draft december 13th, 2011

campus plan for the second decade2010-2020

the new century at elon unIVerSIty

facilities master plan committeesteering committee GeraldWhittington,Chair Dr.LeoLambert Dr.GerryFrancis Dr.StevenHouse Dr.SmithJackson RobertBuchholz Dr.VicCostello BeckyOlive-Taylor ChrisFulkerson

staff NeilBromilow,technicalassistant BradMoore

plannersDanielL.Harrigan,AIATomWoods,AIAJamesWhildin,AIA

SpillmanFarmerArchitectsArchitectsandCampusPlanners1720SpillmanDrive,Suite200,BethlehemPA18015Phone:610-865-2621/E-mail: dharrigan@spillmanfarmer.com; twoods@spillmanfarmer.com

SectionA: Introduction describes the background, goals, objectives and planning process

SectionB: ExecutiveSummary summarizes the general planning strategies of the Master Plan

SectionC: Priorities develops a planning matrix which prioritizes the projects that address the general planning strategies

SectionD: MasterPlan presents in graphic format an overall master plan for the college site and an existing campus plan and an aerial map relating the campus to the proposed bypass

SpecificTopics(SectionEthroughP)-

SectionE: ResidentialLife SectionF: JournalismandMassCommunicationsDepartment SectionG: EducationDepartment SectionH: Recreation SectionI: Arts&Sciences SectionJ: Technology SectionK: SupportFacilities SectionL: FutureConvocationCenter SectionM: Athletics

SectionO: RelationshipsofElonUniversitytotheTown SectionP: RelatedIssuesaddressingparking,landscapingandgeneral siteimprovements

AppendixQ: ClassroomandClassLabUtilizationStudy AppendixR: ElonBuildingsListing

report organiZation

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

section a: introduction

bacKground ThelastmasterplanupdatebySpillmanFarmerArchitectswasin2000.Someofthegoalsandrecommendationsfromthatplanwerethefollowing:

-Improvetherelationshiptothedowntownarea;developfurtheracademicvillage1-developtheacademicvillage2withanewbusinessschool,housinganddining-locateafutureconvocationcenter;createsignificantentriestothecampus-maintainsophomorehousing-maintainanintimatecampusfeel-seektoacquirestrategicproperty-enhancethecommitmenttocampusgreenspace-providecontextualarchitecturalaesthetic-newathleticsprogramstobeconsidered

Duringthepast10years,theuniversity’sfacilitieshavegrownconsistentlyfromapprox-imately1.3mgrosssquarefeetto1.9mgrosssquarefeet.Enrollmenthasincreasedfrom4000full-timestudentsto5709inthefallsemesterof2010,withcorrespondingincreases infacilitiesandstaff.Residentialhousingnowprovidesbedsfor2874stu-dents,andolderresidenceshavebeenupgraded.From1999,thecampusacreagehasincreasedfrom502acresto608acres.

ThepurposeofTheNewCenturyatElon,CampusPlanfortheSecondDecadeistoad-dressthenewstrategicobjectivesoftheuniversity.

4

strategic goals and objectives TheElonstrategicplanadoptedbyElonUniversity’sboardoftrusteesincludesseveralEloncommitmentthemes.Thesethemesinclude:• AnunprecedentedUniversitycommitmenttodiversityandglobalengagement• Supportingaworld-classfacultyandstaff• Attainingthehighestlevelsofachievementacrosstheacademicprograms• Launchingstrategicandinnovativepathwaysinundergraduateand graduateeducation• StewardingElon’scommitmenttoremainabest-valueuniversity• Developinginnovativealumniprogramstoadvanceandsupportthe Elongraduate• Establishinganationaltournamenttraditionofathleticsalongwiththe highestacademicstandardsforPhoenixathletics• SignificantlyenhancingElon’scampuswithpremiernewacademicand residentialfacilitiesandacommitmenttoprotectingourenvironment

Asindicatedbythislasttheme,thiscampusmasterplanaddressestheneeds,qualityandscopeofthesefacilityimprovementsandexpansion.Thestrategicplanincludes:

• a$250millionconstructionplanthatwilldramaticallyexpandresidences• buildinganadditional1600bedstoallowmorestudentstoliveoncampusin innovativehousingcommunities• buildinga5,000-seatconvocationcenter• buildinga1,500-seatauditorium• expandingacademicfacilitiesforscienceandcommunications• buildingamulti-faithcenter• promotingretaildevelopmentintheTownofElon• implementingahostofenvironmentalsustainabilityinitiatives.

Otheron-goingplanninggoalsthatareconsideredinthismasterplanare:

• Elonwillcontinuetogrowslowly,butnotattheexpenseofacademicquality.

• Thecampuswillmaintainanintimatefeel;studentsandlearningwillremain atthecenterofalltheuniversitydoes.

• Elonwillalwaysseektoacquirestrategicallylocatedproperty.

• Theuniversityandthetownwilldevelopacommonapproachforvehicle andpedestriantraffic,signage,landscapingandcommunityaesthetics.

• Theuniversitywillfurtherenhancethecommitmenttocampusgreenspace, expanduponthepedestriannatureofthecampusandlocateparkingto theperipheryasispossible.

• Provideascaleanddesignonfuturefacilitiesthatblendwiththecampus architecturalaesthetic. SP

ILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

5

process A primary objectivewas to involve the entire campus community in theplanning process. The campus planning team spent 2 days on 3 sepa-rateinstancesoncampusduringthefallof2009.AconferenceroominoneofthepavilionsinAcademicVillage1becameabaseofoperationsforall-daycharetteswhereconceptualplans,alternativesandcommentsheets for specificproposalswerekeptondisplay.A3Dcampusmodelwasalsodisplayedforbettergraphiccommunicationofcampusdevelop-mentconcepts.AnopenforumwasconductedforthecampuscommunityinthedigitaltheatreoftheKouryBusinessCenter.Thiswasvideotapedandplannersandadministrationfieldedavarietyofquestions.Students,faculty,andstaffwereencouragedtomeetwiththeplannersatanytime,andspecialmeetingswereheldwithstudentsandspecialinterestgroups.Duringeachcampusweek,aprogressmeetingwasheldwith theFacili-tiesMasterPlanCommittee.Separateprogressreportsweremadetothefaculty,theadministrativestaff,andtheBoardofTrustees.

Dotdiagramexerciseswereutilizedtosolicitstakeholders’perceptionsofthepositiveandnegativequalitiesofthecampus.Theircommentswerethenrecordedandreviewedwiththeplanningcommittee.Twoofthesedotdiagramsareshown.Thereddotsrepresentnegativeopinionsofthecampus,facilities,site,etc.andthegreendotsrepresentpositiveopinionsofthecampus.Stakeholdersfromacrossthecommunitywereengagedinthisexercise.Ofnoteistheconvergenceofopiniononseveralaspectsofthecampus:e.g.,thestakeholdersdidnotliketheNorthArearesidentialhousingortheKouryAthleticsCenter,butreallylikedthestadium,thefoun-tainatAlamance,theKouryBusinessSchoolandColonnadesDiningHall,and theAcademicVillagewith the LindnerBuilding. Thedotdiagramsgraphicallydepict thegeneralviewsof thestakeholdersandprovideapointofdeparture fordiscussionaboutwhy they felt theway theydidaboutvaryingaspectsofthecampus.Whengeneralconsensusoftheplanningboardwasachieved,aprojectsplanningmatrixwasdevelopedtoassistinprioritizingandsequencingele-mentsoftheplananddesignconceptswererefined.ThedraftreportwaspresentedtotheFacilitiesMasterPlanCommitteeinJanuary2009andtotheBoardofTrusteesinMarch2010.Sincethen,newissueshavearisensuchasPhysicalTherapy&Physician’sAssistantprograms,andhavebeenincorporatedintotheMasterPlan.

This Campus Plan is intended to be a working document, presented inloose-leaf format, so that the plan can be expandedandmodifiedasconditionschange.

negatives&positivesdotdiagramfromcampusopenforum

negatives&positivesdotdiagramfromstudentleaders’forum

6

section b:

executive summary TheNewCenturyatElonUniversity,CampusPlanfortheSecondDecadeisavisionforamaturingcampusthatwillbuilduponthesuccessof the lastdecadeandmeetthenewstrategicgoalsofthecollegeasoutlinedunderGoalsandObjectives.Duringtheon-campusstudy,thecampuscommunityclearlyindicatedthatphysicalimprovementstothecampusshouldaddressthesegeneralattributes:• Ensurethecentralityoftheliberalartscurriculum• Integratetechnologythroughouttheentireundergraduateprogram• Promoteinteractive,collaborativelearning• Connectknowledgeattainmentwiththeentirestudentlifeexperience• Continuetoenhanceaspaciousandbeautifullandscapedsetting• Maintainthepedestriannatureofthecampus• Preserveandrenewexistinghistoricbuildingsandbuildnew complementaryarchitecture• DevelopameaningfulphysicalrelationshiptotheTownofElon

Thissectionsummarizesthegeneralplanningstrategiesthatevolvedduringtheplan-ningprocessandarebasictotheCampusPlan.Eachsubjectisdetailedunderthecor-respondingsectioninthereport.

e: residential life a) ExpandhousingattheKouryBusinessCenterandColonnadesarea by300beds b) ExpandGreekhousingattheLoyCenterby64beds. c) ReplacetheStoryandHarperCenter(NorthArea)withnew housingfor600beds;anewsignatureanchorbuildingonthe lakeforstudentserviceswithaGreatHallcommunityspace. Providegeneralpurposeclassroomsandfacultyofficesintegrated intothenewcomplex. d) Continuerefurbishingofolderresidencehalls. e) Createmore“informalinteractive”spacesoncampus.Consideran additiontoDanieleyCommons. f) ImprovetheLodgepropertyforstudentactivities. g) DevelopreplacementandnewhousingatDanieleyCenter. h) AddhousingatFireFields. i) Expandhousingeastofthetenniscourts j) Addparkingtoaccommodatenewhousingandtooffsetlostparking fromthecampusinterior.

f. journalism and mass communications a) ConsiderrenovatingandaddingtotheexistingJMC/McEwen buildingorprovideanewstate-of-the-artfacilityelsewhere oncampus

g. education department a) Reviewalternativesforprovidingatechnology-richacademicfacility fortheEducationDepartment:extensivelyrenovateMooneyormove toavacatedJMC/McEwenbuildingandrenovateasisappropriate.

h. recreation a) Addlightingtorecreationfields. b) Identifypotentialsitesfornewrecreationfieldsforsoftball&soccer. c) CreatejoggingtrailaroundDanieleyCenter d) Expandaquaticfacilities.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

7

i. arts & sciences a) Studythelocationforanewlargecapacityauditorium b) ConsideranadditiontotheCenterfortheArts(CFA)tomeetthe expandedneedsofmusic,artanddance. c) ConsideratheatreadditiontoCFAortheFrancisCenterfor theatresupport. d) RelocatePTfromMcMichaelScienceBuildingtomakespacefor undergraduatescienceprogramsj. technology a) StudytheconsolidationofITfunctionsintoonefacility b) Continuetoprovidestateofthearttechnologyforexistingand newfacilities

K. support facilities a) StudytheacademicvillagesiteforanewMultiFaithCenter b) Studyexpansionofadmissionswithrenovationsand/ornew construction. c) Add1,000parkingspacestoaccommodatenewhousingandto offsetlostparkingfromthecampusinterior. d) Builda1,500-seatauditorium

l. future convocation center a) Potentialusesofa5,000seatconvocationcenter: 1. Convocationandcampus-wideevents 2. Graduation 3. Basketballandsportstournaments 4. Icerink(providesextralengthforfloorevents) 5. Largescaleconcerts 6. Communityevents b) Thecentercouldbeusedforathleticofficesandthedanceprogram. c) Shareparkingwithstadium.

m. athletics a) Buildanewsoftballstadiumandassociatedparkingonthewestside ofWilliamsonAvenue b) MoveathleticstafffromtheKouryAthleticCentertotheStadium AlumniFieldHouse,whichcreatesspaceforundergraduatefaculty officesandclassrooms.

o. relationship of elon university to the toWn a) Developacooperativeplanfordowntownimprovementstoincludea pedestrianmall,towncircle,uniformlightingandsitedevelopments thatenhancethefourblockcorearea.Encouragedevelopmentof shops,restaurantsandservicefacilitiesthatcatertostudentneeds. b) Closelymonitorhousingdevelopmenttobeattractivetooff-campus livingforstudents,graduatestudentsandfaculty

8

section c:

prioritiesseQuential ten-year phasing for specific capital projectselon university planning matrix

seQuential ten-year phasing for specific capital projects 2010-2020

RESIDENTIALLIFE1.TheStationHousingatMillPoint2.GlobalDiningHall

3.GlobalNeighborhoodHousing4.DaniellyCenter

5.NewhousingeastoftennisComplex

6.ColonnadesF,G,H&I

ConstructnewbuildingsBuildnewdininghallattachedtoMoseleyConstructtheGlobalNeighborhoodStartthedevelopmentofinfrastructureforadditionalhousingandrecreationStartfirstphaseconstruction

Buildnewhousing Buildnewrecreation/fitnesscenter

Buildnewhousingandlakepavilion

Buildnewhousing

Startsecondphaseconstruction

Buildphaseoneofnewcomplex

Buildphasetwoofcomplex,includingdiningservicesConstructionphaseone:twobuildings

SUPPORTFACILITIES1.MultiFaithCenter

2.Newauditorium

3.AdmissionsCenter

BuildinAcademicVillagesiteDevelopfeasibilitystudy-location

Buildnewauditorium

Feasibilitystudy-location

Buildnewadmissionscenter

4.Parking BuildlotseastofFrancisCenter

BuildnewparkingsoutheastofTennisCenter

TECHNOLOGYRenovateareaofFrancisCenterfordata/computercen-terandallITStaff

COLLEGE/TOWNStudyopportunitiesforpartneringwiththeTown

Buildadditionalmixed-useretailandofficeintown

Cooperatewithmixed-usehousingdevelopmentintheTown

Expandaquaticscenter

RECREATION1.Lightrecreationfields

3.AquaticsCenter

installlights

2.Joggingtrail buildtrail

ACADEMICSPlanandbuildnewCenterforJournalismandCommunications

RenovateMcEwen

1.Communications

2.Education

3.CollegeofHealthSciences

Renovate1stfloorFrancisCenterforPTandPAprograms

Renovate1stfloorMcMichaelforundergraduate

Feasabilitystudyforexpansion

RenovateFrancisCenterforrehearsal,blackboxanddance

Buildnewaddition4.CenterforArts

5.Theater/Dance

1.Newconvocationcenter

Planfornewconvocationcenter

Buildnewconvocationcenter

ATHLETICS

2.SoftballStadium buildnewstadium

3.RelocateAthleticStaff buildnewfieldhouseatstadium

3.ITDepartment

phase one phase tWo phase three phase four phase five

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

9

section d:

