2002 - West Virginia University

Document Sample
2002 - West Virginia University Powered By Docstoc

                            Campus-Community Master Development Plan

The ten year plan for the use, renovation, and new construction of facilities on the campus of West
Virginia University Institute of Technology was developed through the innovative use of faculty,
professional staff, students, community residents, and business leaders. The study and analysis
leading to the decisions and resulting recommendations found in this plan were accomplished
through a three-hour credit class. This class was taught by two faculty members, one from Business
Management and one from Engineering, and there were students selected by academic deans and
department heads from across academic disciplines enrolled in the class.

Critically important to the integrity and utility of the plan was the integration of the needs and ideas
of students who study and live on campus, faculty and professional staff who work in the facilities,
and area residents and business owners who are neighbors to the campus. Representatives of these
groups were incorporated in two ways. First, the faculty created a Campus-Community
Development Plan Advisory Committee. Second, the faculty scheduled meetings throughout the
community in which the students made presentations to attendees regarding the Higher Education
Policy Commission mandate and the scope and process of the plan development.

The students quickly took great pride in the quality, thoroughness, and utility of the plan they
worked to develop. They named the working group of students the Decade Development Consortium
(DDC). The DDC was given a classroom as “their office” and had laptop computers with campus-
wide, wireless internet capabilities, digital cameras, cell phones, and access to all pre-existing printed
and digitally stored campus plans related to facilities, utility lines and access points, and city street
and utility location information. In addition to the final recommendations being of valuable use to
university administrators, the had a spin off benefit of discovering and correcting several mistakes on
city maps and of providing updates to outdated city maps. In addition, the university received it s
first digitally drawn, to-scale campus map.

The Campus-Community Master Development Plan was approved unanimously by the Advisory
Committee and is now progressing through the levels of the officially required approval process.

WVU Tech Faculty:

Dr. Anne Cavalier
Associate Professor of Business Management
Vice President for Institutional Advancement

Dr. John H. Russell
Professor of Engineering
Vice President for Academic Affairs

Dr. Frank Gourley
Associate Professor and Director
Division of Engineering Technology/Industrial Technology

Campus-Community Master Plan Development Class taught by:

D. Anne Cavalier, Ed.D.
Associate Professor of Business Management
Vice President for Institutional Advancement

John H. Russell, Ph.D.
Professor of Engineering
Vice President for Academic Affairs

The Decade Development Consortium Development Team:

Ronald K. Hatfield - History, Government, and Political Science
Project Team Leader
Document Creation Manager

Tiffany Capps – Graphics Design
Website Design Manager

Adrienne Hill – Biology and Business Management
Landscaping Planning Manager

Jeremy Preston Lucas –Engineering Technology with Mechanical Emphasis
Mechanicals/HVAC Planning Manager
Kelly Kees – Civil Engineering
Traffic and Parking Planning Manager
Project Scheduling Manager

Andria Rumberg – Graphics Design
Property Acquisition Planning Manager

Gregory Sutton – Drafting and Design Technology
Safety Planning Manager

Matthew Tilley – Civil Engineering
Maintenance and Construction Planning Manager

Kristy Young – Business Management
Athletic/Recreation Facilities Planning Manager

Campus-Community Development Plan Advisory Committee:

Dr. Karen R. LaRoe, Chairperson
President, West Virginia University Institute of Technology

Dr. Steve Brown, Dean
College of Business, Humanities and Sciences
West Virginia University Institute of Technology Administration Representative

Guy S. Dooley, President
Upper Kanawha Valley Economic Development Corporation

John P. Giroir, Director
Upper Kanawha Valley YMCA

Nathaniel Johnson, **major**
West Virginia University Institute of Technology Student Representative

H. Joseph Jones, **Job Title**
American Electric Power

Jim King, AIA
Adkins Architects

Robert Neal, President
West Virginia Capital Corporation
Dave Pollard, Director of Planning
Fayette County Commission

Karen Skaggs, Administrative Secretary-Senior
West Virginia University Institute of Technology Staff Representative

Dr. Paul Steranka
West Virginia University Institute of Technology Faculty Representative

Melba L. White
Mayor, City of Montgomery

The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission:

J. Michael Mullen

John R. Hoblitzell, Esq.
Commission Chair

Shawn R. Williams
Commission Vice Chair

J. Thomas Jones
Commission Chair

Mary Clare Eros, Esq.
Commission Vice Chair

Elliot G. Hicks, Esq.
Commission Secretary

Kay H. Goodwin
Secretary of Education and of the Arts
Commission Member

David L. Stewart
State Superintendent Board of Education
Commission Member

Dr. Ron D. Stollings, M.D.
Commission Member
The West Virginia University Board of Governors:

Vaughn L. Kiger
Board Member

Curtis H. (Hank) Barnette

Cathy M. Armstrong
Board Member

Stanley H. Cohen
Faculty Senate Chair

Paul R. Martinelli
Classified Staff Representative

Terry T. Jones
University Relations Chair

Douglas J. Leech
Student Affairs Chair

T. Joseph Lopez
Business Affairs Chair

Thomas E. Potter
Overall Vice Chair

Christopher D. Gregory
Student Representative

Elizabeth E. (Betty) Chilton
Board Member

Paul Gates
Board Member

Rodney K. Thorn
Board Member

Ted Mattern
Board Member
West Virginia University Institute of Technology Institutional Board of Advisors:

Thad D. Epps                  WVU Tech                       Cabinet Members
Chairperson                   Representatives
                                                             Karen R. LaRoe, Ed.D.
Onas Aliff                    Paul Steranka, Ph.D.           President
                              Chair of Faculty
Elaine Chiles                 Assembly                       John H. Russell, Ph.D.
Director of American                                         Executive Vice President
Education Services            Ron Hatfield                   for Academic Affairs
                              SGA President
Ralph H. Goolsby                                             D. Anne Cavalier, Ed.D.
                              John David, Ph.D.              Vice President for
C.R. “Bud” Hill, Jr.          Advisory Council for           Institutional
                              Faculty Representative         Advancement
David S. Long
                              Margaret Legge                 Jo Harris, Ed.D.
Mike P. Miller                Advisory Council of            Provost, Community and
WV American Water             Classified Employees           Technical College
Company                       Representative
                                                             M. Sathyamoorthy, Ph.D.
Edward L. Robinson, P.E.                                     Dean, College of
President, E.L. Robinson                                     Engineering
                                                             Stephen Brown, Ph.D.
Sarah E. Smith                                               Dean, College of
Bowles, Rice, McDavid,                                       Business, Humanities
Graff & Love                                                 and Sciences

Homer Taylor                                                 Mike Neese
                                                             Dean of Students
Nancy Thomas
                                                             Denise Kerby
                                                             Chief Financial Officer

                                                             Sandy Huddleston
                                                             Executive Director of
                                                             Tech Foundation, Inc.
The DDC wishes to recognize the following individuals for the quality of their
contributions and for their dedication to the utility and completion of this project:

Yeshi Abagelan, WVU Tech Student

Charles R. Burdette, WVU Tech, Head of Physical Plant

Jeremy Case, WVU Tech Student

Justin Cunningham, WVU Tech Student

Fred Duffer, WVU Tech Student

Christine Dulaney, WVU Tech Student

Karen Fitzwater, WVU Tech Staff Support

Eric Galuszek, WVU Tech Student

Frank A. Gourley, WVU Tech Faculty

Beverly Jo Harris, WVU Tech Administration, Campus Beautification Committee Chair

James Hissom, WVU Tech Faculty

Rodney Holbert, Burgess and Niple

Jack McClung, WVU Tech Student

Ronald Mink, WVU Tech Campus Safety Director

Jeremey Osborne, WVU Tech Student

Ben Pisarcik, WVU Tech Student

Brian Raney, WVU Tech Student

Saul Roberts, WVU Tech Student

Lon Slater, American Electric Power, retired

Jereme Taylor, WVU Tech Student

Ashley Thompson-Toler, WVU Tech Student/Staff Support

Tammy Tucker, WVU Tech Staff Support




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                          1

HEPC PURPOSE STATEMENT                                     11

WVU BOARD OF GOVERNORS                                     11

WVU TECH MISSION STATEMENT                                 12

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES                                       15

EXISTING CAMPUS FACILITIES                                 17

ENROLLMENT                                                 18

RESIDENCE HALL STATS                                       19

TEN-YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN                                  21

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN                                        38

CAMPUS MAPS                                                41

APPENDICES                                                 47

     A    –    Building Inspection Reports           48
     B    –    Maintenance and Renovation Costs      62
     C    –    HVAC Recommendations                  66
     D    –    Existing Streets and Parking Report   75
     E    –    Landscaping Report Supplement         92
     F    –    Lighting Report                       99
     G    –    Technology Recommendations            116

INDEX                                                      121


       The Campus-Community Development Plan is designed to provide guidelines for
the future renovation, demolition, construction and effective use of the physical facilities
on the campus of WVU Tech, with consideration of Tech’s connection with the City of
Montgomery and the surrounding area. Main emphasis is placed on transportation and
access to these facilities. Current and future technological advances involving academics
and community enhancement are also taken into consideration.

       In January of 2002, the Campus-Community Master Plan Development Class was
formed at West Virginia University Institute of Technology. This class brought together
students from various disciplines and backgrounds and created a dynamic combination of
interests and expertise. Under the tutelage of WVU Tech’s vice presidents, the group
formed the Decade Development Consortium (DDC). The charge accepted by the DDC
was to design and refine the Campus-Community Development Plan for the next ten
years in accordance with legislative mandate.

       Required planning elements include an analysis of existing conditions to establish
a baseline from which to begin campus development, guidelines for future growth and
development in many areas of the campus, recommendations for traffic and pedestrian
circulation, and a development schedule with estimated costs of construction.        These
elements are brought together in accordance with mandates set forth by the West Virginia
Higher Education Policy Commission and in alignment with the WVU Tech Institutional
Mission Statement.

       The Campus Development Plan is the result of the need to create a “Living”
facilities use, renovation, and building plan for institutional planning and decision
making. Developing the plan involved a process involving input from West Virginia
University Institute of Technology personnel and students and from community residents
and leaders.    Representatives from each of these areas accepted positions on the
Campus-Community Development Plan Advisory Committee. This committee met with
the faculty and students at several points during the planning process to provide feedback
and direction for the Campus-Community Development Plan. The students enrolled in
the class named their working group the Decade Development Consortium (DDC). The
class was taught by Dr. Anne Cavalier and Dr. John Russell. The academic component
of the class involved instruction in project management, time and materials, cost analysis,
technical writing and report formatting, and multi-media public presentation. Guidance
and assistance was provided by licensed professionals in engineering and architecture for
all structural and mechanical facility analysis and recommendations.

       The faculty and DDC members formally presented the plans Goals and Objectives
to the Advisory Committee and many area citizens before proceeding with the
development of this plan to facilitate feedback and ideas concerning the 10-year
development plan. The goals and objectives were approved unanimously. The following
organization meetings were attended to make the community aware of the process and to
give them feedback:
   •   Montgomery City Council (and citizens in attendance)
   •   The Upper Kanawha Valley Chamber of Commerce
   •   The Montgomery Rotary Club
   •   WVU Tech Student Government Association
   •   The WVU Tech President’s Cabinet and Leadership Team
   •   WVU Tech Faculty Assembly
       The process has produced physical development goals and design objectives, plan
maps and sketches, and proposed implementation schedules with estimated costs for the
overall campus. Internal space configurations, office and classroom needs, advances in
academic technology, institutional enrollment goals, and academic program changes were
taken into account to develop the most efficient, effective plan possible.
       The following goals were established by the class and approved by the advisory


       Throughout the process, the class focused on making the elements of this plan
practical to implement and valuable to the success of Tech’s academic mission.

       During the lengthy and thoughtful process of determining the point at which the
planning process would start, it became apparent that maintenance, renovation, and
upkeep of existing facilities would involve major elements for attention during the next
decade. Campus physical infrastructure has taken the greatest impact of multiyear budget
cuts and limitation.

       Campus unity is proposed by utilizing new signs, better landscaping and
streetscaping, and clearly defining campus boundaries.

       Traffic flow on campus was also carefully examined. Directional signs, street
markings, the addition of two exit roads to decrease the congestion of traffic, and repaired
roadways are proposed to greatly improve the traffic flow.
        While each goal was viewed as important, it was not viewed as isolated. Several
of the established goals will be touched by one or more proposed projects. For example,
the lighting of the Tech campus not only satisfies the goal of achieving safety, but also
those of campus unity and campus identity. Many more examples of this internelatedness
will become more apparent throughout this plan.

                 Context of Current Ten-year Development Plan

        The policies governing higher education in West Virginia mandate the
development of a ten-year master plan for each campus. At WVU Tech, the last plan was
developed in 1992 so a revised plan was prepared in 2002. This plan addresses various
infrastructure needs linked to institutional priorities over the next ten years. The plan is
subject to review by the WVU Tech Institutional Board of Advisors, the WVU Board of
Governors, and the Higher Education Policy Commission.

        In order to provide some background for the Campus-Community Development
Plan presented in this document, the descriptions of the purposes of the Higher Education
Policy Commission and the Institutional Board of Governors are presented on the
following page. Following this an overview of WVU Tech and a copy of its Mission

                 The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission
                                   Purpose Statement

        The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission is responsible for
developing, establishing, and overseeing the implementation of a public policy agenda
for higher education. It is charged with oversight of higher education institutions to
ensure they are accomplishing their missions and implementing the provisions set by
state statute.
Source: Web site of the Higher Education Policy Commission

              The Purpose of West Virginia University Board of Governors

        The Governing Board shall separately have the following powers and duties: to
determine, control, supervise and manage the financial, business and education policies
and affairs of the state institutions of higher education under its jurisdiction.

