL

-3,788 5,486

195 3,737 1,800

-BOO 800

--

1,200 800 350 850 650 250

2,200 450

23,356

S OIiTre: Maa.r Companies Prwecl10ns

The Campus Center is projected to address both an underserved and growing area to the north of

the main campus. A target service area is depicted on the following page. It shows this service area

as extending from Marina north to Castroville and into the Salinas/Hartnell Community College

District. It is anticipated that the Center will also dip into the Seaside Area to the south. The

demographics of this target service area indicate an annual population growth rate of 1.44%. Based

on the demographics and the projected 2020 enrollment of 2,057 for the year 2020, the Center

should attain a student participation rate (students per 1,000 population) of 11.45. The following

two pages provide a comprehensive look at the Center's projected service area.


January 2004

MAAS Companies

3rd Ave AT 12th St Marina. CA 93933

tfjlPll'''' Avo ~ MingoAVf!,

S 5e(JG.ld~ E

/(..~ H11brAv. Kin~.HAve PiUnMI& A""

c: 2003 £SfU. GOT

1311'1 St

: ., 12thSt £

* 1~th!:\ot ...,." Ill.: f

;; ..)

e 2003 ESRl. GOT

Cl200J ESRI BIS

Site Map

~rd Ave AT 12th St c.~ "ty ........

C;,~

• -$;;'-

Business Information Solutions


Latitude: 36.6683 Longitude: -121.804


MAAS Companies

•

au ...... *"'o,...Uon

• Sok,attOna

~

3n:t Ave AT 12th St

Marina, CA 93933

SUmmary PopIJotion

Households

Families

AY&I':lO'& HOlIsehc~d SIze, O_O~edHUS

Rent&!' Occupied H Us

Median AI;Je

Trends: 2003-2008 Annual Rate

PopIJatlon

HousehOk1s Families

Ov.oerHHs Median H~hold Income

Households by Income

< $15.000

$15.000 - $24.999

$:25.000 - $3.\ .999

535.000 - $49.999

$50.000 - $74.999

575.000 - $99.999

$100.000· $149.999

$150.000 - S199.(00

$200.000+

Median H~hold IncomE

A_~ Household Income

Per Capito Income

Population by AGe

0-4

5 -14

15- 19

20 - 24

25 - 34

35 -44 45-54

55 - 64

65-74

75· 84 85+

Race and Ethnlclly

Whll&Alone 81aCl<AIone

Amerleon Indian Alone ASian Aion<?

P;)CIflc: Islander Alone Some Other Roce Alone

"fiNo or More R~s

HispanIC OrIoln (Any Race; Data Nota: Ina>me is __ in current _ ... .

2000

Number

4.414

4.735

4.846

7.207

7.983

4.165

2.746

511

341

$43.802

$53.142

$16.443

2000

Number

11.028

2U14

9.910

11.911 ;4.990

22.816 14.951

8.185

5.805

3.377

1.007

2000

Number

64.884

8.530

1.590 11.683

922 39.521

8.183

64.687



Site Type: Hancklrawn Shape

2000 135.305

30.948 27.776

3.24

16.998

19.950

30,4

Area

1.44%

1.64%

1.68'1.

2.21~

2.76%

Percent

11.9%

128%

13.1%

19.5%

21.6%

11.3%

7.4%

1.4%

0.9%

Pereent 8.2(X,

15.S%

7.3% 8.$~u

le.5'~.

16."<x. 11.0%

6.1,\;

4.3<),

2.5%

0.7%

Pereent

48.0%

6.3%

1.2%

8.6%

0.7%

29.2%

05.0%

47.S%

2003

Number

·1.055

4.313

4.535

7.438

7.873

4.751

3.B28

741

541

$.17.089

S59.867

$18.282

2003

Number

11.381

22.148

10.822

13.02;

2.J.4~·9

~n05>

16.399

9,2~2

5.682

3.578

1.103

2003

Number

64.749

7.627

1.944

11.241

820

44.810

9.786

74.120

2003

140.877

38.075

28.6~

3.29 18.047

20.028

30.'1

Stale 1,4?')"

1.18'1v

1.18"'-

1.2S%

2.2%

Pereent

10.7'\.

11.3%

11.9%

19.5%

20.7%

12.5%

10.1%

1.9%

1.4%

Percent

8.1", 1~,.7~.

7,7('\,

9.2'11,

17.4'\,

1;3.4'+" 11.6%

6.6% 4.0",

2.5%

0.8%

Percent

46.0'); ..

5.4~,

0.6%

31.e~,

6.9%

52.6%

2008 Number

3.612

3.859

4274

7.081

8.503

5.694

5.863

1.36i 1.046

$53.9015

$71.617

$21.715

2008 Number

12.301

22.861

12.OS9

14.864 2~·22(,

2~.1101

11:\.805

11291

5.6705

3.758 1.307

2008

Number

1>1.893

6.572

2.431

10.531

687

53.994

12239

90.447

latitude:

LongItUde:

Shape:

2008

151.3.\8

41.m

31.180

3.28

20.128

21.171

30.Z

National

1.18%

1.37%

1.31%

1.53 ....

3.11%

Percent

S.7%

9.'3%

10.3%

17.1~"

20.6%

13.8%

14.2'1;'

3.3%

2.5%

Percent

8.14"

lS.1q~

8.0~('

9.Sq~

16.7"',

15.~"'('

12.4% 7.50,;'

3.8".

Percent

42.W" 4.3~~

1.6% 7.0%

O.5~('

35.7%

8.1%

59.8%

36.6&83

·121.104

Custom

Source: U.s. Btreau 01 the Census, 2000 Cen .... clPopUation and Housing. ESRI BIS forecasts for 2003 .nd 2008.

~OO3 ESRI BIS


MAAS Companies

•

BU ...... 'nformatlOn

• Solutionl

IBmI

3RI Ave AT 12111 St

Marina, CA 93933

'tIl !~ :c i<C

; , i i , IE 1<1> '0 I~

~

I I

18

16

14

12-

lo.

8

6-

4

2

OK.74K «V.,'''''''-I·

~2003 ESRI BIS

().4 5-'4 15-19 20·24 25-,.'\4

2003 Household Income



Site Type: Hlllld.drawn Shape

TrendS 2003-2008

PopulaUon by Age

rJ 3544 45-54 55-64 65-74

r1 !""WI 75-84 85+

Latitude: 36.6683

Longitude: ·121.804

Shape: Custom

_Are3 _ Stole

D U.S.

!

I D 2QO~ I _ 200S

I

2003 Population by Race

2003 PHc~t HIsp<ll"lic Origin: 52.6%

4' 41 Monterey Peninsula Community College Di.trict

January 2004

MAAS Companies

Total District Facility Needs


The majority of the Master Plan has focused on viewing the District through its main campus,

Monterey Peninsula College. However, the additions of the Fort Ord Facilities, both the Public

Safety Program and the extension of the main campus, as the Monterey Peninsula College Campus

Center, will also need to be placed into the District's mainstream of thinking. This will not only be

evident in terms of new facility to construct and maintain but also in terms of staffing and support

services.

Forecasted to the Year 2020, the District will change significantly. It will be managing a different

and more vibrant institution. Including on-campus credit and non-credit enrollment at the main

campus and, assuming the successful build out of programs and facilities at Fort Ord, the District

profile will include total enrollments of 17,319 that will generate 164,603 weekly student contact

hours. This represents a District-wide on-campus (credit and non-credit) enrollment increase of

112% and an increase in WSCH of 114% from the current benchmarks. While the main campus

will remain the heart and soul of the District in the future, generating 75% of all Districts enrollment

and WSCH, the greatest percentage and more rapid relative growth (i.e. measured by the percentage

rate of growth) is projected to take place off the main campus.

To accommodate the weekly student contact hours and enrollment projections, the District will

need to provide more than 433,000 assignable square feet of academic and support services facilities

over the next 16 years. Using today'scurrent space inventory as a baseline, this represents an

increase of approximately 140,807 square feet of new and/ or additional space, a figure that is almost

half again the current facility holdings of the District. New construction will be only half of the

facility-space equation, however. Because of the age of the facilities at the main campus, a

significant amount of rehabilitation and reconstruction will also be required. This need will account

for a significant portion of the overall Building/Facilities Program budget. The District will also

need to make provisions to address the issue of maintenance and oversight for this new and

rehabilitated volume of facilities.

4' 42 Monterey Peninsula Community College Distriet

January 2004

MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIfiCATION & fACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - A VISION fOR THE FUTURE

The table that follows provides a perspective, from the District level, that combines the parts into

the whole - a District composite relative to facility needs.

SPACE CATEGORY

0

100

210-230

235-255

300

400

510-515

520-525 530-535 540-555

580

610-625

630-635

650-655

660-665

670-690 710-715

720-770 800

Chart 4.26 DISTRICT COMPOSITE OF TOTAL FACILITY NEEDS

TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS YEAR 2020

DESCRIPTION MONTEREY FORT ORO FORT ORO PENINSULA PUBLIC SAFETY CAMPUS CTR CAMPUS

Inactive Area 0 - -Classroom 29,416 3,622 3,788 Laboratory 113,888 42,457 5,486 Laboratory Service 1,190 267 195 Office/ Conference 39,070 3,281 3,737 Library 45,986 1,250 1,800 Armory/Armory Serv - 5,500 -Phys Ed (Indoor) 35,000 2,400 800 Instr Media (A V /TV) 13,381 1,250 800 Clinic/Demonstration 5,010 - -Greenhouse - - ~

Assembly /Exhibition 12,524 1,400 1,200 Food Service 7,514 850 800 Lounge/LoungeServ 2,863 750 350 Bookstore 9,891 - 850 Meeting /Recreation 4,170 850 650 Data Proc/ Comp 5,000 600 250 Physical Plant 16,305 3,224 2,200 Health Service 1,200 - 450

TOTALASF 342,408 6','01 23,356

DISTRICT TOTAL

° 36,826

161,831

1,652

46,088

49,036

5,500 38,200

15,431

5,010

° 15,124

9,164

3,963

10,741

5,670

5,850

21,729 1,650

433,465 SOl/ree: Maas Companies Projections

The vision translated to quantified needs forms the basis for a complete conceptual

Building/Facilities Program that follows. It should be noted that the foundation for facility needs

has been based on the common starting point - the existing and projected academic program of

instruction.


MAAS Companies

4·44



MAAS Companies

SPACE QUANTIFICATION &. FACJLITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

CHAPTER V - PROPOSED BUILDING/FACILITIES PROGRAM

OVERVIEW

All of the District's "owned" buildings are presently located on the campus of Monterey Peninsula

College. It can be assumed that the College, with its storied past and aging facilities, will have the

greatest need, command the most attention and require the greatest amount of resources relative to

the facilities program of the District. Thus, the greatest emphasis has been place on this campus.

Proposed new and rehabilitated facility development is also projected for the Fort Grd Site for the

future. Development activity in this regard will be referenced separately in the overall context of

this proposed Building/Facilities Program.

A number of factors were taken into consideration' in determining the proposed Building/Facilities

Program for the District. Chief among these were the needs identified in the space quantification

component of the Plan, as the Building/Facilities Program is a reflection of the District's program

of instruction and the student services that support that program of instruction. A great deal of

consideration was also given to the existing physical condition and capacity of the District's existing

facilities as well as to those new facilities that will be required as expansion takes place out at the

Fort Ord Site.

As a starting-point, facility needs for the future were based on certain planning assumptions. These

assumptions provided the shape and form for the development of the proposed Building/Facilities

Plan.

s - I ~'''J:T··n''. I'. 1111Jl->tJ!,1 C:fllnll,tlll"\" (:"ill~!!I' DI .. tt'II't

.J.llHtnl'V:!()U4

\1.1 'IS C""'r"mC\

FACILITY PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

A. Facility planning begins with an assessment of the students who are served by the

district, i.e. those who use the facilities created. Based on the historic trends and

characteristics, the following assumptions for the future were noted:

1. Students are currently attracted to the MPC for its core program of

general and transfer education but also for its on and off-campus

contract programs, its on-campus non-credit instructional programs

and its off-campus programs for credit. Attracting new students to the

campus has been challenging. It will continue to be challenging for the

future.