master plan

10

land oWnership map

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

11

toWn of elon land development ordinance map

TRAVIS LN

BR

IER

CLI

FF R

D

BROWN BARK LN

FIE

L DS

T ON

E D

RGEORGETOWNE DR

AP

PLE

ST

CH

ER

RY

DR

GRE ENW

OO

D TE

R

OA

KLA

ND

DR

E LA

KE DR

GRAPHITE DR

NE

SS

E D

R

OLSEN DR

TRIN

I TY

CT

MILL POINTE WAY

TRIBEK DR

BO

B B

AXTER DR

N TIMBERGATE DR

VETERANS DR

MAIN ST

AQU I N

AS C

T

SP

AN

I SH

OA

K R

D

HWY

61

NE

W Y

OR

K A

VE

EDITH

ST

PARIS

ST

CO

LL

EGE PARK MHP

TRU

ITT DR

SADDLE CLUB RD

KIMBERLY RD

WE

ST B

RO

OK

DR

DONCASTER LN

MEADOWOOD DRAMHERST AVE

STO

NE

WY

CK

DR

CIRCLE DR

WESTOVER TERR

DORSETT ST

S TI

MB

ER

GA

T E D

R

ORANGE DR

HU

NTIN

GD

O

N ST

MC

CU

ISTO

N D

R

N W

ILLIAMSO

N AVE

ENG

LEMA

N AV E

WESTWOOD

DR

KE

OG

H S

T

TOW

ER

DR

RIV

ER

VIE

W D

R

ELIZA

BE

TH A

VE

RID

GE

CR

ES

T A

VE

MOONELON

RD

TROENDLY ST

SH

AR

ON

ST

MACLEO

D

ST

MIC

A D

R

SH

AD

OW

BR

OO

K D

R

HOLLY HILL LN

BELL TOW

ER C

T

ASHLE

Y WOOD DR

WIN

DS

OR

CT

LAKEVIEW TERR

CHANDLER ST

MAY

DR

PINEVIEW DR

GIBSO

NVILL

E OSS

IPEE

RD

GIB

SO

NV

ILLE O

SS

IPEE

RD

AR

CADIA DR

W LAKE DR

PR

INC

ETO

N D

R

MELROSE RD

SPRINGHILL DR

CO

OK R

D

WINDSOR

CIR

YORK PL

LAW

RE

NC

E S

T

CENTRAL

DR

GLE

NV

IEW

LN

LEE

ST

RIVER

HILL

LN

CAMPUS WALK TRL

DE

LAN

EY

DR

GA

RD

EN

CIR

COMMERCE PL

WYCLIFF CT

CAIRN CIR

VICTORIA LN

RUNNING BROOK DR

DU

NN

TOW

N R

D

S G

URNE

Y ST

CH

AR

LEIG

H C

T

STRATFORD RD

HOL

M ES

WA

Y

FOX RUN RD

ALE

X FA

YE

DR

SH

ER

IDA

N P

L

E LON

PARK

DR

PINEC

ROFT

DR

SLATE DR

HUGHES

TRL

LOO

P R

D

TER

RY

SMIT

H TR

L

BU

RK

E C

LUB

HOUSE RD

VON BORA C

T

WADE

COBL

E D

R

GIBSO

NVILLE R

D

W LEBANON AVE

JOYNER ST

EDGEWOOD AVE

JOYN

ER ST

MAN

NING AVE

W FRONT ST

S O

AK AVE

GILLIAM

RD

WESLEY C T

W SUMMERBELL AVE

N O

AK

AV

E

WHITESELL ST

S CHURCH ST

MINNEOLA ST

LOYOLA CT

N 87

HW

Y

N PARK AVE

CH

UR

CH

ST

MACEDONIA DR

ROUTH RD

UN

IVE

RS

ITY

DR

LAUREL OAK DR

MANNING WAY

ELK C

T

W PHOENIX DR

RO

CK

WO

OD

AV

E

WOODLAND AVE

COLONIAL DR

OLD

TOW

NE

DR

JAM

ES

TON

EY

DR

HWY

61/1

00

EVA DR

N FAIRWAY DR

PIE

DM

ON

T A

VE

W TROLLINGER AVE

WA

LKE

R R

D

W HERITAGE DR

ME

AD

OW

ST

BEDFORD CT

HU

FFIN

E ST

QUARTZ CT

RA

LSTO

N D

R

RE

GEN

CY DR

VICTORIA PL

LOWE RD

BURKE ST

PEEBLE

DR

DRIFTWOOD DR

STERLING CTGREEN ST

ARBOR DR

ARM

FIEL

D CT

ASHLEY PL

FINNSBURY DR

WESTBROOK CT

SPENCE AVE

ASPEN AVE

ELO

N CT

BR

OW

NSTONE

DR

N 87 HW

Y

ROLLINGWOOD DR

OA

KH

UR

ST

RIDGEDALE DRORCHID

DR

HUFFMAN

MIL

L R

D

HARVARD CT

ARMFIELD AVE

LONGBROOK DR

WESTOVER DR

W WEBB AVE

FOREST DR

STONE GABLES DR

ASBURY CT

S H

OLT

AV

E

THISTLE RD

YORK RD

W HAGGARD AVE

TROON PL

GLEN

RAVE

N RD

ING

LEW

OO

D D

R

GREEN CT

BRISTOL CT

SLATE CT

SOMERTON PL

MA

NN

ING

AV

E

2ND

ST

PARK RD

CALVIN CT

BROOKFIELD DR

GE

RR

I NG

ER

ST

BARBER RD

MU

IRFI

ELD

CT

ROBINHOOD DR

ZWINGL I CT

LEIGH CT

RANDOM CT

DANDORA RD

GAZEBO DR

LENOX PL

RA

ND

OM

LN

BARRINGTON RD

CREEK RIDGE DR

GREENWOOD DR

HAWTHORNE LN

BERRYHILL RD

TRU

ITT

DR

ELK ST

STRATFORD CT

CAMDEN

CT

ELM ST

CEDAR ST

BRIGHTO

N CT

ASHLE

Y CT

PINEDALE

DR

WESTGATE DR

KELLEY ST

WISTERIA

DR

VICTORIA CT

CHERRY CT

DEVON

SHIRE CT

ELO

N-O

SSIP

EE

RD

WE

SLE

Y D

R

SPR

ING

WO

OD

AV

E

COLONNADE DR

SUTT

ON PL

WAR

REN PL

PEPPERIDGE D

R

SPRIN

G VALL

EY D

R

OW

EN

ST

DURHAM STREET

EXT

NESSE CT

TANNER CT

WY

RIC

K S

T ROLLINGW

OO

D R

D

CHELSEY CT

WH

ARTO

N S

T

NOTTOWAY T

ERR

BAKE

R ST

ORA N GE CT

OLD CHARLESTON

DR

WINWOOD DR

CO

AC

HLI

GH

T TR

L

HUFFINES RD

CARRIAGE PL

MO

RG

A N ST

FAU

CET

TE AV

E

SHADY DR

SPRINGFIELD DR

SPRINGHILL LN

DU

RHA

M MEADOWS CT

SH

AN

NO

N D

R

S HO

RT

ST

WIM

BS

L EY

DR

WHIT

E O

AK ST

ING

LE S

T

CROFTWOOD DR

N MAU

RY AR

CH

MAGNOLIA CT

SLADE ST

PRINCE EDWARD DR

PROVIDENCE CT

NEAL ST

DOWNING CT

HU

TCH

I NI S

ON

RD

GLEN

EA

GLES

CT

BEDF

OR

D S

T

SETON CT

HICKORY DR

SHIRLEY DR

HOLT

CHA

PE

L L

N

WESTBROOK AVE

KINGSTON CT

CE

NT E

R S

T

TIM

BE

RLI

NE ST

ATIO

N DR

FLORA AVE

EDMUND C

T

CAM

ELO

T LN

LITTLE JOHN LN

N O

'KE

LLY

AVE

HARRIET DR

BE

LL S

T

WES

TMIN

STER

DR

CAR

Y ST

FORESTVIEW

DR

RO

SE

MO

NT

ST

CO

LLIN

WO

OD

DR

ASHLEY

TRCE

THA

ME

S C

T

SHELBUR

NE CT

ARCH W

AY CT

BROOKVIEW

DR

WE

XFO

RD

P L

MOTLEY

ST

LOC

KE

SLE

Y L N

SUNNYBROOK DR

STO

NER I

DGE

CT

BLAKEY

HAL

L LN

S MAURY ARCH

SUDBURY CT

LYN

N

ST

MAR

CY TR

L

LACY ST

BROAD ST

AMHE

RST

CT

AMICK STSOMERS AVE

MA

Y S

T

BENT TREE

CT

PRIDE AVE

HA

YD

EN

DR

ATK

INS

ON

AV

E

BRANCHWOOD

D R

PAL LADIUM CT

JEFFRIES-GRAHAM TRL

WO

OD

CH

AS

E S

T

HAZEL

WO

OD

DR

STONE

RIDGE DR

GERRINGER MILL RD

N H

OLT

AV

E

BRIGHTON DR

LEE

ST

MIDWAY CHURCH RD

CAMPUS TRACE

DR

HIDDENWOOD LN

CHARLO

TTE LN

LOW

EL L

DR

HIC

KO

RY

AV E

DANIELEY WAY

WIL

TSH

IRE

DR

SPRING RD

W COLLEGE AVE

HALL ST

CU

MM

ING

S ST

WESTVIEW DR

N A

NTI

OC

H A

VE

NE

WC

AST

LE D

R

E TROLLINGER AVE

WALKER AVE

SP

RIN

GW

OO

D C

HU

RC

H R

D

N G

UR

NE

Y S

T

E LEBANON AVE

SHALLOWFO

RD C

HU

RC

H R

D

DOGWOO

D LN

HEAT HER LY

CT

PHIBBS RD

KE

RR

AV

E

CORNHILL

DR

COBB ST

CARSON DR

DA

NIE

L LN

OAK ST

NEW BERN CT

BROOKVIEW CT

GR

EE

NLE

A D

R

MC

PH

ER

SO

N R

D

CHA

NNI NG CT

CR

ISSM

AN R

D

ME

AD

OW

BR

OO

K A

VE

W.R

. LN

PINES T

COURTLAND DR

POLLARD AV

E

TURNBURY PL

ARBOR DR

CLEVELAND ST

GERRINGER RD

WO

OD

LAN

D D

R

PARK DR

LIVA

N C

T

TRAVIS LN

BROOKSIDE

DR

EDGEW

OO

D C

T

ALLISON CT

MABLETON DR

TRIBEK CT

DURHAM MEADOWS DR

SUNSET HILLS AVE

SILVER MAPLE

DR

LONG ST

DOWNING DR

AARON ST

S FAIRWAY DR

PINE ST

S RIVERVIEW DR

GOODSON AVE

WA

GO

NE

R R

D

GR

EE

NF

E

RN CT

STEELE ST

PARRISH ST

EASTGATE DR

LAK

EV

IEW

AV

E

STUART CT

RADIANCE DR

ROLLING

MEADO

WS

LN

KENSINGTON PL

FRANZ CT

MC

AR

THU

R LN

GORDON ST

BANK

OF

AME R

ICA

DR

PITT RD

GU

RN

EY ST

EARL DR

BERWICK DRTANBARK CT

UNIVERSITY DR

CEDAR

WO

OD

DR

PINE

GRO

VE RD

WOODHUE DR

RE

GO

DR

ST

JOH

N S

T

SHAW ST

FREEMAN LN

WOODALE DR

BURLINGTON RD

MADKINS ST

ZA

C W

AL

KER PL

N RIVERVIEW DR

LITTLE AVE

LEIGH DR

DICK ST

CAROL LEE DR

BRYC

EWOO

D C

T

ENGLE

MAN CT

MO

NR

OE

LN

FER

ND

ALE

DR

OLD

WELL

DR

HAC KETT PROPERTY

TRL

EDGEWATER RD

EUGENE AVE

GURNEY CT

GRA

CEW

OO

D C

T

MAJESTRY RD

CH

AN

CER

Y S

T

MACG

RE

GO

R D

R

TUCK DR

WEST

FIELD LN

SAIN

T M

ARKS

CH U

R CH

RD

TRIN

ITY

DR

ELON OAK

TRL

COY ST

GIB

SON

VIL

LE O

SSIP

EE RD

DE

VO

NS

HI R

E LN

ST NICHOLAS DR

PINEWAY DR

ELON ACORN DR

HILLCREST DR

MARTIN S

T

ABINGDON PL TREM

ON

T D

R

KERNODLE C

IR

SAINT REGIS DR

CROSBY DRE SUMMERBELL AVE

INTE

RN

ATI

ON

AL D

R

WHITE

POPLAR DR

FOSTER DR

ELM CREST LN

MU

LLIN

S D

R

BA

RH

AM

STJOH

NS

ON

ST

NOTTINGHAM LN

DREW LN

FARWOOD RD

VA

LLEY

DA

LE DR

CRESTWELL D R

SCOTT DR

SUNSET DR

HUNTER AVE

WESTVIEW DR

CANTERBURY DR

CAP

POQ

UIN

WA

Y

ELON COMMONS DR

FOREST DR

TIMBERLAKE DR

GREENTREE RD

FLOW

ERS RD

WINDRIFT DR

OAKVIEW DR

1ST

ST

POWER LINE RD

POWER LINE RD

BILL

LOY

DR

CANDLEWOOD DR

HUFFMAN LN

AVENUE OF

TREES

N O

KE

LLY

AV

E

LEE

DR

WHITESELL DR

O'NEAL ST

S SC

HO

OL

ST

DOGWOOD DR

FARMINGTON LN

FARM

RD

N PARK AV

WYRICK TRL

WELLINGTON RD

E PHOE NIX

DR

OAKWOOD DR

CA

BLE

RD

DALTON MCMICHAEL D

R

GR

EE

N G

AB

L E TR

L

BEN SHARPE RD

AMICK RD

DURHAM STREET EXT

HERITA

GE DR

S O

KE

LLY

AV

E

S W

ILLI

AM

SON

AVE

JAMESTOWNE DR

BR

IGH

AM

DR

WILLI AM PENN

CT

BALLPARK AVE

E HAGGARD AVE

DAN

IELE

Y W

ATE R

WH

EEL

RD

BURCH BRIDG

E R

D

SMIT

H ST

S A

NTI

OC

H A

VE

FORESTDALE DR

LEW

IS AV

E

O&I

O&I

O&I

O&I

NR

NRO&INR

O&IO&I O&I

NRNR

NR

NRNR

NRUR

SR

SR

I

I

I

SR

TC TC

TC

TC

TC

TC

TC

TC

TC

UR

UR

O&I

O&I

O&I

PI

PI

UR

VCUR

UR

C

CUR

C

C

I

VC

O&I

VCVCCO&I

UR

PI

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

O&I

VC

VC

O&I

NR

TCC

PIPI

C

C

PI

C

NR

NR

NR

TC TC

NR

NR

NRNR

NR

NR

NC

SR

SR

SR SR

SR

SR

SR

NC

UR

SR

RR

SR

SR

SR SR

SR

SR

SR

UR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SRSR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SRSR

SRSR

SR

SR

SR

SRSR

SRSR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SRSR

SRSR

SRSR SR

SR

SR

SR

SRSR

SR

SR

SR

SR

SR

O&I

C

SR

NR

PIPI

PI

PI

PI

SR

SR

PI

SR

C

PI

SR

PI

PI

SR

SR

SRSR

SR

NR

SR

SRSR

VC

VC

SR

NR

VC

NR

SRPI

PI

SR

NR

NR

NR

O&I

O&I

TC

O&I

UR

NR

TCURTC

TC

PI

VC

TC

TC

PI

UR

NR

SR

PI

I

PI

I

SR

SRNR

UR

TC

SRPI

SR

O&I

700 0 700 1,400 2,100 2,800350

Feet

1 inch = 700 feet

Land Use TypesRR - Rural ResidentialSR - Suburban ResidentialNR - Neighborhood ResidentialUR - Urban ResidentialNC - Neighborhood CenterVC - Village Center

TC - Town CenterC - CommercialI - IndustrialO&I - Office & InstitutionalPI - Public Institutional

Overlay Planning DistrictsSP - Stream Protections

TND - Traditional Neighborhood Development

MHN - Manufactured Home Neighborhood

County Boundary

Municipal Boundary

ETJ Boundary

Tax Parcels (unofficial)

Streets

Proposed Streets

Rivers, Creeks

Lakes, Ponds

²This map was compiled from the GIS resources of the Burlington Regional GIS Partnership for public planning and agency support purposes. These resources include public information sources of different scale, time, origin, definition and accuracy, which aspects produce inconsistencies among features represented together on this map. Neither the City of Burlington nor the Partnership shall be held liable for any errors in this map or supporting data. Primary public information sources from which this map was compiled, in conjunction with field surveys where required, must be consulted for the verification of the information contained within this map.

TOWN OF ELON

Map Date: 06/14/2011

Land Development Ordinance Map

Burlington Regional GIS Partnership12

section e:

residential lifehousing facts and figures:

1. 58percentofElonundergraduatesliveoncampus,including1,290first-year students,1,090sophomores,320juniorsand180seniors

2. On-campushousingcapacity(in2011)is2,881Beds,900ofwhicharesingle roomsand1,981ofwhicharedoubles

3. Thereare770apartmentsoncampus

4. Elonhas16learningcommunitiesacrosscampus,rangingfromService LearningtoBusinesstoSpanishHousetoSustainableLiving

5. Threefaculty-in-residenceliveinlearningcommunitiesoncampus

Themapbelowshowsthelocationsofexistingbedroomconcentrationsoncampus.Asindicated,themajorityofthehousingisstillcenteredaroundElon’smaincampus.

sections e-n:

specific topics

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

13

housing planning principles:Theplannersrecommendthemixandthedispersionofresidentialhousingthroughoutthe campus. This feature is very supportiveof the concept of integrating livingandlearning.Itissuggestedthatapartmentunitsforyoungfacultybecreatedineachhous-ingareaandthat,asnewhousingiscreated,spaceberecapturedinolderunitsforseminarspace,studyspace,socialspace,bikestorage,andinformalspacetopromoteinteraction among students. It also feasible to developportions of older residencesforspecialinterestgroupssuchaslanguagehousesorinternationalhousescontainingfacultyoffices.

Neighborhoodsmadeupofgroupsofresidentialhouseswillincludeinteractivegather-ingspacesandwillcontainintellectualcommunitiestocreateastrongersenseofcom-munityamongstudents.

14

Eachneighborhoodwillalsoincludedestinationswhichmayincludeclassroomsforlec-turesandgatheringsaswellassocialvenueslikelate-nightcoffeeshopswherestudentscaninteract,think,gather,socializeandstudy.Thesedestinationswillhelpcreatethefeelofaneighborhoodthatprovidesanintimatehomebaseforstudentsandenhancesstudent,facultyandstaffinteraction.Neighborhoodscouldalsoincludestudentservices,unifyingtraditions,signatureevents,andoutdoorgatheringspaces.

Eachresidentialhousewillcreateacohesivecohortthatismadeupofsmallerfloorsandsub-groupssuchaslearningcommunitieswithgroupsconnectedanintellectualin-terest.Many houseswill haveaffiliated facultyand staff, peermentors, classrooms,uniquehouselegaciesandtraditions,andcommonsocialandacademicspaces.

Elon’sneighborhoodswillinclude: HistoricNeighborhoods(formerlyEastandWestareas) Colonnades GlobalNeighborhood(formerlyNortharea) DanieleyNeighborhood LoyCenter OaksApartments Seniorclasshousing

This initiative is not only a housing or brick and mortar plan. Rather, the focus is re-connecting the residential and larger campus experiences and thereby transforming the intellectual climate of the campus

Students’residentialexperiencescannotexistinasiloatthefringeofthecampusex-perience,isolatedfromtheuniversitymission,academicsortheoveralldevelopmentofstudents.Thereforetheplanisbuiltonthefollowinginterwovenstructures:

1. Pathway:apredictablefour-yearpathwaythroughtheresidentialexperience, thatgroupsstudentsby,andfocuseson,specificclassyeardevelopmentand needsandserves75percentofstudents.

2. Neighborhoods:intellectualneighborhoodsthatorientandgroundstudents intellectuallyandsocially,includinggroupsofresidential“houses”,affiliated facultyandstaff,peermentors,classrooms,commonsocialandacademic spaces,dining,services,andunifyingtraditions.Supportingthese neighborhoodswillrequirebuildingnewsocialandacademiccommon spacesanddestinationsthatalsosupporttheincreasingcampusdiversityand reducedensityincurrentresidentialfacilities.3. Bridges:intentionallylinkingtheresidentialexperiencewithfacultythrough coursestaughtinresidentialneighborhoods,faculty-in-residencewithinfirst- yearandsophomorehousing,facultyaffiliatesleadingdiscussions/programs withneighborhoodsandfloors,partnershipswithacademicunitsandtargeted supportservices(includingtheIsabellaCanonInternationalCenter,Academic Advising,CareerServices,andothers),andlayeredmentoringconnecting residentialstudentstoupperdivisionstudentmentors(TAs,tutors,mentors).

4. Integration:Theresidentialcampusmustbeintegratedbothphysicallyand programmatically.Neighborhoodsmustbeconnectedvisually,asopposedto alienatedatthefringeofcampus.Outdoorspacesshouldbegreened, parkinglotsshouldbemoved,andoutdoorgatheringspacesshouldbeadded tobuildcommunity.Additionally,theprogrammustsupport,complementand alignwithexistingacademicprogramsandacommitmentbytheentireElon communitywillberequired. SP

ILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

15

the north area:The currentNortharea residential housing (StoryandHarperCenters) is notof thequality to attract and retain students. This area should be replacedwith aGlobalNeighborhoodconsistingof5threeandfourstoryresidencehallswithatotalof600beds,ananchorbuildingfortheIsabellaCannonCenterforInternationalStudies,fac-ultyoffices,multi-purposerooms,studenthangoutspaceandamediaroom.AGreatHallisalsoplannedforthisanchorbuildingtoaccommodateavarietyofspecialfunc-tionsaswellasdailyevents.

Toservethediningneedsofstudentsinthenorthareaofcampus,anewdininghallisenvisionedasanadditionontotheMoseleyCenter.

RH 1

RH 2

RH 3

RH 4

RH 5

CFA

AnCHoR

building

globAl

16

the station at mill point:TheStationatMillPointisauniqueresidentialvillagebeingplannedforthepropertyknownasFireFieldstothesouthofcampusalongWilliamsonAvenue.Thiswillprovideforattractiveandhighqualityapartmentandtownhomestylehousingwith324bedsandanAmenityBuildingwithPoolnearthecampusandintheTownofElon.

poolCommunity building W

illi

Amso

n Av

enue

bAllpARk Avenue

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

17

tennis housing area:NewhousingisproposedneartheTennisCourtsthatwillprovide400bedsandanewdininghall.