Source: Senate Bill 653, 2000 West Virginia Legislature
                   West Virginia University Institute of Technology

       Annually recognized by U.S. News and World Reports as a superior quality
baccalaureate engineering program and liberal arts institution, West Virginia University
Institute of Technology is located in the Upper Kanawha Valley region of West Virginia.
While the institution has students from across the state, nation and world, its students
come primarily from 23 counties in the southern part of the state. Tech offers certificate,
associate, baccalaureate and graduate degree programs. Davis Hall , on the Tech campus,
is home to the Community and Technical College, which offers certificate, associates,
and baccalaureate degree programs. The Community and Technical College returns
nearly 50% of its associate degree students to finish a four-year degree program.

       Recent enrollment averages at Tech are at 2,100 students.           Through active
recruitment programs and progressive program offerings, Tech’s administration has set
objectives of 3,000 students, with 1,000 on-campus residents over the next decade. These
projections were incorporated into the ten-year plan.

       Primarily due to its programs being highly infused with laboratory instruction the
Tech campus is the third most valuable physical plant among all the college and
university campuses in the state.
                                MISSION STATEMENT

       The mission statement of WVU Tech, adopted during the 1998-1999 academic
year, incorporates both the general mission of the Institution in the first paragraph and the
more specific statements of purposes, which are listed in bulleted form:

       “West Virginia University Institute of Technology, West Virginia’s only public
institute of technology and a regional campus of West Virginia University, has the
responsibility to address the engineering, scientific, and technical education needs of
business, industry, and government. The most important function of the Institute is to
prepare students for a lifetime of dynamic, forward thinking, and adaptive learning as
productive citizens of the State, national, and global communities. A student-centered
philosophy of education that balances career preparation with understanding and
appreciation of the traditional arts, humanities, and sciences guides fulfillment of this
mission. As part of its public trust and as a contributing community member, WVU Tech
also has responsibilities to participate in the economic development of the area
andimprove the quality of life in the region through the intellectual, cultural, and
recreational opportunities it offers.

       To accomplish its mission, WVU Tech
   •   provides (1) certificate, associate, baccalaureate, and graduate degree
       programs to prepare individuals for careers in the public and private
       sectors that derive from the basic and applied sciences and (2) academic
       programs through the community and technical college component to
       prepare students for technically oriented occupations
   •   offers continuing, extension and workforce education relevant to regional
   •   convenes a faculty with excellent credentials, dedicated to teaching and
       active in the pursuit of scholarship
   •   collaborates within the West Virginia University system and with other
       institutions to deliver academic programs and support services that
    promote access to higher education for traditional and nontraditional
•   enhances the educational process and fosters intellectual, professional,
    and personal growth of its students, faculty, and staff in an open, ethical,
    and stimulating environment characterized by an appreciation for
    diversity, personal respect, and frequent collegial interactions”

Source: Web Site of West Virginia University Institute of Technology

      The Goals and Objectives summarized below were developed during faculty lead
classroom instruction and discussions and approved by the Campus-Community
Development Plan Advisory Committee.

         •   Improve the overall image and appearance of Tech’s grounds, buildings,
             and parking areas.
         •   Continue a land acquisition program that will reduce or eliminate gaps
             within the campus between the Vickers Bridge on the east and Jackson
             Street on the west.
         •   Upgrade campus graphics, signs, streetscaping, and landscaping
             throughout the campus.

         •   Design a circulation system for vehicles that will reduce conflicts with
         •   Develop a pedestrian corridor through the center of campus.

         •   Create a new and highly visible primary entrance to Tech.
         •   Place a major entrance feature/sign at the new location to signal arrival on
             to the Tech campus.
         •   Place major boundary signs on campus at the east and west ends.
         •   Enhance the secondary entrances to the campus through better signage and
             improve the appearance of the frontage along State Route 61 (SR 61).
     •   Create a safer pedestrian link between the central campus area and the
         downtown business district of Montgomery.
     •   Improve security and lighting for protection of students, staff, faculty, and
     •   Improve accessibility for the disabled to campus buildings, facilities, and
         parking areas.
     •   Protect and enhance the use of Tech’s current facilities with electrical,
         heating, cooling, and ventilation (HVAC) upgrades

     •   Identify sites for additional educational, residential, recreational, athletic,
         and open space use, whether on or off campus.
     •   Create plan for best use, scheduled maintenance, and repair of existing
     •   Create additional and enhance existing parking facilities.
     •   Examine viability of additional access and egress to parking lots, possibly
         along perimeter of campus.

     •   Identify sites in need of enhancement of current LAN-based technology
     •   Create plan for future upgrade to campus-wide wireless technology.
     •   Create guidelines for high tech and learning enhanced classroom facilities.
                             EXISTING CAMPUS FACILITIES
                         (See Appendix A for individual building descriptions)

                 Structure                           Year Constructed and        Gross Square
                                                          Renovated                Footage

Old Main                                           1895, 1899, 1904 and            33,974
Center for Applied Technology and
                                                       1928 and 2001                5,976
Business Development
Conley Hall                                            1936 and 1976               29,521
Orndorff Hall                                                1988                  75,546
COBE                                                         1953                  36,000
Tech Center                                            1962 and 2000               29,556
Neal D. Baisi Athletic Center                          1966 and 2001               86,923
Martin Field House & Annex                                   1951                   4,899
Engineering Classroom Building                         1965 and 1994               47,593
Engineering Laboratories                               1941 and 1983               74,994
Davis Hall                                                   1970                  78,508
Westmoreland Hall                                            1978                   8,596
Maclin Hall                                            1939 and 1953               49,394
Ratliff Hall                                                 1963                  43,984
Hirise Residence Hall                                        1966                  80,380
Co-Ed Residence Hall                                         1969                  67,176
Vining Library                                               1971                  53,761
Lanham Building (Maintenance)                                1977                  15,510
*Alumni House                                                1927                   4,000
*President’s Residence                                       1930                   3,148
Faculty Residences (2)                                       1925                   3,780
Total                                                                             833,219
Enrollment Information

                         ENROLLMENT HISTORY

         YEAR                FULL TIME        HEADCOUNT
         1992                   2,777           3,076

         1993                   2,577           2,859

         1994                   2,457           2,695

         1995                   2,242           2,538

         1996                   2,147           2,486

         1997                   2,136           2,554

         1998                   2,043           2,508

         1999                   2,044           2,593

         2000                   2,086           2,326

         2001                   1,972           2,374
                           Residence Hall Figures
                        RESIDENCE HALL CAPACITIES

                           Ratliff Hall   238 Women
                           High-Rise      267 Men
                           Coed           306 Men and Women
                           Total          811

Current Occupancy Level: 373 Residents or 46% Occupancy Rate


Ratliff Hall:       238 Beds for Female students
                    199 Rooms
                    68 Residents
                    56 Empty Rooms
                    44 Internet-equipped Rooms
                    28.5 % Occupancy
                    No Air Conditioning

Hirise Hall:        267 Beds for Male students
                    64 Double Rooms
                    8 Hirise Resident-Assistant Rooms
                    3 Small Private Rooms
                    145 Residents
                    4 Empty Rooms
                    55 Internet-equipped Rooms
                    54.3 % Occupancy
                    No Air Conditioning
                    Houses Resident Students Cafeteria

Coed Hall:          306 Beds for Co-Ed Residents
                    153 Rooms
                    160 Residents
                    16 Empty Rooms, which includes 2 modules shut down due to
                    asbestos contamination
                    93 Internet-equipped Rooms
                    52.3 % Occupancy
                    Air Conditioned Units

       The 2002-2012 Campus – Community Development Plan is broken into four
sections. These sections progress from general in nature to very specific information, as
contained in the Appendices.

       The first of these sections addresses general suggestions for the overall physical
plant that follow the Goals and Objectives established by the class and approved by the
advisory committee. These suggestions encompass all aspects of the campus under the
scope of this plan.

       Section Two is a more specific subsection that addresses particular problem areas
on campus. These problem areas have suggested solutions that are paramount to the
successful implementation of this plan.

       The third section specifically lists a detailed recommended plan for implementing
projects over the next decade. The plan is organized into five phases listing individual
projects within each phase. Estimated costs are attached to each project. Following this
section are maps relating to the projects within each phase.

       Finally, the seven Appendices detail findings, materials, and specific suggestions
necessary to complete certain projects.
Plan Section One

For campus unity and beautification, the class recommends the following:

   •   A unified system of stationary building signs used in conjunction with adaptable
       flag signs should be implemented throughout campus as a top priority. Internal
       building signs should also be built into any unified system. The flag system
       should be adaptable to mark the building’s normal use and can also be customized
       for special events, such as Homecoming and Open House.
   •   A uniform system of landscaping to be used throughout campus. Sub-systems,
       using similar plantings, may be used for different purposes, such as around
       building signs, near secondary entrances, or freestanding flower displays.
       However, all displays must follow a uniform theme with similar plantings.
   •   that the Vining Library has a wonderful façade framing its entrance; however, the
       lighting in this entranceway has not functioned for sometime and needs to be
       operational. The Vining Library plays a key role in the appearance of the
       proposed main entrance to campus.
   •   Powerful exterior lighting for Old Main to make it the showcase of campus. The
       structure, although partially hidden by the Tech Center when viewed from town,
       could be highly visible from U.S. Route 60. The exterior needs to be repaired
       with bricks repointed and repainted.
   •   South Adams Street should be closed to provide a green area for students and
       visitors and enhance the entrance to Conley Hall Little Theatre and Pierce Art
       Gallery. Concrete sidewalks and concrete picnic tables should be provided along
       with the greenery for shade and visual aesthetics.
   •   Trash dumpsters should be added at each building on campus to provide the safe
       deposit of all building trash. In addition, these dumpsters should be concealed
       behind privacy screens, such as vinyl privacy fencing or “green” screening.
   •   The pine tree from the flower garden on the mall at Old Main be removed and a
       three-pole flag display for U.S., State and Tech flags be installed.
   •   Restoration of the fountain currently used as a flower garden on the mall in front
       of Old Main.
   •   During new construction or renovation, close attention needs to be paid to ensure
       that the building’s exterior architecture and colors match the other structures
       located in the respective section of campus. The campus is sectioned from east to
       west into residential, student life, non-engineering academics, community and
       technical college, and engineering areas.
   •   Lighting fixtures across campus should be replaced and additional units added.
       These must be uniform in style and color of light emission.
For improvement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic circulation systems, the class
recommends the following:

   •   The repaving of roadways and parking lots across campus should be an
       institutional top priority. After paving, proper road markings, such as crosswalks,
       must be applied following state standards.
   •   The section of Fayette Pike behind the Baisi Athletic Center and running east to
       the dead end behind Coed Hall needs to be widened for two-way vehicular traffic.
       The end shall become a paved cul-de-sac with a radius of 25-feet. To properly
       accomplish this, student parking will be prohibited along this stretch. Utilities
       will need to be moved and it is recommended that they be buried. Proper
       landscaping and streetscaping should be installed to make this an attractive route
       to class.
   •   The roadway leading up the eastside of the Tech Center should to be widened to
       accommodate a loading zone next to the eastern double doors of the Tech Center.
       This should be accomplished by taking a certain number of parking spaces from
       the west edge of the commuter and staff lots adjoining the library and bringing
       two lanes of traffic through this new space. The area immediate to the Tech
       Center should then become a loading zone and handicapped parking area, thus
       reducing an ADA concern and reducing a prominent eye sore.
   •   Exit roads need to be completed leading from both the west side of the Martin
       Field parking lot and the parking lot off the west side of the Center for Applied
       Technology and Business Development. Completion of these roads will provide a
       perimeter road system around central campus.
   •   Complete closure of the roadway leading from the main entrance intersection of
       Fayette Pike and progressing up beside the eastside of Vining Library. With
       drainage of the mining runoff, this roadway poses an ice hazard in winter and a
       constant pedestrian hazard due to its slope. An alternate entrance to these parking
       lots should be developed from the road behind the Vining Library that leads to
       Martin Field. This should be incorporated into plans for a new Student
       Recreation Center.

To increase campus identity by improving entrances and gateways to Tech, the class
recommends the following:

   •   The property directly to the north of the Vining Library and the Tech Center can
       be acquired the main entrance should be kept where it is currently located.
       However, removal of at least two trees on the northwest corner of the Baisi Center
       lot will allow for an ornamental/informational structure to be erected which can
       clearly designate the main entrance to campus.
   •   A distinctive type of brick paving stone should be embedded into U.S. Route 61 at
       this entrance and on the west end at the intersection beside the. This paving stone
       design can then be used in decorative focal points at various spots on campus.
   •   Additional definition of campus boundaries on U.S. Route 61 is necessary on both
       the east and west corners. This should be accomplished by the use of ornamental
       fencing, shaped hedges, and uniformly spaced flagpoles with uniform flags
       denoting the institution’s name. On the east corner, this system will reduce the
       unsightly parking of vehicles along the hill leading up to Coed Hall. On the west
       corner, the U.S. Postal Service mailbox should be moved to an alternative
       location. This corner boundary system can only be used up to the west corner of
       the Hirise Hall parking lot and up to the east end of the Engineering Laboratory
       Building due to non-institutional structures and numerous secondary entrances
       throughout campus.
   •   Not using the newly finished green area at the east end of campus as a picnic
       space. Due to road noise, dirt, and mine runoff, this area will be seldom used as
       such. This area, with proper signage, should be uses to mark the entrance to the
       southern side of the city and Tech’s campus.
   •   Secondary entrances need signage upgraded to match the specific purpose of the
       entrance, i.e., Entrance to Engineering Building Parking Lot.