2. The gender breakdown that presently slightly favors female students to

male students will show an increasing trend for females. By 2020,

female are projected to account for almost 60% of all enrollments,

3. White/Caucasian students will continue to dominate the composition

of the student body, keeping pace with the ethnic composition of the

District's service area. Hispanic students will increase as a percentage

of the student body.

4. Enrollments will continue to be dominated by older students. The

prototypical 19 to 24 years of age student will only comprise 15 to 20%

of all students on campus. The District will increasingly attract an

older, life-long-learning type of student.

5. The predominant student on-campus will be part time, taking between

3 and 6 credits. Full time students (12 credits or more) ·will range

between 15% and 20%.

6. There will be an increase of new students who will be under-prepar~d

for college level academics. At the same time, there will be an increase

in the number of students who return to the College and/or its Centers

who already have some level of college work completed, including

those with degrees.

7. Most students will be working in addition to pursuing an education.

S·2 \l",:t.·n·y l'I'nlJ);.;uia COmmUlll~' C"J}(~1.!l~ Di:;tl'lct

.LlInHlJ"~· 2()U4

:V1,\ '\ S Compam"\


B. While instructional delivery will change and the program of instruction ,adapted to meet

shifting needs, the core curriculum at the College and Centers will generally remain

devoted to its current purpose and mission. Overall, the District is projected to exhibit a

broad-based, multifaceted, on and off-campus curriculum. Distance education will also

take a higher profile relative to delivering the future program of instruction.

C. The current dependence on creative programming, expanded public-private partnerships

and growth of the Public Safety instructional division will remain as a priorities for the

District relative to enrollment growth.

D. The availability and use of technology in the classroom will be consistent with competing

colleges in the area.

E. Lecture and laboratory hours taught will sometimes be difficult to discern. With

computers used to assist in delivery of the program of instruction, "blended" classrooms

that support both teaching modalities will be required.

F. Instructional productivity will be improved to meet operational efficiency relative to the

generation of weekly student contact hours (WSCH), full time equivalent students

(FTES) and full time equivalent faculty (FTEF). The District will maximize its

operational efficiency relative to receiving funding from the s~ate.

G. Scheduling of courses will be improved to guarantee maximum facility utilization.

H. The role of Student (support) Services will be expanded to help students with the

District become successful. Tutorial support and learning resources will be utilized to

improve the student success rate.

1. The population of the District's effective service area will reach 273,297 by 2020.

J. Growth within the IS-mile service radius of the College will be slow, growing at only

1.28% annually. The greatest impact for growth will occur to the north.

K. Combined in-District and out-of-District student participation rates relative to on

campus enrollment will improve from the current 37.51 students per 1,000 population to

45.82 by the year 2020. The District will meet its projected growth targets for 2020 of

128,195 on-campus WSCH (credit and non credit) and 12,524 enrollment.

L. Greater emphasis will be placed on student attraction and recruitment, particularly as it

relates to the District's service area demographics. Improvements will be made in

retaining students at the College and Centers of the District.

S·3 \l,.rl',·n'.\' l'I'n11)~lIi,1 (:OmmIlILt·· (·,dJ(~:.!t· Di~t"tet

.J.tn~1nJ·~· 2004

\1 .. , ,\~ C"nlpan,",

SPACE QUANTIFICATION" FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

M. The District's organization structure will remain the same through the year 2020, i.e. a

single college district with satellite campuses to deliver the program of instruction that

supports the academic mission.

N. The District will take title to property located at the former Fort Ord military facility and

develop that property to support needed facilities for the Public Safety instructional

division. A satellite Center will also be created to serve the faster growing areas north of

the College.

O. The District will pursue new sources of revenue, in addition to its successful bond

program, to actualize a facilities program that will include new construction,

reconstruction, renovation and infrastructure upgrades.

EXISTING FACILITIES CONDITION AND CURRENT PLANS

The following components were assessed and reviewed to determine the existing facilities inventory,

the current use of buildings, the condition and age of facilities, and the current plans of the District

relative to new construction, reconstruction, remodel, or refurbishing:

A. Existing Buildings and Building Use

B. The District's Current Scheduled Maintenance Plan

C. The District's Five-Year Capital Construction Plan

D. Capacity Load Ratios for the Five Key Facility Areas

A. Existing Buildings and Building Use:

Most of the existing buildings on the campus of the College were found to be in excess of forty

years of age. Recent construction was in evidence, as characterized by the new Library/Technology

Center and the Plant Services buildings, both of which were built within the last two years. An

overall physical assessment of the current facilities condition indicates that MPC has a sufficient

volume of space to meet its current and most of its future demands. Much of this space, however,

is old and inefficient. The facility assessment primarily indicates that while some new construction

will be required, the greatest need will be for replacement/ reconstruction and remodel! refurbishing.

5-4 \l,lJ1t.·rp\ Pt'nmM.d •• COlnulI:nitv CoJ1(!~I~ Di. ... tt .. t't

.J.lnllnl'Y 2{)il.,J

:\1.·, ,\~ ComrJmc\


The table that follows provides a composite view of the existing building inventory on the Monterey

Peninsula campus.

Table 5.1 CURRENT BUILDING ANALYSIS

BLDG # AGE RMS ASF OGFT % EFF. USE Art Studio 1 42Yrs 11 4,314 4,880 88.4% Class Lab/Offices Business/Comp Sci 2 36 Yrs 22 10,759 20,040 53.7% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms Bus/Humanities 3 57Yrs 30 4,939 6,420 76.9% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms

Student Services 4 46 Yrs 26 3,655 5,872 62.2% Off, MtgRms Drafting/Grap Arts 5 9 Yrs 9 3,243 3,997 81.1% Class Lab Fam/ConsEd 6 55 Yrs 7 2,046 3,202 63.9% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms Humanities 7 36 Yrs 29 10,579 19,363 54.6% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms Nursing 8 45 Yrs 13 4,242 6,180 68.6% Class Lab/Demo library (Old) 9 44 Yrs 20 13,869 19,040 72.8% Study, Offices, Mtg Rms Life Science 10 36 Yrs 37 10,245 20,952 48.9% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms Green Houses 11 10 Yrs 3 1,066 1,080 98.7% Support/Resource Auto Tech 12 48 Yrs 6 4,698 4,890 96.1% Class Lab Pool/Lockers 13 41 Yrs 7 2,014 4,200 48.0% Gym/Phys Ed Support Music 14 33 Yrs 24 8,590 12,560 68.4% Class Lab, Offices Physical Science 15 36 Yrs 39 12,095 24,962 48.5% Lee, Lab, Off, Mtg Rms Administration 16 55 Yrs 24 4,438 7,152 62.1% Offices, Conf Areas College Serv/Child Ctr 17 55 Yrs 21 3,838 6,651 57.7% Service Support/Lab Lecture Forum 18 35 Yrs 15 12,717 18,545 68.6% Lee/Office International Ctr 19 35 Yrs 18 8,608 13,478 63.9% Offices, Conf, Mtg Areas Social Science 20 35 Yrs 26 7,191 12,580 57.2% Lee, Off, Mtg Rrns Art-Dimensional 21 35 Yrs 14 8,127 12169 66.8% Class Lab/Office Physical Education 22 35 Yrs 33 28,408 46826 60.7% Gym/ Class Lab College Readiness 23 2 Yrs 6 1,329 1440 92.3% Class Lab Physical Fitness 24 55 Yrs 6 4,001 4276 93.6% Class Lab Theatre 27 35 Yrs. 20 14,664 27724 52.9% Assembly / Class Lab College Center 29 33 Yrs 31 19,899 27,736 71.7% M tg/Recrearion/ Office Art-Ceramic 30 33 Yrs 14 5,101 6,800 75.0% Class Lab/Office Dance/Adaptive PE 31 56 Yrs 10 8,443 11,060 76.3% Class Lab Children's Modular 32 4 Yrs 4 1,129 1,440 78.4% Service Support Art Gallery 33 6 Yrs 2 884 1,000 88.4% Exhibition Facilities 35 1 Yr 37 15,107 18,440 81.9% Office/Service Support library Tech Ctr 36 1 Yr 97 52,134 67,011 77.8% Learning Res, Media, Lab Career Testing (Trlr) 37 3 Yrs 1 286 320 89.4% Office/Service Support

TOTAL 662 292,658 442,286 66.2% .. . . Source: Monterey Pemnsula College Dumct Facility Buildmg Report 17 Summary 2003; Anafysl.I Maas Compames

B. Scheduled Maintenance

The current Scheduled Maintenance program provides insight as to the issues and challenges of

maintaining a campus that that has a significant number of older buildings. The projects listed .

below are those that require the immediate attention of the District, i.e. within the next five years.

They are not indicative of the total repairs, upgrades and replacements that are presently exists on

5·S .\J lIll:,·n':: .t'i 1111l:-,tda C()mll1l1l1it~· (·!lIJc~!!t· DL ... ttiet

');'UH1UJ'\, 2004

\1 A '\ ~ CnmrJnlC\

SPACE QUANTIFICATION &: FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

the campus. The current Scheduled Maintenance Program discloses that an amount of $11,432,270

has been earmarked for those concerns deemed most critical.

Table 5.2 CURRENT SCHEDULED MAINTENA.;."JCE PROGRAlvl - 2003 - 2008

YEAR AREA PROJECT EST. COST

2003· 2004 Humanities, Business, DP, I1fe Sci Roof Repair/Replace $392,000 Campus-wide Fire Nann Phase I $310,500 Campus-wide Boiler $398,700 I1brary HVAC 5172,200 Humanities, Business, DP, I1fe Sci Refinish/Repaint Phase I $335,000 Campus-wide Elevator Safery/Upgrades Phase I $343,200

sub total $1,951,600 2004-2005 Art, Nursing, Phys Sci Repair Roof $405,900

Campus-wide High Voltage PM/Upgrade Phase I $279,259 Campus-wide Fire Alarm Phase II $310,500 Business/Data Processing Back-up Power Supply $165,000 Theater HVAC Replacement/ AQ Upgrade $395,050 Student Serv, Auto, Art Studio Refinish/Repaint Phase II 335,000 Campus-wide Elevator Safery /Upgrades Phase II $343,200 Campus-wide Re-Key Campus to New System 5345,015

sub total $2,578,924 2005-2006

Campus-wide Sewer/Storm Drain, Voice/Fiber Upgrd Ph. I $400,000 Campus-wide Network Upgrade $275,500 Campus-wide High Voltage PM/Upgrade Phase II $279,259 Business/Data Processing HVAC $98,502 Campus-wide Underground HW /Gas Pipe Upgrade Phase I $387,500 Humanities HVAC $95,325 I1fe Science HVAC $136,954 Social Science HVAC $91,083 Fam/Cons Sci, Lec For, Coll. Serv Refinish/Repaint Phase III 5335,000 Campus-wide Multi-purpose Classroom Upgrd $390,000

sub total $2,489,123 2006-2007 Campus-wide Campus Security System Upgrade $392,000

Campus-wide Voice/Data/Fiber Network Upgrade Phase II 5275,500 Lecture Forum HVAC $236,596 Campus-wide Underground HW /Gas Pipe Upgrade Phase II 5387,500 Physical Education HVAC $392,827 Campus-wid~ Elevator Safety/Upgrades Phase III $343,200 Campus-wide Equipment Labeling System $40,000 Campus-wide EMS Upgrade/Expansion Phase I 5400,000

sub total $2,467,623 2006-2007 Campus-wide Safety/Security Upgrade Phase I $400,000

Campus-wide Interior Voice/Data, IDF & Connectivity Upgrd $300,000 Campus-wide Underground HW /Gas Pipe Upgrade Phase III $387,500 Physical Education Swimming Pool Repairs $72,500 Campus-wide Parking Lot Repaint/Roadway Repairs $385,000 Campus-wide EMS Upgrade/Expansion Phase II 5400,000

sub total $1,945,000 TOTAL

SouTre: Monte~ Peninsula Community College District, 2003- 2008 Five-Year Scheduled Maintenance Plan

$11,432,270

5-6 .\I·l/;'.·rt": t'; rJlIJ.I :.1 C(j;nll\!,IJ~~\' c,.;j(·UI' Ih',,'111"t

·j.tl11111)·Y 20H4

\1 \ :\!) C:ompanll':\

C. The Five-Year Capital Construction Plan

SPACE QUANTIFICATION,. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

The Five-Year Capital Construction Plan is the primary planning document that qualifies the District

for state funding for new facilities. This plan is updated on an annual basis to reflect the changing

dynamics and needs of the District. The table below depicts the current planning efforts relative to

capital projects scheduled. The District currently has nine project proposals in the capital

construction cue totaling $50,545,203. At the current time, two of these projects totaling

$24,808,592, i.e. the Library/Technology Center and the Plant Services Center, have been

completed.