18

danieley center:It isrecommendedthatnewresidencestotaling754bedsbeaddedtotheDanieleyCenterArea.Themasterplanindicatespotentialsitelocations.

colonnades housing:ItisrecommendedthatnewresidencesbeaddedtotheColonnadesHousingcomplex.Themasterplanindicatespotentialsitelocations.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

19

section f:

journalism and mass communications departmentThisprogramhasbeenoneofthemostpopularoncampus. Ithasoutgrowntheuseofitscurrentfacilityand,inordertoservethestudentsbetter,itneedstobeinanewlargerbuilding.Theprogramrequiresapproximately82,000gsfandincludesstu-dentradiostation,TVstudios,editingsuites,classrooms,officesuits,andothersupportspaces.Thelocationisindicatedonthemasterplan.

20

section g:

education departmentThe current locationof the EducationDepartment inMooney is not conducive to thespaceneedsintermsofquantityandqualityforthisprogram.Theplansuggeststhatonepossiblemeanstoaddress thedepartment’sspaceneeds is torelocate it totheMcEwenJournalismandMassCommunicationBuilding.Morespacesmustbecreatedforflexibleteaching,groupstudy,large-scaleinstruction,resourcesupport,andoffices.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

21

section h:

recreationclub sports fields:NewclubsportsfieldsaretobelocatednorthoftheFrancisCenterforsoccer,fieldhockey,baseball,andsoftball.Theseareforclubsportsandcansecondarilybeuti-lized for recreational use. Lightsmust be installedat thebaseball field in order toextendthefield’stimeofuse.

22

recreation center:AstheDanieleyCenterRecreationCenterexpandswithmorehousing,arecreationfa-cilityforwellnessandfitnessisplannedtoservicetherecreationalneedsofthestudentsinthisareaofcampus.

AnewMiniatureGolfcourseshouldbecreatedtothewestoftheDanieleyCenterRec-reationCentertocreateanatmosphereoffunonthecentralcampus.

Further,thecreationofaLakePavilionandDeckdrawsstudentstothecenterofcampuswhileprovidingavenueforstudent-centeredeventsontheLake.

neW

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

23

the lodge:The Lodgeproperty representsauniqueopportunity to createamorevital studentspace for everything from the “blow-off” party to the quiet retreat. Every campusshould have sucha spacewhere students can vary the uses from class to class. TheLodgebuildingshouldremainrusticincharacter,butitshouldbemodestlyrenovatedforstudentusewithappropriatefurnishings.Itisconceivablethatthepropertycouldbeconnectedto the tram/bikewaysystemwith thecooperationofone interveningpropertyowner.

aQuatic facility:Thecampusplanindicatesapotentialsiteforan8lane40yardstretch-competitionpoolandspaonthenorthendofKouryCenter.Thiswouldallowforexpandedintra-mural,recreationalandvarsityteamopportunities.

aquatIcS center

24

section i:

arts & sciencescenter for the artsMorespaceisneededbytheprogramsfortheatreandthearts.AnadditionontheCenter for the Arts can be provided to accommodate for the space needs of theprogramswithintheFineArtsDepartmentaswellandalleviatesomeoftheaestheticconcernsofthebuilding.Thecurrentexteriordoesnotblendwellwiththepreferredarchitecturallanguageonthecampusandanyfutureimprovementandadditionsneedtotakethisintoconsideration.

TheCenterfortheArtswasconstructedin1987whenthestudentpopulationwas3000.Itisafunctionalbuildingthatwassuccessfulinservingthebasicprogramsintheatre,musicandartatthattime.Thecurrentpopularityoftheseprogramswithaconsiderablylargerstudentbodyhasplacedgreatstrainsonexistingspace.Itisdesirabletokeepthesefineartsfunctionstogether,andthereisnotanadjacentsiteavailablefornewconstruction.Theatrelacksadequatebackstagesupportspace,andtheplanindicatesapotentiallocationforanaddition.

Theadditioncouldhelpmeetcurrentprogrammaticneeds. Withmodestexpansionontheeastsideofthefirstfloor,newspacecouldbeprovidedasindicatedinthecon-ceptualplan.Theadditionwouldalsooffertheopportunitytocontextuallyrelatethisbuildingtotherestofthecampus.TheCenterfortheArtswasbuiltpriortothe1990campusplanwhichfirstproposedaunifiedcampuswithrelatedarchitecture.

globAl

CFA

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

25

francis center/dance renovation:AblackboxtheaterforacademicinstructionandperformancescouldbelocatedintheFrancisCenter toprovidemuchneededspacefor thedramaticarts (theater,dance,andmusic).

26

mcmichael science centerAsiteisreservednexttoMcMichaelforanadditiontohouseanexpandedsciencepro-gram.ThisbuildingcouldalsohousethegreenhousewithlaboratoryspaceandofficespacefortheCenterforEnvironmentalStudiesratherthanbuildaseparatebuilding.Becauseofvibrationrequirements,thisisprobablyabetterlocationthanKouryAthleticCenterforadomedastronomyplatformcapableofhandlingcommunitygroups.ThisexpansionwouldallowneededspaceinMcMichaelfor“smart”classrooms.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

27

section j:

technologyIt isrecommendedthatthe ITStaffandserversshouldbeconsolidatedintoasinglefacilityattheFrancisCenter.

1. Presently,theITStaffofficesarespreadthroughoutmanybuildingsoncampus. RelocatingITStafftoasinglefacilitywillenhanceITStaffefficiencyand vacateofficespacethatisbettersuitedtoacademicoffices.

2. Currently,computerserversareinmultiplelocationswhichhaveissueswith facilityreliability.Relocatingthemtoamoresecuresitewithdedicated redundantpowerandHVACisneeded.

FutuRe it

28

section K:

support facilitiesadmissionsGroupadmissionspresentationsareconductedonthefirstfloorofMoseleywhichhasaconvenientlylocated(adjacent)visitors’parkinglot.Admissions’receptionandindi-vidualcounselingareconductedinqualityspaceonthefirstfloorofPowell.Admissions’operationsareverycrowded.ConsiderconsolidatingAdmissionsintoonenewfacility.ThiswillfreeupspaceinMoseleyforstudentactivitiesandPowellforAdministrativeneeds.

auditoriumA1,500-seatauditoriumwillbebuiltasanadditiontotheMoseleyCenter.

Admissions

multi-faith centerAdda15,000sfMulti-FaithCenteratAcademicVillageasthesixthandfinalpavilionintheAcademicVillage.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

29

section l:

future convocation centerThestudentbodynownumbers5709.Bytheyear2020,withmodestgrowthoffewerthan100studentsayear,thestudentpopulationcouldpossiblyexceed6300students.Atsomepoint,thiswillplaceagreatstrainonconvocation/athletic/recreationfa-cilities.Also,thereisnolargeassemblyspaceoncampus.Thecampusplanenvisionsaconvocationcenterof5,000fixedseatswhichwouldserveamultitudeofpurposesincludingconvocationsandcampuswideevents,graduation,largescaleconcerts,com-munityevents,expositions,competitionsports,icerink,athleticofficesand,possibly,thedanceprogram.Theideallocationwouldbeclosetothestadiumtoshareparking.Thecampusplanindicatesthelocationandapproximatesizeofthedescribedfacility.

30

section m:

athleticsKoury athletic centerStudytheexpansionandrenovationfortheKouryCenterGymtoprovideexpandedseatingandvarsitylockerrooms.

softballAnewsoftballstadiumwithparkingshouldbelocatedalongWilliamsonAvenue.Thefacilitywillincludepressbox,lockerrooms,and313seats.

& loCkeR Rooms

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

31

section o:

relationship of elon to the toWnElonUniversityhas5700studentsand360facultyandstaff.TheTownofElonhasover7,600inhabitants.Bothentitiesareindevelopmentmode;bothareimpactedpositivelybythehighwaybypass;andbotharedesirousofaviable“downtown”thatcaterstostudentsand residentsalike. Themajorgrowth forbothwill takeplacenorthof therailroadwhichwilltendtosegregatelandtothesouthwhenhi-speedrailserviceisin-troducedwithattendantclosingsofrailcrossingsandinstallationofbarrierconstruction.Membersofthecampuscommunityareactiveintownaffairs.Theuniversity’sSeniorVicePresidentforBusinessandFinanceandtheTownManagermeetmonthly.Theuni-versityneedsinfrastructuredevelopment,zoningassistanceandnewcampusentrancesonHaggardAvenue.Thisisanopportunistictimetoimplementjointprogramsforthebenefitofboth.doWntoWn developmentMiamiUniversityinOxford,Ohio,RowanUniversityinGlassboro,NJandOberlinCol-legeinOberlin,Ohio,arejustthreeofmanyinstitutionswhichhaveworkedtogethertocreateviableandvitalcommercialdistrictsadjacenttothecampus.Studentswouldlovetoseeamenitiesinthetownsuchasadrugstore,musicstore,hairsalon,bookstore,ethnicrestaurants,andalternativeentertainmentspots.Recently,theconstructionofathreestorybookstore/mixedusebuildingonWilliamsonis indicativeofthetypeofcooperativeretaildevelopmentthatcanbenefittheuniversityandtheTownofElon.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

33

toWn-college entrancesThenewbypassintersectsHaggardAvenuetothewestrightnexttotheTownofElontownlineandtotheeastjustbeyondthetownline.ItwouldbeappropriatetobuildbrickentrancestructuresatbothtownlinestodesignatemutuallyElonUniversityandTheTownofElon.Withappropriatelandscaping,lightingandstreetdevelopment,verypleasingentrancestobothentitiescouldbecreated.PropertyownersalongHaggardAvenue could be encouraged to participate, and adverse views could be partiallyscreenedinthepublicrightofway.

other opportunitiesDevelopacohesiveplanforin-townstudentapartments.Encouragefacultytobuyhousesclosetothecampus.Worktogethertocleanupsubstandardhousing.Cooperateinthedevelopmentofanoneholegolfcourse?

34

section p:

related issueslandscaping and general site improvementsCampuslandscapingissuperb.Thecampushascolor,texture,varietyandagoodselec-tionofplantmaterials.Theeffortsofthelast10yearsarebeginningtomature,andthenewertreesarereachingappropriatescaletothebuildings.Thisimagewillonlyim-provewithtime.Thecampusismaintainedclosetoperfection.Itissaidthataprospec-tivestudentdecidesinthefirst15minutesoncampuswhetherornottokeeptheschoolonher“list.”TheinitialimpressionofElonUniversityintheyear2010ascomparedto2000isamazing.Itistestamenttotheprinciplethatthespacearoundbuildingsisjustasimportantasthebuildingsthemselvesindefining“campus.”

Withinthiscontextgreatopportunityexiststonowdevelopthecampusforincreasedstudentandfacultyuseofthecampus:

Continuetocreateserendipitousmeetingplacesthroughoutcampusforinformalgather-ings.Thereoughttobebenchplazasandsittingwallsatallmainbuildingentrances.ThefountainatAlamanceisagoodexample.

Createoutdooractivityspacesateachresidencehall.

Maintainthepedestriannatureofthecampus,expandwalkways,trailsandfacilitiestoaccommodatebicycles.Continuetoexpandthetram/BioBussystembasedondemand.

parKingElonUniversityhasbeenresponsivetoparkingneedswhiletryingtominimizeunneces-saryautomobileusetocrossthecampus.TheexistingBioBussystemisanexcellentsys-tem,andthisreportrecommendsexpansionasappropriate.Restrictingfreshmanpark-ingtoDanieleyCenterorotherremotelotshastwobenefits:itmeansfewercampusspacesarerequired,but,moreimportantly,studentsgetaccustomedtonon-automobiletransportation.As enrollment grows, expansion of this restriction to sophomores is agoodidea.

Adda1,000-carparkinglottotheeastofTheFrancisCenter.

SPILLMANFARMER

architects

elo

n u

niv

ersi

tyc

am

pus

mast

er p

lan f

or

the

sec

ond d

ecade

35

appendix Q:

classroom and class lab utiliZation studyAclassroomutilizationstudyforthemaincampusaswellastheLawSchoolinGreens-boroisneeded.In2011,thisstudywasconductedbyComprehensiveFacilityPlanners.ThePhysical TherapyandPhysician’sAssistantdepartmentswereexcluded from thisstudyastheyweremovingfromMcMichaeltotheFrancisCenter.Thestudyisattached.

36

 

  CLA

SSR

OO

M A

ND

CLA

SS L

AB

UTI

LIZA

TIO

N S

TUD

Y

FIN

AL

REP

OR

T

OC

TOB

ER 2

011

         

Com

preh

ensi

ve F

acili

ties P

lann

ing,

Inc.

8

4 N

orth

Sta

nwoo

d R

oad

Col

umbu

s, O

hio

4320

9

ww

w.c

fp-p

lann

ers.c

om

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Table of Contents 

Executive Su

mmary ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 

Overview ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 

Definition

 of T

erms .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

Utilization Guide

lines ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 

Summary of In

structiona

l Facilitie

s ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6 

Classroo

m Ana

lysis ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 

Class Labo

ratory Ana

lysis ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 

APP

ENDIX ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 

Scho

ol of Law

 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 

Summary of In

structiona

l Facilitie

s .......................................................................................................................................................................... 27 

Classroo

m Ana

lysis ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

 

State Classroo

m and

 Lab

 Utilization Guide

lines .......................................................................................................................................................... 31

 

Detailed Main Ca

mpu

s Classroo

m Utilization .............................................................................................................................................................. 32 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 1 

 Classroom and Class Lab Utilization Study 

Executive Summary 

This rep

ort a

nalyzes the Fall 20

10 utilization of th

e classroo

ms an

d labo

ratories fo

r Elon

 University

.  Fo

r Fall term

 201

0, th

e main campu

s ha

d 75

 classroo

ms, 4 sem

inar roo

ms an

d 49

 labo

ratories used for regu

larly sche

duled instruction.   In add

ition

, one

 aud

itorium

 was used for several 

classes.  

Classrooms 

During the da

y (8 am to

 5 pm) the

 75 classroo

ms an

d 4 seminar roo

ms were used

 on average 31

.5 hou

rs per wee

k, 70%

 of the

 45 

available ho

urs, and

 64.1%

 of the

 sea

ts were occupied

 whe

n the room

s were in use. 

oTh

e 31

.5 hou

rs per wee

k the classroo

ms were sche

duled falls in

 the mid‐ran

ge of e

xpected use.  A

ccording

 to pub

lishe

d space 

guidelines a use of b

etwee

n 30

 and

 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k is con

side

red a reason

able goa

l. o

How

ever, the

re are selected area

s of available tim

es and

 several roo

ms that cou

ld accom

mod

ate ad

ditio

nal sectio

ns.  Available 

hours are prim

arily at the

 beginning

 and

 end

 of the

 day.  Und

erutilized room

s in KOBC

, MOON, A

VRP, AVP

S, M

CMI, an

d ALA

M 

may be pa

rtially due

 to a less con

venien

t location.   

oTh

e station occupa

ncy of 64.1%

 is also with

in th

e rang

e of expected use.  A

ccording

 to pub

lishe

d space gu

idelines, statio

n occupa

ncy be

twee

n 60

% and

 67%

 is con

side

red a reason

able expectatio

n. 

oTh

e campu

s ha

s capa

city to

 expan

d the even

ing instruction. 

Classroom Enrollment Capacity 

The classroo

m enrollm

ent c

apacity

 provide

s an

 estim

ate of th

e FTE stud

ents th

e curren

t classroom

 sea

ts cou

ld sup

port based

 on the assumed

 utilizatio

n rates.    For th

is calculatio

n, an average use of 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k with

 65%

 statio

n occupa

ncy was assum

ed.  Th

e University

 sho

uld 

verify th

at th

ese assumptions are accep

table an

d achievab

le over the long

 term

.   

With

 the relocatio

n of Phy

sical The

rapy

 from

 McM

icha

el, the

 PT classroo

ms an

d labs cou

ld be available after Decem

ber 2

011 to m

eet future 

campu

s‐wide instructiona

l nee

ds.  If the three class labs are con

verted

 to classroom

s an

d the curren

t classroom

s are available, th

e University

 could ad

d ab

out 2

96 sea

ts to

 the existin

g classroo

m sup

ply bringing

 the total available seats to 3,031

. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 2 

 If the utilizatio

n is increa

sed from

 31.5 weekly room

 hou

rs (W

RH) to 33

 WRH

 and

 the Station Occup

ancy is increa

sed from

 64%

 to 65%

 and

 the 

estim

ated

 296

 sea

ts from

 the PT

 room

s are ad

ded to th

e curren

t 2,735

 sea

ts, the

 classroom

s could accommod

ate ab

out 5

,800

 FTE (p

lus or m

inus 

50), an

 increa

se of just o

ver 8

00 FTE from

 the Fall 20

10 FTE

 of 4

,970

.  

Laboratories 

On average the 49

 labo

ratories were use 21

.4 hou

rs per wee

k du

ring

 the da

y with

 70.4%

 of the

 statio

ns occup

ied.  This is nea

r spa

ce utilization 

recommen

datio

ns of a

bout 22 ho

urs with

 80%

 of the

 statio

ns occup

ied.  H

owever, u

tilization expe

ctations gen

erally vary by

 discipline. For 

labo

ratories th

at req

uire no special setup

 for classes such as compu

ter lab

s, W

RH use guide

lines are sim

ilar to th

at of classroom

s (30+

 hou

rs per 

wee

k).  Fo

r labo

ratories re

quiring eq

uipm

ent set up such as na

tural scien

ce or technical lab

s, 22 ho

urs pe

r wee

k are more ap

prop

riate.  In some 

cases it is expected that th

e stud

ents will nee

d to use th

e lab for projects or othe

r “non

 sched

uled

” activ

ities (e

.g., art, nursing

).  In

 these cases 

the wee

kly room

 hou

r go

al fo

r sche

duled activ

ity is re

duce to

 18 ho

urs or 15 ho

urs pe

r  wee

k.   Since most lab

oratories are de

sign

ed fo

r a specific 

type

 of instructio

n requ

iring specialized

 equ

ipmen

t and

 furnishing

s, labs th

at are und

erutilized cann

ot easily be used

 to m

eet the

 teaching

 nee

d in unrelated

 disciplines unless the room

 is re

design

ed or mod

ified

 to accom

mod

ate multip

le uses. 