To achieve greater campus safety and accessibility, the class recommends the following:

   •   Proper safety and roadway identification signage should be identified as a
       necessity on Tech’s campus. Stop signs on the wrong side of streets and
       deteriorating directional signage creates a multitude of unsafe and inconvenient
       situations for visitors and community members and is detrimental to first
       impressions of visitors.
   •   Concrete steps with handrails need to be installed on the hill leading from the
       eastern most resident parking area up in the bridge ramp circle to the rear entrance
       of Coed Hall. Proper lighting on this pedestrian route is a necessity for student
   •   Concrete steps and handrails need to be installed on the hill leading from the
       residence halls and Baisi Center to the parking lots on the hill east of Vining
       Library. The location of the current steps on that hill is not adequate, as the
       pedestrian worn footpaths indicate. A transitional walkway is also recommended
       from the lower lot to the upper lot behind the Baisi Center.
   •   Sidewalks should be extended at the northwest entrance of Orndorff Hall where
       pedestrian traffic has created a worn footpath to the doorway.
   •   The freight elevator in the Engineering Laboratories Building should be upgraded
       to meet ADA passenger regulations.
   •   Safety issues should be eliminated with adequate exterior lighting, walkways, and
       security locks. These include poor lighting in several high traffic areas, including
       the north side of the Center for Applied Technology and Business Development
       and Lover’s Lane; the need for additional lighting and a more secure opening at
       the service tunnel entrance on the east side of COBE; plans for one or more
       elevated pedestrian walkways crossing over Rt. 61 and the railroad crossings
       through town; and a locked door and camera security system on the existing
       daycare center.
   •   Student and employee health should be safeguarded with campus-wide repair,
       upgrades and first time installation of HAVC systems in all buildings.
       Comfortable temperatures and clean, healthy air are minimum expectations in the
       21st Century for living, working, and playing areas.
   •   The walkway connecting the Engineering Laboratories Building and the
       Engineering Classroom Building should be repaired to eliminate leaks.

To identify current facility and land use patterns and to develop optimum plans for
facility and land use patterns in the future, the class recommends the following:

   •   Continuation and completion of the current plan to build and/or renovate the
       dormitory structures. The eastern end of campus is designated as the residential
       life section and should be the location of any future dormitory construction.
   •   considering the type of construction within Hirise Hall, serious consideration
       should be given to its renovation into a convention hotel, using the current
       cafeteria as meeting venues with food service and accommodations in-house.
   •   that attention should be paid to the relocation of Ratliff Hall residents, since
       Ratliff is technically outside of the residential life section of campus. Ratliff Hall
       may then be used for other purposes or demolished to create a more attractive
       entrance to campus after new dormitories are constructed.
   •   completion of the planned renovation to the Neal D. Baisi Athletic Center. This
       plan includes a Wellness Center for community use. Parking must be studied and
       added where necessary for any part of this project.
   •   implementation and completion of a plan to construct a Student Recreation Center
       on the hill to the south of the Baisi Center. This facility should house a Daycare
       Center as well as “student use only” recreation equipment. This center will take
       existing parking areas, which must be accounted for and replaced.
   •   that the Tech Center must be updated to improve both the exterior appearance of
       the structure and the space utilization of the interior. Plans should include a new
       floor of rooms at the same height of the Bear’s Den & extending over the existing
       ballroom, renovation and modernization of the Bear’s Den, and removal of the
       yellow glass on the exterior. The Tech Center is in the middle of the main view
       of campus and should be embraced as such. The freight elevator is not ADA
   •   that locker room facilities on Martin Field need to be expanded to accommodate
       two college football teams during game day. The area behind the home bleachers
       is large enough to hold a structure to house the teams, public restrooms, an
       operational concession stand, renovated president’s box seating, and press box.
       With these and other minor improvements, Martin Field will meet standards
       required to host high school playoff football games, which may result in
       additional revenue.
  •   the completion of the project to convert Maclin into revenue-producing
      apartments or other business locations.
  •   the completion of the Conley Hall renovation, allowing the first floor to be used
      by the Printing Education Department. Any renovation of Conley must preserve
      proper entrances to the Art Gallery on the upper floor and provide handicapped
      accessible elevator service to the building.
  •   advises the completion of current plans to renovate the Tech Marina on the Route
      60 side of the Kanawha River into a revenue-producing entity.
  •   rapid development of extreme sports facilities on or near the Tech campus.
      Projects should include continued development of the Tech Mountain Trail
      System to allow for greater hiking and biking access. A mountaintop lodge
      should also be incorporated in these plans, as suggested by the Extreme Sports
      Committee at Tech.
  •   that the property acquisition issues include continuation of a property acquisition
      program focusing on prioritized areas such as in front of central campus,
      residential life areas, and then academic sections of campus

  the DDC advises:
  • implementation of the current plan to use Title III grant funding to increase and
      improve academic technology.
  • that despite evolution to a wireless Internet environment, the hardwired LAN
      ports be retained in all locations in the event of a malfunction of the wireless
  • that the Level 2 Classroom, as defined in the 2002 Title III Grant Proposal, shall
      be adopted as the model for the majority of classrooms that are used for the
      purpose of usual academic lectures and presentations. This model includes an
      instructor’s console with computer, wireless Internet access point, webcam, and
      graphics tablet; and a classroom with interactive whiteboard and LCD projectors.
  • all classroom facilities should follow a model using a table and chairs setup, doing
      away with individual desks. These tabletops will allow room for multiple
      reference books and portable computers that are increasingly used on college
  • that each campus building should contain a minimum of one Level 1 Classroom,
      as defined in the 2002 Title III Grant Proposal. This includes all amenities of a
      Level 2 classroom, but includes equipment to allow for interactive distance
      learning, such as cameras, microphones, increased speakers, and other technology
      necessary to complete the interactive learning experience.
  • that when doors across campus are re-keyed for security purposes, an electronic
      card reading system should be installed.
Plan Section Two:

                        Facilities Usage and Maintenance Plan

        Most existing structures on the campus are in need of some maintenance and/or
renovation. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning systems and windows need to be
replaced throughout campus. This will improve comfort and decrease climate control
costs as well as enhancing appearance of several buildings. Deferred maintenance is to
be completed throughout the plan, and future deferred maintenance should be minimized.
Major repairs are to include replacement of several roofs, addressing safety concerns, and
the removal of asbestos. More information on this aspect of the plan can be found in
Appendix A.

                                  Property Acquisition

       As was documented in 1992, the Tech campus buildings are mixed among private
residences throughout the campus interior. This creates both a perceived and literal lack
of unity, which is detrimental to campus atmosphere. A project as simple as defining
campus boundaries with fencing is practically impossible with private residences located
within the campus. More complex projects, such as creating a “grand campus entrance”
or committing to a pedestrian corridor by restricting vehicular traffic through the center
of campus is definitely impossible.

    Areas of campus with concentrated privately owned or Tech-owned housing (any
buildings that retain the look of residential housing) should be examined for opportunities
to create green space or recreational areas. Residential style housing is not a unified part
of the campus plan. Specific areas to study include:

   Church and houses behind dormitories and the Baisi Center
   Apartments on the northwest corner of Hirise
   Residences between Hirise and Baisi Athletic Center
   Residences along Fayette Pike between Ratliff Hall and Grassy Knoll
   Residences along Route 61 between Ratliff Hall and Grassy Knoll
   Residences along Route 61 between Orndorff and Davis Hall
   Residences along street running parallel to Route 61, between Orndorff and Davis
   Residences along Fayette Pike, starting at Orndorff
   Apartments at four-way stop along Route 61, adjacent to Davis Hall
   Residences between four-way stop and Engineering Laboratory along Rt. 61
   All other Residences between Route 61 and mountainside, and between Davis Hall
   and Engineering Building
   The streets that will be closed and landscaped to create green space

        Allot $50,000 a year for property acquisition, with any remainder to be carried
into the next year.
                                   Traffic Circulation


        All roads and parking facilities on campus are in serious need of resurfacing.
Most areas have severe cracking and potholes. This not only detracts from the beauty of
campus but also provides unfavorable driving conditions and causes safety concerns.
Traffic signs are incorrectly located at many points throughout campus. On Fayette Pike
there are several stop signs that are placed on the wrong side of the road. A stop sign
located on the left side of the road differs from the driver’s expectation and is often not
seen and obeyed. There is also a need to use uniform signage. Presently, there are many
different types of signs used. The MUTCD, manual on uniform traffic control devices,
should determine signage type and placement. In addition, current signage is old, faded
and unattractive, this being detrimental to visitor first impressions.


        To improve the traffic flow behind the Baisi Center, Hirise and Coed Residence
Halls traffic patterns should be altered. At present there are noticeable problems with
traffic congestion due to one-way travel, vehicles parking on the sidewalk and on the
grassy area next to the road; and there are serious issues with drainage and ice build up.
This area has been the site of several minor collisions because of the confined area and
sidewalk parking. The elimination of parking in the grassy area would also eliminate
congestion, along with improving the appearance of the area.

       The recommended two-way road will allow better traffic flow for the area. The
design of the roadway should include a raised curb to ensure that traffic will follow the
desired traffic pattern. Signage and strict enforcement by Campus Safety will eliminate
parking on the sidewalk. All utilities should be buried.

        The cul-de-sac at the end of the roadway should at least have a 25’ radius to
accommodate the turning of passenger vehicles, while 30’ is preferred for aesthetics.
Vehicles of larger size should obtain special permission from Campus Security to use the
road because of the small turning area. Due to the incorrect placement of the drainage
system in this area, water tends to accumulate after a rainstorm. This has caused erosion
of the roadway along with rather unsightly conditions. The drainage problem should be
corrected for both safety and aesthetics reasons.


        The construction of these two proposed roads would provide a safer and more
efficient traffic circulation pattern. Nearly all traffic on campus should become one-way,
with the exception noted earlier. This would provide safer driving conditions on campus
because drivers would not encounter head-on traffic.

       The first to be constructed should be the exit from Martin Field. This roadway
would begin at the west end of the parking lot at Martin Field. This exit is on an existing,
but unpaved roadbed that was cleared years ago but now is covered in small saplings and
underbrush. It will need to be cleared again, grubbed, and leveled by minor earthwork.
As the road is built, proper drainage should be installed. This road will terminate at
Fayette Pike, where a block building formerly used as a warehouse now stands.

        The other road to be constructed is an exit from the campus at the west end of the
Applied Technology and Business Development Center parking lot. It should go behind
existing private residences and connect to Fayette Pike by way of an existing road that
comes from behind “Meyer” Apartments. When constructed, the roadway will allow
safer traffic flow from Old Main and a less confusing exit from campus. An existing but
overgrown roadbed would need to be cleared and grubbed, earthwork done to level the
area, proper drainage installed, and paved.


        When the Ratliff Hall Residence and previously identified non-Tech property
along Route 61 are removed, a new entrance that better identifies the school should be
put in its place. This new road would connect to the existing road leading to both the
football field and Old Main. The entrance and new road pattern will eliminate a portion
of the two parking lots between the library and the student center. This would also
provide an opportunity to build a loading zone for the Tech Center, which would be out
of the main stream of traffic. In turn this will eliminate a serious and prominent eyesore
and create the opportunity for convenient ADA compliant parking for the student center.

       Once the new entrance and roadway is constructed, the two residence parking lots
would be connected to the newly constructed roadway, because access would then be
closed off from Fayette Pike.

       Jim King, with Adkins Architects an Tech faculty member, and a member of the
Campus Community Development Plan Advisory Council, graciously provided the
following concept drawings to pictorially explain what might be achieved through
implementation of this plan.
   Concept Drawing for Grand Entrance of WVU Tech

Concept Drawing of Plan View of Grand Entrance of WVU Tech
                             Pedestrian Traffic Circulation


         All sidewalks and stairways on campus are in need of repair. Repair is necessary
for safer conditions for all pedestrians. ADA requirements also need to be incorporated
when repairing or constructing sidewalks. Proper curb cuts and crosswalks need to be
provided. Additional stairways leading from the residential lots on the east end of campus
would provide better access for students and encourage better use of these parking

        Sidewalk conditions present a safety hazard in many places across campus.
Sidewalk pavement sections are broken and elevated, and/or the ground on either side is
6 inches or more below the walking plane. It is recommended that these high sidewalks
be filled in on the sides with dirt to make the pavement and ground the same height. It is
further recommended that all cracks and elevated concrete on sidewalks and stairways
should be repaired for pedestrian safety.


        Currently, Fayette Pike is the most popular pedestrian traffic corridor on campus.
The conditions should be improved by widening the sidewalks along Fayette Pike from in
front of the Tech Center to the intersection with Monroe Street. The sidewalk should be
widened to approximately 8’, so pedestrians would have enough room to travel
comfortably with little worry of stepping out into vehicular traffic. This would also
provide an opportunity for additional landscaping to aid in the unification and
beautification of the campus. Seating could be provided along this throughway to allow
students, faculty and staff to socialize.


        It is the opinion of the class that the undertaking of an overtrack walkway is too
complex for the institution to attempt alone. This type of project will require the
cooperation of the town, the institution, state and federal agencies, and CSX Railroad. It
is recommended that the institution provide leadership to bring these entities together on
a task force for the purpose of addressing solutions to the pedestrian track crossing issue.