Table 5.3 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL CONSTRUCTIOX PLA.i~

PROJECT NET ASF START DATE COMPLETION EST. COST Library/Technology Center 42,087 2001 2003 Completed $22,030,000 Plant Services Center 2,499 2001 2003 Completed $2,779,592 Child Development Center 3,976 2004 2006 $4,911,379 Old Library Modernization 9,516 2005 2006 $4,389,000 Mathematics/Science Bldg. 12,772 2005 2007 $7,508,245 Student Services Modernization 3,767 2005 2008 $1,787,700 Art Ceramics Modernization 10,779 2006 2009 $2,204,747 Admin Bldg. Modernization 9,382 2007 2010 $3,458,336 Art Studio Modernization 4,314 2007 2010 $1,476,204

TOTAL 99,092 $50,545.203

Source: Monterry Peninsula Community CoUege District, 200} Five-Year Capital Construction Plan, dated 7/15/ O}

D. Capacity Load Ratios

Based on data from the District's 2003 Five-Year Capital Construction Program, an assessment of

the five key elements tracked by the state relatiye to facility funding qualifications (i.e. space for

lecture, laboratory, office, library and instructional media) indicates that the District is over the

capacity load ratios (the state's standard for the square footage allowed for a given level of weekly

student contact hours) for lecture, laboratory, office and library. Instructional media is the only "key

element" that would presently qualify for "need" relative to the space standards of the state. Areas

that exhibit percentage ratios under 100% are considered as having a need for state supported

funding; areas over the 100% ratio do not qualify for state supported funding.

5·7 \ll1nt p rpv l'pnlllsuia Community C.IJJ<~:!t~ J)i..;n·u~~

~Ltn\1nl·~· 2004

M .\!\S Cnnopantc,

SPACE QUANTIFICATION ... FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

ASSESSMENT OF KEY FACILITY PLANNING ELEMENTS

Six key planning elements were identified in assessing the f~cility needs of Monterey Peninsula

College. These elements included:

A. Sense of Place

B. Access

C. Campus Architecture

D. Land Utilization/Availability

E. Supporting Infrastructure

F. Existing Facilities Utilization

A. Sense of Place

The physical setting for Monterey Peninsula College is largely reflective of the beautiful surrounding

Monterey environment, i.e. a rolling topography with significant grade elevation changes. The

campus has a sense of being near the ocean, which it is. The climate and quality of the environment

are most apparent on-campus.

Identifying a "first presence" at the College is challenging: The identity of the campus is somewhat

obscured at its point of entry. The College does not present particularly well from either the main

and/ or service roadways of Aguajito/Freemont/Lavehdera. The physical presence of the new

Library Technology building and presence of a small sign provide the only visual point of reference

that suggests a college campus might be present.

The identity of the College does not become apparent until one is physically present on the campus

site. The overriding feeling of "sense of place" is that of a mature campus. The feel of a past

military relationship/history is still present, captured in the functional design of the buildings a~d

the relationship of these buildings to the landscape. Overall, there is a sense of being on an

established campus premises.

S-8 ~1Hlll"'r(>\' 1"'l'Ilu!-,tda C011'lllHlll1tY CnlJe~H' Di:in"ie{

.LIn"o)'v 20fl.J

MA'\s Cnmpamc\


The College has been designed around a significant natural feature - a canyon that bifurcates the

campus into three zones, creating the effect of campuses within the campus. Almost all of the

buildings are characterized as mature - ranging in age from 30 to 50 years old and being utilitarian in

their design and architectural style.

From a user perspective, the College is identified by the majority of its students as a local resource

for meeting general education requirements and transfer to a four-year college or university, i.e.

students view it as a portal to higher education. Secondarily, it is viewed as a resource for continuing

education.

Obseroations

1. The main portion of the campus is built around a common area that features

interspersed open spaces. Buildings are relationally spaced for function and

compact in relationship to openness of the landscape. To the south, grade

elevation changes give way to he secondary building locations - those that

support athletics and physical education. Bridges that cross the expanse of the

canyon suggest that yet another part of the campus is located to the west - the

visual and performing arts area.

2. Trees and landscaping, particularly those associated with the canyon, enhance the

character of the campus. Open space is apparent but not necessarily inviting for

use other than for visu~ appeal.

3. First-time visitors may have difficulty with locating buildings on-campus. This is

particularly true for Student Services, the Student Center, Bookstore and Food

Service, all of which have obscured locations.

4. Not all exterior lighting on the buildings, grounds and parking areas has been

upgraded to illuminate Walkways, stairways, etc. to the current standards.

5. The community's perception relative to security on campus is generally good.

Students generally feel secure in the environment of the College. Lighting could

be improved in some of the parking areas.

S-9 \lnfllt'rpv t'1.·nlll~lIia C"mnHIIJ)'~' C!1I1C!:.!l~ DI .... tti.et

.J.H\1.II11,:,.2004

\1.\\ ~ C""'ramc,

B. Access


The College lacks official ingress and egress points. From the roadways of

Aqajito/Freemont/Lavendera, entry to the College can be gained through three choices. Navigating

these three entry points can be challenging. Traffic circulation for students coming to College

from other than the north, use a combination of public roadways to gain access to the College. In

short, there is no real, distinctive visual entry point and no vehicular circulation pattern that moves

traffic in an orderly and consistent manner to and from the campus. On-campus access by foot is

adequate, once there is a sense of familiarity. Parking needs to be redesigned to support the flow of

traffic.

Observations

I. Access to the campus via the parking lots is haphazard and not particularly user

friendly. The main parking areas (end of Costanoan Drive) require pedestrians

to cross vehicular roadways to gain access to the main portion of the campus

2. Parking on campus needs to be reevaluated and redefined. At present there is

not a consistent pattern for parking to support traffic flows.

3. Interior pedestrian walkways are apparent and provide links to the portions of

the campus bifurcated by the canyon.

4. The College needs to address remaining architectural barriers for disabled

students.

5. On-campus signage could be improved. First time students/users would find

this particularly helpful. Overall, signage and internal navigation of the campus is

rated as average.

C. Campus Architecture - Opportunities and Challenges

Buildings, while similar on the main portion of the campus, do not have a common architectural

theme. They reflect the era from which they were built, primarily the late 1950's and 1960's - a

utilitarian architectural style mixed with some of the more contemporary design elements that

followed those eras. Buildings on the Westside of the campus (Art area) are constructed with wood

exterior in contrast to the "hard wall" exteriors of most buildings on the main portion of the

s - to \1I1nkrp\' Pf'nlllbuLJ Ct);nlJ!tlllIt~· C.,jJ(:~.W ))i:"lft'u~t

,L.IIltlllry 2()1)4

M.\AS CO"'ranl~'

". SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

campus. The Library/Technology Building, built in 2003, is the only new, modem building visible

on the main portion of the campus.

The campus architecture and grounds generally present a positive image. The compactness of

buildings on the campus gives a feeling of density, even though green space is used as a linking

amenity. Otherwise, there is a relative sense of order and consistency.

Architecturally, the campus is on a challenging site with significant grade changes and little prime

land that is not already devoted to parking available for new construction. The clustering of like

academic and support services is apparent, indicative of a plan to create groupings of similar purpose

and function. Student services functions are presently housed in different areas. These buildings are

not discemable from a marked point of ingress and must be accessed on-foot once on the campus.

Observations - External Conditions

1. The interior grounds and exterior building facades generally make a positive

architectural statement on the upper campus.

2. The Westside of the campus (across the canyon), the Physical Education

facilities, and the Student Activities area needs to be tied into the main portion of

the campus visually as well as functionally.

3. Because of the diversity in architectural design, the College will be challenged in

blending the existing architectural designs and new building construction - this

could be both a plus and minus.

4. The existing structures appear to have good structural integrity, renovation and

remodel will be more of a need than new construction in the future.

Observations - Internal Conditions

1. The current building ratios of gross square footage to assignable square footage

as noted in the existing space inventory (66.2%) are at the minimum level of the

statewide guidelines. These will need to improve in order for the District to

qualify for state funding support. Future architectural designs and plans should

address this condition.

S· 1\ . \j.d :"fi'''" \', nl.};·.lf ,: Cq'nlJ~tllJ;:'i C,:J{!~ .. Di .... n'l·t

.l.!ntlhl'V:.!(}l)·l

\1.\ \~ C""'p.n,",


2. The existing learning environments consist of traditional lecture/laboratory type

classrooms that offer faculty limited flexibility for alternative instructional

delivery. Future new and remodel building projects will need to address how

traditional space can be modified to reflect open learning environments.

3. Instructional space is not well apportioned and tends to be lacking in

consistency. Redesign for functional efficiency should be given top

consideration in plans for the future.

4. Not all of the interior academic and meeting spaces are equipped to support a

technologically advanced learning environment.

5. Office space is inconsistent in its location on-campus. It is not well designed

and, therefore, full utilization of space is poor.

6. The Lecture Forum building is the hub of the larger lecture oriented instructional

delivery that supports a majority of the on-campus disciplines - its condition and

future should be given top priority.

D. Land Utilization/Land Availability

The College is projected to require only 49,750 assignable square feet of additional facility space to

meet the target of 128,195 on-campus (credit and non-credit) weekly student contact hours and an

enrollment of 12,524 students, a mark that has been projected for the year 2020. It appears that the

existing campus will accommodate this projected enrollment growth without the need for the

District to expand its land holdings in the immediate area. The exception to this may be the need

for parking facilities - either surface parking or a structured parking facility.

Obseroations

.1. Parking will be a significant concern for the future. As enrollment grows to

12,524 students (projected for 2020), the College will have a need for

approximately 2,700 parking spaces. A parking plan/study should be conducted

and the results receive major consideration in all decision-making involving land

utilization and/or land acquisition.

2. Future land utilization should address the problem of creating better physical

access to the College. Such things as vehicular circulation, pedestrian flows and

S ·12 !\-l"ntl'n'\' P"n11l;iuh Commtlllay C .. jh!~w Dl~tI·lf:t

.J.<llll.lftJ"Y 2004

\1., A~ C"ml'am~'

SPACE QUANTIFICATION,. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

ingress/ egress points need to be systematically and simultaneously addressed

with the consideration of any new construction and/or remodeling efforts.

3. Attention should be given to preserving and expanding the landscaping

component of the College. Landscaping should be given major consideration as

a means to link the various portions of the campus that are presently divided. It

should also be used to meld the architectural styles. Unlike parking, landscaping

cannot be moved off-campus. It should receive the same degree of importance

as the College's building program.

4. Additional human and physical resources should be considered for the

landscaping effort. Typically, community college districts in California allocate

between 10% and 12% .of their budget to maintenance and operation (including

personnel and materials).

E. Support Infrastructure

Monterey Peninsula College has both current and future infrastructure needs. Overall, infrastructure

should be considered as the backbone that supports the District's building/facilities program. An

assessment of the existing infrastructure condition suggests that the College can anticipate spending

between 20% and 30% of the cost of its overall Building/Facilities Program on upgrading its utility

infrastructure and distribution systems.