Several lab

s were used

 well b

eyon

d the expe

cted

 hou

rs.  Th

ey in

clud

e:  

Co

mpu

ter Labs, M

CE1‐20

5, M

CE1‐20

7, M

CE1‐20

9, and

 ALA

M‐201

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Th

e Dan

ce Studios, A

RTS‐11

1, ART

S‐11

2, ART

S‐11

7 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

CU

PID Lab

, CARL‐321

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Intro CIS Lab, DUKE

‐303

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Intro Ph

ysics, M

CMI‐2

03, M

CMI‐2

07 (2

2 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Gen

eral Che

mistry, M

CMI‐3

04 (1

8 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Po

litical Scien

ce, A

VPS‐11

0 (22 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Several o

f the

 Fine an

d Pe

rforming Arts Labs, H

G13

‐116

, HG13

‐124

, HG13

‐104

, HG13

‐120

 and

 ART

S‐10

4, ART

S‐16

1, ART

S‐16

4 (18 

Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

If the labs are sched

uled

 at the

 recommen

ded Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

rs fo

r each ty

pe of lab

 (see

 Tab

le 11) with

 80%

 of the

 statio

ns occup

ied then

 the labs cou

ld sup

port an FTE en

rollm

ent increase of abo

ut 20%

 which is con

sisten

t with

 the po

tential increase that th

e classroo

ms could 

supp

ort.  H

owever, since  labs te

nd to

 be specialized

, available space in one

 lab may not be ab

le to

 be used

 by an

 unrelated

 discipline.  Tab

le 11 

show

s which labs cou

ld sup

port add

ition

al sectio

ns or en

rollm

ents. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 3 

 School of Law

 Th

e Scho

ol of Law

 utilizes five gen

eral purpo

se classroom

s, tw

o seminar roo

ms, and

 one

 com

puter lab located in th

e lib

rary along

 with

 several 

clinic roo

ms.  The

 clin

ic roo

ms an

d the compu

ter lab

 are gen

erally used as “op

en” labs.  It is assum

ed th

at th

ey are not used for regu

larly 

sche

duled cred

it instruction an

d are exclud

ed from

 the an

alysis. 

 On average the fiv

e gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s were used

 25.5 ho

urs pe

r wee

k which is 56.7%

 of the

 45 ho

urs available for the wee

k.  

An average of 30 ho

urs of sched

uled

 use fo

r the gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s shou

ld be an

 achievable go

al.  

Th

e average class mee

ting size was abo

ut 40 stud

ents resultin

g in average statio

n occupa

ncy of abo

ut 50%

.  Most g

uide

lines sug

gest a 

station occupa

ncy go

al of 6

0% of m

ore.   

Th

e tw

o seminar roo

ms, 205

 and

 211

, were sche

duled a total o

f 12 ho

urs an

d are exclud

ed from

 the capa

city ana

lysis since they wou

ld 

not b

e a lim

iting

 factor fo

r future enrollm

ent g

rowth. 

Classroom Enrollment Capacity 

The classroo

m enrollm

ent c

apacity

 provide

s an

 estim

ate of th

e nu

mbe

r of stude

nts the curren

t classroom

 sea

ts cou

ld sup

port based

 on assumed

 utilizatio

n rates.  Since th

e classroo

m sea

ts are a critic

al fa

ctor in th

is calculatio

n it is im

port th

at th

e room

 cap

acities are accurately repo

rted

.   

Of e

qual im

portan

ce in

 the capa

city calculatio

n are the assumed

 utilization rates.  For th

is calculatio

n, a W

eekly Ro

om Hou

r rate of 3

0 with

 60%

 station occupa

ncy is used.   Th

e Scho

ol sho

uld verify th

at th

ese assumptions are accep

table an

d achievab

le.    

If the classroo

m utilization is increa

sed from

 25.5 ho

urs pe

r week to 30 ho

urs pe

r week an

d the class sizes are increa

sed from

 abo

ut 40 stud

ents 

to 48 stud

ents (statio

n occupa

ncy of 60%

), the Scho

ol cou

ld grow by ab

out 4

0% from

 344

 stude

nts en

rolled in 201

0 to abo

ut 480

 stude

nts.  

Increa

sing

 the class section size only wou

ld accom

mod

ate a grow

th of a

bout 20%

 while increa

sing

 the nu

mbe

r of sectio

ns only,. w

ould 

accommod

ate an

 enrollm

ent g

rowth of 1

5% at c

urrent sectio

n sizes. 

   

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 4 

 Overview 

This rep

ort a

nalyzes the utilizatio

n of th

e classroo

ms an

d labo

ratories fo

r the main campu

s in Elon, North Carolina.  A

n an

alysis of the

 Schoo

l of 

Law classroom

s located in Green

sboro, North Carolina is presented

 in th

e App

endix. .   The

 basic data used

 in th

e an

alysis was provide

d by

 the 

University

’s Registrar’s Office (Fall Term 201

0 class sche

dule and

 credit h

ours) a

nd Spillm

an Farmer Architects (classroom

 and

 class lab squa

re 

footage).  

The cred

it ho

urs were conv

erted to FTE

 by dividing

 the un

dergradu

ate cred

it ho

urs by

 15 an

d the grad

uate credit h

ours by 12

.  Th

is produ

ced a 

total o

f 4,970

 FTE stude

nts.   

Definition of Terms 

Classroo

m and

 labo

ratory utilization is gen

erally expressed

 in tw

o mea

sures: W

eekly Ro

om Hou

rs (W

RH) a

nd Statio

n Occup

ancy percent (sectio

n size/roo

m cap

acity

).  Other fa

ctors im

pacting classroo

m and

 labo

ratory spa

ce nee

d are Wee

kly Stud

ent C

ontact Hou

rs (W

SCH) a

nd Statio

n Size. 

Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

rs (W

RH) a

re th

e nu

mbe

r of h

ours a roo

m is used for sche

duled cred

it classes du

ring

 a ty

pical w

eek.  C

lass cha

nge 

time is add

ed to

 the actual m

inutes a class m

eets.  Fo

r exam

ple, if a class m

eets 50 minutes th

ree da

ys a wee

k an

d there is a 10 minute 

chan

ge time, th

en th

e classroo

m is used 3 ho

urs du

ring

 the wee

k.  The

 average W

RH fo

r classroo

ms is th

e total W

RH divided

 by the 

numbe

r of roo

ms.   Gen

eral utilization gu

idelines (see

 next sectio

n) fo

r classroo

ms recommen

d that classroom

s be

 used ab

out 6

7% to

 73

% of the

 available ho

urs. Utilization gu

idelines fo

r labo

ratories are ty

pically lo

wer th

an classroom

s an

d de

pend

 on othe

r factors such 

as set‐up tim

e, th

e ne

ed fo

r op

en lab tim

e an

d tim

e for project w

ork.   

Wee

kly Stud

ent C

ontact Hou

rs (W

SCH) is the WRH

 times th

e nu

mbe

r of stude

nts en

rolled du

ring

 the official rep

ortin

g pe

riod

.  Fo

r exam

ple, a class m

eetin

g 3 ho

urs pe

r wee

k with

 an en

rollm

ent o

f 30 stud

ents gen

erates 90 WSC

H. 

Station Occup

ancy percent (S

O%) is the pe

rcen

t of sea

ts occup

ied whe

n the room

 is in

 sched

uled

 use.    For classroom

s, th

e recommen

ded station occupa

ncy shou

ld be be

twee

n 60

 and

 67%

 but fo

r sm

aller capa

city roo

ms, th

e station occupa

ncy shou

ld gen

erally 

by highe

r.  For labo

ratories 70 to 80%

 is th

e expe

ctation. 

Station sizes vary with

 the furnitu

re and

 equ

ipmen

t in the room

.  Fo

r classroo

ms a rang

e of 15 to 20 squa

re fe

et on average is 

approp

riate bu

t the

 tren

d is to

ward larger statio

n sizes to provide

 more teaching

 flexibility.  A lecture room

 with

 fixed seats might 

average 13

 squ

are feet per statio

n, while a sem

inar roo

m with

 tables and

 cha

irs might be closer to

 25 squa

re fe

et per statio

n.  For 

labo

ratories th

e station size varies by

 discipline an

d eq

uipm

ent h

oused. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 5 

 Utilization Guidelines 

Whe

n review

ing the utilizatio

n results in

 this rep

ort it is he

lpful to compa

re th

em to

 pub

lishe

d gu

idelines.    Several States ha

ve ado

pted

 spa

ce 

guidelines fo

r classroo

ms, labs and

 other ty

pes of spa

ces.  Since m

ore than

 90%

 of E

lon’s instruction occurs during the da

y – 8 am

 to 5 pm (4

5 ho

urs pe

r wee

k), it is ap

prop

riate to “be

nchm

ark” Elon with

 states that have pu

blishe

d gu

idelines fo

r da

ytim

e classroo

m utilization.  Tab

le 15, in

 the App

endix, id

entifies the classroo

m and

 lab utilizatio

n for 13

 states with

 daytim

e gu

idelines.   

For Classroo

ms: 

Th

e Expe

cted

 Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r average for the 13

 states is 30.8 ho

urs or 68.4%

 of the

 available 45

 hou

rs.  Th

e rang

e is 30 to 33 ho

urs 

(67%

 to 73%

 of the

 45 available ho

urs). 

Th

e station occupa

ncy average is 64%

 with

 a ra

nge from

 60%

 to 67%

. 

Th

e average station size is 17.2 squa

re fe

et with

 a ran

ge from

 15 to 20 squa

re fe

et. 

Ano

ther guide

line source is a pub

lication titled “Spa

ce Plann

ing for Institu

tions of H

ighe

r Ed

ucation”, autho

red by

 The

 Cou

ncil of Edu

catio

nal 

Facility Plan

ners In

ternationa

l (CE

FPI).  The

ir re

commen

datio

n for campu

ses with

 a daytim

e stud

ent F

TE betwee

n 3,00

0 an

d 10

,000

 is a W

eekly 

Room

 Hou

r (W

RH) o

f  30 with

 a Statio

n Occup

ancy (S

O) o

f 67%

 and

 a statio

n size of 2

0 squa

re fe

et fo

r a 45

 hou

r wee

k.  

For labo

ratories: 

Th

e Expe

cted

 Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r average for the 12

 of the

 13 states th

at have labo

ratory guide

lines is abo

ut 21 ho

urs; th

e rang

e is 20 to 

23 hou

rs. 

Th

e station occupa

ncy average is 78%

 with

 ran

ge from

 70%

 to 80%

. 

CEFP

I’s guide

lines fo

r campu

ses with

 a daytim

e stud

ent F

TE betwee

n 3,00

0 an

d 10

,000

 recom

men

ds a W

eekly Ro

om Hou

r (W

RH) o

f 20 an

d a 

Station Occup

ancy (S

O) o

f 80%

 for a 45

 hou

r wee

k.  Statio

n size varies by

 discipline.  

While th

e ab

ove gu

idelines provide

 an average utilizatio

n the consultants ha

ve fo

und that, d

epen

ding

 on the type

, class labo

ratories can

 be used

 at a greater rate than

 20‐23

 hou

r average cited in th

e ab

ove gu

idelines.   How

ever, if lon

ger set u

p tim

es are nee

ded or unsched

uled

 use is 

requ

ired

 for project w

ork, th

ey can

 be sche

duled at a lo

wer wee

kly room

 hou

r rate.  Fo

r long

 ran

ge plann

ing an

d an

alysis, the

 con

sulta

nts 

suggest the

 follo

wing gene

ral guide

lines:   

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 6 

 

Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire no special setup

 for classes, such as com

puter labs, the

 Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r use gu

idelines sho

uld be

 sim

ilar 

to th

at of classroom

s (30 or m

ore ho

urs pe

r wee

k).   

Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire equ

ipmen

t set up such as the ph

ysical and

 natural scien

ces or te

chnical lab

s, 22 ho

urs pe

r wee

k is 

recommen

ded. 

Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire stude

nts to use th

e lab for projects or othe

r no

n sche

duled activ

ities, such as art, the

 Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r go

al fo

r sche

duled activ

ity sho

uld be

 redu

ced to 18 ho

urs, or in som

e cases to 15 ho

urs pe

r wee

k.   

Establishing

 rea

sona

ble, achievable utilizatio

n gu

idelines are essen

tial for lo

ng ran

ge classroom

 and

 labo

ratory plann

ing.  The

 utilization rates 

need

 to reflect th

e na

ture and

 culture of the

 cam

pus, te

aching

 patterns, th

e official class day and

 class wee

k, acade

mic qua

lity an

d othe

r factors 

that m

ay be un

ique

 to Elon University

.  

Summary of Instructional Facilities 

The follo

wing table summarizes th

e instructiona

l facilitie

s on

 the main campu

s. 

Table 1: Sum

mary of In

structiona

l Facilities 

Room

 Type

   Description

 Num

 of 

Room

s Assigna

ble 

Squa

re Fee

t Num

ber of 

Seats 

Ave

rage

 Roo

m 

Squa

re Fee

t Ave

rage

 Num

 of 

Stations 

Avg. Station

 Size 

110 

Classroo

m 

75 

52,632

 2,67

5 70

1.8 

35.7 

19.7 

130 

Seminar Roo

m 

4 1,61

2 60

 40

3.0 

15.0 

26.9 

210 

Class Labo

ratory 

40 

43,244

 1,00

4 1,08

1.1 

25.1 

43.1 

240 

Compu

ter L

aboratory 

9 8,16

1 23

1 90

6.8 

25.7 

35.3 

610 

Aud

itorium

 (ART

S 15

0) 

1 1,92

5 12

5 1,92

5.0 

125.0 

15.4 

 

The campu

s ha

s a second

 Aud

itorium

 (ART

S 13

0) th

at has no sche

duled cred

it classes for Fall term

 201

0 an

d is th

erefore exclud

ed from

 this ana

lysis. 

Includ

ing the 75

 gen

eral purpo

se classroom

, the

 4 sem

inar roo

ms an

d the Aud

itorium

 (ART

S 15

0) th

e campu

s ha

s 80

 roo

ms for gene

ral 

classroo

m in

struction. 

Th

ere are a total o

f 49 labo

ratory or compu

ter lab facilities with

 sched

uled

 credit instructio

n. 

Other in

structiona

l facilitie

s such as the writin

g lab, th

e lang

uage lab, and

 the TV

 studio are no

t sched

uled

 with

 regular credit instructio

n an

d are exclud

ed from

 this ana

lysis. 

Th

e average station sizes are in line

 with

 CEFPI guide

lines. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 7 

 Classroom Analysis 

The classroo

m ana

lysis includ

es th

e 4 seminar roo

ms, th

e au

ditorium

 (Arts 15

0) and

 the 75

 classroom

s. 

Time by Day 

Figu

re 1 and

 Tab

le 2 illustrate how

 the classroo

ms were sche

duled du

ring

 a ty

pical w

eek for the Fall 20

10 te

rm.  Th

e chart sho

ws intensity

 of u

se 

throug

h the da

y for the classroo

ms, not th

e nu

mbe

r of classroom

s in use fo

r that hou

r.  W

eekly Ro

om Hou

rs (W

RH) (vertical scale) is the total 

numbe

r of roo

m hou

rs sched

uled

 for 80

 roo

ms. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 8 

 Figu

re 1: T

ime by

 Day Distribution ‐ C

lassroom

s 

 

  

0102030405060708090

8:00

 AM

9:00

 AM

10:00 AM

11:00 AM

12:00 PM

1:00

 PM

2:00

 PM

3:00

 PM

4:00

 PM

5:00

 PM

6:00

 PM

7:00

 PM

8:00

 PM

9:00

 PM

Weekly Room Hours

Time of Day 

Fall 20

10Time by

 Day Distribution  ‐80

 Classroom

s

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 9 

 Table 2: W

eekly Ro

om Hou

rs by Time by

 Day fo

r Classroo

ms 

Time 

Mon

 Tu

e Wed

 Th

u Fri 

Totals 

% 

8:00

 35

.25 

63.67 

35.25 

61.33 

30.25 

225.8 

8.2%

 9:00

 54

.08 

59.17 

54.5 

57.75 

49.67 

275.2 

9.9%

 10

:00 

65.5 

40 

65.83 

38.5 

61.58 

271.4 

9.8%

 11

:00 

65 

77.33 

65 

76.33 

58 

341.7 

12.3% 

12:00 

66.67 

71.5 

68.42 

71.67 

59.25 

337.5 

12.2% 

1:00

 67

.67 

69.33 

69.5 

70.75 

46.58 

323.8 

11.7% 

2:00

 70

.67 

67.83 

74.5 

68.33 

22.83 

304.2 

11.0% 

3:00

 56

.5 

69.75 

57.58 

70.83 

5.17

 25

9.8 

9.4%

 4:00

 61

.42 

24.42 

62.42 

21.42 

1.83

 17

1.5 

6.2%

 5:00

 35

 18

.5 

39.58 

15.42 

0.25

 10

8.8 

3.9%

 6:00

 21

 24

.17 

20.17 

20 

0 85

.3 

3.1%

 7:00

 10

.17 

12.67 

9.67

 9.42

 0 

41.9 

1.5%

 8:00

 4.5 

5.25

 4 

1.25

 0 

15.0 

0.5%

 9:00

 1.5 

0.75

 2.25

 0.42

 0 

4.9 

0.2%

 To

tals 

614.9 

604.3 

628.7 

583.4 

335.4 

2,76

6.8 

 % 

22.2% 

21.8% 

22.7% 

21.1% 

12.1% 

  

  Observations: 

Pe

ak use occurs on

 Tue

sday and

 Thu

rsda

y du

ring

 the 11

 am hou

r. 

Th

e distribu

tion of classes from

 8 am to

 3 pm is very go

od.  

While Frida

y use drop

s off inten

tiona

lly after 2 pm, it is close to a utilization gu

ideline expe

ctation of 15%

 of the

 total d

ay.  

Even

ing use (6 pm to

 9 pm) is low.  

  

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 10 

 Classroom Utilization Summary 

Since more than

 90%

 of the

 instruction occurs during the da

y (8 am to

 5 pm) the

 follo

wing utilizatio

n summary da

ta is presented

 for da

y tim

e use on

ly.  Sp

ring

 term

 cou

rse de

man

d is less th

an Fall term, the

refore it is exclude

d from

 the summary. 

The follo

wing table summarizes basic daytim

e (8 am to

 5 pm M

onda

y thru Frida

y) utilization da

ta fo

r the classroo

ms, sem

inar roo

ms an

d au

ditorium

 for Fall term

 201

0.   

Table 3: Classroom

 Utilization Su

mmary ‐ D

aytime ‐ F

all 2

010 

Coun

t of 

Room

s Avg. Station

s Pe

r Ro

om 

Total 

WRH

 Avg. 