         All parking facilities on campus should be resurfaced, parking spaces repainted,
and new signage installed. It is further recommended that shrubs, ornamental grasses,
and perennials be installed to create a more attractive view of these lots. Most parking
facilities have cracking and potholes. Also, new pavement markings should be provided.


      It is recommended that additional parking areas be created on the west end of
campus, near the Engineering building, as property becomes available.

                                 Campus Landscaping

       The campus landscaping component of the plan has been given an order of
implementation so maximum, early impact to unification and beautification can be
achieved. It is desirable to create and promote unity throughout campus with uniform
signage. The new signage will be accompanied by uniform landscaping schemes at each
building. The first step in this process was to identify primary and secondary entrances
for each building. Then a uniform primary entrance designed with landscaping, signage
and lighting. A second uniform design was developed for secondary entrances. The
implementation of these recommended designs are to be the highest priority for WVU
Tech’s ten-year development. This sign is to be the highest priority for WVU Tech’s ten-
year development. Specific problems and possible solutions for other areas around
campus are also described below but are of lesser priority.


        A diagram follows showing the recommendations for the primary entrance,
including signage, lighting, and landscaping for each of Tech’s buildings. It is important
to note that the diagram shows its appearance in the winter, with no perennials present.
Not pictured in the diagram, but included in the recommended design is vertical accent
lighting that is crucial to the visual display.

        The plants surrounding the primary building entrance sign have been chosen with
care, including three evergreen shrubs. Selection was based on color, climate zone
suitability, ease of maintenance, and aesthetics. The focal point, which consists of
seasonal perennials, in blue and gold hues, is at the center. Color pictures of each can be
found in Appendix E.
       Each plant is described individually. These plants are recommended by the class,
however, if it is not possible at the time of planting to find the recommended species,
plants meeting height, shape, and color requirements may be substituted.

Primary Entrance Signage with shrubbery

The recommended plants for the primary signage are as follows:

         A. Specimen A needs to be a tall pyramidal shaped evergreen. It should not be
            more than 1 or 2 ft. higher than the sign; otherwise, it would detract from the
            sign instead of complementing it. With a sign being approximately 5 ft. tall,
            this plant should be between 6 and 7 ft. tall. The recommended species is
            Picea glauca (Dwarf Alberta Spruce).

         B. Specimen B needs to be roughly half the size of specimen A. The approximate
            height requirement is 3-4 ft. The shape needs to be rounded. The
            recommended species is Buxus sempervirens (Common Boxwood).
         C. Specimen C needs to be low growing and slightly rounded. The height
            requirement is less than 3 ft. The recommended species is Eunonymus
            Fortunei (Wintercreeper). There are many different varieties. The one
            pictured in the index is a variegated variety that looks very attractive next to
            the Boxwood.
D. The focal centerpiece of the primary sign will be seasonally blooming
   perennials. The height of the tallest flower should not exceed three feet. The
   flowers that were chosen were selected with the criteria of hardiness and a
   long blooming season.

   When choosing a color scheme for the perennials, it was decided to limit the
   colors to shades of blue (including purple), yellow, and white. This was
   decided because it will be a floral representation of Tech’s colors, blue and

   The perennials or bulbs that have been chosen will be divided by the seasons
   in which they bloom.

              The recommended perennials and bulbs for spring include (listed
       in descending height):
              • Iris siberica, Siberian Iris, blue and yellow
              • Narcissus spp. Daffodils, yellow and white
              • Tulipa spp. Tulips, yellow, medium height 8-10 inches (Tulip
                  varieties have a wide range of growing seasons. Planting a few
                  different varieties with different blooming times will maximize
                  their beauty all spring)
              • Anemone blanda, Windflower, blue and white
              • Crocus tommasinianus, Crocus, purple and yellow

              The recommended perennials and bulbs for summer include (listed
       in descending height):

              •   Allium hollandicum ‘Purple Sensation’, purple
              •   Hemerocallis spp. ‘Stella D’Oro’, Daylilies, yellow
              •   Liatris spicata, Gayfeather, purple and white
              •   Campanula carpatica, Bellflower, blue and white
              •   Delosperma cooperi, Hardy Iceplant, yellow

              The recommended perennials and bulbs for summer include (listed
       in descending height):

              •   Aster x Frikarti ‘Monch’, Michaelmas Daisy 28 in., violet and
              •   Chrysanthemum spp., white and yellow
              •   Sternbergia lutea (Fall daffodil) 6-8 in., yellow
       The east entrance on campus on Route 61 from the bridge should have the same
arrangement. The plant species chosen for the main entrance would need to be similar but
of a larger variety than the ones listed above because that sign sits so far from the road
and up on a hill.


        Upon careful inspection of the wide variation in secondary building entrances,
several problems are identified. First, there is often no space for any landscaping at all.
Many of these entrances open onto pavement or concrete. It is difficult to make a
standard entrance design in these conditions. To solve this problem it is recommended
that potted plants be utilized at all the secondary entrances, these uniformity and
beautification can be achieved. It is recommended that dwarf conifers, such as the
Dwarf Alberta Spruce (Picea glauca) in a standard urn or pot, preferably made of the
same materials as the primary entrance signs, be placed at either side of each secondary

       It is also recommended that accent lighting be placed to highlight both the
primary and the secondary entrance landscaping and signage.


        This proposal recommends that
functional flag signs and flagpoles be placed
around campus. These flag signs will relate to
building function or even to Tech special
events. This would consist of a flagpole or
other hanging apparatus and a vertical hanging
flag with functional designations. Tech colors
of blue and gold are always to be prominent in
these functional signs on a white background.
The picture shown is representational of the
general look to be achieved.


        This plan recommends the widening of certain roads and placing additional green
spaces adjacent or in them. This would include the new entrance and the road leading to
Old Main. In these instances, a selection of evergreens and perennials is recommended.
Ornamental grasses are to be spaced evenly between the evergreens to create visual
interest and traffic screening. Plants are to be selected from Appendix E.

        This proposal recommends the widening of the sidewalks on Fayette Pike behind
Maclin Hall and dwarf ornamental trees should be placed at intervals. They should be
trees that will not grow past 15 feet in height. The recommendation is that flowering
Crepe Myrtles, Lagerstroemia indica, be used in specific incremental sections of the
sidewalks down Fayette Pike. (Appendix E). Wooden benches should be placed in close
proximity to these plantings to create green, social areas.


        This grassy area is a wide-open green space on campus between Ratliff and
Maclin Halls, often used for recreation or for training by the WV Correctional Academy.
The current recommendation is to leave the area open and grassy. There are a few issues
that need to be addressed. There is a fence on the roadside of Rt. 61. It is unattractive and
covered by Japanese Honeysuckle, which is considered a pest plant by landscapers. It is
the recommendation by the class that the chain link fence be removed and ornamental
fencing matching that used at campus boundaries or split rail fencing be erected facing
Rt. 61. This will create a much friendlier “institutional face” to the community.

       *Also called the Lover’s Lane

        The footpath is a beautiful area that leads up to Tech Mall from the current Day
Care playground. There is the need for maintenance on the benches. Secondly, there are
several dead or dying plants in the small, forested area on the south side. It is
recommended to remove those dead trees, which include dogwood and black locust. The
third recommendation is to heavily plant the hillside with the WV State flower, the
rhododendron. The area is perfect for its growth and would provide a stunning display
when in bloom. The fourth recommendation is to add a few forsythia bushes on the lower
north side (ref. Appendix). There are several lining the way above Fayette Pike; however,
there are a few large gaps that need to be filled to complete the visual effect.

Tech Mall

        Tech Mall is a meeting place for many people. It is referred to as the center of
campus, but it is not very attractive. There is too much pavement and not enough green. It
is our recommendation to remove 15 % of the hardscape, replacing it with perennials and
ornamental shrubs.

        An immediate improvement that can easily be made is to add large standard
planters or urns filled with perennials and shrubs. There is already one planter present,
but the space is being used ineffectively. First, the spruce tree is off center in the planter,
disrupting the entire visual experience. It is recommended that a three-flag display be
constructed in this existing planter, to showcase the US, State, and Tech flags, and the
spruce be removed.

        It is also suggested that the existing fountain currently used as a planter be
restored to its original working order.

Basic Maintenance of Existing Landscaping

        Many of the buildings at WVU Tech have landscaping already present. A lot of it
is not being maintained properly and needs pruning and mulching. There are shrubs that
are making contact with some buildings from not having been pruned, such as on the
west side of Davis Hall. Some trees may need to be cut back or removed. For instance,
the birches outside of COBE are lovely specimens, but they were not the ideal plant for
the setting. Birches grow up to 70 feet tall; thus they will be a problem in the future. They
are planted too close to the building, probably too close for the building to withstand the
growing trunks over time. Another example is the Box Elder that is growing next to a
Silver Maple on the north side of COBE. It is growing straight into the building. It needs
to be pruned this winter (2003). There are several more examples on campus of
maintenance needs. Many trees have climbing vines and poison ivy that must be

        Many of the plants already in place on campus are attractive and acceptable, but
they need to be trimmed, weeded and mulched. Once that has been completed, the areas
can be surveyed and plants added where needed to fill in bare areas. Perennials from the
appendix are to be selected. The campus needs the addition of more flowering shrubs like
the crepe myrtle, rhododendron and azaleas. These changes will make the campus more
Plan Section Three:

             Costing for the Ten Year Plan
             (Each phase is recommended to encompass approximately two years)

  Phase I                                                                                  Costs

Complete all maintenance and renovation to COBE                                            $100,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Tech Center e                                  $3,500,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to President's Residence                            $60,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Lanham Building                                 $300,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to LCN College of Engineering Building            $1,205,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Orndorff Hall                                   $471,000.00
Complete modernization of electrical systems on campus a                                   $150,000.00
Complete all outdoor lighting renovation b                                                  $15,000.00
Complete all decorative campus signage, landscaping, and accent lighting                   $200,000.00
Allowance for property acquisition c                                                       $100,000.00
Improve the existing entrance to the campus                                                 $10,000.00
Improve the signage and follow the guidelines of the MUTCD (Manual on uniform
traffic control devices).                                                                    $1,000.00
Improve the sight distance difficulties at intersections by eliminating a few on street
parking spaces on Route 61.                                                                    $200.00
Construction of two-lane road and cul-de-sac behind Baisi Center, Hirise and Coed
Residence Halls                                                                            $200,000.00
Improve all sidewalks traversed by students; include curb cuts for use by
handicapped users.                                                                         $100,000.00
Provide crosswalks at all intersections to allow safe crossings for pedestrians.             $5,000.00
Improve the conditions of all stairways on campus.                                          $75,000.00
Academic Technology Enhancements                                                           $710,000.00
 Phase II

Complete all maintenance and renovation to Old Main                               $4,755,000.00
Allowance for property acquisition c                                               $100,000.00
Improve pavement conditions and pavement markings on existing roadways that are
on campus                                                                          $250,000.00
Improve pavement conditions and pavement markings on all parking areas provided
by WVU Tech.                                                                       $250,000.00
Closure of S. Adams Street for green space and entertainment area.                  $20,000.00
Closure of a portion of Madison Street to make space for more faculty parking.      $10,000.00
Create a One-Way Alley adjacent to the Engineering Laboratories.                     $1,000.00
Academic Technology Enhancements                                                   $710,000.00
Phase III

Complete all maintenance and renovation to Davis Hall                     $1,675,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Conley Hall e                   $141,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Maclin Hall                    $2,620,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Vining Library                  $950,000.00
Allowance for property acquisition                                         $100,000.00
Construction of exit road from Martin Field                                $500,000.00
Expansion of sidewalk on Fayette pike along with additional landscaping     $15,000.00
Build new stairways leading from the residential lots to dormitories        $75,000.00
Academic Technology Enhancements                                           $710,000.00
 Phase IV

Complete all maintenance and renovation to Hirise e                         $1,204,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Engineering Laboratories         $1,601,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Westmoreland Hall                  $20,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Baisi Center                     $1,150,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Martin Field                      $192,000.00
Allowance for property acquisition                                           $100,000.00
Construction of exit road from Center for Applied Technology and Business
Development                                                                   $75,000.00
 Phase V

Complete all maintenance and renovation to Ratliff Hall e                                                           $1,480,000.00
Complete all maintenance and renovation to Coed Hall                                                                $2,481,000.00
Allowance for property acquisition                                                                                   $150,000.00
Completion of New Entrance                                                                                          $1,000,000.00
Completion of new road to the residential lots                                                                       $200,000.00
Movement of tennis courts to site adjacent to the Baisi Center, turning old site into
parking area                                                                                                           $50,000.00

                                                                                      Grand Total for Ten Year Plan $29,287,200.00

                                                                                           Summary of Costs
                                                                         Deferred Maintenance and Renovation       $25,960,000.00
                                                                                                New Projects        $3,327,200.00

             a - Electrical system replacement should be offset by future budget savings
             b - All costs for new lighting will be offset by future budget savings
             c - An allowance of 50,000 per year shall be set aside and carried over if unused
             d - At the time of publishing plans for the building are underway
             e - Plans currently in development shall supercede the maintenance plans for residential facilities
A   –   Building Inspection Reports
B   –   Maintenance and Renovation Costs
C   –   HVAC Recommendations
D   –   Existing Streets and Parking Report
E   –   Landscaping Report Supplement
F   –   Lighting Report
G   –   Technology Recommendations
    Appendix A

Building Inspections
                                  Structure Inspections

Conley Hall

       The original structure was built in 1936 and was last renovated in 1976. The
building is approximately 29,000 square feet. The building has three floors and a
mezzanine between the first and second levels.