Observations

1. The College has addressed some of its immediate infrastructure needs through its

recent construction projects .. However, much of the supporting infrastructure is

not adequate to meet the existing or planned student enrollment of the next 16

years, i.e. through 2020. Key infrastructure upgrades will need to be considered

for the following:

a. Telephone/Telecommunications

b. Electrical

c. Water and Wastewater Services

S· 13 :\:l"J1ft'n'~; ,'"nlllsuia Commlluir:v ClIlJf!!(t~ Dl:o:itnl't

thll1tuu'y 2004

MAAS Comp3n;0,


d. Water Distribution System - Retrofits (pressure valves,

hydrants, backflow devices)

e. HVAC Source and Distri~ution Upgrades

2. Technological infrastructure that is sufficient to meet the needs and demands of

a post secondary institution of higher learning is a priority. The College needs to

be able to communicate and interact both internally and with the external world.

Upgrading of the College's technological infrastructure also needs to include

technology in the classroom. Many of the classrooms are lagging behind with

respect to technologically advanced instructional support equipment.

3. The current program of replacement/ repair will need to be further augmented to

address the replacement of roofs and other on-campus support infrastructure

such as lighting, campus walkways, etc.

F. Current Facility Utilization

The utilization ratios, i.e. available space (assignable square footage or ASp) as compared

to demand (weekly student contact hours produced or WSCH), a measure used by the

Chancellor's Office to determine space needs, indicate that the College currently has a

surplus of space in most of its facilities. The lone exception is instructional media, which

presently shows a need of approximately 2,600' ASF.

Observations'

1. Scheduling of classes reflects a four-day use pattern - Monday through Thursday.

2. The impact of a 16-week semester has further compressed the schedule between

Monday through Friday, elongating the facilitY use demand during prime times

but leaving the facilities open for use at others.

3. There is a gap between the end of afternoon classes and the beginning of

evening classes where facilities receive very little use.

4. Class size data in relationship to room capacities indicates that the College is

presently operating at an excess (of space) relative to academic space utilization,

particularly for lecture classrooms.

S ·14 :'\],,1;1,_(1".' I', nll):,ni;1 ('rmnnlll)jl,- (: .. ~I(!:!\· Di:-:lt'll.'t

.J.UHUU':V ~nn4

\1:\-\S (:Prllj"':JOlC\

SPACE QUANTIFICATION" FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

5. Overall, the College currently has 92,149 ASF of academic space on its facilities

inventory with a qualifying need for 85,603 ASF (Reference Table 5.4 that

follows.

Table 5.4 ACADEMIC ASSIGNABLE SQUARE FEET ALLOTED BY TITLE 5 STANDARDS

CURRENT INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM 77,092 W'SCH - 8,153 ON-CAMPliS STliDENTS

TOPS DIVISION TOPS CODE LEC ASF LAB ASF TOTAL ASF

Architecture 0200 124.4 634.2 758.6

Biology 0400 484.0 5,855.3 6,339.3

Business & Management 0500 882.9 1,703.6 2,586.5

Communications 0600 30.8 230.3 261.1

Computer & Info Science 0700 425.6 1,752.3 2,177.9

Education 0800 874.5 1,347.4 2,221.9

Engineering Tech/Indus Tech 0900 239.4 1,911.7 2,151.1

Fine & Applied Arts 1000 1,034.3 22,676.5 23,710.8

Foreign Language 1100 1,186.7 2,054.6 3,241.3

Health Science 1200 507.4 6,750.2 7,257.6

Consumer Ed/Home Econ 1300 677.4 463.0 1,140.4

Humanities 1500 3,040.7 4,336.7 7,377.4

Library 1600 18.9 22.0 40.9

Mathematics 1700 2,716.0 863.3 3,579.3

Physical Science 1900 760.5 6,150.5 6,911.0

Psychology 2000 867.8 0.0 867.8

Public Affairs/Services 2100 137.9 869.2 1,007.1

Social Sciences 2200 2,601.2 154.2 2,755.4

Interdisciplinary Studies 4900 1,658.2 9,558.9 11,217.1

TOTAL 18,269 67,334 85,603

" , Source: By TOP Code DlVtston, TItle 5 Standards,. Data taken from 2002 Fall Semester VIS-a-IItS Office Inshtutzonal Research,' AnalYsts by Maas Companies, Data is for 2002 Fall Semester. '" Pbysical Education ASF is determined by a different calmlation. Per Title 5 Standards, an additional allowance of 35,OOOASF is offered for Pbysical Education to meet enrollment demands of 8,153.

6. The status of total facility utilization at Monterey Peninsula College is noted in the

table that follows. The data suggests that the College has a qualified need, per state

standards, of 236,569 ASF with a useable space inventory of 292,658 ASF. The

surpluses for academic space are nearly at a breakeven status, running in excess of

the state standards by 2,316 ASF for lecture and 2,467 ASF for laboratory space.

s - IS ;\lt1rlt.·r('\· l'1.'nlll~lIia COlnllllllllt.\· ClIlI(HW DisU1Ct

.J.mtl,"'y20tl4

M A ·\S Cnmpamc,

CODE 0

100 210-230 235-255

300 400

510-515 520-525 530-535 540-555

580 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800 900

Table 5.5

SPACE QUANTIFICATION & FACIUTIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACIUTIES PLAN

CURRENT FACILITY [~'VE:NTORY AS COMPARED TO NEED

CURRENT TITLE 5 DESCRIPTION INVENTORY ALLOTMENT DIFFERENTIAL NEED

Inactive 13,869 0 (13,869) 0 Classroom 20,585 18,269 (2,316) 0 Laboratory 69,801 67,334 (2,467) 0 Laboratory Service 1,763 775 (988) 0 Office I Conference 33,125 25,401 (7,724) 0 Library 35,820 32,754 (3,066) 0 Armory 201 0 (201) 0 Phys Ed (Indoor) 38,713 35,000 (3,713) 0 (AV/TV) 9,222 11,865 2,643 2,643

Child Care, Clinic 4,719 3,261 (1,458) 0 Greenhouse 1,327 0 (1,327) 0 Assembly/Exhibition 28,159 8,153 (20,006) 0 Food Service 8,857 4,892 (3,965) 0 Lounge/Lounge Serv 3,105 1,722 (1,383) 0 Bookstore 5,355 6,963 1,608 1,608 Meeting IRecreanon 3,057 2,715 (342) 0 Data Proc/Comp 1,499 5,000 3,501 3,501 Physical Plant 13,341 11,265 (2,076) 0 Health Services 140 1,200 1,060 1,060 Dormitories 0 0 0 0

TOTALS 292,658 236,569 (56,089) 8,812

Source: Monterey Peninsula Community College Distrid, Report 17 (as amended October 2003); Maas Companies analYsis based on Title 5, Chapter 8, Section 57028 oj the California Code oj Regulations.

S·I6 \1p'!~I'r(':; 1·I·alll;.u~.1 CfltnlTllllli!'" ("do:,!!: J)i~tI·lI·t

.LIIHlIIJ'Y 2{)1I4

\t \ 1\ '" C: nrnr:JnlC\

FACILITIES MASTER PLAN ISSUES


Several planning issues were considered in determining the Building/Facilities Program for the

future. Listed below are those issues that were labeled as most likely to affect the planning process

and the prioritization of facilities:

A. A Changing Academic Environment

Major trends that will influence the development and direction of the instructional and support service

programs of the future will also affect the future facilities plan of the District. These trends will

include:

1. A Less "Campus Centered" College: Significant changes in the methods of delivery of

instructional programs at community colleges may mean a decrease in the

significance of the large community college campuses that have been developed in

the past. Large numbers of classrooms and traditional laboratories may be less

important than developing technology-based learning resource centers and· outreach

centers.

2. Learning Resource Centers: The community college of the future will require a more

significant investment, both in terms of people and finances and in the development

of ways to support alternative instructional delivery. The Learning Resource Center

(LRC) will augment some of the Library functions in this new approach to learning

advancement. The LRC will be a central learning location on the campus as well as

the primary site for transmission of distance learning and tutoring.

3. Facility Flexibility: There will be difficulty in determining the line that has

traditionally separated lecture from laboratory space. Accordingly, buildings should

be constructed to accommodate multiple use. Change should be anticipated in that

use. Facilities that are planned must be developed with the idea that within ten

years they will most likely be remodeled. Thus, construction should permit the

maximum amount of structural and infrastructure flexibility .

s - 17 . ;\11,r.!I·n'\" I'ilnlllslila COmmllllltV ColJJe:!1.! Ui:-itt'iet

.J.\I'\\lHI'V 2004

\1.\'IS C"mpan,",


Maximum flexibility should be the primary goal of new construction. reconstruction

or remodel. Considerations should be given to the multiple uses of utility raceways,

the use of non-bearing interior walls, and demountable partitions. Buildings should

be essentially thought of as shells with interior spaces. The utility infrastructure

should also be as flexible as possible. It should be available to any area of the

building and capable of being added to or deleted from - as needs change. Interior

rooms. offices. classrooms. and laboratories should be totally changeable. While the

development of this construction concept may increase costs at the time of original

construction, it can be demonstrated that over the life of the building (and

numerous remodels) it will be extremely cost effective and use efficient.

4. Modular Construction: Modular construction should be considered as a concept in

the original design process for permanent buildings so that square footage

additions and modifications can easily be accommodated. Much has been

learned from the modular building industry in terms of designing buildings that

can be expanded. reconfigured, and even reduced in size. Permanent buildings

can similarly be constructed using some of these same techniques, i.e. designs

that facilitate major building reconfigurations. As needs change, so can the

physical dimensions of buildings. The design concept should be carefully

developed with due consideration of all code requirements.

5. Public/Public and Public/Private Partnerships: There are times when districts should

consider not constructing a building, but rather entering into partnerships with

local business and industry or public agencies to co-produce Goint venture) a

facility. Buildings constructed in partnership with area business, industry,

and/ or other educational or public institutions can offer the district an

alternative means of acquiring facilities at a minimal cost.

6. Off-Campus SateUite Centers: Off-campus satellite centers will become an

important component of instructional delivery. As distance learning and other

modes of alternative instructional delivery gain in popularity, the need for large

central campuses will be less significant. Smaller, complex learning centers

capable of networking with a variety of educational providers will become more

5·18 ),l<ltlt··rpy l'I'nlll!-.U;a C()1J\ll'lt1llir~' C.,jh::.ft· J)i~tliet

!hllnlUJ'~" ZOO ...

M:\/\s C.:fmlpanH!\

SPACE QUANTIFICATION'" FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

prevalent. The future will also see these education centers shared between high

schools, colleges, and universities. In essence, taking education to the

community in place of requiring the community to come to the campus. This

concept will mean a total redefinition of what constitutes a "college campus"

and will greatly increase the efficiency of educational delivery. Off-campus

centers will also become hubs for satellite uplinks and downlinks. They will be

communication intensive spaces, designed to move information from one point

to another. These centers may also become conference centers, small business

incubators, electronic decision centers, and teleconferencing hubs, purposely

designed to bring area businesses and community members together for non

traditional educational services.

7. Extended Use of Facilities: In this new era, educational sites should be designed to

operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week and fifty-two weeks per year as

the information age reaches its maximum level of intensity. This will present

facilities planning and maintenance issues that must be addressed in today's

planning environment.

B. Defining the Direction of the Facilities/Building Program

The District currently finds itself over the state limits for its capacity load ratios for instructional

space. At the same time, it has, in its building inventory, a significant amount of aging and

inefficient buildings that do not serve the needs of its academic mission. As a result, a considerable

amount of focus will need to be placed on recolilstruction and/or remodel, with building efficiency

being the prime objective. Design implications for all planned reconstruction and! or remodel

projects should be held to the same standards of new construction - that is:

1. Ascribe to the concept that all instructional spaces need to be flexible to

accommodate either lecture or laboratory use.

2. Consistent with the assignable square footage (ASF) standards defined by the

State Chancellor's Office.

s - 19 \1·,r::,·rp\' ~·+'n\ll~ui.l C(jmml1))J!~.t ClljJ{!Ut! Ui:..fI,et

.J.IIHlIIl'V 2(1)4

\1..\ A \ c.,mr"nJC\


3. Accomplished with an eye towards facilita~g the conversion of existing spaces

to other uses, as the District's needs change.