WRH

 % Availa

ble 

Hou

rs (4

5) 

WSC

H 

Avg. C

lass 

Mee

ting

 Size 

Station 

Occup

ancy % 

Total Section

 En

rollm

ents 

Num

ber of 

Sections 

Gen

eral Classroom

s 75

 35

.7 

2,44

2.6 

32.6 

72.4% 

54,644

 22

.4 

62.7% 

16,143

 68

3 Seminar Roo

ms 

4 15

 47

.8 

12.0 

26.6% 

623 

13.0 

86.9% 

291 

23 

Aud

itorium

 1 

125 

19.8 

19.8 

44.0% 

278 

14.0 

11.2% 

146 

7 To

tals 

80 

35.8 

2,51

0.2 

31.4 

69.7% 

55,545

 22

.1 

61.8% 

146 

7 

  Observations: 

Th

e 80

 roo

ms were used

 on average 31

.4 hou

rs per wee

k, 69.7%

 of the

 45 available ho

urs. 

Th

e gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s were used

 on average 32

.6 hou

rs per wee

k, 72.4%

 of the

 45 available ho

urs. 

oTh

is is nea

r the up

per rang

e of 73%

 for the 13

 states with

 daytim

e classroo

m guide

lines. 

oTh

e Station Occup

ancy of 6

1.8%

 for the 80

 roo

ms is in

 the rang

e for the 13

 states with

 daytim

e classroo

m guide

lines. 

Th

e Station Occup

ancy fo

r the gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s was 62.7%

. 

Th

e Seminar Roo

ms are well b

elow

 the average utilizatio

n gu

idelines fo

r the 13

 states with

 daytim

e classroo

m guide

lines. 

Note that th

e Aud

itorium

 is used more like a seminar roo

m with

 an average section size of 1

4 stud

ents or 11

.2% of the

 sea

ts occup

ied.  

There are on

ly 3 sectio

ns in

 total for th

e who

le cam

pus with

 over 70

 stude

nts.  The

refore, for th

e Ca

pacity Ana

lysis later in th

is rep

ort 

the au

ditorium

 sea

ts are exclude

d from

 that calculatio

n. Excluding

 the au

ditorium

 cha

nges th

e ov

erall u

tilization as fo

llows: 

oWRH

 = 31.5 

oStation Occup

ancy = 64.1%

 

  

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 11 

 Recom

mended Utilization Goals 

Establishing

 rea

sona

ble utilizatio

n go

als is an im

port part o

f sou

nd classroom

 plann

ing.  Since th

e gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s are alread

y used

 ab

ove the up

per lim

it of th

e CE

FPI guide

lines and

 most o

f the

 state guide

lines, the

re wou

ld be no

 rea

son to red

uce the utilizatio

n expe

ctations.   

For this ana

lysis it is assum

ed tha

t a utilization rate nea

r the curren

t gen

eral purpo

se classroom

 rate is rea

sona

ble at 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k be

twee

n 8 am

 and

 5 pm.  How

ever, this is an issue the campu

s shou

ld add

ress.  Th

e utilizatio

n rates ne

ed to

 reflect th

e na

ture and

 culture of 

the campu

s, te

aching

 patterns, th

e official class day and

 class wee

k, acade

mic qua

lity an

d othe

r factors that m

ay be un

ique

 to Elon University

. 

Exclud

ing the au

ditorium

, the

 current Statio

n Occup

ancy rate of abo

ut 64%

 is in

 the mid ran

ge of g

uide

line suggestio

ns.  Fo

r plan

ning

 purpo

ses, 

it is sug

gested

 that th

is be roun

ded to th

e 65

%. 

Weekly Room Hours per Classroom

 – Fall 2010 – (Highest to lowest)  

The follo

wing chart d

isplays the nu

mbe

r of hou

rs per wee

k (W

RH) e

ach classroo

m was used du

ring

 a ty

pical w

eek Fall 20

10.  Th

e blue

 bar 

represen

ts th

e ho

urs used

 during the da

y be

twee

n 8 am

 and

  5 pm.  Th

e Re

d ba

r represen

ts th

e ho

urs sche

duled du

ring

 the even

ing.  The

 green

 ho

rizontal line

, WRH

 Daytim

e Goa

l (33

 hou

rs), represen

ts a rea

sona

ble go

al based

 on curren

t sched

uling practic

es.  

Figu

re 2 displays the 44

 classroom

s that were used

 more than

 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k, while Figure 3 show

s the 36

 roo

ms that were used

 less th

an 33 

hour in

 Fall term 201

0.  

  

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 12 

 Figu

re 2: 4

4 Classroo

ms used

 MORE

 tha

n 33

 hou

rs per wee

k 8 am

 to 5 pm

 daily 

 

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

AVAS 106

ALAM 207

AVRP 201

LONG 107

KOUR 140

AVAS 208

DUKE 302

CARL 309

ALAM 203

KOUR 139

LONG 114

KOBC 302

ALAM 302

AVAS 210

AVAS 204

POWL 302

AVAS 102

CARL 325

ALAM 206

KOBC 242

ALAM 202

LONG 201

ALAM 301

MCE1 110

DUKE 202

ALAM 205

MCE1 212

KOBC 348

KOBC 200

MCE1 210

POWL 304

MOON 312

AVPS 201

MOON 305

KOBC 244

ARTS 165

ALAM 218

DUKE 205

DUKE 207

DUKE 301

KOBC 208

KOBC 310

CARL 225

ARTS 163

Weekly Room Hours (WRH)

Classroo

ms

Classroo

m W

eekly Ro

om Hou

r Use ‐Fall 20

10So

rted

 Highe

st to

 Low

est D

aytime Use

44 Classroom

s with WRH

 Usage abo

ve Recom

men

ded Level o

f 33 Hou

rs per wee

k

Eve WRH

Day W

RHWRH

 Daytim

e Goa

l (33

 hou

rs)

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 13 

 Figu

re 3: 3

6 Classroo

ms used

 LESS than

 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k 8 am

 to 5 pm

 daily 

 

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

Weekly Room Hours (WRH)

Classroo

ms

Classroo

m W

eekly Ro

om Hou

r Use ‐Fall 20

10So

rted

 Highe

st to

 Low

est D

aytime Use

36 Classroom

s with WRH

 Usage Below

 Recom

men

ded Level o

f 33 Hou

rs per wee

k

Eve WRH

Day W

RHWRH

 Daytim

e Goa

l (33

 hou

rs)

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 14 

 Needs by Size Range 

Table 4 compa

res the da

ytim

e Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r (W

RH) D

eman

d by

 sectio

n size ran

ge to

 available room

s by

 sea

ting capa

city size rang

e.  

Definition

s of th

e column he

adings are listed

 below

: 

Th

e Cu

rren

t Ro

oms column prov

ides a cou

nt of roo

ms by

 sea

t cap

acity

 for ea

ch of the

 9 size rang

es id

entified.  

Th

e Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r Dem

and column totals th

e nu

mbe

r of daytim

e ho

urs of class sectio

ns with

 enrollm

ents (a

djusted for 20

% 

attrition

 from

 sched

uling to th

e official enrollm

ent rep

ortin

g pe

riod

) for each size ran

ge. 

A Con

ting

ency of 5

% is app

lied to th

e WRH

 dem

and. 

Th

e Dem

and on

 Roo

ms column show

s ho

w m

any room

s wou

ld be requ

ired

 if th

e room

s were sche

duled at 33 ho

urs pe

r wee

k from

 8 

am to

 5 pm daily.   

Be

cause it is im

practic

al to

 exactly m

atch th

e de

man

d to th

e exact size room

, som

e de

man

d for sm

aller room

s will “cascad

e” in

to larger 

room

s.  The

 Cascade

 colum

n show

s the % of cascade

d used

 in th

e mod

el fo

r this ana

lysis. 

Th

e Mod

ified

 Dem

and on

 Roo

ms column show

s the nu

mbe

r of roo

ms requ

ired

 after app

lying the cascad

ing assumptions.   

Th

e Be

st Fit Roo

ms column show

s the idea

l num

ber of roo

ms by

 size rang

e to fit the

 current sectio

n size profile.   

Th

e Differen

ce colum

n is th

e Be

st Fit Ro

oms – Cu

rren

t Roo

ms 

Table 4: Classroom

 Nee

ds by Size Ran

ge 

Size 

Rang

e Cu

rren

t Ro

oms 

WRH

 Dem

and 

Contingency 

Dem

and 

on Roo

ms 

Cascad

e Mod

ified

  Dem

and 

on Roo

ms 

Best Fit 

Room

s Differen

ce 

1‐15

 4 

431 

5% 

13.7 

40% 

8.2 

8 4 

16‐24 

3 70

0 5%

 22

.3 

30% 

21.1 

21 

18 

25‐29 

8 36

7 5%

 11

.7 

30% 

14.9 

15 

7 30

‐35 

36 

460 

5% 

14.6 

20% 

15.2 

15 

+21 

36‐39 

13 

303 

5% 

9.6 

20% 

10.6 

11 

+2 

40‐48 

10 

179 

5% 

5.7 

20% 

6.5 

6 +4

 49

‐63 

2 59

 5%

 1.9 

20% 

2.6 

3 1 

64‐72 

3 8 

5% 

0.3 

20% 

0.6 

0 +3

 72

+ 1 

5 5%

 0.2 

0% 

0.2 

1 0 

Total 

80 

2,51

1  

79.9 

 79

.9 

80 

0 

 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 15 

 Observations: 

Th

e table show

s that th

ere is a sho

rtage of small roo

ms (und

er 30 seat cap

acity

) while th

ere is surplus of roo

ms of greater sea

t cap

acity

.  In practice it all b

alan

ces ou

t in the en

d with

 the sm

aller sectio

ns being

 sched

uled

 in roo

ms larger th

an necessary.     

If ad

ditio

nal roo

ms are ad

ded in th

e future smaller room

s wou

ld be acceptab

le.  How

ever, add

ing room

s larger th

an th

e minim

um 

requ

ired

 can

 provide

 sectio

n size growth flexibility in

 the future to

 accom

mod

ate en

rollm

ent increases and

 to provide

 the University

 with

 more fle

xibility. 

Physical Therapy 

Since Ph

ysical The

rapy

 is m

oving from

 McM

icha

el th

eir c

lassroom

s an

d labs cou

ld becom

e available after D

ecem

ber 20

11 to

 mee

t future 

instructiona

l nee

ds.  Ph

ysical The

rapy

 will re

leased

 three labs, M

CMI 0

02, 0

08, 0

06 and

 three classroo

ms MCM

I 102

, 104

 and

 115

.  Th

e three 

labs and

 roo

ms 10

2 an

d 10

4 were exclud

ed from

 the utilizatio

n stud

y since they had

 no repo

rted

 sched

uled

 use in

 the class file for fall 20

10.  

How

ever M

CMI 1

15 was sched

ule for Biolog

y an

d Ch

emistry classes for Fall term

 201

0 an

d was in

clud

ed in

 the utilizatio

n an

alysis.  If the three 

labs are con

verted

 to classroom

s an

d the othe

r tw

o room

s (102

 and

 104

) rem

ain as classroom

s, th

en th

e campu

s could ad

d ab

out 2

96 sea

ts to

 the classroo

m sup

ply. 

Table 5: Former Phy

sical The

rapy

 Roo

ms 

ASF 

Estimated

 Ca

pacity 

Avg. 

Station 

MCM

I 00

2 1,34

4 67

 20

.1 

MCM

I  00

6 1,33

7 67

 20

.0 

MCM

I 00

8 96

5 48

 20

.1 

MCM

I 10

2 88

6 60

 14

.8 

MCM

I 10

4 1,05

3 54

 19

.5 

 To

tal 

5,58

5 29

6  

  N

ote: M

CMI 1

15 is exclude

d from

 this ta

ble since it is currently being

 sched

uled

 for no

n PT

 cou

rses. 

Conclusions 

Classroo

m utilization of 31.4 wee

kly room

 hou

rs during the da

ytim

e is abo

ve th

e CE

FPI guide

lines. H

owever, as the Time by

 Day cha

rt 

and the Classroo

m W

eek Ro

om Hou

r Use cha

rts show

 there are po

ckets of available tim

es and

 som

e room

s that cou

ld accom

mod

ate 

additio

nal sectio

ns.  Und

erutilized room

s in KOBC

, MOON, A

VRP, AVP

S, M

CMI, an

d ALA

M m

ay be du

e to a less con

venien

t location or 

missing

 sched

uled

 data.  A

vailable ho

urs are prim

arily at the

 beginning

 and

 end

 of the

 day.   

Th

e campu

s ha

s capa

city to

 expan

d even

ing instruction. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 16 

 

Exclud

ing the au

ditorium

, the

 average statio

n occupa

ncy of abo

ut 64%

 is at the

 mid ran

g of guide

line recommen

datio

ns.  Th

erefore, 

there is little opp

ortunity to

 grow sectio

n en

rollm

ents to

 accom

mod

ate future enrollm

ent increases.   

Classroom Enrollment Capacity 

The classroo

m enrollm

ent c

apacity

 provide

s an

 estim

ate of th

e FTE stud

ents th

e curren

t classroom

 sea

ts cou

ld sup

port based

 on assumed

 utilizatio

n rates.  Since sched

ulab

le classroom

 sea

ts are a critic

al fa

ctor in

 this calculatio

n it is im

port th

at th

e room

 cap

acities are accurate.  

While th

e au

ditorium

 was in

clud

ed in

 the ba

se utilization da

ta presented

 earlier in th

is rep

ort, th

ose seats are remov

ed from

 this calculatio

n since it is unlikely they wou

ld ever be

 used at an average rate of 6

5% statio

n occupa

ncy (average sectio

n size of 8

1 stud

ents – th

ere were on

ly 3 

section of greater th

an 70 for fall 20

10). Re

mov

ing the au

ditorium

 sea

ts leaves 2,735

 classroom

 and

 sem

inar roo

m sea

ts. 

Of e

qual im

portan

ce in

 cap

acity

 calculatio

n are the assumed

 utilization rates.  For th

is calculatio

n a Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r rate of 3

3 with

 65%

 station occupa

ncy is assum

ed.  As stated

 earlier in th

is rep

ort the

 cam

pus shou

ld verify

 that th

ese assumptions are accep

table an

d achievab

le 

over th

e long

 run.   

If the classroo

m utilization is in

crea

sed to 33  ho

urs at 65%

 statio

n occupa

ncy, th

en th

e en

rollm

ent c

ould grow by ab

out b

y ab

out 6

% or 30

0 FTE 

from

 497

0 to abo

ut 5,270

 FTE: 

Increa

sing

 the WRH

 to 33 ho

urs with

out c

hang

ing the section sizes wou

ld accom

mod

ate a grow

th of a

bout 230

 FTE

 stude

nts. 

Increa

sing

 the section sizes (to 65

% statio

n occupa

ncy) with

out c

hang

ing the WRH

 wou

ld also accommod

ate a grow

th of a

bout 70 FTE 

stud

ents. 

Add

ing the PT

 roo

ms (296

 sea

ts) a

nd sched

uling them

 at 3

3 ho

urs pe

r wee

k at 65%

 statio

n occupa

ncy wou

ld accom

mod

ate a grow

th of 5

00 to

 55

0 FTE stud

ents. 

    

If the utilizatio

n is in

crea

sed from

 31.5 WRH

 to 33 WRH

 and

 the Station Occup

ancy is in

crea

sed from

 64%

 to 65%

 and

 the estim

ated

 296

 seats from

 the PT

 roo

ms are ad

ded to th

e curren

t 2,735

 sea

ts, the

 classroom

s could accommod

ate ab

out 5

,800

 FTE (p

lus or m

inus 50), 

an in

crea

se of  just o

ver 80

0 FTE from

 the Fall 20

10 FTE of 4

,970

. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 17 

 Class Laboratory Analysis 

Overview 

A primary differen

ce betwee

n instructiona

l lab

oratories an

d the gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s is th

e assumption of th

e nu

mbe

r of hou

rs per wee

k (W

RH) tha

t the

 labs sho

uld be

 sched

uled

.  Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire no special setup

 for classes such as compu

ter labs, W

RH use guide

lines 

are similar to th

at of classroom

s (30 ho

urs pe

r wee

k).  How

ever fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire equ

ipmen

t set up such as some science or te

chnical 

labs, 2

2 ho

urs pe

r wee

k is m

ore ap

prop

riate.  In some cases it is expected that th

e stud

ents will nee

d to use th

e lab for projects or othe

r “non

 sche

duled” activities (e

.g. art, n

ursing

).  In

 these cases the wee

kly room

 hou

r go

al fo

r sche

duled activ

ity is red

uce to 18 ho

urs or fo

r some labs, 

15 hou

rs per wee

k.   

Since most lab

oratories are de

sign

ed fo

r a specific type

 of instructio

n requ

iring specialized

 equ

ipmen

t and

 furnishing

s, labs th

at are 

unde

rutilized

 can

not e

asily be used

 to m

eet the

 teaching

 nee

d in unrelated

 disciplines unless the room

 is red

esigne

d or m

odified

 to 

accommod

ate more than

 one

 type

 of u

se. 

Laboratory Summary 

The follo

wing table summarizes basic data for the 49

 labo

ratories th

at were used

 for sche

duled classes for Fall 20

10.   

Table 6: Lab

 Sum

mary 

Num

ber o

f Lab

s 49

 To

tal Statio

ns 

1,23

5 Sq

uare Fee

t 51

,405

 Average Statio

n Size 

41.6 

Average Statio

ns per Lab

 25

.2 

Average Squ

are Feet per Lab

 1,04

9 

  Table 7: Lab

 Utilization Su

mmary 

 All Day 

Daytime 

Guide

line 

Utilization Ra

te per Lab

  8a

m ‐ 10

 pm 

8 am

 ‐ 5 pm

 Daytim

e Average W

RH  

23.0 

21.4 

22.0 

Station Occup

ancy Rate 

70.60%

 70

.40%

 80

% 

 

Th

e da

ytim

e utilizatio

n of th

e 49

 labs on average is nea

r the CE

FPI guide

line recommen

datio

n. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 18 

 Detailed Utilization 

Expe

rien

ce has sho

wn that som

e type

s of labo

ratories can

 be used

 at a

 greater rate than

 20‐23

 hou

r average cited in th

e labo

ratory guide

lines 

while som

e requ

iring op

en lab tim

e are sche

duled at a lo

wer rate. For lo

ng ran

ge plann

ing an

d an

alysis th

e follo

wing gene

ral guide

lines are 

prop

osed

:   

Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire no special setup

 for classes such as compu

ter labs W

RH use guide

lines are sim

ilar to th

at of classroom

s (30 

hours pe

r wee

k).   

Fo

r labo

ratories th

at req

uire equ

ipmen

t set up such as some science or te

chnical lab

s, 22 ho

urs pe

r wee

k is m

ore ap

prop

riate.   

In som

e cases it is expected that th

e stud

ents will nee

d to use th

e lab for projects or othe

r “non

 sched

uled

” activ

ities e.g. art.  In th

ese 

cases the wee

kly room

 hou

r go

al fo

r sche

duled activ

ity is red

uce to 18 ho

urs or in

 som

e cases to 15 ho

urs pe

r wee

k.   