       The ground level houses
the Conley Hall Little Theater.
The first level and mezzanine
house the Music Department.
The second level houses the Art
Department, which includes the
school’s art gallery, and some
classrooms that are used by the
English Department.

        The building has several
entrances: a main north entry at
the top of a set of stairs; a
second north delivery entrance
(a garage door); an entry on the
east side, which serves as a service entry; an entry on the south facing Fayette Pike; a
second entry on the south side, which is handicap accessible; and a theater entry on the
west side.

        The building is constructed of brick and concrete. The building seems to be
structurally sound.

Environs that affect the visitors:
   • Minimal handicap accessibility.
   • Location, quantity and condition of public facilities are inadequate.

Recommendations for upgrade and renovation of the building include:
   • Add new signage per recommendation of this plan at primary and secondary
   • Add an elevator. (There was one in the original plan, but it was removed when the
     last major renovations were done.)
   • Inspect for Asbestos.
   • Install a Fire protection system.
   • Install a security or intrusion detection system.
   • Repair and renew all wall and floor coverings.
   • Replace the windows for energy savings.
   • Replace HVAC system.
   • Replan and install new and adequate public facilities.
   • Develop ADA compliant theater entrance to tie to new elevator.
     •     Clean brick exterior.
Reference source: Adkins Design, Inc.’s proposal for the renovation of Conley Hall into the new Publishing Innovation Center.

Davis Hall

       The original structure was built in 1970. The building is approximately 78,508
square feet, with a 6 floors and a basement.

        The basement level is used mainly for lab space. It appears relatively clean,
considering the type of work done there. The first floor contains primarily the
auditorium, snack bar, and a large lobby area. This area is one of the nicest on the
campus. Furniture appears to be new, including lobby furniture that is used for the snack
bar. The area seems to be open and attractive. The paint looks recent and is in excellent
condition. The auditorium is not in perfect condition, and its decoration is out of date.
At several places in the room, the walls appear rough. However, the table and chair
arrangement is very interesting and may be useful in the future. The third and higher
floors are used mainly for classrooms, labs, and offices. These floors appear to be in
good shape and have good lighting. Wide hallways are also nice here. Tile damage on
upper floors indicates some form of leak in the past.

                                                                                            Overall, Davis Hall
                                                                                    seems to be in good condition
                                                                                    for a structure of its age. The
                                                                                    area around the building appears
                                                                                    to be in quite reasonable shape.
                                                                                    Entrances can be found at the
                                                                                    two rear (Fayette Pike side)
                                                                                    corners, and at the front of the
                                                                                    building. The rear entrance at
                                                                                    the east side and the front
                                                                                    entrance are both handicapped
                                                                                    accessible. Two maintenance
                                                                                    entrances exist on the East side
                                                                                    of the building.

        Davis Hall has two main staircases and two elevators to allow access to upper
stories. It also has an interior staircase between the first and second stories. Although
functional, it seems to be primarily a decorative element. The main staircases are located
at the east and west ends of the building. They are similar in design, having large steel
beams as exposed structural elements and solid steel tubing as support for the handrails.
The staircases are overall an attractive element of the building and are a unifying theme.
The west staircase is approximately twice as wide as the east one.

Recommendations for upgrade and renovation of the building include:
   • Add new signage per recommendation of this plan at primary and secondary
   •   Replace tile where cracking was noted in the basement floors.
   •   Paint staircases.
   •   Clean the exterior.

Hirise Hall

       The original structure was built in 1966. The building is approximately 80,380
square feet, and has 10 floors and a basement.

       Entrances are located at the east, west, and back (Fayette Pike) sides of the
building. The east side also has a loading area that is used for deliveries to the cafeteria.
The east side also has a handicapped access ramp

        The first floor of
Hirise is primarily used for
the cafeteria. The cafeteria
is not especially well
decorated, and the ceilings
are in bad shape.

        The second floor of
Hirise is used for the
recreation room, mailroom,
women’s restroom, and
resident director’s office
and apartment.

        The third to tenth floors are for resident student dormitory rooms. These stories
are all quite similar. Although the four students per room design is unacceptable to most
students, many like the larger rooms available. Especially when occupied by only two
students, the rooms can be much roomier than the ones in comparable dormitories.

       The building has staircases at the east and west ends of the buildings and centrally
located elevators. Stairways in Hirise are well lit, but are not in perfect shape.

Recommendations for upgrade and renovation of the building until decisions can be made
about this buildings long term use:
   • Add new signage per recommendation of this plan at primary and secondary
   • Expert investigation of exterior steel columns is needed because they appear
       corroded        and      sidewalks     around      them         exhibit   severe
       cracking. An expert should investigate as to whether this is dangerous.
   • Repair of spauling in the concrete of the landing at the second floor
       entrance on the backside, is recommended.
   • Replace of the HVAC system.
Coed Hall

       The original structure was built in 1969. This building is approximately 67,176
square feet and has 6 floors.

        It has entrances at all four sides, and handicapped entrances at the back on the east
and west sides. All 6 floors of the residence hall are used as living space. This air-
conditioned facility houses 300 students living in groups of rooms called modules, which
have cable TV and phone jacks provided. Coed Hall has three sundecks, a mailroom, an
office, a recreation room, a TV area, a kitchen area and a laundry room.

Recommendations        for    upgrade     and
renovations of the building include:
   • Add          new        signage      per
   recommendation of this plan at
       primary and secondary entrances.
   • Extensive repair of exterior of the
       building where it is          severely
       damaged is recommended.           This
       includes areas where structural
       cracking is noted on exterior stairs.
       These were repaired after they were
       condemned in previous years, using
       materials that are dissimilar to other
       supports in the building. Concrete floors throughout the structure are cracked,
       and significant damage is observable.
   • Repair and/or update the fire alarm system. A major issue in Coed is that steam
       from the showers sometimes sets off the fire alarm. Consideration should be
       given to either replacing the fire alarm system or showerheads to reduce the
       likelihood of this occurrence. An additional problem is that the structure is not
       secure since each module has its own exit to the outside.
   • Replacing the roof of Coed Hall.
Lanham Building (Maintenance Building)

       The original structure was built in 1977. The building is approximately 15,510
square feet, with 2 floors.
        This masonry structure has 4
entrances with 3 that are handicapped
accessible. In overall good condition is the
sprinkler system fire protection, fire alarm
system, fire evacuation plan, and the 2nd
level has HVAC.

        Roof will need to be replaced, floors
in good shape in the offices, lighting inside
and outside is good. All of the space is used
adequately. Safety, traffic, and parking are
sufficient for the purpose of this building.
Two and a half bathrooms and showers,
however, none are handicapped accessible, but are well maintained.

Neal D. Baisi Center (Athletic Building)

       The original structure was built in 1966, and renovations are in progress now.
The building is approximately 86,923 square feet, with three floors.
        The Baisi Center has seven
entrances, handicapped access to the
pool only, masonry construction,
overall good condition, athletic
complex and training room with
HVAC, no sprinkler system for fire
protection, fire alarm system, but no
fire evacuation plan.

   Recommendations for upgrade and
renovations of the building include:
   • Add        new      signage     per
   recommendation of this plan at
   primary and secondary entrances.
   • General Maintenance (painting and replacing broken things like lights, etc),
       outside lighting at some of the entrances, weight room and wellness, fitness center
       equipment repair and replacement.
   • Have a Fire Evacuation Plan located on each floor where it can be visible and also
       should have a fire sprinkler system.
   • Place additional LAN connections in the classrooms.
Maclin Hall

       The original structure was built in 1939 and expanded in 1953. Some renovations
have been done since 1992. It is 40,394 square feet and houses the West Virginia
Corrections Academy and a business.

        The building is broken down into three sections, A, B and C. The Corrections
Academy is housed in sections A and B. They occupy the dormitory areas, offices and
other facilities on all floors. Business incubation space is located in Section C on the
second floor.

        There are three entrances on the south side of the building, one handicap
accessible. On the north side, there are three entrances on ground level, one handicap
accessible, and an entrance on the second floor. There are also entrances on the west and
east sides of the building.

        There      are       fire
extinguishers located on all
floors at intervals in the
Corrections Academy section.
The heating system has
recently been worked on
(removal of asbestos and
replacement of piping) but the
removal of the old steam
system with a modern HVAC
system should be done. About
half of the building’s electrical
wiring has been replaced.
There is only one handicap
accessible sleeping room at the
end of C-section. The plumbing seems adequate for its current use. The roof is adequate
on sections A and C, but section B needs replaced. The building is constructed of brick
and concrete and appears to be structurally sound.

Recommendations for upgrade and renovations of the building, if the building is to
continue under its current use:
   • Add new signage per recommendation of this plan at primary and secondary
   • Paint all walls and ceilings.
•   Repair plaster work (steam damage).
•   Repair ceiling tiles (steam damage).
•   Repair stairs (traction surface degrading).
•   Repair or replace windows.
•   Repair floors (tile replaced and holes fixed from piping work).
•   Replace the Fire Safety System (smoke detectors and pull down alarms).
Westmoreland Hall

        The original structure was built in 1978 and now contains approximately 8,596
square feet with two floors. The front entrance is on Fayette Pike. One back door of the
building is locked from the outside and used only as fire exit for the Day Care Center; the
other serves as the entrance to the lab
facility for engineering technology

        Internal wall construction
materials consist of mainly sheet rock.
The outside material is pre-fabricated
sheet metal and steel, with a set of
metal stairs going down the outside of
the building. This building is in good

        A major concern with this
structure is the entrance to the Day
Care Center. There is inadequate
space for parking while leaving
children at the Center, creating a safety concern. The Center attendees must cross a one-
way street and climb steps to reach the outdoor play area, which creates further
vehicular/pedestrian confrontation.

Early Suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building include:
   • A door that automatically locks, limiting access to the day care center. Currently,
       a bell rings when the door opens, which sometimes fails to alert staff of visitors.
   • There is a short fence near the Center entrance that needs extended to protect
       pedestrians from a 5 to7 foot drop off.
   • The building’s exterior is starting to rust and is in need of sanding and painting.


        The original structure was built
in 1953 and has been renovated within
the last 8 years. It is 36,000 square feet,
with     Departments,       offices,   and
classrooms intermingled over 4 floors.

       The basement and first floors is
classroom oriented. The second floor
houses the Department of Accounting
and Finance and The College of
Business, Humanities, and Sciences with
classrooms intermingled. The third floor houses the Department of Management and
Computer Information Systems and the Department of Social Sciences.

        The building has 5 entrances: 2 on the south side leading into the first floor and 3
on the north side leading into the basement. Handicap accessibility is on the south side of
the building with an automated door. Each floor is accessible by an elevator. Fire escape
exits exist on the east and west sides, coming from stairs accessible from each hallway.

       Each floor has multiple fire alarms and a fire extinguisher with a dry standpipe
located in each stairwell for Fire Department use. The HVAC System and Electrical
System are relatively up to date, but there are some issues with humidity control in the
basement level. The restrooms are well maintained and handicap accessible.

       The building is constructed of brick and concrete and is structurally sound.

Early Suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building:
   • Cleaning (floors, walls, ceilings)
   • Painting
   • Carpet replacement in areas
   • Humidity control in lower level

Engineering Complex Tower

       The original structure was built in 1966 and renovated 1994-1995. The building
has approximately 47,593 square feet.

       The building is known to have water penetration problems on the west facing
sidewalls; maintenance personnel state that this only occurs under the heaviest of rains.
The building underwent a renovation in 1994-95 to make room for the school’s new
super-computer, which was never used and remains stored in 468 square feet of unused

                                                              The first and fifth floors hold
                                                     men’s restrooms, and women’s
                                                     facilities are on the third and
                                                     mezzanine floors. Handicap access
                                                     is good from both the north and
                                                     south entrances.        However, the
                                                     thresholds of these doors are high
                                                     enough to make wheelchair access
                                                     difficult, but not impossible. Easy
                                                     elevator access exists on all floors.

                                                            The building’s exterior has
                                                     presented an eyesore for many
                                                     months in that a water pipe repair
near the south entrance has not been covered and restored to its normal state. Also, on
the west end of the grounds, a sidewalk is absent along the street. A developed green
area exists on the east end; however, amenities such as tables and chairs, and possibly a
barbecue grill, are needed.

        On the building’s second floor, which houses student computer labs, there is 1612
square feet of totally unutilized space. This space has raised floors built in to run
computer and electrical cables to machines. Also, many students are packed into a
computer lab class in room 211, which is smaller than surrounding rooms that could be
better equipped to handle larger class sizes. Most classrooms are wired for LAN access;
however, few have the table/chair setup necessary for students to utilize technology.
Small desks are currently the norm.

Early Suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building:
   • It was recommended by the fire marshal’s office that easily accessible gas cut-offs
       be placed near all gas laboratory appliance areas.
   • This high-rise building has no sprinkler system, which is completely
   • AC units, removal and renovation of reactor area, and upgrade of temperature
       controls. Windows also need replaced.

Engineering Laboratory Building

       Originally constructed in 1941, this building had a major addition completed in
1983 to give it a total of 74,994 square feet. The building houses engineering
laboratories for all disciplines and includes the printing department and information
technology department for the institution.