4 .. Utilizing space to its highest and best purpose.

Renovation projects will need to be considered to meet the "secondary effects" that will result from

any planned new construction, reconstruction or remodeling efforts. Additionally, technological

upgrades/improvements, i.e. providing instructional delivery systems that are current and

competitive in the educational marketplace, should be a high priority for the District in its facility

development program.

C. Infrastructure

While the District has tried to keep-up with the repair and upgrade of its utility and support

infrastructure, the available monies for this formidable task have been limited. This has resulted in

the approach to infrastructure replacement being mostly reactive nature - i.e. addressing the issues

that require immediate attention but never being able to get ahead of the curve. The importance of

"backbone" infrastructure as a top priority and outcome of the building/ facilities plan cannot be

stressed enough. "Backbone" infrastructure such as water and sewer, electrical, telecommunications

and HVAC are critical to meet health and safety standards on the campus. New building

construction and reconstruction/remodel will need to take into account that a substantial percentage

of the associated cost will need to be devoted to this key component.

While utility infrastructure is a critical item as a point of address, particular attention will also need to

be given to support infrastructure, such as parking and vehicular circulation, points of ingress and

egress, pedestrian circulation, lighting and landscaping. These "above ground", visible amenities aJ;'e

as critical to the long-term viability and success of the College as the underground, utility

infrastructure.

s· 20 :,\1oJ:i f 'r('.,· P"nllJ1-illla Community' CljJH~l' Di.MI·Wt

.J''''tll\l·~· 2()f)4

\<L\,\S C"mpomc\

SPACE QUANTIFICATION II: FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

D. Building to the Planning Criteria of the State Chancellors Office

Even though the District has funds available via the successful passing of its local bond measure, the

monies appropriated will not be sufficient to meet all the facility needs and demands through the

year 2020. It will be imperative that the District leverages its local bond with monies available

through the state. Facility construction and reconstruction/remodel will, therefore, be subject to the

state's Title 5 Standards. The District's Building/Facilities Program should take into account that

the best possibility for state funding rests with those projects that meet the following priorities:

1. Health and Safety Issues

2. Remodel for Efficiency

3. Remodel/Construction for Technological Advancement

E. Maintaining the Relationship with the Program of Instruction

Assignable square footage requirements that have been generated for the Building/Facilities

Program of the future assume an instructional program that is similar to that which currently exists

at Monterey Peninsula College, i.e. a blend of general education/transfer, occupational/vocational

degree and certification programs, developmental education opportunities, strong off-campus

contract programs in Public Safety and a healthy non-credit on-campus program led by the Arts and

Physical Education. The impact of technology-based instructional delivery, however, could

drastically change the way in which these and other current on-campus facilities are deployed,

utilized and structured. The District will also have the additional impact of the Fort Ord facilities

that are proposed for development. The Fort Ord facilities will support the Public Safety

instructional division as well as be a satellite resource facility (Campus Center) that will offer basic,

core general education courses. Since decisions related to the planning and delivery of instructional

and support services drive the facilities planning process, it is an essential that instructional planning

and facilities planning be closely coordinated at all stages of the building/ rebuilding process.

S·21 \1t1Jll.,rpy fJ.'nIIlSU\a COUUnltllll.Y C.dJ(!~l~ Di:;fnf.'t

,L.ll1luu·:'t'" 200';

MA.\~ C"mp,,",c,

F. Technological Considerations

SPACE QUANTIFICATION'" FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

The following facilities-related issues should be taken into consideration with regard to the impact of

technology:

1. There is a need to have classrooms, laboratories and conference rooms that are

supported with modern technology such as computer and media equipment and

connections to the Internet. As faculty becomes more deeply involved in the use

of technology in the classroom, there will be a widening need to continue and

expand the available technical resources.

2. Consideration should also be given to the impact. of distance learning on

campus, learning facilities (classrooms and laboratories), the allocation of space

to house communications hardware supportive of distance learning, and the need

for off-campus learning delivery.

3. If the use of technology as a device for instructional delivery accelerates as

anticipated, it may greatly redefme the concept of what the campus is -. in a

facilities sense. The District should be watchful of these changes and prepare

alternative strategies to keep pace with technology needs.

4. The implementation of off-site learning strategies may also develop a new

definition of an off-campus center, thus impacting the Building/Facilities

Program.

5. As the District contemplates new or remodeled facilities, attention should be

directed toward the establishment of des.igns that are adaptive for future

technology. While not every technological device can be anticipated, it is

possible to provide equipment and other components that will support future

technology needs.

6. The challenge for the next decade and beyond will be to constantly monitor the

changes that are occurring in instructional delivery and support services delivery

and to integrate these changes into a Building/Facilities Program.

S·22 ~ll1ntt'TI'\ }.If'nlll:'Ut;1 CfJllllnlJlllty ('ode:,:" Dl:o,tnet

.J.dll1ury 20114

\1.., ·\S C;n",pan.c\

G. Design Integration

SPACE QUANTIFICATION Be FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING FACILITIES PLAN

With every new building that is constructed, the District redefines itself to the public as an

institution of higher learning. It is imperative, therefore, that architectural guidelines and standards

for new construction, reconstruction and/or remodel, as well as for landscape treatment, be

coordinated so as to project and convey a consistent, logical and understandable message that

reflects the character of the District, via the College and/or its Centers. At MPC, blending the old

with the new - including both building exteriors and interiors (offices, classrooms, laboratory and

support facilities) - will need to be priority to achieve the goal of a unified campus. A campus-wide

plan for upgrading all facilities will need to be implemented as a result.

H. Operational Efficiency Levels of the District

The District will need to demonstrate that in delivering its program of instruction it is operating at

the performance standards adopted by the state. Operational efficiency and existing facility

utilization will have a direct correlation on the operational monies that the District receives on an

annual basis as well as on the prospects of qualifying (in a very competitive atmosphere) for state

monies for new construction, reconstruction and/or remodeling projects. This may mean

demonstrating use of facilities on a full five-day per week basis and that the College and/or the

Centers are engaged in utilization of District facilities between the weekday hours of 8:00 AM and

4:00 PM as well as during the early and late evening hours. The productivity of the College and/or

Centers relative to statewide averages for students per class section, weekly student contact hours

(WSCH) per class section, WSCH per full time equivalent faculty (FfEF) will need to demonstrate

higher levels of success. The District's current ratios for productivity/efficiency, in some cases, are

substantially below the state standards. With limited state funding, the available funds will be

awarded to those community colleges demonstrating the greatest productivity/efficiency values.

The District will, therefore, need to demonstrate that accountable, efficient operation is being

achieved.

5·23 :'I.1<lJj;.·fj'\" 1"'IHd:-tl~:l C{J!JW:UIlJ!\ CIl,I<~UI' Di:'!tt'it:L

,LIIHIIIJT :!ou4

\1.\-\\ C"mp,",",

I. Maintenance Issues


The area that is most often lost in the design and construction, reconstruction and/or remodel of

new facilities is that of maintenance. After the beautiful architectural renderings, the final walk

through and ribbon cutting ceremonies, new construction and reconstruction/remodel must be

maintained. It is assumed that this need will somehow occur just because the building is completed.

The maintenance issue is not only critical to the facilities planning process - it is imperative. Key

maintenance issues that need to be addressed as part of the Building/Facilities Program include the

following:

1. The adequacy of the current and projected maintenance organizational structure

to support new or remodeled facilities and/or changes in instructional delivery.

2. The need to generate (parallel with the Program) an overall comprehensive and

long-term plan for maintenance.

3. A long-term commitment of funding for maintenance.

J. Construction "Phasing"

The success of the Building/Facilities Program will not only be dependent on identifying a priority

list of projects but also on how and when those projects will be implemented. Proper "phasing" of

projects will insure that the minimal disruption to the campus occurs, that alternate space is

provided to accommodate the disruptions to class schedules or support services, that key utility

infrastructure is not disassembled rendering the campus useless. Timing and logistics are critical to

the construction process.

K. Off-Campus Needs

For the future, the District will need to expand away from its existing main campus if it is to be

successful in meeting the needs of its constituent base. Because growth for the service area is

projected to occur primarily to the north, the addition of a satellite Campus Center in this area

should be a high priority goal. The Fort Ord facility offers the best possibility for accommodating

this need. Overall, the District will be challenged to meet the needs of its changing and diverse

population base in the future; educational (satellite) centers will provide a bridge to addressing

change and diversity.

5-24 :. .. J"y;!.·rl'. I'. llilbt ... j C(lITlInlll1;r:,-· Cf!j}(~J,W J)i~tt,et

.J.UHIIIJ'Y 2004

\1,\ ·IS Cnmr"mc\

PROPOSED PROJECTS

Overview


Monterey Peninsula College is projected to maintain an overall annual rate of growth for on-campus,

credit and non-credit WSCH of between 2.78% and 2.92% through 2020. In terms of on-campus

enrollment, the College is projected to grow from 77,092 WSCH and 8,153 on-campus students to

over 128,195 WSCH and 12,524 students by the year 2020. Additionally, the Fort Ord Public Safety

Program and the Campus Center are projected to reach 24,446 WSCH, 2,719 enrollment and 11,372

WSCH, 2,057 enrollment respectively by this benchmark year. To meet this demand, the District

will need to have useable facility space that will be in excess of 433,000 ASF, an addition of almost

141,000 ASF of additional building space for instructional and support services purposes.

While Title 5 (California Code of Regulations) qualifying criteria can be used to determine

"supportable" need, from the state's perspective, it does not specifically address the condition of

existing facilities on campus. In the case of Monterey Peninsula College, most of the existing

facilities are 30 to 45 years of age. As part of the Building/Facilities Program, selected buildings that

are presently on-campus will need to be reconstructed and/or remodeled for efficiency. Overall, the

District's facility program, will fall into one of three categories:

A. New construction to meet new demand

B. Renovation/remodel for greater efficiency

B. Reconstruction to replace existing structures

While new construction and reconstruction will be required on the main campus, the greatest need

will fall into Category B, Renovation/Remodel for better building efficiency. Facilities at the Ford

Ord location will, for the most part, fall into Category A, New Construction .

S - 25 .\-I 0 11T,·rt'." ",·nlllhlil;J C:01nmulllt~· C'Jlt~)!,· I>tsft"ll''t

.hmtlnr~· 2()04

M,.\.\ s C:""'ran1c,


Overview of Greatest Facility Needs

Based on the analysis conducted, the input received from adminis~tors, faculty and staff of the District,

the following building/facility projects, outlined by function, have surfaced as top considerations for a

Building/Facilities Plan.

On-Campus

o Greatest Overall Needs

• Infrastructure Upgrades and Replacement

o Greatest Academic Needs (New and/or Expanded Facilities)

• Music (New ConstructionlReplacement)

• Math and Science (New ConstructionlExpansion)

• Physical Education (Facility Rehabilitation)

• Humanities (Expansion)

• Health Services (RemodellExpansion)

o Greatest Support Services Needs

• Student Services (New ConstructionlReplacement)

• Child Development Center (New Construction/Replacement)

Off-Campus

o Greatest Facility Needs

• Development ofFord Ord Facility (New Construction)

Based on the input and a thorough analysis of space needs and qualification for state assistance, the

following proposed Building/Facility Program is presented. The Program defines projects by time,

priority, task, scope, action and cost. The cost estimates for projects are based on current construction

costs as defined by the state for construction andlor remodel. Timelines for the projects, by group, are in

four~year time intervals.