Tables 8, 9

, and

 10 iden

tify the class labo

ratories by recommen

ded Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r use.  The

 class labo

ratories id

entified in Tab

le 8 req

uire 

no spe

cial setup

 for classes an

d therefore could be

 sched

uled

 at a

 rate similar to th

e classroo

ms – 30

 or more ho

urs pe

r wee

k.  

Table 8: Lab

s with Expe

cted

 Use of 3

0 or M

ore Hou

rs per W

eek 

Bldg

 Ro

om 

Dep

t Co

mmen

t ASF 

Capa

city 

Fall 20

10 Day 

WRH

 Expe

cted

 Day 

Time WRH

 

ALA

M 

201 

CPLA

B EN

G PC LA

B 65

5 20

 34

.73 

30 

ALA

M 

315 

CPLA

B IBM LAB 

1111

 30

 27

.16 

30 

ART

S 11

1 PA

RTS 

DANCE

‐TAP 

1303

 16

 38

.98 

30 

ART

S 11

2 PA

RTS 

DANCE

 2 

1442

 16

 38

.98 

30 

ART

S 11

7 PA

RTS 

DANCE

 1‐LG 

1780

 20

 38

.98 

30 

AVA

S 20

2 CP

LAB 

Compu

ter L

ab 

988 

36 

14.66 

30 

CARL 

321 

ENG 

CUPID LAB 

618 

20 

34.73 

30 

DUKE

 30

3 CIS 

INTR

O LAB 

1120

 30

 32

.32 

30 

KOBC

 20

1 BU

S Lab ACC

 201

,332

,331

 79

6 35

 22

.82 

30 

KOBC

 31

3 BU

S CP

TR Lab

 CIS 211

 73

9 36

 36

.15 

30 

KOBC

 35

4 BU

S CP

TR Lab

 ECO

 203

 86

5 40

 22

.82 

30 

MCE

1 10

8 CP

LAB 

Mac Lab

 10

78 

25 

30.90 

30 

MCE

1 20

5 CO

M 

CPTR

 Lab

 75

1 20

 35

.15 

30 

MCE

1 20

7 CO

M 

CPTR

 Lab

 74

4 20

 34

.73 

30 

MCE

1 20

9 CO

M 

CPTR

 Lab

 73

9 20

 34

.73 

30 

MCM

I 32

0 BIO 

CRTR

 Lab

 51

3 20

 14

.83 

30 

MOON 

201 

CPLA

B PC

 Lab

 10

78 

30 

22.40 

30 

MOON 

202 

CPLA

B MAC Lab 

1017

 30

 11

.49 

30 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 19 

 The class labo

ratories id

entified in Tab

le 9 req

uire set up tim

e, th

erefore an

 expected WRH

 of 2

2 ho

urs is m

ore ap

prop

riate.   

Table 9: Lab

s with Expe

cted

 Use of 2

2 Hou

rs per W

eek 

Bldg

 Ro

om 

Dep

t Co

mmen

t ASF 

Capa

city 

Fall 20

10 

Day W

RH 

Expe

cted

 Day 

Time WRH

 

ART

S 24

0 PA

RTS 

RECO

RDING STU

DIO 

434 

15 

9.08

 22

 AVP

S 11

0 PO

LS 

LAB PO

LLING CEN

TER 

1302

 30

 23

.82 

22 

DUKE

 30

4 CIS 

NETWORK

 LAB 

433 

20 

3.83

 22

 LO

NG 

113 

PSY 

PSY Lab 

689 

20 

11.33 

22 

MCM

I 10

3 BIO 

Zoo/Bo

t Lab

 13

02 

28 

16.34 

22 

MCM

I 10

7 BIO 

Ecolog

y Lab 

973 

28 

19.75 

22 

MCM

I 11

0 BIO 

Bio Majors Lab 

1367

 28

 6.50

 22

 MCM

I 11

4 BIO 

Bio Lab 

1431

 28

 22

.51 

22 

MCM

I 20

3 PH

Y Ph

y Intro Lab 

1162

 20

 40

.85 

22 

MCM

I 20

6 PH

Y Ph

y Adv

 Lab

 66

0 20

 6.17

 22

 MCM

I 20

7 PH

Y Ph

y Intro lab 

1134

 30

 34

.73 

22 

MCM

I 21

7 BIO 

Microbio Lab 

1249

 18

 19

.50 

22 

MCM

I 21

8 BIO 

Physiology Lab

 12

50 

18 

9.75

 22

 PO

WL 

306 

BIO 

Sci Lab

 65

0 24

 12

.83 

22 

POWL 

311 

BIO 

BIO 101

 76

8 24

 18

.34 

22 

  The class labo

ratories id

entified in Tab

le 10 are often used

 for projects or othe

r “non

 sched

uled

” activ

ities th

at req

uire large blocks of “op

en” lab 

time.  A

n expe

cted

 WRH

 of 1

8 or 15 ho

urs is m

ore ap

prop

riate.   

Table 10

: Lab

s with Expe

cted

 Use of 1

5 or 18 Hou

rs per W

eek 

Bldg

 Ro

om 

Dep

t Co

mmen

t ASF 

Capa

city 

Fall 20

10 

Day W

RH 

Expe

cted

 Day 

Time WRH

 

ART

S 10

4 PA

RTS 

THEA

 DESIGN 

740 

16 

22.83 

18 

ART

S 13

1 PA

RTS 

BLACK

 BOX 

1945

 14

 8.08

 18

 ART

S 16

1 PA

RTS 

PIANO ROOM 

602 

18 

23.82 

18 

ART

S 16

4 PA

RTS 

BAND ROOM 

2382

 10

0 26

.65 

18 

HG13

 10

4 FINE 

DRA

WING STU

DIO 

1398

 22

 13

.00 

18 

HG13

 11

2 FINE 

PAINTING STU

DIO 

896 

15 

13.00 

18 

HG13

 11

6 FINE 

CERA

MICS 

1908

 18

 19

.50 

18 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 20 

 Bldg

 Ro

om 

Dep

t Co

mmen

t ASF 

Capa

city 

Fall 20

10 

Day W

RH 

Expe

cted

 Day 

Time WRH

 

HG13

 12

4 FINE 

PHOTO

G CLA

SSRO

OM 

398 

15 

26.00 

18 

MCM

I 30

4 CH

EM 

Gen

 Che

m Lab

 13

32 

28 

19.50 

18 

MCM

I 31

0 CH

EM 

Organ

ic Lab

 13

88 

28 

13.00 

18 

MCM

I 31

2 CH

EM 

Inorg / Ana

ly Lab

 12

03 

28 

16.00 

18 

MCM

I 31

4 CH

EM 

P. Che

m Lab

 75

7 29

 6.50

 18

 GRH

S 10

3 BIO 

Green

house 

1204

 24

 13

.25 

15 

HG13

 11

4 FINE 

DESIGN STU

DIO 

1274

 25

 14

.25 

15 

HG13

 11

8 FINE 

INTR

O DIGITAL STUDIO 

912 

20 

13.00 

15 

HG13

 12

0 FINE 

ADV DIGITAL STD 

925 

20 

19.50 

15 

  Figu

re 4 presents a grap

hical o

verview of the

 num

ber of Daytim

e ho

urs each lab was sched

uled

 for Fall 20

10 (the

 blue vertical bars) com

pared to 

the expe

cted

 num

ber of hou

rs th

at ty

pe of lab

 sho

uld be

 used (the

 red

 horizon

tal line).   

 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 21 

 Figu

re 4: Fall 2

010 Class Lab use Co

mpa

red to Exp

ected Hou

rs 

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

ALAM‐201/ CPLAB/ ENG PC LABALAM‐315/ CPLAB/ IBM LAB

ARTS‐111/ PARTS/ DANCE‐TAPARTS‐112/ PARTS/ DANCE 2

ARTS‐117/ PARTS/ DANCE 1‐LGAVAS‐202/ CPLAB/ Computer Lab

CARL‐321/ ENG/ CUPID LABDUKE‐303/ CIS/ INTRO LAB

KOBC‐201/ BUS/ Lab ACC 201,332,331KOBC‐313/ BUS/ CPTR Lab CIS 211KOBC‐354/ BUS/ CPTR Lab ECO 203

MCE1‐108/ CPLAB/ Mac LabMCE1‐205/ COM/ CPTR LabMCE1‐207/ COM/ CPTR LabMCE1‐209/ COM/ CPTR LabMCMI‐320/ BIO/ CRTR LabMOON‐201/ CPLAB/ PC Lab

MOON‐202/ CPLAB/ MAC LabARTS‐240/ PARTS/ RECORDING STUDIOAVPS‐110/ POLS/ LAB POLLING CENTER

DUKE‐304/ CIS/ NETWORK LABLONG‐113/ PSY/ PSY Lab

MCMI‐103/ BIO/ Zoo/Bot LabMCMI‐107/ BIO/ Ecology Lab

MCMI‐110/ BIO/ Bio Majors LabMCMI‐114/ BIO/ Bio Lab

MCMI‐203/ PHY/ Phy Intro LabMCMI‐206/ PHY/ Phy Adv LabMCMI‐207/ PHY/ Phy Intro labMCMI‐217/ BIO/ Microbio Lab

MCMI‐218/ BIO/ Physiology LabPOWL‐306/ BIO/ Sci LabPOWL‐311/ BIO/ BIO 101

ARTS‐104/ PARTS/ THEA DESIGNARTS‐131/ PARTS/ BLACK BOX

ARTS‐161/ PARTS/ PIANO ROOMARTS‐164/ PARTS/ BAND ROOM

HG13‐104/ FINE/ DRAWING STUDIOHG13‐112/ FINE/ PAINTING STUDIO

HG13‐116/ FINE/ CERAMICSHG13‐124/ FINE/ PHOTOG CLASSROOM

MCMI‐304/ CHEM/ Gen Chem LabMCMI‐310/ CHEM/ Organic Lab

MCMI‐312/ CHEM/ Inorg / Analy LabMCMI‐314/ CHEM/ P. Chem Lab

GRHS‐103/ BIO/ GreenHouseHG13‐114/ FINE/ DESIGN STUDIO

HG13‐118/ FINE/ INTRO DIGITAL STUDIOHG13‐120/ FINE/ ADV DIGITAL STD

Weekly Room Hours

Sche

duled Labo

ratories

Class Lab Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

r Use ‐Fall 20

10 

8 am

 ‐5 pm

 Daily

Compa

red to th

e Expe

cted

 WRH

 Utilization

WRH

‐Daytim

eExpe

cted

 WRH

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 22 

 Departmental Summaries 

Table 11

 sum

maries the ba

sic da

ta fo

r ea

ch dep

artm

ent a

nd lab. 

Column de

finition

s: 

Dep

artm

ent, Building, Roo

m and

 Lab

 Typ

e ‐ from a rep

ort from th

e Office of th

e Re

gistrar. 

Sq

uare Fee

t ‐ calculated from

 floo

r plans. 

Stations –(roo

m cap

acity

) from th

e Office of th

e Re

gistrar repo

rt 

Average Sectio

n Sizes – To

tal sectio

n en

rollm

ent d

ivided

 by the coun

t of sectio

ns – all ob

tained

 from

 the Fall 20

10 class file. 

Po

tential Enrollm

ent Increases ‐   N

umbe

r of add

ition

al stude

nts to bring

 the average section size to

 80%

 of the

 num

ber of statio

ns. If 

the average section size excee

ds th

e 80

% th

reshold this field is blank

.  

Daytim

e WRH

 – th

e nu

mbe

r of hou

rs th

e lab was sched

uled

 for Fall 20

10 betwee

n 8 am

 and

 5 pm. 

Re

commen

ded WRH

 – The

 Guide

line Re

commen

d for the nu

mbe

r of hou

rs th

e lab shou

ld be sche

duled. Varies by

 lab type

. 

Add

ition

al Poten

tial H

ours – The

 differen

ce betwee

n Re

commen

ded WRH

 and

 the Daytim

e WRH

.  Th

is field is blank

 for room

 that 

curren

tly excee

ds th

e recommen

datio

n.  

Ca

n Add

 Sectio

ns – This fie

ld is m

arked for those labs th

at cou

ld add

 poten

tial h

ours. 

Ca

n Increa

se Current Sectio

n Sizes – Th

is field is m

arked for those labs th

at can

 add

 more stud

ents per sectio

n. 

     

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 23 

 Table 11

: Lab

 Utilization by

 Dep

artm

ent 

Department 

Building 

Room 

Lab Type 

Square Feet 

Stations 

Average Section Size 

Section Count 

Additional Enrollments to Current Sections 

Daytime WRH 

Recommended WRH 

Additional Potential Hours 

Can Add Sections 

Can Increase Current Section Sizes 

BIO 

GRH

S 10

3 Green

house 

1,20

4 24

 16

.00 

4 13

 13

.3 

15 

1.75

 x 

x 

BIO 

MCM

I 10

3 Zo

o/Bo

t Lab

 1,30

2 28

 19

.25 

4 13

 16

.3 

22 

5.66

 x 

x 

BIO 

MCM

I 10

7 Ecolog

y Lab 

973 

28 

18.67 

6 22

 19

.8 

22 

2.25

 x 

x 

BIO 

MCM

I 11

0 Bio Majors Lab 

1,36

7 28

 20

.50 

2 4 

6.5 

22 

15.50 

x x 

BIO 

MCM

I 11

4 Bio Lab 

1,43

1 28

 15

.43 

7 49

 22

.5 

22 

x 

BIO 

MCM

I 21

7 Microbio Lab 

1,24

9 18

 16

.67 

6 19

.5 

22 

2.50

 x 

BIO 

MCM

I 21

8 Ph

ysiology Lab

 1,25

0 18

 18

.00 

3 9.8 

22 

12.25 

x 

BIO 

MCM

I 32

0 CR

TR Lab

 51

3 20

 14

.75 

4 5 

14.8 

30 

15.17 

x x 

BIO 

POWL 

306 

Sci Lab

 65

0 24

 20

.80 

5 12

.8 

22 

9.17

 x 

BIO 

POWL 

311 

BIO 101

 76

8 24

 24

.60 

5 18

.3 

22 

3.66

 x 

BIO Total 

    

10,707

 24

0 18

.47 

46 

15.4 

22.1 

67.91 

BUS 

KOBC

 Lab ACC

 201

,332

,331

 79

6 35

 29

.00 

6 22

.8 

30 

7.18

 x 

BUS 

KOBC

 CP

TR Lab

 CIS 211

 73

9 36

 24

.11 

9 42

 36

.2 

30 

x BU

S KO

BC 

CPTR

 Lab

 ECO

 203

 86

5 40

 24

.67 

6 44

 22

.8 

30 

7.18

 x 

x BU

S To

tal 

    

2,40

0 11

1 25

.93 

21 

27.26 

30.00 

14.36 

CHEM

 MCM

I Gen

 Che

m Lab

 1,33

2 28

 20

.00 

6 14

 19

.5 

18 

x CH

EM 

MCM

I Organ

ic Lab

 1,38

8 28

 16

.50 

4 24

 13

.0 

18 

5.00

 x 

x CH

EM 

MCM

I BIO 

Inorg / Ana

ly Lab

 1,20

3 28

 13

.50 

4 36

 16

.0 

18 

2.00

 x 

x CH

EM 

MCM

I BIO 

P. Che

m Lab

 75

7 29

 8.00

 2 

30 

6.5 

18 

11.50 

x x 

CHEM

 Total 

  BIO 

  4,68

0 11

3 14

.50 

16 

13.75 

18.00 

18.50 

CIS 

DUKE

 30

3 INTR

O LAB 

1,12

0 30

 14

.75 

8 74

 32

.3 

30 

13.50 

x x 

CIS 

DUKE

 30

4 NETWORK

 LAB 

433 

20 

10.00 

1 6 

3.8 

22 

18.17 

x x 

CIS To

tal 

    

  1,55

3 50

 12

.38 

9 18

.07 

26.00 

31.67 

COM 

MCE

1 20

5 CP

TR Lab

 75

1 20

 16

.33 

9 35

.2 

30 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 24 

 

Department 

Building 

Room 

Lab Type 

Square Feet 

Stations 

Average Section Size 

Section Count 

Additional Enrollments to Current Sections 

Daytime WRH 

Recommended WRH 

Additional Potential Hours 

Can Add Sections 

Can Increase Current Section Sizes 

COM 

MCE

1 20

7 CP

TR Lab

 74

4 20

 15

.44 

9 5 

34.7 

30 

x CO

M 

MCE

1 20

9 CP

TR Lab

 73

9 20

 16

.56 

9 34

.7 

30 

COM Total 

    

  2,23

4 60

 16

.11 

27 

34.87 

30.00 

0.00

 CP

LAB 

ALA

M 

201 

ENG PC LA

B 65

5 20

 20

.67 

9 34

.7 

30 

CPLA

B ALA

M 

315 

IBM LAB 

1,11

1 30

 26

.00 

7 27

.2 

30 

2.84

 x 

CPLA

B AVA

S 20

2 Co

mpu

ter L

ab 

988 

36 

20.50 

4 33

 14

.7 

30 

15.34 

x x 

CPLA

B MCE

1 10

8 Mac Lab

 1,07

8 25

 14

.75 

8 42

 30

.9 

30 

x CP

LAB 

MOON 

201 

PC Lab

 1,07

8 30

 15

.67 

6 50

 22

.4 

30 

7.60

 x 

x CP

LAB 

MOON 

202 

MAC Lab 

1,01

7 30

 17

.67 

3 19

 11

.5 

30 

18.51 

x x 

CPLA

B To

tal 

    

  5,92

7 17

1 19

.21 

37 

23.56 

30.00 

44.29 

ENG 

CARL 

321 

CUPID LAB 

618 

20 

18.44 

9 34

.7 

30 

ENG Total 

    

  61

8 20

 18

.44 

9 34

.7 

30 

0.00

 FINE 

HG13

 10

4 DRA

WING STU

DIO 

1,39

8 22

 16

.50 

2 2 

13.0 

18 

5.00

 x 

x FINE 

HG13

 11

2 PA

INTING STU

DIO 

896 

15 

16.50 

2 13

.0 

18 

5.00

 x 

FINE 

HG13

 11

4 DESIGN STU

DIO 

1,27

4 25

 12

.75 

4 29

 14

.3 

15 

0.75

 x 

FINE 

HG13

 11

6 CE

RAMICS 

1,90

8 18

 12

.33 

3 6 

19.5 

18 

x FINE 

HG13

 11

8 INTR

O DIGITAL STUDIO 

912 

20 

16.00 

2 13

.0 

15 

2.00

 x 

FINE 

HG13

 12

0 ADV DIGITAL STD 

925 

20 

14.33 

3 5 

19.5 

15 

x FINE 

HG13

 12

4 PH

OTO

G CLA

SSRO

OM 

398 

15 

12.25 

4 26

.0 

18 

FINE To

tal 

    