                                                             Access for the physically
                                                     handicapped is located on both the
                                                     north and south sides of the
                                                     building. The freight elevator,
                                                     however, does not allow easy,
                                                     unassisted access to the second
                                                     floor of the building. When seated
                                                     in a wheelchair, one cannot close
                                                     the bulky door, which is done by
                                                     pulling an overhead strap. Also,
                                                     the operating switches are higher
                                                     than acceptable. Automatic doors
                                                     and lower buttons are suggested to
                                                     bring this elevator into ADA

                                                           All critical laboratory and
computer areas have AC; however, classrooms are lacking this service. Also, classrooms
are lacking LAN ports, although the computer center is housed in the building.

Early suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building:
   • These include roof replacement, humidity controls for sensitive computer
       equipment storage areas, upgrading of electrical systems, and AC installation in
   • Many sprinkler heads are obstructed by new ceiling tile arrangements in hallways.
   • Safety equipment is lacking for saws and other laboratory equipment.
   • Small desks are used in classrooms, which results in problems when students
       attempt to utilize technology such as laptop computers.

Vining Library

       The Vining Library was constructed in 1971 and contains over 53,000 square feet.

        The building is in excellent
condition structurally, is handicapped
accessible, and is well utilized. The
recent installation of wireless Internet
technology brings the building in line
with institutional goals.

       The     building     houses     a
videoconference center, which is used
to produce distance-learning programs,
and     tune–in     various    satellite

         Parking is adequate on the west
side of the building. The interior is
well lit; however, the outside is in need
of more lighting.

Early suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building:
   • Exterior entrance walkway lighting has not functioned for some time.
Tech Center

       This structure serves as the student center and was constructed in 1962 with
almost 30,000 square feet. A renovation in 2000 made office space for Student Support
Services in the lower floor, but removed the game room.
                                                                  The building houses
                                                           the Bear’s Den cafeteria,
                                                           which is mainly used for
                                                           lunch meals. The building is
                                                           used almost weekly for
                                                           student activities, which are
                                                           held    in    the    spacious
                                                           ballroom, as well as the
                                                           Bear’s Den.

                                                                 The     building   is
                                                         structurally sound and should
                                                         be retained. However, its
                                                         location, as a prominent
                                                         structure adjoining Old Main,
requires that the cosmetically outdated façade look of the building be remodeled.
Drawings were obtained several years ago for a complete remodel; however, the project
ended because funding was unavailable.

Old Main
       Old Main was originally constructed in 1896 and currently contains over 33, 974
square feet.
       Old Main is the oldest building on campus. With an east wing completed in 1899,
the west wing added in 1904, and an addition made to the east wing in 1958, Old Main
                                                     today      houses    administrative
                                                     offices, including those of the
                                                     president, vice president of
                                                     academic services, international
                                                     student office, administrative vice
                                                     president, dean of student affairs,
                                                     registrar,    business    manager,
                                                     counseling and career services,
                                                     office of placement activities,
                                                     secretarial services, financial aid,
                                                     and public information, as well as
                                                     several academic departments. A
                                                     red brick structure, Old Main is
                                                     situated on a hillside overlooking
                                                     the campus. For this structure to
                                                     remain as the prominent feature
on campus, major maintenance and renovations must take place.
Early suggestions for upgrade and renovations of the building include:
   • electrical systems
   • fire safety systems
   •   heating, ventilating, and air conditioning

Ratliff Hall

       Lavada Ratliff Hall was
constructed in 1963 and contains
over 43, 394 gross square feet.
        Ratliff Hall is the only
all-women's residence hall and
houses 250 women. This
centrally located hall is adjacent
to both the Vining Library and
the gymnasium. Ratliff Hall
consists    of    two     sections
connected by an enclosed
walkway, called the "breezeway.”
        The vast majority of rooms are traditional double occupancy rooms with cable TV
and phone jacks provided. Each floor has a centrally located community bathroom. The
hall has a main lounge with big screen TV, student-accessible meeting room, kitchen,
wellness/fitness room, vending area, main desk, change machine, individual mailboxes,
recreation room, and two laundry rooms. The hall also has several sundecks and
individual floor lounges.
       There are two special living floors, the Wellness floor and the Intensive Quiet
floor. Each room, on these floors, is carpeted and has a computer Internet connection.
The Campus Safety Office and the Office of Residence Life are located in Ratliff Hall,
providing a real convenience to residents. On one floor of Ratliff Hall, office space is
available for 14 student clubs and organizations

Orndorff Hall

       Orndorff Hall was constructed in 1988 and contains over 75, 546 square feet.

        Orndorff Hall is a 3-story facility that is used for a variety of classes such as
Biology, Chemistry, English, Nursing, Physics, Geology, and Psychology. The building
is divided up in to classrooms, laboratories, and offices.

        The building seems to be structurally sound, but it has some serious problems.
The HVAC is totally inadequate for the size of the building, and it causes extremely high
humidity. The humidity causes the ceiling tile to draw dampness, allowing mold to grow
on the tile. Another complaint from the building is the noise. There are ventilation hoods
that run constantly. These hoods must be there in order to use certain chemicals in the
classrooms. This causes noise pollution problems in the classrooms containing the hoods.
There are also notable signs of water leaking from the domes in the top of all three
stairwells. Some attempt has been made to fix the problem. and the damage has been
covered up by paint.

       The building was built in
1988, so it was designed with the
Americans with Disabilities Act
in mind. Handicapped parking is
provided at the front of the
building on Route 61. There are
two points of handicapped
accessibility, one at the front
entrances and one at the rear
entrance on Fayette Pike. There
are two elevators in the building
for handicapped use. All of the
restrooms are accessible; these
include toilet stalls, sinks, and
          Appendix B

Maintenance and Renovation Cost
Individual costs for maintenance and renovation per building

 Baisi Center
 Replace Fire Alarm Systems                                       $80,000.00
 Replace exterior doors, re-key building                          $90,000.00
 Replace roof                                                   $280,000.00
 Replace hot water heater                                       $110,000.00
 Asbestos Removal                                               $450,000.00
 HVAC                                                           $140,000.00
 Total                                                         $1,150,000.00

 HVAC                                                          $ 100,000.00
 Total                                                          $100,000.00

 Coed Dormse
 Fire Alarm upgrade                                             $100,000.00
 Re-key Building                                                  $11,000.00
 Stairwell repairs                                              $450,000.00
 Asbestos Removal                                               $600,000.00
 HVAC                                                          $1,100,000.00
 Concrete repairs                                               $100,000.00
 Stone panel replacement                                        $120,000.00
 Total                                                         $2,481,000.00

 Conley Halle
 Upgrade fire alarm systems                                      $40,000.00
 Replace exterior doors                                          $60,000.00
 Paint 3rd floor classrooms and offices                           $6,000.00
 Replace carpet in building                                      $35,000.00
 Total                                                          $141,000.00

 Davis Hall
 Replacement/repair of rusty pluming                            $120,000.00
 Washing of windows                                               $35,000.00
 Roof Repairs                                                   $100,000.00
 Waterproofing and drainage problem correction                  $350,000.00
 Asbestos removal                                               $280,000.00
 HVAC                                                           $790,000.00
 Total                                                         $1,675,000.00

 Engineering Building
 Fire marshal and insurance repairs                             $150,000.00
 Rekey Building                                                  $55,000.00
 Mechanical engineering lab automation                          $100,000.00
 HVAC                                                           $500,000.00
Replace domestic hot water heater                       $60,000.00
Removal of reactor and renovation of area             $280,000.00
Renovate old super computer center                      $60,000.00
Total                                                $1,205,000.00

Engineering Laboratories
Replace roof                                          $250,000.00
ADA access improvements                               $230,000.00
HVAC                                                  $450,000.00
Upgrade electrical system in old section              $600,000.00
Replace ceiling tiles                                   $11,000.00
Install humidity control for computer center            $60,000.00
Total                                                $1,601,000.00

Football Field
Upgrade concession stand to Health Dept. standards     $22,000.00
Replace bleachers and bleacher areas                  $170,000.00
Total                                                 $192,000.00

HVAC                                                  $770,000.00
Re-key building                                          $9,000.00
Replace fire alarm system                             $140,000.00
Replace exterior doors                                  $35,000.00
Asbestos removal                                      $110,000.00
Upgrade trayveyor                                     $140,000.00
Total                                                $1,204,000.00

Maclin Halld
HVAC                                                 $1,800,000.00
Replace exterior doors and rekey building               $40,000.00
Replace roof                                          $280,000.00
ADA access                                            $230,000.00
Upgrade electrical system                             $170,000.00
Repair Showers                                          $60,000.00
Refinish terazzo floors in public bath                  $40,000.00
Total                                                $2,620,000.00

Old Main
HVAC                                                 $1,575,000.00
Rekey Building                                          $40,000.00
Fire Marshall and Insurance upgrades                 $1,100,000.00
Masonry Repairs                                         $60,000.00
Asbestos Removal                                     $1,700,000.00
Upgrade electrical system                             $280,000.00
Total                                                $4,755,000.00

Orndorff Hall
HVAC                                                  $100,000.00
Replace soiled and damaged ceiling tiles                                             $11,000.00
Repair skylights                                                                    $280,000.00
Paint interior of building                                                           $40,000.00
Replace carpet                                                                       $40,000.00
Total                                                                               $471,000.00

Lanham Building (Physical Plant)
Roof Replacement                                                                    $300,000.00
Total                                                                               $300,000.00

Presidents Residents
Renovations                                                                          $60,000.00
Total                                                                                $60,000.00

Ratliff Halle
HVAC                                                                              $850,000.00
Replace exterior doors and rekey buildings                                          $90,000.00
Upgrade fire alarm system                                                           $60,000.00
Repair fire marshal and insurance report violation                                $150,000.00
Upgrade electrical system                                                         $220,000.00
Asbestos removal                                                                  $110,000.00
Total                                                                            $1,480,000.00

Tech Centere
HVAC                                                                              $470,000.00
Replace exterior doors and rekey building                                           $60,000.00
Replace fire alarm                                                                  $60,000.00
ADA access                                                                        $350,000.00
Elevator Upgrade                                                                  $200,000.00
Total                                                                            $1,140,000.00

Vining Library
HVAC                                                                                $300,000.00
Replace Roof                                                                        $170,000.00
Asbestos removal                                                                    $280,000.00
Media center lighting corrections                                                    $30,000.00
Replace Carpet                                                                      $170,000.00
Total                                                                               $950,000.00

Westmoreland Hall
HVAC                                                                                 $20,000.00
Total                                                                                $20,000.00

d - At the time of publishing plans are in development for the building
e - Plans currently in development shall supercede the maintenance plans for residential facilities
                   Appendix C

Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

       HVAC Recommendations for Buildings on Campus

        The purpose and objectives for updating the campus HVAC systems are to
improve the learning, living, and recreational areas for all students, staff, faculty and
visitors. Most homes have these amenities, therefore, employees and students expect
them at work. Since most buildings on campus have, old or no air conditioning systems,
the recommendation to install new HAVC appears for nearly every building.

Building Summaries

Orndorff Hall

        The current 63,000 CFM HVAC system in Orndorff Hall does not contain enough
coils to properly dehumidify the air. This humidity leads to problems such as water
condensing and dripping from the ducts and causing water damage to the ceiling.
Another consequence of the humidity is a moist environment, which breeds bacteria and
causes mildew, all of which creates an uncomfortable environment unsuitable for
learning. There are two plans of action to cure the humidity problem. The first is to
replace the entire HVAC system with one containing more coils so the humidity is
removed from the air before reaching the diffusers. This process would be labor and cost
intensive and is not recommended. The best solution to this problem would be to add a
dehumidifier to the system, between the coils and output to the ducts. This was the
solution recommended by Bob Burdette, head of maintenance, because of its ability to
remove moisture from the air, its adaptability to the present system, and relatively low
cost ($200,000 to install and get operating).

        Another problem in Orndorff Hall that needs to be addressed is the ventilation
problems in the labs. A negative air balance must be kept in the building to prevent
potentially hazardous fumes from being circulated throughout the building. Currently,
there is no exhaust in the ceilings of the labs, which would help evacuate the fumes.
Since most chemical fumes will rise to the ceiling this is the optimal location for exhaust
ducts. Fixing the ventilation problems in Orndorff Hall would cost approximately
$100,000. Doors should be closed so the negative air balance can be kept constant, and
all experiments should be done under the existing exhaust hoods.

       Currently, there are 44 computers controlling the HVAC system in Orndorff Hall.
The Director of Physical Plant believes that these controls can handle the updates without
Vining Library

       The existing air conditioning system in the Vining Library consists of 2 vapor-
vapor-compression units with 200 tons of cooling capacity, two 50-ton compressors in
each unit. The problem with these units is the way the piping is plumbed from coil to
coil. Each unit contains four coils: when the first coil is full of coolant, the second coil
begins to be filled, then the third, then the fourth. In this method of plumbing if
something happens to one of the coils, the whole conditioning unit is lost. The
recommended solution to this problem is to repipe the system so that when one coil is lost
the entire condensing unit is not unusable. This repiping would cost approximately

Old Main

        Central HAVC is recommended for the entire building. Because Old Main is on
the National Historic Register, one must choose the type of system installed cautiously;
there are guidelines to ensure the historical architecture of the building is retained. The
expected cost of putting a central air system in Old Main is $1,575,000.

Center For Applied Technology And Business Development

        The Center for Applied Technology and Business Development currently has
window unit air conditioners that are expensive to operate and inefficient. It is
recommended that a central heating and air conditioning system be installed. A system
of this nature would cost approximately $150,000; this does not include the computerized
control system, which would cost another $150,000.