S -26 .\hml·ri'Y }t, IHIl:"\il.l C()mml1llj~\' Ctdle:,!t! I)i:~tl"iet

.J.tmllu·~" 200-01

\1 A·\ ~ COlllr"","'

Proposed Building/Facility Program

o Student Serv. Bldg Supp Serv Offices 22,400 New Construction

o Music Bldg. Labs/Support Space/Office 9,950 Replacement Constr

o Lecture Forum Bldg. LF 103 Lecture/ Assembly Space 3,443 Remodel

LF 101 and 102 Lecture/Assembly Space 3,870 Complete Remodel All Other LF Offices/Support Space 5,404 Remodel

o Intn Ctr/Nursing Lab/Offices Upgrades 8,608 Remodel 1 st floor

o Child Devel Ctr Child Care/Lab 8,577 New Construction

o Physical Education Stadium/FieldrrracklFitness NA Rehab Gym/Locker Rms 28,408 Rehab/Remodel

o Fort Ord Site On sitesllnfrastructure/Facilities NA Utility Development Public Safety 22,500 Construction

o Old Library Adm. Offices/Support Services 13,869 Remodel/Conversion

subtotal

5-27

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDINGIFACILITIES PLAN

$7,392,000

$4,503,470 * Candidate State Assistance

$728,195 * Candidate State Assistance $363,780 $972,720

$774,720 * Candidate State Assistance


$8,300,000 * Candidate Private Support $8,291,443 * Candidate State Assistance

$4,155,975 * Candidate Public Support $8,311,950


$49,870,369 I


MAAS Companies ,JallllRry 2004

o Math/Sci Bldg LeclLabs/Offices/Support

o Humanities LeclLab/Office

o Art - Dimensional Lab/Offices Upgrades

o Theater Lab and Support Space

o Nursing Lab and Support Space

Fort Ord College Satellite Center Public Safety

Support Infrastructure

o College Center Student AcUMerchandizing Food Service/Offices

15,626 New Constr/Expansion

10,579 Rehab/Remodel

8,127 Remodel

14,466 Remodel/Expansion

4,242 Rehab/Remodel

12,500 New Construction 16,200 New Construction

NA On-sites/Infrastructure

19,899 Remodel/Expansion

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING/FACILITIES PLAN



$1,462,860

$5,311,915

$1,557,662

$4,670,625 $5,984,604 * Candidate State Assistance

* Candidate Public Support $6,100,785

$4,208,639

subtotal $37,611,0391

5-28

Monterey Peninsula Community College J>iatrict

Mp -" Companies .ry 2001

o Physical Science LeclLab/Office

o Art-Ceramics Labs Upgrade

o Art - Studio Labs Upgrade

o Life Science LeclLab/Offices/Support .

o Social Sciences Lecture/Labs Upgrade

o Bus. & Humanities Lecture/Lab/Offices/Support

o Fort Ord

o Art Gallery

Public Safety Campus Center

Exhibition Space

12,095 Remodel for Efficiency

5,101 Remodel

4,314 Remodel

10,245 Remodel

7,191 Remodel

6,448 Reconstr .IExpansion

16,500 10,800

884

New Construction New Constr/Expansion

Remodel

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDINGfFACILITIES PLAN


$918,180

$776,520


$1,294,380

$2,500,212

$6,165,225 * Candidate Public Support $4,035,420

$159,120

subtotal $20,251,250 I 5-29


MAAS Companies .J"~IISlry 2004

DArts - Graphic

o Fort Ord

o Consumer Ed

o Business and CS

o Swim Pool

Construction/Remodel

Lab/Offices Upgrades

Outdoor Training Facilities Public Safety

Lecture/Lab/Offices/Support


Pool House Pool

3,243 Remodel

NA New Construction 10,500 New Construction

1,981 Remodel

10,759 Remodel

2,014 Remodel Pool Reconstruction

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES PLAN CHAPTER 5 - PROPOSED BUILDING/FACILITIES PLAN

$583,740

$3,800,000 $3,923,325 * Candidate Public Support

$356,580


$362,520 * Private/Public Support $2,200,000

subtotal $13,162,7851

5-30


M /' . ~ Companies

nry :.!004

Support Serv/Child Ctr Children's Module Plant Service Student Services Auto Tech Music Bldgs Physical Fitness Business and Humanities Administration

Academic/Support EquipmenUFurnishings Other

Swing Space (including site prep)

Infrastructure ImprovemenUUpgrades Parking/T rafflc Circulation Pedestrian Circulation Landscaping

Soft Costs

3,838 1,129 3,476 3,655 4,698 8,590 4,001 4,939 4,438 38,764

5'31

SPACE QUANTIFICATION AND FACILITIES PLAN CHAPTER 5' PROPOSED BUILDINGIFACILITIES PLAN

ISub Total $120,895,443 I

$460,560 $135,480 $417,120 $438,600 $563,760

$1,030,800 $480,120 $592,680 $532,560

ISub Total $4,651,680 I $4,810,498

$650,000 ISub Total $5,460,498 I

$4,550,000 ISub Total $4,550,000 I

$36,268,633 $2,947,800 $1,150,000


MAAS Companies ,JanuAry 20(H

SPACE QUANTIflCA nON AND FACILmES MASTER PLAN APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

Overview

Through the work of the Academic· Affairs Committee and the Student Services Division of

Monterey Peninsula College, an educational master plan was completed in 2003. The Monterry

Peninsula College Educational Maste,. Plan is comprised of a series of goal statements, ten in all, that

reflect the current priorities as well as the thinking and needs of the College from the perspective of

faculty and staff. Each stated goal of the Educational Master Plan was reviewed and input offered

relative to the changes and needs that would be required to attain the goal - both from the academic

and student support points of view. Inherent in the context of the .responses to the goals are

expressed planning statements and resources needs ("initiatives'') - including those relating to

curriculum, delivery and programmatic changes, i.e. the program of instruction, the engine that

drives all other functions of the College.

The goal statements are elaborated upon in full detail in the Educational Master Plan elements but

generally include and/or relate to the following:

1. Quality Instruction 2. Compensation Parity 3. Liaison with the Community 4. Technology 5. Governance/Decision-Making

6. Responsiveness of Administration 7. Facilities/Facilities Plan 8. Effective Research/Planning 9. Fiscal Stability/Responsibility 10. Staff Diversity

This document, the Monterry Peninsula College Educational Maste,. Plan, is referenced as significant to the

qualitative input regarding space needs of the District. As such, it is included as an appendix to the

Monterry Peninsula Communi!} College District's Space Quantification and Facilities Maste,. Plan.

A'I Monterey Peninsula Community College District

January 2004

MAAS Companies

A-2

SPACE QUANTTfICA nON AND FACILITIES MASTER PLAN APPENDIX A


MAAS Companies

. .-


\Agenda Item #~

. , .

Monterey Peninsula Community College

District

Ed ucationa 1/ Faci I iti es Master Plan

Executive Summary

..

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

MONTEREY PENINSULA COLLEGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EDUCATION/FACILITY MASTER PLAN

·." ..

The following is an Executive Summary ("Summary') of the 2004 Monterey Peninsula

Community College District Educational! Facilities Master Plan ("Master Plan" or "Plan"). The

Summary is the conclusion of research and analysis conducted over the past several

months that supports the creation of the Plan. The ultimate goal of this effort was to

produce a document that would guide the District to a building/facilitY program,

addressing the needs of the College and its Campus Centers through the year 2020.

Background and Support

Several key findings shaped the direction of the Master Plan and provided the basi~ for

the conclusions drawn and actions recorrunended. These findings are noted in the

synopsis that follows.

he External Environmen

• GROWTH WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA WILL BE RELATIVELY SLOW

For the view period through the year 2020, the population rate of growth is

projected to average only 1.28% on an annual basis, a mark substantially below

the state average of 1.49%. Population growth in Monterey proper will be very

slow. Almost all new growth will occur to the north (Seaside and beyond).

Mon1erey Peninsula Communi1y College District February 2004

MAAS COMPANIES

he Internal Environment



• ATTRACTING NEW STUDENTS TO THE CAMPUS WILL CONTINUE TO BE

CHALLENGING

For the future, the College will continue to be challenged in findirlg new ways to

bring students to the Campus. While the District has made its "cap" relative to

apportionment funding from the state, and that "cap" has been in the 3+% range,

it has had to rely on creative instructional programming and delivery, expanded

public/partnerships and growth of the Public Safety instructional division to do

so. Overall, enrollmeht growth has been slow and dependent on particular

segments within the academic program of instruction. This fact was borne out in

an extensive and detailed analysis of the College's existing program of

instruction, in evaluation of historical trends and via interviews with the

administrators, faculty and staff.

Demographically, nothing was found to indicate that there would be an increase

in the 19 - 24 year old age segment of the population (a prime target for

community colleges). The data indicated a growing trend for the 45 - 64 year old

population segment, suggesting that the population within the effective service

area will be getting older. This older population base may indicate an

opportunity for the District in the long term.

• OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AT THE COLLEGE WILL NEED TO IMPROVE

Via review of the District's database for on,campus credit and non,credit

teaching instruction loads, the current ratio for weekly student contact hours

(WSCH) to full time equivalent faculty (FTEF) was found to be 414.17. The state

standard for achieving full funding efficiency is 525 WSCH per FTEF. The result

of this disparity is partially manifested in smaller class sizes (averaging 29.5

students) and, subsequently, underutilization of existing building space.

Underutilization was noted in the capacity load ratios of the 5,Year Capital

Outlay Plan of the District, particularly as it applied to on,campus lecture space.

2

Monterey Peninsula Community College District February 2004

MAAS COMPANIES

MONTEREY PENINSLILA COLLEGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


As state funding for new, replaced or remodeled facilities is predicated on

existing space utilization practices, the District will need to consider.

implementing a plan that is directed to raising efficiency and utilization levels.

Pros ects for Growth

• THE ENROLLMENT RATE OF GROWTH IS PROJECTED TO AVERAGE 2.34%

On an annual basis, enrollment growth rates within the District are projected to

range between 1.98%· and 2.69%. The greatest opportunity to capture new

enrollment growth will be from the population expansion that will occur

primarily to the north of Monterey Peninsula College.

• THE RATE OF GROWTH FOR WEEKLY STUDENT CONTACT HOURS (WSCH) IS

PROJECTED TO AVERAGE 2.850/0

For the future, the annual rate of growth for WSCH is projected to outpace the

growth rate for student enrollment. WSCH growth rates will range between

2.78% and 2.92%. On a per semester basis, WSCHis projected to reach 128,196

by 2020, an approximate increase of 50,000 WSCH from the current mark of

77,093.

• STUDENT PARTICIPATION RATES WILL NEED TO INCREASE

In order to meet enrollment and weekly student contact hours projected, the

District will need to increase its "student participation rate". Currently, the

District's rate of student participation on~campus is at the statewide average of

37.5 students per 1,000 population. By 2020, this rate will need to increase to

45.8 students per 1,000 population. The District may need to tap into its older

(resident) student population base to reach this target.

3


MAAS COMPANIES



• OFF,CAMPUS AND COMMUNITY,BASED PROGRAMS WILL BE THE PRIMARY

DRIVERS OF NEW ENROLLMENT GROWTH

The Public Safety Instructional Division (Fire, Administrative Justice, Parks and

Recreation) will be a significant generator of student enrolhnent and WSCH for '

the District .. These programs will maintain a presence that is off,campus.' New

enrollment growth will also be driven by programs that share a common interest

with the community - particularly those related to the Arts and Athletics.

The College has always been noted for its strong program of general education

and its transfer,based curriculum. This program is projected to remain strong

and grow at proportional levels to the District's rate of overall enrollment growth.

he Ph skal Plant - Buildin and Facilities

• THE CAMPUS IS SHOWING ITS AGE

A great portion of the space for academic programs and support services on;.

campus is old - 40 to 50 years olds, in many cases. While the "bones" of these

buildings may be good, a cosmetic overhaul is needed. To meet the instructional

. delivery and support services standards of today's educational environment,

upgrading of the building contents (Le. furnishings, equipment, and expansion of

technological capacity) will also needed.

• IF NOT ADDRESSED, INFRASTRUCTURE COULD BECOME A "GROWTH

LIMITING" FACTOR FOR THE FUTURE

Similar to the aging of on,campus buildings, "backbone" infrastructure, including

utility services for electrical, gas; and telecommunication, is old and in need of

upgrading and replacement. Internal distribution systems for water, sewer and

storm drainage are equally aged. While some of these needs have been addressed

through scheduled maintenance and operating budget appropriations, a long'

range replacement plan, supported by the appropriate financial resources

specifically for this purpose, is required to bring these vital components up to

4

Monterey Peninsulo Community College District Februory 2004

MAAS COMPANIES

current standards.