  7,71

1 13

5 14

.38 

20 

16.89 

16.71 

12.75 

PART

S ART

S 10

4 TH

EA DESIGN 

740 

16 

10.29 

7 18

 22

.8 

18 

x PA

RTS 

ART

S 11

1 DANCE

‐TAP 

1,30

3 16

 13

.50 

10 

39.0 

30 

PART

S ART

S 11

2 DANCE

 2 

1,44

2 16

 11

.40 

10 

14 

39.0 

30 

x PA

RTS 

ART

S 11

7 DANCE

 1‐LG 

1,78

0 20

 16

.80 

10 

39.0 

30 

PART

S ART

S 13

1 BLACK

 BOX 

1,94

5 14

 13

.00 

2 8.1 

18 

9.92

 x 

PART

S ART

S 16

1 PIANO ROOM 

602 

18 

9.33

 9 

46 

23.8 

18 

x PA

RTS 

ART

S 16

4 BA

ND ROOM 

2,38

2 10

0 31

.14 

7 34

2 26

.6 

18 

x 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 25 

 

Department 

Building 

Room 

Lab Type 

Square Feet 

Stations 

Average Section Size 

Section Count 

Additional Enrollments to Current Sections 

Daytime WRH 

Recommended WRH 

Additional Potential Hours 

Can Add Sections 

Can Increase Current Section Sizes 

PART

S ART

S 24

0 RE

CORD

ING STU

DIO 

434 

15 

10.33 

3 5 

9.1 

22 

12.92 

x x 

PART

S To

tal 

    

  10

,628

 21

5 14

.47 

58 

25.93 

23.00 

22.84 

PHY 

MCM

I 20

3 Ph

y Intro Lab 

1,16

2 20

 22

.38 

13 

40.8 

22 

PHY 

MCM

I 20

6 Ph

y Adv

 Lab

 66

0 20

 6.00

 2 

20 

6.2 

22 

15.83 

x x 

PHY 

MCM

I 20

7 Ph

y Intro lab 

1,13

4 30

 27

.44 

9 34

.7 

22 

PHY To

tal 

    

  2,95

6 70

 18

.61 

24 

27.25 

22.00 

15.83 

POLS 

AVP

S 11

0 LA

B PO

LLING CEN

TER 

1,30

2 30

 16

.17 

6 47

 23

.8 

22 

x PO

LS Total 

    

  1,30

2 30

 16

.17 

6 23

.8 

22 

0.00

 PSY 

LONG 

113 

PSY Lab 

689 

20 

14.33 

3 5 

11.3 

22 

10.67 

x x 

PSY To

tal 

689 

20 

14.33 

3 11

.3 

22 

10.67 

Grand

 Total 

51,405

 12

35 

16.94 

276 

21.74 

23.84 

256.99

 

  Observations 

Several lab

s are used

 well b

eyon

d the expe

cted

 hou

rs.  Th

ey in

clud

e:  

Co

mpu

ter Labs, M

CE1‐20

5, M

CE1‐20

7, M

CE1‐20

9, and

 ALA

M‐201

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Th

e Dan

ce Studios, A

RTS‐11

1, ART

S‐11

2, ART

S‐11

7 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

CU

PID Lab

, CARL‐321

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Intro CIS Lab, DUKE

‐303

 (30 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Intro Ph

ysics, M

CMI‐2

03, M

CMI‐2

07 (2

2 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Gen

eral Che

mistry, M

CMI‐3

04 (1

8 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Po

litical Scien

ce, A

VPS‐11

0 (22 Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Several o

f the

 Fine an

d Pe

rforming Arts Labs, H

G13

‐116

, HG13

‐124

, HG13

‐104

, HG13

‐120

 and

 ART

S‐10

4, ART

S‐16

1, ART

S‐16

4 (18 

Expe

cted

 Hou

rs) 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 26 

 If the labs are sched

uled

 at the

 recommen

ded Wee

kly Ro

om Hou

rs fo

r each ty

pe of lab

 (see

 Tab

le 11) with

 80%

 of the

 statio

ns occup

ied then

 the labs cou

ld sup

port an FTE en

rollm

ent increase of abo

ut 20%

 which is con

sisten

t with

 the po

tential increase that th

e classroo

ms could 

supp

ort.  H

owever, since labs te

nd to

 be specialized

, available space in one

 lab may not be ab

le to

 be used

 by an

 unrelated

 discipline.  Tab

le 11 

show

s which labs cou

ld sup

port add

ition

al sectio

ns or en

rollm

ents.  

    

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 27 

 APPENDIX 

School of Law

 Th

e utilizatio

n an

alysis in

clud

es th

e classroo

ms for the Scho

ol of Law

 located in Green

sboro, North Carolina.  The

 Fall term 201

0 sche

dule data 

was provide

d by

 the Law Schoo

l and

 individu

al classroom

 squ

are footage was provide

d by

 Spillm

an Farmer Architects.  The

 Schoo

l’s web

 site

 iden

tified a total o

f 132

 incoming stud

ents and

 a grand

 total o

f 344

 stude

nts for Fall term

 201

0. 

Summary of Instructional Facilities 

The Scho

ol of Law

 utilizes five gen

eral purpo

se classroom

s, tw

o seminar roo

ms, and

 one

 com

puter lab located in th

e lib

rary along

 with

 several 

clinic roo

ms.  The

 clin

ic roo

ms an

d the compu

ter lab

 are gen

erally used as “op

en” labs.  It is assum

ed th

at th

ey are not used for regu

larly 

sche

duled cred

it instruction, and

 are th

erefore exclud

ed from

 the an

alysis of sched

uled

 use.  Table 12

 sum

marizes th

e curren

t sup

ply for the 5 

classroo

ms an

d 2 seminar roo

ms. 

Table 12

: Current Sup

ply 

Room

 Typ

e Num

 of 

Room

s Assigna

ble 

Squa

re Fee

t Num

ber of 

Seats 

Ave

rage

 Roo

m 

Squa

re Fee

t Ave

rage

 Num

ber 

of Station

s Ave

rage

 Station Size 

Classroo

ms 

5 8,10

6 40

1 1,62

1.2 

80.2 

20.2 

Seminar Roo

ms 

2 1,04

6 35

 52

3.0 

17.5 

29.9 

Totals 

7 9,15

2 43

6 1,30

7.4 

62.3 

21.0 

  Classroom Analysis 

Time by Day 

Figu

re 5 and

 Tab

le 13 illustrate ho

w th

e seven room

s were sche

duled by

 hou

r of th

e da

y du

ring

 a ty

pical w

eek for the Fall 20

10 te

rm.  Th

e chart 

iden

tifies the intensity

 of u

se th

roug

h the da

y for the room

s, but doe

s no

t dep

ict the

 num

ber of classroom

s in use fo

r that hou

r.  W

eekly Ro

om 

Hou

rs (W

RH) (vertical scale) is the total n

umbe

r of roo

m hou

rs sched

uled

 for classroo

m and

 sem

inar roo

ms.  Pea

k use occurs on Tu

esda

y at 1:30 

and 2:30

 PM with

 all room

s in use.  Th

ere is little sched

uled

 activity

 at 8

:30 AM and

 after 6:30 PM

   

  

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 28 

 Figu

re 5: C

lassroom

 Tim

e by

 Day Distribution 

 

  

012345678

8:30

 AM

9:30

 AM

10:30 

AM

11:30 

AM

12:30 

PM1:30

 PM

2:30

 PM

3:30

 PM

4:30

 PM

5:30

 PM

6:30

 PM

7:30

 PM

8:30

 PM

9:30

 PM

Weekly Room Hours

Time of Day)

Fall 20

10 

Time by

 Day Distribution ‐C

lassroom

s an

d Se

minar Roo

ms

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 29 

 Table 13

: Classroom

 Tim

e by

 Day 

Time 

Mon

 Tu

e Wed

 Th

u Fri 

Totals 

% 

8:30

 AM 

1.5 

3 1.5 

2 0 

8 5.1%

 

9:30

 AM 

3 5 

3 3 

1.5 

15.5 

9.9%

 

10:30 AM 

3.25

 4.25

 3.25

 3 

2 15

.75 

10.0% 

11:30 AM 

2.5 

3.25

 2.5 

2.75

 1.75

 12

.75 

8.1%

 

12:30 PM

 2 

3.5 

2.5 

2 2.25

 12

.25 

7.8%

 

1:30

 PM 

4.25

 7.25

 5.25

 4 

2.5 

23.25 

14.8% 

2:30

 PM 

5 7.25

 5.75

 3.75

 1 

22.75 

14.5% 

3:30

 PM 

4 5.67

 5.75

 3.67

 0 

19.09 

12.2% 

4:30

 PM 

1.75

 3.75

 2.75

 2.75

 2 

13 

8.3%

 

5:30

 PM 

2.08

 1 

1.58

 1 

1.75

 7.41

 4.7%

 

6:30

 PM 

2 0.25

 1 

0.25

 0 

3.5 

2.2%

 

7:30

 PM 

1.75

 0 

1 0 

0 2.75

 1.8%

 

8:30

 PM 

0 0 

0.75

 0 

0 0.75

 0.5%

 

9:30

 PM 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

0.0%

 

Totals 

33.08 

44.17 

36.58 

28.17 

14.75 

156.75

 

% of T

otal 

21.1% 

28.2% 

23.3% 

18.0% 

9.4%

 

  Detailed Room Utilization 

Table 14

 sum

marizes how

 the fiv

e classroo

ms were used

 for Fall 20

10 during the no

rmal class day: 8

:30 AM to

 5:30 AM. 

Table 14

: Classroom

 Utilization 

Room

 Num

 ASF 

Seats 

Wee

kly Ro

om 

Hou

rs 

% Availa

ble 

Hou

rs (4

5) 

Wee

kly Stud

ent 

Contact Hou

rs 

Ave

rage

 Class 

Mee

ting

 Size 

Station 

Occup

ancy% 

Section 

Enrollm

ent 

Section Co

unt 

105 

1,24

0 60

 26

.17 

58.2% 

780 

29.81 

49.7% 

257, 

10 

107 

999 

35 

24.67 

54.8% 

428 

17.35 

49.5% 

175, 

10 

204 

1,57

0 79

 26

.83 

59.6% 

1,22

0 45

.47 

57.5% 

365, 

9 

206 

1,91

6 99

 23

.75 

52.8% 

1,01

2 42

.61 

43.0% 

290, 

7 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 30 

 Room

 Num

 ASF 

Seats 

Wee

kly Ro

om 

Hou

rs 

% Availa

ble 

Hou

rs (4

5) 

Wee

kly Stud

ent 

Contact Hou

rs 

Ave

rage

 Class 

Mee

ting

 Size 

Station 

Occup

ancy% 

Section 

Enrollm

ent 

Section Co

unt 

207 

2,38

1 12

8 26

.25 

58.3% 

1,66

0 63

.24 

49.4% 

503, 

8 

Totals  

8,10

6 40

1 12

7.67

 5,10

0  

1,59

0 44

 

Average 

 80

.2 

25.5 

56.7% 

39.95 

49.8% 

 

On average the fiv

e room

s were used

 25.5 ho

urs pe

r wee

k which is 56.7%

 of the

 45 ho

urs available for the wee

k.  A

n average of 30 

hours of sched

uled

 use fo

r the gene

ral p

urpo

se classroom

s shou

ld be an

 achievable go

al.  

Th

e average class mee

ting size was abo

ut 40 stud

ents resultin

g in average statio

n occupa

ncy of alm

ost 5

0%.  Most g

uide

lines sug

gest a 

station occupa

ncy go

al of 6

0% of m

ore.   

Th

e tw

o seminar roo

ms, 205

 and

 211

, were sche

duled a total o

f 12 ho

urs an

d are exclud

ed from

 the capa

city ana

lysis since they wou

ld 

not b

e a lim

iting

 factor fo

r future enrollm

ent g

rowth. 

Classroom Enrollment Capacity 

The classroo

m enrollm

ent c

apacity

 provide

s an

 estim

ate of th

e nu

mbe

r of stude

nts the curren

t classroom

 sea

ts cou

ld sup

port based

 on assumed

 utilizatio

n rates.  Since th

e classroo

m sea

ts are a critic

al fa

ctor in th

is calculatio

n it is im

port th

at th

e room

 cap

acities are accurate.   

Of e

qual im

portan

ce in

 the capa

city calculatio

n are the assumed

 utilization rates.  For th

is calculatio

n, a W

eekly Ro

om Hou

r rate of 3

0 with

 60%

 station occupa

ncy is used.   Th

e Scho

ol sho

uld verify th

at th

ese assumptions are accep

table an

d achievab

le.    

    

If the classroo

m utilization is in

crea

sed from

 25.5 ho

urs pe

r wee

k to 30 ho

urs pe

r wee

k an

d the class sizes are increa

sed from

 abo

ut 40 

stud

ents to

 48 stud

ents (statio

n occupa

ncy of 60%

), the Scho

ol cou

ld grow by ab

out 4

0% from

 344

 stude

nts en

rolled in 201

0 to abo

ut 480

 stud

ents.  Increa

sing

 the class section size wou

ld only  accommod

ate a grow

th of a

bout 20%

 while in

crea

sing

 the nu

mbe

r of sectio

ns wou

ld 

only accom

mod

ate an

 enrollm

ent g

rowth of 1

5% at c

urrent sectio

n sizes. 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 31 

 State Classroom and Lab Utilization Guidelines 

Table 15

 sum

marizes th

e expe

cted

 Wee

kly Ro

om Rate an

d Station Occup

ancy rate for classroo

ms an

d labs fo

r States th

at have da

ytim

e gu

idelines. 

Table 15

: State Utilization Guide

lines 

 Class Ro

oms 

Labs 

 Expe

cted

 WRH

 SO

% 

Station ASF 

Expe

cted

 WRH

 SO

% 

Arizona

 30

 60

% 

18 

23 

80% 

Colorado

 30

 67

% 

15 

20 

80% 

Conn

ectic

ut 

30 

60% 

18 

20 

Geo

rgia 

32 

65% 

16 

23 

80% 

Louisian

a 30

 65

% 

11‐20 

80% 

Marylan

d 30

 65

% 

17.5 

New

 Jersey 

30 

67% 

20 

20 

70% 

New

 Mexico 

32 

65% 

16 

23 

80% 

Oklah

oma 

30 

63% 

15 

23 

80% 

Orego

n 33

 60

% 

16 

22 

80% 

South Dakota 

30 

65% 

18 

20 

70% 

Tenn

essee 

30 

67% 

21 

80% 

Wyo

ming 

33 

60% 

20 

20 

75% 

Average 

30.8 

64% 

17.2 

20.5 ‐ 21

.25 

78% 

      

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 32 

 Detailed Main Cam

pus Classroom Utilization 

Table 16

 provide

s the de

tailed utilizatio

n da

ta fo

r the 75

 classroom

s, 4 sem

inar roo

ms, and

 1 Aud

itorium

 for Fall 20

10. 

Table 16

 Classroom

 Utilization 

 Bldg

 Ro

om 

ASF 

Capa

city 

Daytime 

WRH

 SO

% 

WSC

H 

Sections 

Section 

Enrollm

ent 

Avg. 

Section 

Even

ing 

Hou

rs 

Classroo

ms 

 ALA

M 

202 

655 

33 

36.32 

47.8% 

572.00

 10

 15

5 15

.5 

1.0 

 ALA

M 

203 

669 

33 

38.98 

89.2% 

1144

.00 

10 

296 

29.6 

1.0 

 ALA

M 

204 

633 

33 

31.25 

75.7% 

780.00

 10

 23

4 23

.4 

1.0 

 ALA

M 

205 

633 

33 

35.06 

84.1% 

970.00

 10

 27

3 27

.3 

5.2 

 ALA

M 

206 

602 

33 

37.40 

78.8% 

970.00

 10

 26

3 26

.3 

1.0 

 ALA

M 

207 

877 

27 

40.15 

70.8% 

767.00

 11

 20

4 18

.5 

8.7 

 ALA

M 

215 

651 

33 

25.50 

37.3% 

314.00

 5 

67 

13.4 

0.0 

 ALA

M 

218 

624 

34 

34.15 

76.6% 

887.00

 9 

233 

25.9 

2.2 

 ALA

M 

301 

651 

33 

35.48 

50.9% 

595.00

 10

 16

7 16

.7 

2.2 

 ALA

M 

302 

715 

33 

38.98 

69.5% 

892.00

 10

 22

7 22

.7 

1.0 

 ALA

M 

304 

489 

16 

26.92 

70.5% 

304.00

 10

 12

2 12

.2 

1.0 

 ART

S 16

3 61

6 25

 33

.31 

53.2% 

444.00

 13

 19

4 14

.9 

7.2 

 ART

S 16

5 59

0 25

 34

.48 

48.7% 

420.00

 11

 13

0 11

.8 

4.0 

 AVA

S 10

2 1,32

3 72

 37

.57 

39.7% 

1075

.00 

10 

283 

28.3 

3.4 

 AVA

S 10

6 69

0 32

 40

.48 

65.8% 

854.00

 12

 22

5 18

.8 

7.0 

 AVA

S 20

4 1,01

4 48

 38

.98 

54.6% 

1023

.00 

10 

266 

26.6 

4.3 

 AVA

S 20

8 1,17

1 72

 39

.40 

41.7% 

1183

.00 

10 

298 

29.8 

4.3 

 AVA

S 21

0 79

5 36

 38

.98 

84.2% 

1182

.00 

10 

306 

30.6 

6.6 

 AVH

P 10

1 51

3 25

 24

.49 

52.9% 

324.00

 7 

94 

13.4 

1.1 

 AVIP 

101 

513 

25 

22.90 

63.4% 

363.00

 6 

94 

15.7 

1.1 

 AVP

S 20

1 70

0 35

 34

.73 

68.8% 

836.00

 9 

216 

24.0 

6.1 

 AVR

P 10

1 70

0 33

 24

.99 

34.7% 

286.00

 9 

100 

11.1 

1.0 

 AVR

P 20

1 70

0 33

 40

.00 

79.9% 

1053

.00 

12 

293 

24.4 

5.6 

 CA

RL 

225 

557 

25 

33.66 

72.8% 

612.00

 10

 17

4 17

.4 

6.1 

 CA

RL 

309 

557 

33 

38.98 

69.5% 

892.00

 10

 22

7 22

.7 

1.0 

 CA

RL 

325 

548 

30 

37.49 

61.3% 

691.00

 11

 19

7 17

.9 

4.8 

 DUKE

 20

2 60

1 40

 35

.15 

63.6% 

894.00

 9 

231 

25.7 

4.8 

 DUKE

 20

5 60

4 33

 33

.99 

83.3% 

933.00

 9 

242 

26.9 

0.0 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 33 

  Bldg

 Ro

om 

ASF 

Capa

city 

Daytime 

WRH

 SO

% 

WSC

H 

Sections 

Section 

Enrollm

ent 

Avg. 