       In addition to the central HVAC system the windows in the Center should be
replaced. The present windows are single pane and highly inefficient. Double pane
windows with an insulating gas between the panes are recommended at a cost of


         COBE Hall recently had its temperature control units replaced with computer
controls. This contributed to updating the HVAC system; however, both the fan coil
units and unit ventilators still need replacement. The current units are getting old, and
because of dirt and rust build-up in the coils, the capacity and efficiency of the units are
suffering. Another problem with the currently installed units is that the capacity of the
coils is not great enough to relieve humidity in the basement rooms. While the humidity
problem is not as severe as it is in Orndorff Hall, COBE Hall’s humidity problem is
aggravated by water seepage in the southwest basement wall.
        The suggested solution to these problems is to replace both the fan coil units and
unit ventilators with new units containing a greater number of turns in the each coil,
which will result in higher capacity and more dehumidification. Also the new units will
be built with the latest technology, which will provide greater efficiency. The estimated
cost of replacing these units is $100,000.

Coed Hall

        The existing heat pumps in Coed Hall were installed in 1980 along with their
controls, which consist of 2 computers. All the electronics are hard wired, which
presents an electrocution hazard that must be addressed. There are much better control
systems on the market today that do more than the currently installed system and cost less
money to install and operate. Also the available systems are not hard wired, which
allows for safer operation and maintenance. The cost for adding a system like this would
be approximately $150,000. Along with replacing the controls, $200,000 should be used
to replace the heat pumps in the building. Inefficiency is the main reason for their need
to be replaced.

       To gain the maximum energy savings, the windows in Coed should also be
replaced. The existing windows are “solar bronze” single pane windows, the same as in
Davis Hall. The solar bronze coating helps with the efficiency of the air conditioning
system by reflecting some of the sun, but there are more efficient windows on the market,
such as a window containing an insulated gas sandwiched between two panes. The cost to
replace these windows would be $750,000.

Maclin Hall

       Maclin Hall was built in 1939 and renovated 1953. This building had a gross area
of 49,394 square feet. There are only two major HVAC updates needed. The new
HVAC system will be more efficient than the old one because of new technologies in
HVAC. The new HVAC system will cost 1.5 million dollars. An update of the
temperature control system will help in saving energy because it can be turned on or off
during the hours of operation. The new control system will allow selective heating and
cooling of different areas, thus reducing energy waste. The new temperature control
system will cost $300,000.

Tech Center

       The Tech Center was built in 1962 and has an overall area of 29,556 square feet.
The air conditioning unit for the bookstore will cost approximately $70,000 to replace.
The renovation of the HVAC systems will cost about $200,000. Currently there is a 75-
ton chiller and an old pneumatic control system in place. The windows also need to be
replaced by energy-efficient windows at a cost of approximately be $200,000.

Ratliff Hall

       Ratliff Hall was constructed in 1963 and has an area of 43,984 square feet. The
building does not have energy efficient windows, and it will cost about $200,000 to
replace them. There is no temperature control in any of the rooms. If the pumps are
turned off, the hot water stays in the pipes continuously heating the building. To replace
the HVAC and heating systems will cost approximately $500,000.


        Hirise was constructed in 1966 and has an area of 80,380 square feet. The heating
system and air conditioning system needs to be updated, because it is old and inefficient.
The temperature controls also need to be replaced with a more current system. The
cafeteria is the only part of Hirise that has air conditioning. The windows will need to be
replaced because they are not energy-efficient. The total cost of the updates is
approximately $770,000.

President’s Residence

       The President’s residence was built in 1930 and has a 3,148 square foot area.
Currently there are two 5-ton air conditioners, upstairs and the other downstairs. The
replacement of the HVAC system will cost about $20,000. The residence has storm and
leaded windows.

Engineering Building

        The air-handling units of the top two floors must be installed to make the
environment better for the students and the staff. The cost of installing the air-handling
units is $300,000; this also includes the purchasing of the units. At present, heat in the
building rises to the top floors, creating a very undesirable environment. Most of the
building has temperature control units in each of the rooms, which make it possible to
control the temperature from a remote location. These temperature control units will
assure that the temperature doesn’t fluctuate from the desired setting. The purchase and
installation of the temperature control units will cost $150,000. The domestic hot water
heater also needs to be replaced, being very old and inefficient. The replacement of the
hot water heater will cost approximately $50,000. Replacement of these components will
make building energy-efficient, and the annual cost of operation will decrease.
Engineering Laboratory

        The HVAC needs to be updated to ensure that all of the building has adequate
heating, venting, and air conditioning in all rooms to create a controlled environment.
The purchase and installation of the new components will cost $200,000. The building
also needs to replace the existing temperature control units at a cost of $100,000 for
purchase and installation. The computer center needs to install a humidity control device
to protect electronic components. Purchase and installation of this humidity control
device cost about $50,000. Installation of air conditioning in the rooms 107, 202, and 207
needs to be completed in order to create a controlled environment. The purchase and
installation of these components in the rooms will cost about $100,000. With the
completion of all of these improvements, these buildings would become a very positive
working and learning environment.

Davis Hall

        Davis has no HVAC problems, and the maintenance on its components is
performed regularly to prevent breakage. However, this building’s overall annual heating
and cooling bill could be reduced by installing an enthalnex wheel. The enthalnex wheel
will recycle exhaust to make the system performance more efficient overall. The
purchase and installation of this component will cost $40,000. The windows in this
building are very old and inefficient so that their replacement is very important to overall
efficiency. The replacement of all the windows in this building will cost $750,000.

Westmoreland Hall

       The HVAC system in this building works well and doesn’t need a lot of work or
updates. The air conditioning wall units need to be replaced. The total cost for
purchasing the units and installing them is $20,000.

Neal D. Baisi Center

        The air conditioning units that are presently in this building are old and inefficient
and need to be replaced. The replacement of these units would greatly improve the
overall efficiency and would reduce the annual cooling costs. The replacement of these
units would cost $40,000 for purchase and installation. The hot water system also needs
some updates to help the efficiency. The hot water system replacement will cost
$100,000. These components and updates will help to improve the environment inside
the building and will also decrease the utility costs.

                         Window Replacement Summary
      Most of Tech’s buildings use a single-pane window, which was a good window
when the buildings were constructed, but now there are many more efficient choices.
One attractive option is low-emissivity window coating, because it is relatively
inexpensive and has a better thermal resistance (R-value) than the windows that are
currently in use. Low-emissivity coatings were developed in the early 1970s primarily by
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and introduced into the market around
1980. Most low-e coatings have relatively high Tvis (Tvis = visible transmittance of the
glazing layer) and reflect 40 to 70 percent of infrared. In short, low-e lets in light but
blocks the heat. Various low-e coatings allow different amounts of UV radiation, ranging
from a 0.05- to 37-percent reduction.

        A low-e coating is a microscopically thin, virtually invisible, metal or metallic
oxide coating deposited on a glazed surface. The coating may be applied to one or more
of the glazing surfaces facing an air space in a multiple-pane window, or to a thin plastic
film inserted between panes. The coating limits radiative heat exchange between panes
by reflecting heat back into the home during cold weather and back to the outdoors
during warm weather. This effect increases the insulating value of the window. A low-e
coating can be applied on glass or plastic films using one of two methods. Low-e coated
glazing is used on one of the panes in a multipane unit. The low-e coating can either be
located on the inside of the exterior pane or on the exterior of the interior pane,
depending on desired performance.

        If the windows are replaced in a timely fashion, the money saved could be
invested in the HVAC system that seriously needs to be completed. The windows that are
currently in use don’t have adequate thermal resistance to keep the heat in the building,
and the glazing and the sealing is old and deteriorated. Using the Low-E, the buildings
would become more efficient and would create a better environment for the students and
the staff.

        To hold down costs, window replacement will be performed in phases. In
addition, the need of warehousing the new windows before replacement will be
minimized.     A detailed cost analysis has been performed to provide assistance in
determining the order in which the buildings will be updated with the new windows. The
cost analysis will also provide a payback period for each update chosen. Monies saved
from the window update can then be re-appropriated into additional updates for each
building. This means that, money saved by replacing the windows could be recaptured
for the HVAC system or similar update. Determining where and how to re-appropriate
saved monies will be the ultimate goal in providing updates within the project timeline
and budget.

W.V.U.I.T. Campus
Price Estimates Given by: Bob Burdette and the R and A Projects

  1. Engineering Building
        a. Complete replace of A/C units on top two floors    $300,000
        b. Replace the domestic hot water heater              $50,000
        c. Update temperature control system                  $150,000
                                                      Total   $500,000
  2. Engineering Laboratory
       a. Replace existing temperature control units
       b. Update HVAC system for specialized equipment        $200,000
       c. Install humidity control for the computer center    $50,000
       d. Install A/C units in rooms 107, 202, 207            $100,000
                                                      Total   $450,000
  3. Davis Hall
       a. Replace enthalnex wheel in HVAC system              $40,000
       b. Window replacement                                  $750,000
                                                      Total   $790,000
  4. Westmoreland Hall
        a. Replace A/C wall units                             $20,000
                                                      Total   $20,000
  5. Neal D. Baisi Athletic Building
       a. Replace existing A/C units                          $40,000
       b. Replace existing hot water heater system            $100,000
                                                      Total   $140,000
  6. Orndorff Hall
       a. Correct ventilation problem                         $100,000
                                                      Total   $100,000
  7. Vining Library
       a. Replace A/C units                                   $300,000
                                                      Total   $300,000
  8. Old Main
        a. Replace A/C units in Dean of Students, room 310,   $75,000
            Registrar’s office
       b. HVAC Updates                                        $1,500,000
                                                      Total   $1,575,000
  9. Center for Applied Technology and Business Development
       a. Install Central Heat and Air Conditioning           $150,000
       b. Replace windows                                     $75,000
                                                      Total   $225,000
10. COBE Hall
      a. Install Fan Coils and Unit Ventilators           $100,000
                                                  Total   $100,000
11. Coed Hall
       a. Heat Pump replacement and temperature           $350,000
          Control update
       b. Window replacement                              $750,000
                                                  Total   $1,100,000
12. Ratliff Hall
       a. Replace windows                                 $200,000
       b. Install temperature control system              $150,000
       c. Replace HVAC system                             $500,000
                                                  Total   $850,000
13. Hirise
        a. Update heating system & temperature controls   $500,000
        b. Replace hot water heater                       $20,000
        c. Replace windows                                $250,000
                                                  Total   $770,000
14. Maclin Hall
        a. Install HVAC system                            $1,500,000
        b. Install temperature control system             $300,000
                                                  Total   $1,800,000
15. Tech Center
        a. Replace A/C units for bookstore                $70,000
        b. HVAC renovation                                $200,000
        c. Replace windows                                $200,000
                                                  Total   $470,000
16. President’s Residence
        a. HVAC replacement                               $20,000
                                                  Total   $20,000
               Appendix D

Existing Conditions of Streets and Parking
                        Existing Roadway Pavement Conditions

1st Avenue: (between Jefferson and Monroe) Pavement cracking observed.

1st Avenue: (between Madison and Monroe) Pavement is good, drainage is in need of
repair, trees need to be removed to a address vehicle and pedestrian concerns.

Behind Library, road to football field: Severe decay including multiple potholes,
guardrail needs to be replaced, drain needs to be angled; drainage inlet needs to be
dropped to accept water.

Behind Old Main: Excellent pavement conditions, new except at corner.

Fayette Pike: Needs to be paved, needs signs relocated to correct (right) side of the road
to conform to driver expectation.

Ferry Street: Drainage issues noted, pavement is full of potholes and heavily patched.

Lee Street: Good Pavement, needs some patching.

Lewis Street: Pavement is in poor condition.

Monroe Street: Some cracking in pavement but in acceptable condition.

S. Adams Street: Pavement is severely damaged, and needs to be replaced immediately if
road is to remain in service. Drainage is suitable.

S. Madison Street: Overall pavement is in good shape; drainage inlet needs to be
repaired or replaced on corner.

S. Jackson Street: Significant pavement cracking, drainage issues previously observed,
no pedestrian space other than grass.

S. Jefferson Street: Pavement cracking observed

Unnamed Street Owned by WVU Tech: Deep potholes, scrape marks indicate dragging
of vehicle, uncertain of need for no left turn sign.
                Existing Conditions of Streets and d Parking Facilities

Lot 1 – Faculty and Staff                                                 28 Spaces
The area is located directly behind Old Main and is adjacent
to the Tennis Courts.

Lot 2 – Faculty and Staff                                                 59 Spaces
The area is located between COBE and the CATBD.

Lot 3 – Faculty and Staff                                                 18 Spaces
The area is located on S. Lewis Street between the Old Main
Building and the Vining Library.

Lot 4 – Faculty and Staff                                                 22 Spaces
The area is located off Route 61 on the east side of the
Neal D. Baisi Center.

Lot 5 – Faculty and Staff                                                 28 Spaces
The area is located off First Avenue directly behind the
Leonard C. Nelson College of Engineering. This lot can be
entered from South Jackson Street.

Lot 6 – Faculty and Staff                                                 39 Spaces
The area is located off First Avenue behind the Engineering Labs.

Lot 7 – Faculty and Staff                                                 31 Spaces
The area is located off First Avenue and is directly in front of
the Maintenance Building.

Lot 8 – Faculty and Staff                                                 9 Spaces
The area is located on Monroe Street, across from Orndorff Hall

Lot 21 – Resident                                                         37 Spaces
The area is located off South Ferry Street by going up the hill and
turning into the lower level on the left side.