. I

Additionally, support infrastructure, ~cluding HV AC ,

systems, landscaping, and campus lighting improvements, ~ need to be

addressed as a major component of the overall building/facilities program.

• PARKING/CIRCULA TION/INGRESS, EGRESS/ON,CAMPlJS NAVIGATION

The existing parking/circulation patterns can be described in levels that vary

'. from random to haphazard. Parking/circulation, therefore, should be consid~red

a top priority in the overall plan for campus development. A comprehensive

traffic plan with appropriate roadway support, including looped,on campus

roadway~ for emergency vehicle access as well as internal roadways that are safe

and appropriately linked to established parking areas, should receive the

District's highest attention.

Additionally, there is a need to establish a clear and definable "front door" to the

College - one that welcomes students to the campus. Navigable paths for

pedestrian circulation and campus sign age are also needed and considered vital to

the campus environment as well as to the success of the overall building/facilities

program.

• THE VOLUME OF EXISTING SPACE ON,CAMPUS IS ADEQUATE

Generally, the volume of space that the District has on,campus is adequate to

meet the current and even the near,term projected space needs. However, much

of the space is "bad space". Some departments/disciplines and support services

functions will require new space, but largely the building/facilities program of the

future will focus on remodel and renovation.

• CAMPUS DESIGN LAYOUT AND INEFFICIENCIES WILL NEED TO BE ADDRESED

Much of the space on campus is inefficient relative to design layout and use

efficiency. Relative to facilities, there is a great need to "right,size" classrooms for

the future, balancing larger class sizes with larger lecture spaces. The capacity to

load ratios, a measure that compares the amount of usable square feet to the

5

Monlerey Peninsula Communily College Dislricl February 2004

MAAS COMPANIES


, EDUCATION/FACILITY MASTER PLAN

actual amount of use (Le. weekly student contact hours generated per square foot

of inventoried space) presently indicates a significant overage in lecture space.

Additionally, support services spaces should be r~located so as to make these

facilities more visible,. accessible; ·useful, and user~friendly.

Overall, the campus site is challenged by its ·natural physical features. The

"canyon" that bisects the campus is one such example. While it contributes to

the charm of the College, adding a unique dimension, it is simultaneously a

divisive barrier that separates snidents from one side of the campus to the other.

The area that houses· the existing Student Center and the adjacent outdoor

amphitheater is one example .. While offering great potential, this area is largely

"dead space", as much separate from the campus as it is a part of it. Physical

education facilities are also on the fringe area of campus traffic. The bifurcation

of the campus as a result of the canyon, tends to create a compartmentalized

rather than an integrated campus - lending to the feeling of campuses existing

within the campus. Improved linkages and articulation between the intra~

campus zones should be a goal for the future.

• ATTENTION TO FACILITIES THAT SUPPORT THE DISTRICT'S GROWTH

POTENTIAL

OfFCampus

While the bulk of available bond funds and state monies will be targeted to

upgrading the main campus, resources, including infrastructure development,

buildings and support amenities, will be needed in the northern portion of the

District. Assuming that the College is successful in securing deeded rights to the

Fort Ord property, facilities at this location offer the best possibilities for

capturing new growth to the north, serving as an educational extension of the

main campus. Additionally, it is an ideal resource for housing an expanded Public

Safety program. The Public Safety division is projected to contribute

significantly to the overall enrollment growth potential for the future.

6


MAAS COMPANIES

Community, Based Programs



Because the ~ollege is closely ti~d to the Greater Monterey corrum~nity in the arts

and athletics, the building/facilities program for the future should give a high

degree of attention to facilities that offer multiple use opportunities and satisfy

multiple use demands - i.e. serve the College and the community, meet

requirements for both academic and non' academic purposes. These facilities not

only provide residents with a point of entry to the College but are also the

strongest marketing tool that the District has for supporting its programs,

services and overall academic mission.

Future Space Needs of the College

To determine future space needs of the College, weekly student contact hours, (WSCH)

. achieved by the College at given points of time, was used as the primary tool for

f~recasting. Specifically, the years of 2010 and 2020 were targeted as the tirneline

benchmarks for WSCH generation. The Master Plan was developed to meet the Title V

standards set forth in the educational code. The building/facility program, therefore

meets all the requirements for state funding.

• SPACE ALLOCATION FOR THE ACADEMIC PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION

Consistent with the state standards for facility planning, instructional divisions

were transformed from the District's organizational structure to those used by

the state - i.e. the Taxonomy of Programs (TOP) format. Using the TOP code

format, academic space requirements for Monterey Peninsula College indicate a

need for 29,416 assignable square feet (ASF) of lecture space and 113,888

assignable square feet (ASF) of laboratory space' or an overall need of 143,888

ASF when WSCH reaches a level of 128,195, projected to be in the year 2020. - ----7

Monlerey Peninsula Communily College Dislric1 Februory 2004

MAAS COMPANIES



, , Space needs for th~ future program of instruction of Monterey peninsula College

are more specifically presented in table that follows. ",

ACADEMIC SPACE NEEDS PROJECTED FOR 2020 MONTEREY PENISULA COLLEGE

LEe LAB TOT TOPS DIVISION CODE SECTIONS ASF ASF ASF

Agriculture 100 8 208.2 1,123.5 1,331.7 • Biological Sciences 400 45 817.4 9..1014.1 9,831.5 ----...,

Business &: Mgmt 500 59 1,658.2 2,328.2 3,986.4 Communication 600 3 79.4 232.6 312.0 Computer &: Inf Sci 700 34 709.0 2,809.4 3.518.4 Education 800 106 760.6 2,011.7* 2,7723

, Engin &: Indus Tech 900 14 343.4 3)922.4 4,265.8 .. ~

Fine and Applied Art 1000 190 1,635.6 39,1923 40,827.9 Foreign Language 1100 37 1,913.5 3,295.4 5,208.9 Health 1200 42 593.5 12,620.7 13,214.2 ..

Cons &: Family Studies 1300 44 1,008.0 983.1 1,991.1 Humanities 1500 129 5,254.0 6,794.7 12,048.7 Library 1600 2 20.7 723 93.0

• Mathematics 1700 66 4,104.1 ------- J.366.0 7,470.1 • Physical Sciences 1900 59 1,258.3 10,409.7 11,668.0 -Psychology 2000 28 1,417.7 260.9 1,678.6

Public Affairs/Services 2100 8 313.5 1,132.6 1,446.1 Social Sciences 2200 80 4,219.5 301.1 4,520.6 lnterdiscip Studies 4900 163 3,101.7 14,017.5 17,119.2

Total 1,117 29,416 113,888 143,305

Source: Maas Companies Projections .. Physical Education laboratory space is calculated as a separate item. as different Title 5 criteria applies. ASF for this category is found in the Building Requirements Section

8


MAAS COMPANIES



• SPACE ALLOCATION FOR ALLFACIUTIES NEEDS OF THE COLLEGE

When the Monterey Peninsula College reaches weekly student contact hours

(WSCH) of 128,195 . and stud~~t e~ollment of 12,524 for a given semester , .

(projected to be 2020). the total facility needs of the College (based on on~

campus credit and non~credit enrollments) will be 342,408 assignable square feet

(ASF).

The table that follows .depicts space needs for the future as plus or minus figures

compared to the current (2003) space inventory of the College. The greatest need

for new academic space will be for class laboratories (44,087 ASF). Most of the

laboratory space needs will be driven by the Arts, Interdisciplinary Studies and

the Sciences. Off campus space requirements, such as the Contract Programs for

Fire, Administrative] ustice and Parks and Recreation (not depicted in the table),

will also exhibit a substantial need for laboratory space. These needs are

addressed in the proposed programs at the Ford Ord Facility - Public Safety and

a new Campus Center (space needs for these two facilities are noted in pages that

follow).

Based on the projections and analysis, the demand for new facilities at the main

campus will be limited, substantiating one of the findings that

rehabilitation/reconstruction will comprise the bulk of the need for the District'S

building/facility program. This will not be the case for the Fort Ord Facility,

where most of the facilities will require new construction.

The table that follows depicts both credit and non~credit WSCH that is

projected to be generated on~campus at Monterey Peninsula College in the

future. The benchmark year of 2020 was used as a target.

9


MAAS COMPANIES



TOTAL CAMPUS SPACE NEEDS PROJECTED FOR 2020 MONTEREY PENINSULA COLLE(JE

Code Description ASF ASF Differential 2002 2020

0 Inactive 13,869 (13,869)

100 Classroom 20,585 8,831

210-230 Laboratory 69,801 44,087

235-255 Non Class Laboratory 1,763 (573)

300 Office/Conference 33,125 5.945

400 Library 35,820 10.166

510-515 Armory/Armory Service 201 (210)

520-525 Phys Ed (Indoor) 38,713 (3,713)

530-535 (AVrrv) 9,222 4,159

540-555 Child Care, Clinic 4,719 291

580 Greenhouse 1,327 (1,327)

610-625 Assembly/Exhibition 28,159 (15,635)

630-635 Food Service 8,857 (1,343)

650-655 Lounge/Lounge Service 3,105 (242)

660-665 Bookstore 5,355 4,536

670-690 Meeting /Recreation 3,057 1,113

710-715 Data Processing/Comp 1,499 3,501

720-770 Physical Plant 13,341 2,964

800

Source: Maas Companies Projections; Monterey Peninsula Community College District Report 17 for 2002 as submitted to State Chancellor's Office

• DISTRICT FACILITIES AT FORT ORD

Campus Center

Projected, by the year 2010, is the addition of a new Campus Center at the Fort Ord

facility. The Campus Center will have an instructional program profile that is basic

in scope, offering a selected range of general education as well as developmental Monterey Peninsula Community College District

10 February 2004

MAAS COMPANIES



education courses. , Overall, the facility has been planned for a build~ut for 23,350 . ,

assignable square feet by the year 2020, based on WSCH producti~n of 11,372 and

an enrollment of 2,057 at that time. Facility requirements are projected to be 12,550

ASF in the initial, opening year (estimated to be between 2008 and 2010)

The target service area for the Campus Center will extend from Marina north to

Moss Landing and northeast to Castroville and Salinas. It is anticipated that the

Center will also attract students from the Seaside Area to the south. The

demographics of this target service area indicate an annual population growth rate

of 1.440/0.>

Public Safety Facilities

Recommended between the years 2004 and 2006, is the first phase of a Public

Safety Facility at the Fort Ord site. This facility will have a targeted and specific

purpose, addressing the needs of Administration of Justice,. Fire Protection

Technology, Fire Academy, Emergency Medical Services, Parks and Recreation and

other related public service programs projected for the future. It will consolidate

programs that are currently offered both on,campus and at various off,campus sites

into one comprehensive location. The facility is projected to have 2020 space

needs of 67,700 assignable square feet with start~up space needs in 2004,2006 of

26,500 ASF. Facility needs have been based on 2020 WSCH product jon of 24,446

and an enrollment of 2,719.

The tables that follow depict assignable square footage needs for Fort Ord as

forecasted for the year 2020 or when WSCH reaches 11,372 for the Campus Center

and 24,446 for the Public Safety Facilities.