Section 

Even

ing 

Hou

rs 

 DUKE

 20

7 48

6 32

 33

.99 

54.3% 

591.00

 9 

157 

17.4 

0.0 

 DUKE

 30

1 60

2 40

 33

.74 

65.2% 

879.00

 10

 25

2 25

.2 

2.4 

 DUKE

 30

2 60

1 40

 38

.98 

64.1% 

999.00

 10

 25

6 25

.6 

7.3 

 HG13

 12

6 81

2 33

 27

.99 

49.6% 

457.00

 9 

133 

14.8 

3.3 

 KO

BC 

112 

710 

40 

31.90 

44.2% 

563.00

 9 

158 

17.6 

1.0 

 KO

BC 

145 

842 

30 

26.41 

54.6% 

433.00

 8 

136 

17.0 

0.0 

 KO

BC 

200 

811 

33 

34.73 

86.4% 

988.00

 9 

256 

28.4 

4.3 

 KO

BC 

208 

992 

38 

33.73 

61.7% 

793.00

 9 

205 

22.8 

7.5 

 KO

BC 

211 

824 

35 

27.82 

71.9% 

700.00

 8 

193 

24.1 

1.0 

 KO

BC 

237 

794 

36 

23.65 

67.0% 

571.00

 7 

170 

24.3 

1.0 

 KO

BC 

242 

1,24

4 40

 36

.32 

66.7% 

969.00

 10

 26

6 26

.6 

9.8 

 KO

BC 

244 

766 

36 

34.73 

75.9% 

950.00

 9 

246 

27.3 

4.3 

 KO

BC 

302 

793 

23 

38.98 

84.4% 

757.00

 10

 19

4 19

.4 

8.1 

 KO

BC 

306 

785 

33 

26.41 

71.1% 

619.00

 8 

184 

23.0 

0.0 

 KO

BC 

310 

992 

38 

33.66 

71.8% 

921.00

 9 

234 

26.0 

8.7 

 KO

BC 

346 

1,24

4 60

 19

.99 

45.8% 

549.00

 6 

161 

26.8 

1.0 

 KO

BC 

348 

766 

36 

34.73 

68.6% 

858.00

 9 

224 

24.9 

8.7 

 KO

BC 

353 

836 

44 

29.07 

40.4% 

517.00

 8 

132 

16.5 

2.0 

 KO

BC 

355 

842 

33 

20.59 

64.7% 

439.00

 8 

153 

19.1 

1.0 

 KO

UR 

139 

545 

35 

38.98 

77.5% 

1058

.00 

10 

270 

27.0 

2.9 

 KO

UR 

140 

494 

35 

39.73 

67.4% 

938.00

 11

 25

0 22

.7 

9.0 

 KO

UR 

141 

532 

35 

32.15 

61.5% 

693.00

 9 

196 

21.8 

5.2 

 LO

NG 

106 

825 

36 

30.57 

75.0% 

826.00

 9 

227 

25.2 

1.0 

 LO

NG 

107 

714 

36 

39.81 

76.2% 

1093

.00 

11 

293 

26.6 

1.3 

 LO

NG 

114 

687 

35 

38.98 

85.4% 

1166

.00 

10 

299 

29.9 

4.8 

 LO

NG 

201 

723 

26 

35.56 

65.3% 

605.00

 10

 17

2 17

.2 

2.1 

 MCE

1 01

1 96

5 70

 16

.91 

33.9% 

401.00

 5 

111 

22.2 

3.8 

 MCE

1 11

0 55

5 36

 35

.19 

66.3% 

839.00

 13

 26

8 20

.6 

4.3 

 MCE

1 21

0 53

9 36

 34

.73 

70.3% 

880.00

 9 

222 

24.7 

1.0 

 MCE

1 21

2 54

7 36

 34

.74 

54.4% 

681.00

 10

 18

6 18

.6 

0.0 

 MCE

1 21

4 54

7 36

 29

.24 

59.8% 

630.00

 8 

168 

21.0 

0.0 

 MCM

I 11

5 1,02

5 63

 23

.34 

49.6% 

730.00

 6 

188 

31.3 

0.0 

 MCM

I 22

6 78

7 39

 31

.82 

56.9% 

706.00

 9 

198 

22.0 

4.2 

 MCM

I 32

2 63

1 40

 32

.08 

54.6% 

701.00

 9 

192 

21.3 

0.0 

Elon

Uni

vers

ity

Cla

ssro

om a

nd C

lass

Lab

Util

izat

ion

Stud

y   Comprehensive Facilities Planning 

October ‐ 2011 

Page 34 

  Bldg

 Ro

om 

ASF 

Capa

city 

Daytime 

WRH

 SO

% 

WSC

H 

Sections 

Section 

Enrollm

ent 

Avg. 

Section 

Even

ing 

Hou

rs 

 MCM

I 32

9 71

9 29

 28

.25 

48.5% 

397.00

 7 

98 

14.0 

0.0 

 MCM

I 33

3 62

5 41

 27

.83 

71.6% 

817.00

 8 

225 

28.1 

0.0 

 MOON 

105 

451 

20 

10.52 

75.0% 

156.00

 8 

116 

14.5 

0.0 

 MOON 

207 

472 

35 

32.98 

47.0% 

542.00

 9 

155 

17.2 

3.5 

 MOON 

210 

570 

30 

32.73 

46.8% 

460.00

 7 

107 

15.3 

8.0 

 MOON 

302 

725 

40 

28.99 

44.9% 

520.00

 8 

131 

16.4 

1.8 

 MOON 

303 

525 

30 

32.33 

39.3% 

382.00

 7 

89 

12.7 

6.7 

 MOON 

304 

473 

30 

28.90 

45.4% 

394.00

 6 

80 

13.3 

4.8 

 MOON 

305 

490 

35 

34.73 

68.7% 

835.00

 9 

220 

24.4 

7.1 

 MOON 

310 

436 

30 

26.57 

58.8% 

469.00

 9 

152 

16.9 

4.0 

 MOON 

312 

560 

35 

34.73 

102.3%

 12

44.00 

9 31

5 35

.0 

8.7 

 PO

WL 

302 

603 

33 

38.32 

71.2% 

898.00

 10

 23

5 23

.5 

4.8 

 PO

WL 

304 

734 

30 

34.73 

73.5% 

767.00

 9 

196 

21.8 

1.0 

Seminar 

 AVH

P 10

3 42

9 15

 8.18

 93

.6% 

117.00

 6 

84 

14.0 

0.0 

 AVIP 

103 

429 

15 

14.67 

132.1%

 29

2.00

 7 

122 

17.4 

0.0 

 AVP

S 20

0 37

9 15

 14

.32 

60.1% 

128.00

 4 

36 

9.0 

1.0 

 AVR

P 20

0 37

5 15

 10

.59 

54.1% 

86.00 

6 49

 8.2 

0.8 

Aud

itorium 

 ART

S 15

0 1,92

5 12

5 19

.75 

11.3% 

278.00

 7 

146 

20.9 

0.5 

Totals  

Room

s 80

 56

,169

 2,86

0 2,51

0 61

.9% 

55,542

 71

3 15

,317

 21

.5 

255.9 

  

 Avg W

RH 

31.4 

  

  

 

 

appendix r:

elon buildings listby function (november 18, 2011)

ELON UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS BY FUNCTION Nov. 17, 2011

# building Address Constructionyear

Acquisitionyear

grossArea

owned

grossArea

rented

yearRented

ACAdemiC226 academic Village 3 Gray Pavilion 303 east lebanon 2004 2004 9,632228 academic Village 4 Belk Pavilion 370 n. antioch ave. 2007 2007 9,632227 academic Village 5 Spence Pavilion 360 n. antioch ave. 2007 2007 9,632105 alamance 107 e. haggard ave 1923 1923 36,240129 Belk library 308 n. o'Kelly ave. 2000 2000 75,000121 Black Box theatre (old Purchasing) 104 n. williamson ave 1920 2,700 1990106 carlton 105 e. haggard ave. 1925 1925 22,428116 center for the arts - Dance wing 207 n williamson ave 1987 1987 13,674117 center for the arts - Music wing 207 n williamson ave 1987 1987 30,415118 center for the arts - theater wing 207 n williamson ave 1987 1987 26,370102 Duke 109 e. haggard ave. 1927 1927 23,134816 elon west arts 406 w. haggard ave 1970 1970 22,548140 Gerald l. Francis center 762 e. haggard ave. 1960 2010 140,923131 Greenhouse 314 east haggard 2002 2002 3,433135 Koury Business center 401 n. o'Kelley ave. 2006 2006 60,120229 lindner 310 e. lebanon 2009 2009 35,590104 long 108 e. lebanon ave 1966 1966 15,400108 Mcewen JMc 129 n. williamson ave 1968 1968 38,329128 McMichael Science center 314 e. haggard ave 1998 1998 81,155103 Mooney 110 e.lebanon ave 1923 1926 24,215101 Powell 111 e.haggard ave. 1970 1970 27,101223 Powell house (Sociology ) 405 e. college ave 1924 1924 3,832925 School of law 201 n. Greene St. (Gboro) 1964 2006 68,274926 School of law annex 211 n. Greene St. (Gboro) 1955 2006 16,470927 School of law clinic 210 w. Friendly (Gboro) 2009 3,420107 whitley 106 e. lebanon ave 1924 1924 13,652

Academic total 810,619 2,700AtHletiCs

721 alumni Fieldhouse 2009 Zac walker Place 2010 2010 34,565706 east Gym 500 e. college 1952 1978 15,152701 Koury center - alumni Gym 104 e. haggard ave 1949 1949 25,480701 Koury center - Fitness 104 e. haggard ave 1994 1994 58,894701 Koury center - Jordan Gym/Beck Pool 104 e. haggard ave 1969 1969 25,526701 Koury center - weight room 104 e. haggard ave 2002 2002 12,600704 Koury Fieldhouse - team area 10 Bank of america Dr 1980 1980 8,030704 Koury Fieldhouse - training 10 Bank of america Dr 2000 2000 3,380708 Powell tennis center 401 e. haggard ave 1988 1988 564702 rhodes Stadium 543 n. williamson ave 2001 2001 22,900705 walter c. latham Baseball Park 544 n. williamson ave 2001 2001 1,959535 worsley Golf training 378 S. antioch 2009 2009 1,520

Athletics total 210,570 0dining

604 acorn coffee Shop 116 n. williamson ave 1920 1997 2,096110 town table restaurant ( elon Portion) 114 n. williamson ave 1920 1920 2,310606 colonnades Dining hall 100 Dalton McMichael Drive 2007 2007 23,566605 Daniel commons 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 7,360602 harden Dining hall -harper center 105 Phoenix Dr 1969 1969 24,030601 Mcewen Dining hall 131 n. williamson ave. 1956 1956 17,200

dining total 76,562 0Housing

224 academic Village 1 Kenan Pavilion 320 n. antioch 2002 2002 8,858225 academic Village 2 cannon Pavilion 302 e. lebanon 2002 2002 8,858203 Barney - hBB 120 e. lebanon ave 1966 1966 8,841202 Brannock - hBB 120 e. lebanon ave 1966 1966 9,402204 carolina 115 e. haggard ave. 1956 1956 25,104220 chandler-Story center 113 Phoenix Dr 1982 1982 20,405219 colclough-Story center 111 Phoenix Dr 1982 1982 16,098465 colonnades residence hall a 106 Dalton McMichael Drive 2007 2007 34,170466 colonnades residence hall B 110 Dalton McMichael Drive 2007 2007 34,170467 colonnades residence hall c 525 e. Phoenix Drive 2011 2011 34,170468 colonnades residence hall D 625 e. Phoenix Drive 2011 2011 34,170469 colonnades residence hall e 696 e. Phoenix Drive 2011 2011 34,170405 Danieley center apt a 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 6,640406 Danieley center apt B 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 7,140407 Danieley center apt c 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 6,640408 Danieley center apt D 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 6,640409 Danieley center apt e 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 7,140410 Danieley center apt F 700 e. haggard ave 1989 1989 6,640424 Danieley center Flat G 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 16,090425 Danieley center Flat h 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 16,090

C:\Users\carterk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\ZUIYCUKD\elon Building List by Function 2011

ELON UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS BY FUNCTION Nov. 17, 2011

# building Address Constructionyear

Acquisitionyear

grossArea

owned

grossArea

rented

yearRented

426 Danieley center Flat I 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 16,090427 Danieley center Flat J 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 16,090428 Danieley center Flat K 700 e. haggard ave 1999 1999 16,090439 Danieley center Flat l 700 e. haggard ave 2001 2001 16,090440 Danieley center Flat M 700 e. haggard ave 2001 2001 16,090441 Danieley center Flat n 700 e. haggard ave 2002 2002 16,090442 Danieley center Single Bed o 700 e. haggard ave 2002 2002 12,900443 Danieley center Single Bed P 700 e. haggard ave 2002 2002 12,900201 hook - hBB 210 e. lebanon ave 1966 1966 9,249301 loy center a 108 loy court east 1997 1997 3,674302 loy center B 107 loy court east 1997 1997 3,674303 loy center c 106 loy court east 1997 1997 3,674304 loy center D 105 loy court east 1988 1988 3,422305 loy center e 104 loy court east 1988 1988 3,532306 loy center F 103 loy court east 1988 1988 3,532307 loy center G 102 loy court east 1988 1988 3,532308 loy center h 101 loy court east 1988 1988 3,412309 loy center I 100 loy court east 1988 1988 3,532310 loy center J 205 Phoenix Dr 1997 1997 1,837311 loy center K 203 Phoenix Dr 1997 1997 1,837312 loy center l 209 Phoenix Dr 1997 1997 3,674313 loy center M 207 Phoenix Dr 1997 1997 3,674314 loy center n 3223 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 4,713315 loy center o 3217 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 2,610316 loy center P 3211 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 2,610317 loy center q 3185 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 4,713318 loy center r 3773 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 4,713319 loy center S 3821 Bill loy Dr 2011 2011 4,713916 loy house 567 n. o'Kelly ave 1957 1997 3,131218 Maynard-Story center 109 Phoenix Dr 1982 1982 20,637216 Moffitt - harper center 107 Phoenix Dr 1968 1968 15,903456 oaks housing Building a 1000 elon acorn Drive 2006 2006 31,905457 oaks housing Building B 1002 elon acorn Drive 2006 2006 27,216458 oaks housing Building c 1006 elon acorn Drive 2006 2006 27,216459 oaks housing Building D 1001 elon acorn Drive 2006 2006 46,896460 oaks housing Building e 1004 elon acorn Drive 2007 2007 31,905461 oaks housing Building F 2001 elon commons Drive 2007 2007 31,905208 Sloan 101 e. haggard ave. 1960 1960 19,149205 Smith 113 e. haggard ave. 1957 1957 25,104217 Staley -harper center 103 Phoenix Dr 1968 1968 33,175525 trollinger house (the abby) 201 w. trollinger 1950 5,850 2006207 Virginia 103 e. haggard ave. 1956 1956 20,703206 west 102 e. lebanon ave 1903 1903 20,523

Housing total 895,471 5,850institutionAl suppoRt

819 Business Services ( hr, acctg, Purchasing) 314 w. haggard 2002 7,000 2002124 holland house 699 holt chapel lane 1963 1963 4,000836 haggard ave Gatehouse 630 e. haggard ave 2009 2009 155445 Information technology (college Manor) 202 w. lebanon ave. 1964 2007 6,686532 Johnston hall 123 S. antioch 1926 2003 12,230136 Mccoy commons (oaks- Security) 216 n. williamson ave. 2007 2007 17,288821 nc campus compact house 515 e. college 1948 1,612 2006835 o'Kelly avenue Gatehouse 600 n. o'Kelly ave. 2008 2008 155820 Pc Support & campus computer Shop 114 w. lebanon ave 1993 1,536 2004402 Print Shop, library offsite Storage, & Music 406 w. haggard ave. 1970 1970 6,500823 wellness (State Farm Building) 412 w. haggard 1989 2006 1,120431 truitt center for religious and Spiritutal life 401 e. college ave. 1969 2000 3,215533 truitt hall ( university relations) 103 S. antioch 1975 2003 3,496

institutional support total 54,845 10,148otHeR Housing

412 Brannock house 4 Poplar 1975 1994 3,000430 Seven lakes house 115 Pinewood court 1975 1994 3,000

other Housing total 6,000 0pHysiCAl plAnt

810 Ballfield Irrigation Pump hse. 544 n. williamson 1987 1987 800803 center for the arts - telephone Switch Building 207 n. williamson 1987 1987 400831 colonnades Pump house aB 106 Dalton McMichael Drive 2007 2007 600817 elon west equipment Storage 406 w. haggard ave. 2001 2001 1,700915 Gibsonville warehouse Gibsonville, lindley lab 1940 16,500 1989818 landscape Field equipment Storage 100 Phoenix Drive 2002 2002 2,400824 Dickson Building (automotive Shop) 803 w. haggard ave. 2006 2006 4,500

C:\Users\carterk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\ZUIYCUKD\elon Building List by Function 2011

ELON UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS BY FUNCTION Nov. 17, 2011

# building Address Constructionyear

Acquisitionyear

grossArea

owned

grossArea

rented

yearRented

822 Dickson Physical Plant 803 w. haggard ave. 1983 33,436 2006841 lipuma Shop 1 418 w. haggard ave. 2003 2009 1,500842 lipuma Shop 2 416 w. haggard ave. 1997 2009 2,400815 well Gazebo lake Mary nell 207 n. williamson 1987 1987 100

phy plant total 14,400 49,936stAFF Housing

416 Isley house 810 e. haggard 1950 1998 3,500802 lodge apartment 400 Moonelon Drive 1955 1983 2,020503 Maynard house 2423 Pineway Drive 1980 1990 7,278403 Veazey house 206 Moonelon Drive 1956 1995 1,411

staff Housing total 14,209 0student suppoRt

534 harden hall ( Sports club) 305 S. antioch 1971 2003 7,370530 holt chapel 207 S. antioch 1956 2003 4,588828 lighthouse tavern 131 w. college ave. 1949 2008 3,900801 lodge 400 Moonelon Drive 1955 1983 3,360812 lodge Shelter 400 Moonelon Drive 1955 1983 1,620127 Moseley center 100 campus Drive 1994 1994 74,314109 Priestley Building 100 n. williamson ave 1891 2,750 1985130 r.n. ellington health & counseling center 201 Phoenix Dr 2001 2001 5,000119 rich house (Financial Planning) 306 n. o'Kelly ave. 1940 1963 2,668

student support total 102,820 2,750gRAnd totAl 2,185,496 71,384

C:\Users\carterk\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\ZUIYCUKD\elon Building List by Function 2011