11


M ... AS COMPANIES


. EDUCATION/FACILITY MASTER PLAN

SPACE NEEDS PROJECTED FOR 2020 - FORT ORD FACILITIES

CAMPUS CENTER

SPACE CATEGORY

100 210-230 235-255

300 400

520-525 530-535 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800

DESCRIPTION

Classroom Laboratory Non Class Laboratory Office/ Conference Library Physical Education (Indoor) Instructional Media (AV /TV) Assembly /Exhibition Food Service Lounge/Lounge Service Bookstore/Merchandizing Meeting /Recreation Data Processing/Comp Physical Plant Health Service

CURRENT ASF

o o o o o o· o o o o o o o o o

ASF FOR 2020

ASF DIFFERENTIAL

3,788 5,486

195 3,737 1,800

800 800

1,200 800 350 850 650 250

2,200 450

PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES

, SPACE CATEGORY

100 210-230 235-255

300 400

510-515 520-525 530-535 610-625 630-635 650-655 660-665 670-690 710-715 720-770

800

DESCRIPTION

Classroom Laboratory Non Class Laboratory Office/ Conference Library Armory / Armory Service Physical Education (Indoor) Instructional Media (A V /TV) Assembly /Exhibition Food Service Lounge/Lounge Service Bookstore/Merchandizing Meeting /Recreation Data Processing/ Comp Physical Plant Health Service

Source: Moos Companies Projections

CURRENT

12

ASF o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

ASF FOR 2020

ASF DIFFERENTIAL

3,622 42,457

267 3,281 1,250 5,500 2,400 1,250 1,400

850 750

850 600

3,224

Monterey Penin5ulo Community College District February 2004

MAAS COMP.ANIES

• OVERALL SPACE NEEDS OF THE DISTRICT



A composite space needs analysis in terms of assignable square feet required to

meet the forecasted program of instruction and the support services space needs of .. ,' ,

the future, is presented in the table that follows. Overall, the District can

anticipate managing more than 430,000 assignable square feet of facility space by

the year 2020.

100

210,230

235,255

300

400 510,515

, 520;525

530,535

540-555

580

610,625

630,635

650,655

660,665

670,690

710-715

720-770

800

DISTRICT COMPOSITE OF TOTAL FACILITY NEEDS TOTAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS YEAR 2020

Classroom 29,416 3,622 3,788

Laboratory 113,888 42,457 5,486

Laboratory Service 1,190 267 195

Office/Conference 39,070 3,281 3,737

Library 45,986 1,250 1,800

Armory/Armory Serv 5,500

Phys Ed (Indoor) 35,000 2,400 800

Instr Media (A V rrv) 13,381 1,250 800

CliniclDemonstration 5,010 Greenhouse

AssemblylExhibition 12,524 1,400 1,200

Food Service 7,514 850 800

Lounge/Lounge Serv 2,863 750 350

Bookstore 9,891 850

Meeting /Recreation 4,170 850 650

Data Proc/Comp 5,000 600 250

Physical Plant 16,305 3,224 2,200

Health Service ... to:ft\L

DISTRICT TOTAL

Source: Maas Companies Projections

13

Monlerey Peninsula Communily College Dislricl february 2004

MAAS COMPANIES

Overview of Greatest Facility Needs



Based on the analysis conducted, the input received from administrators, faculty and staff

of the District, the following building/facility projects, outlined by function, surfaced as

top considerations for a BUilding/Facilities Program.

• Greatest Overall Needs

• Infrastructure Upgrades and Replacement

• Grea~est Academic Needs (New and/or Expanded Facilities)

• Music (New ConstructionlReplacement)

• Math and Science (New ConstructionlExpansion)

• Physical Education (Facility Rehabilitation)

• Humanities (Expansion)

• Health Sciences (Remodel/Expansion)

• Greatest Support Services Needs

• Student Services (New Construction/Replacement)

• Child Development Center (New ConstructiOn/Replacement)

• Greatest Facility Needs

• Development of Ford Ord Facility (New Construction)

The Master Plan culminates with a Recommended Building/Facility Program that defines

projects by time, priority, task, scope, action and cost. The cost estimates for

projects are based on current construction costs as defined by the state for

construction and/or remodel. Timelines for the projects, by group, are in four'year

time intervals with overlaps.

14


MAAS COMPANIES

Attachments

MONTEREY PENINSUL '.LEGE EXECUTIVE: ,.MARY

EDUCATIONAL/FACILITIES PLAN


o Student Servo Bldg Supp Serv Offices

o Music Bldg Labs/Support Space/Office

o Lecture Forum Bldg LF 103 Lecture/Assembly Space

LF 101 and 102 Lecture/Assembly Space All Other LF Offices/Support Space

o Intn'l Ctr/Nursing Lab/Offices Upgrades (1st floor)

o Child Devel Ctr Child Care/Lab

o Physical Education Stadium/FieldlTrack/Fitness Gym/Locker Rms

o Fort Ord Site

o Old Library

On Sites/lnfrastructure/F acilities Public Safety

Adm. Offices/Support Services

22,400 New Construction

9,950 Replacement Constr

3,443 Remodel 3,870 Remodel 5,404 Remodel

8,608 Remodel

8,577 New Construction

NA Rehab 28,408 Remodel

NA 22,500

13,869

Utility Development ~::f;::P::

New Construction

Remodel/Conversion

fr.u~ $7,392,000 r


$728,195 * Candidate State Assistance $363,780 * Candidate State Assistance $972,720 * Candidate State Assistance



$8,300,000 * Candidate Private Support $8,291,443 * Candidate State Assistance

$4,155,975 * Candidate Publi~Support $8,311,950 * C~ndidate State Assistan~e


subtotal $49,870,369 I

15


MAAS Companies February 2004

o Math/Sci Bldg

o Humanities

o Art - Dimensional

o Theater

o Nursing

o Fort Ord

o College Center


Lec/Labs/Offices/Support 15,626 New Construction

Lec/Lab/Office 10,579 Remodel

Lab/Offices Upgrades 8,127 Remodel

Lab and Support Space 14,466 Remodel/Expansion Internal Infrastructure

Remodel 4,242 Remodel

College Satellite Center 12,500 New Construction

Public Safety 16,200 New Construction

Support Infrastructure NA On-sitesllnfrastructure

Student AcUMerchandizing 19,899 Remodel

Food Service/Offices

n(i~r 0i ~\~.r v)~ y





$1,462,860 * Candidate State Assistance-



$4,670,625 * Candidate Public Support $5,984,604 * Candid~te Public Support

$6,100,785* Candidate Public Support

$4,208,639

subtotal $37,611.039\

16


- MAAS Companies

February 2004

MONTEREY PENINSU' ,)llEGE EXECUTI\ .v1MARY

EDUCA lIONAl/FACILITIES PLAN


o Physical Science Lee/Lab/Office

DArt-Ceramics Labs Upgrade

o Art - Studio Labs Upgrade

o Life Science Lec/Lab/Offices/Support

o Social Sciences Lecture/Labs Upgrade

o Bus. & Humanities Lecture/Lab/Offices/Support

o Fort Ord Public Safety Campus Center

o Art Gallery Exhibition Space

12,095 Remodel for Efficiency $2,558,093 * Candidate State Assistance

5,101 Remodel $918,180 * Candidate State Assistance

4,314 Remodel $776,520 * Candidate State Assistance -

10,245 Remodel $1,844,100 * Candidate State Assistance

7,191 Remodel $1,294,380 * Candidate State Assistance

6,448 Replace. Const/Exp. $2,500,212 * Candidate State Assistance

16,500 New Construction $6,165,225 * Candidate Public Support

10,800 New Constr/Expansion $4,035,420 * Candidate State Assistance

884 Remodel $159,120

subtotal $20,251,250 1

17

~ .JJ ,,\~"

v\,n I'i"\ Iv'v /;

/ \U'· /'



DArts - Graphic

o Fort Ord

o Consumer Ed

o Business and CS

o Swim Pool


Lab/Offices Upgrades

Outdoor Training Facilities Public Safety



Pool House Pool

3,243 Remodel

NA New Construction 10,500 New Construction

1,981 Remodel

10,759 Remodel

2,014 Remodel Reconstruction




$3,800,000 * Candidate Public Support $3,923,325 * Candidate Public Support



$362,520 $2,200,000

subtotal $13, 162,7851

18



·_Infrastructure Improvement/Upgrades ParkinglTraffic Circulation Pedestrian Circulation Landscaping

Academic/Support Equipment/Furnishings

Other

Support Serv/Child Ctr Children's Module Plant Service Student Services Auto Tech Music Bldgs Physical Fitness Business and Humanities Administration

Swing Space (including site prep)

Soft Costs

3,838 1,129 3,476 3,655 4,698 8,590 4,001 4,939 4,438 38,764

MONTEREY PENINSUL LLEGE EXECUTIVI:. .IMARY


ISub Total $120,895,443

$36,268,633 $2,947,800 $1,150,000 $2,100,000

ISub Total $42,466,433

~---.

ISub Total $4,651,680

19

Sub Total $4,550;000

Sub Total $33,582,375 . /~--"'II -z.z iJ2t; -5 v ,- ,\'j~

Grand Total $211,606,428


- MAAS Companies February 2004

MAAS COMPANIES Planning and Development Consultants

DRAFT

June 8, 2004

TO: Joe Bissell

FROM: Michael Maas

SUBJECT: Revised Funding Plan for the EducationaVFacilities Master Plan

On May 18 and May 24, 2004, I forwarded to you the initial and revised funding plans for the capital construction program. Presented in this memorandum is a final revision of the plan based on input from faculty, staff and administrators at the College. It is my understanding this memorandum will be shared with the College Council on June 8, 2004 and presented to the Board of Trustees on June 22,2004.

Background The total capital construction budget, as listed in the EducationaVFacilities Master Plan, is $212 million dollars. Of this amount, $145 million is from local bond funds. The balance of $67 million will need to be obtained from other sources of funding. The proposed time line and funding for the issuance of local bond funds is as follows:

Series A B C D TOTAL

Issue Date 8/1/03 8/1/06 8/1/09 8/1/12

Amount $40.0M $35.0M $35.0M $35.0M $145.0 M

By category, the revised funding sources for the $67 million in augmented funds are as follows:

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

Source of Funds State Capital Construction State Scheduled Maintenance* State Hazardous Materials* State Equipment & Materials* Redevelopment Funds (RDA) Federal Grants (Ft. Ord) LocallPrivate Funding TOTAL

Amount 45.5M

3.0M 1.5 M 1.OM 1.5 M

12.0M 4.0M

67.0M • These funds may be distributed by the State as a "Block Grant" in future

years. If so, the College must annually designate these funds for augmentation of the capital construction program.

----------------------........

DRAFT

Exhibit Proposed Time Line and Sequence for State Funding for EducationallFacilities

Master Plan Projects (2003-2015)

Project Amount of Funding ~ Date Date of Initial

Requested ofIPP ofFPP State Funding*

Child Dev. Center $4,200,000 7/1/01 711102 711104

Old Library $2,200,000 7/1/02 7/1103 7/1105

Ft. Ord Ed. Center $2,700,000 7/1/05 7/1/06 7/1/08

Ft. Ord Public Safety $6,000,000 7/1106 7/1107 7/1/09

Humanities $2,400,000 7/1/07 7/1108 7/1111

Music $3,300,000 711104 711105 711108

MathiScience# $4,300,000 7/1103 7/1104 7/1107

PE-Gym, Loc. Rms. $3,000,000 7/1108 7/1109 7/1112

Ft. Ord Ed. Center $2,000,000 7/1/08 7/1109 7/1111

Ft. Ord Public Safety $5,100,000 7/1/09 711110 711112

Life Science# $3,000,000 7/1103 7/1104 7/1107

Physical Science# $4,000,000 7/1/03 7/1104 7/1107

Bus.! Computer Sc. $3,000,000 7/1110 7/1111 7/1113

Theater $3,600,000 7/1111 7/1112 7/1114

Social Science $2,200,000 7/1/12 7/1113 711115

TOTAL $51,000,000

Notes: 1. * Initial date of typical three year funding cycle. The first year will be funding for Preliminary

Plans and Working Drawings, the second year Construction and the third year Equipment. Some projects may be candidates for "Easy Access" which may accelerate the funding time line.

2. # These three projects may be combined into one Final Project Proposal with the State. 3. The funding of all projects is contingent upon the college achieving capacity load ratios of 100%

in the appropriate categories and providing matching non-state funds in accordance with the Funding Plan for the Capital Construction Program.

4. All July 1 st dates listed above may be modified to May 1 st dates of the same year based on

direction from the Chancellor'S Office. 5. The $51,000,000 in state funding anticipates an additional $9,900,000 in matching funds from

other non-state, alternate funding sources on a time line to support the above requests for state

funding.

monterey peninsula community college district · in 1982-83, monterey peninsula college was...

Documents