Lot 22 – Resident                                                         41 Spaces
The area is located off Route 61 just east of Coed Hall on the right

Lot 23 – Resident                                                         12 Spaces
The area is located off Fayette Pike in between the building of
Ratliff Hall.

Lot 24 – Commuter                                                         15 Spaces
The lot is on South Lewis Street between the Student Center
and the Vining Library.
Lot 31 – Parking Permit Only                                           119 Spaces
The area is located off South Ferry Street, up the hill beside the
Vining Library to the upper level.

Lot 32 – Commuter                                                      41 Spaces
The area located beside the CATBD and behind the building.

Lot 35 – Commuter Only                                                 36 Spaces
The area is located behind Engineering Laboratories on First Avenue.

Lot 41 – Parking Permits Only                                          125 Spaces
The area is located around Martin Field.

Lot 42 – Parking Permits Only                                          21 Spaces
This area is located halfway up the hill to Martin Field.

Lot 43 – Parking Permits Only                                          26 Spaces
The area is located on Fayette Pike behind the Maintenance Building.

Total Faculty and Staff Parking                                        234 Spaces
Total Resident Parking                                                 90 Spaces
Total Commuter Parking                                                  92 Spaces
Total Parking Permit Only Parking                                      291 Spaces

Total Campus Parking                                                   707 Spaces
                                  Non-Campus Parking

        There are many locations in the city that commuters and other Tech students use
for parking. The most frequently used areas are the spaces provided along Route 61 and
spaces along residential streets. Other areas include city parking meters and city parking
permit spaces that produce revenue for the city.

Route 61

Jackson Street to Monroe Street
Eastbound – 32 spaces
Westbound – 35 spaces

Monroe Street to Adams Street
Eastbound – 21 spaces
Westbound – 40 spaces

Adams Street to Ferry Street
Eastbound – 28 spaces
Westbound – (City Permit Parking)

Ferry Street to Bridge
Eastbound – 23 spaces
Westbound – 37 spaces

Total Route 61 spaces ≈ 216

City Metered Parking

Third Avenue
Route 61 (Adams Street to Ferry Street)

City Permit Parking

Third Avenue (Monroe Street west)
Route 61 (in front of Ratliff Hall)
Existing Conditions of Parking lots at WVU Tech

Lot 1 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located directly behind Old Main and is adjacent
to the Tennis Courts.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Faded
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 2 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located between COBE and the CATBD.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 3 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located on S.Lewis Street between the Old Main
Building and the Vining Library.

       Pavement Conditions: Fair
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 4 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located off Route 61 on the east side of the
Neal D. Baisi Center.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Faded
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced
Lot 5 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located off First Avenue directly behind the
Leonard C. Nelson College of Engineering. This lot can be
entered from South Jackson Street.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 6 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located off First Avenue behind the Engineering Labs.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 7 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located off First Avenue and is directly in front of
the Maintenance Building.

       Pavement Conditions: Good
       Pavement Markings: Faded
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced.

Lot 8 – Faculty and Staff
The area is located on Monroe Street, across from Orndorff Hall

       Pavement Conditions: Good
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 21 – Resident
The area is located off South Ferry Street by going up the hill and
turning into the lower level on the left side.

       Pavement Conditions: Bad
       Pavement Markings: Needs Replaced
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced.
Lot 22 – Resident
The area is located off Route 61 just east of Co-ed Hall on the right

       Pavement Conditions: Bad
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 23 – Resident
The area is located off Fayette Pike in between the building of
Ratliff Hall.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Needs Replaced
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 24 – Commuter
The lot is on South Lewis Street between the Student Center
and the Vining Library.

       Pavement Conditions: Good
       Pavement Markings: Fair
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 31 – Parking Permit Only
The area is located off South Ferry Street, up the hill beside the
Vining Library to the upper level.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings : Fair
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced

Lot 32 – Commuter
The area located beside the CATBD and behind the building.

       Pavement Conditions: Good
       Pavement Markings: Fair
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced
Lot 35 – Commuter Only
The area is located behind Engineering Laboratories on First Avenue.

       Pavement Conditions: Fair
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced
       Special: Needs Tree removed at west end of lot

Lot 41 – Parking Permits Only
The area is located around Martin Field.

       Pavement Conditions: Good
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced
       Special: Tree removal needed. Unsightly trash dumped at West end; probably
       bad for animals, may affect prospective student recruitment.

Lot 42 – Parking Permits Only
This area is located halfway up the hill to Martin Field.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Good
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced.

Lot 43 – Parking Permits Only
The area is located on Fayette Pike behind the Maintenance Building.

       Pavement Conditions: Poor
       Pavement Markings: Faded
       Signs: Needs to be Replaced.
Handicapped Accessibility

Parking Spaces located in lots

                                                 Handicapped           Handicapped
        Lot number            Parking Spaces        Parking              Spaces
                                                     Spaces             Required
Lot 1 – Faculty and Staff            28                1                    2
Lot 2 – Faculty and Staff            59                1                    3
Lot 3 – Faculty and Staff            18                0                    1
Lot 4 – Faculty and Staff            22                0                    1
Lot 5 – Faculty and Staff            28                1                    2
Lot 6 – Faculty and Staff            39                1                    2
Lot 7 – Faculty and Staff            31                0                    2
Lot 8 – Faculty and Staff             9                0                    1
Lot 21 – Resident                   37         (0) Not accessible           2
Lot 22 – Resident                   41                                      2
Lot 23 – Resident                   12                 1                    1
Lot 24 – Commuter                    15                0                    1
Lot 31 – Parking Permit             119        (0) Not accessible           5
Lot 32 – Commuter                    41                0                    2
Lot 35 – Commuter Only               36                1                    2
Lot 41 – Parking Permit             125                2                    5
Lot 42 – Parking Permit              21        (0) Not accessible           1
Lot 43 – Parking Permit             26                 0                    2

Requirements for number of Handicap Parking spaces per lot under ADA
1 to 25 – 1 space to be provided
26 to 50 – 2 spaces to be provided
51 to 75 – 3 spaces to be provided
76 to 100 – 4 spaces to be provided
101 to 150 – 5 spaces to be provided

Handicap parking at buildings, along Route 61, and Fayette Pike

CATBD – 1 located in the faculty parking lot
COBE – 1 between COBE and Old Main
Co-ed dorms – 0
Conley Hall – 1 in front of Orndorff hall
Davis Hall – 1 on Route 61 and 1 located at the rear of the building on 1st Ave.
Engineering Laboratories – 1 located in front of LCN on Rt. 61
Hirise dorms – 0
LCN College of Engineering – 1 on Rt. 61
Maclin Hall – 1 located in the rear of the building and 2 on Fayette Pike
Orndorff Hall – 2 on Rt. 61
Old Main – 1 between building and COBE, and 1 in the faculty parking lot
Ratliff Hall – 1 Located in the parking lot 23 and 1 on Route 61
Westmoreland Hall – 0
          Existing Conditions for the Project of
The Cul-de-sac and two-lane improvement to the Dormitory

       View of roadway behind the Hirise Dormitory

         View of Roadway behind Coed Dormitory
           Picture of future site of cul-de-sac

View of drainage problems due to height of drainage inlet
Existing Conditions of the Proposed Project for
    The Martin Field exit and CATBD exit

        End of Martin Field parking lot
View of existing condition of Martin Field exit

View of existing condition of Martin Field exit
                     View of existing condition of CATBD exit

Existing Conditions of the Project of Closure of S. Adams Street, S. Madison Street
           and One-way alley adjacent to the Engineering Laboratories
       South Adams Street

Alley adjacent to Engineering Laboratories
          Appendix E

Recommended Plants To Be Used On
Appendix F

Major problems that need to be addressed:
No lighting available
Inadequate lighting
Glare where existing lighting shines directly into the eyes
Lack of continuity where lighting is not available to move from one area of TECH to another

Suggested standards for lighting:
Excellent - five foot candles
Good - four foot candles
Adequate - three foot candles
Minimal - two foot candles
Insufficient - any thing less than two foot candles


CATBD – Center for Applied Technology and Business Development
Contractor - anyone contracted to install or maintain a lighting system
D/D - Dusk to dawn photocell controlled lighting
In-house - Work performed by TECH employees
LIGHT ABBREVIATIONS (kinds of lights):

Foot Candle - a measurement of light at a working surface such as ground level. Five foot
candles is a nationally recognized standard for most non-competitive activity lighting

Lumens - a measurement of light at its source, such as the output of light bulb. One lumen of
light per square foot is about one foot candle if measured one foot from the source; however,
as the distance increases, the number of lumens needed to produce one foot candle is
squared.   At most manufacturers’ recommended mounting heights, it takes about one
hundred lumens to produce one foot candle at ground level.

Light trespass - Complaints by neighbors that a light causes part of their property (i.e.
sleeping quarters) to be too brightly illuminated.

Light types - Refers to angle of bulb to earth. Types range in classification from I through
V. Type I is horizontal to earth, while type V is perpendicular to earth. Most commonly
used is Type V for D/D area lighting and Type II for street or narrow parking lot lighting.

Lighting system - In this case, designed for a specific area i.e. a parking lot, steps, etc.

Rented lighting systems - those rented from an outside vendor and usually refer to those
provided by the local electric utility company, currently American Electric Power Company
(AEP). It should be noted that AEP does not want to install any light system that cannot be
installed and maintained by truck.

Tech –West Virginia University Institute of Technology and its entire campus including
roads, walkways, inside and out side of all buildings.

FIXTURES - Average of quotes from three vendors. Buying in quantity could lessen cost.

YEARLY ENERGY COST - watts X 1.2 for ballast x 10 hours/day x 365 days/year x 5-
cents/kilowatt hour/1000

MAINTENANCE COST - While it is nearly impossible to predict future cost, historically
about five percent of all light fixtures will fail within a ten year period, and another five
percent will be destroyed by nature, e.g., tree fall, lightning, etc. or by accidental or
intentional damage. Almost all will require a bulb change after seven years, which averages
about 25 percent of the cost of a new fixture. All existing fixtures were assumed to be at least
ten years old and requiring total replacement in the next ten years.

RENTAL FEES - Taken from AEP tariffs on file with the West Virginia Public Service

TREE TRIMMING - Major tree trimming and removal should only be completed by
qualified contractors and must also be referred to the beautification committee before
proceeding. A small amount of in-house trimming could be accomplished if climbing is not
involved. If TECH assumed the responsibility of disposal of the wood, estimated cost for
this project is $500.
                                  LOVERS LANE

AREA - Lovers Lane, the walkway running parallel to Fayette Pike from Old Main and
ending across from Westmoreland Hall

PROBLEM - Insufficient lighting. At present, there are four 175-watt MV D/D lights along
this walkway. One is broken, one does not burn, and the other two are very dim.

SOLUTION - Replace these In-House with four 150-watt HPS Type V D/D lights

COST - $340

YEARLY ENERGY COST - savings of $18/year

MAINTENANCE COST - savings of $48/year

REMARKS - If the MV lights were new, they only produce a total of 28,000 lumens while
new HPS lights would produce a total of 66,000 lumens. Also, the age of the MV lights were
considered in the maintenance savings.

SPECIAL REMARKS - Trees need trimmed and pruned along Lovers Lane. Some dead
limbs may present a safety hazard. Referred to beautification committee.

NET ON BUDGET – An initial cost of $340 offset by a saving of $64/year
                     PARKING LOT WEST of CATBD

PROBLEM - Inadequate lighting and glare. This lot is mainly illuminated from a single
floodlight mounted on the building. This not only fails to provide sufficient light but also
hurts the eyes under certain conditions.

SOLUTION - Remove the light and rent a system from AEP consisting of a 45 ft. pole, 150
ft. of conductor and a 400-watt HPS cobra head d/d light.

RENTAL FEE - $153.75 per year



YEARLY ENERGY COST - Savings of $88/year.

MAINTENANCE COST - Savings of $ 40 per year based up age of existing fixture.

REMARKS - This would increase the light output from 28,000 lumens to 50,000 lumens,
disperse light evenly across the lot, and eliminate glare.

NET ON BUDGET - An increase of $25.75/year
                    BALL FIELD

PROBLEM - There is no light on the parking lot and only a small, inadequate 250-watt MV
d/d light about midway up the steps. The pole holding this light is very rotten and in danger
of falling at any time. The fixture produces very little light and cannot be safely replaced due
to rotten pole

SOLUTION - Carefully remove pole and rent a system from AEP consisting of a pole, wire
and 400 watt HPS cobra head d/d. If placed near the end of parking lot closest to the steps, it
would light both the steps and parking lot.

RENTAL COST - $153/year



YEARLY ENERGY COST - Savings of $54.75/year

MAINTENANCE COST - Savings of one time charge of $413 to replace pole and light or
$41.30/year for 10 year plan.

REMARKS - Increase from 12,500 lumens if the fixture were new to 50,000 lumens with
the AEP light. Readings now show light to be less than 7,000 lumens.

NET TO BUDGET - An increase of $56.95/year for 4 times as much light.

SPECIAL REMARKS - Trees need trimmed and pruned.

PROBLEM - Insufficient lighting. Three 200-watt metal halide shoebox lights mounted on
the building now illuminate this area. Two of these are burning continuously, and one may
not work at all. Continuous burning not only greatly reduces the life and brightness of these
lights, but also is very expensive in terms of yearly energy cost.

SOLUTION - Remove existing lights and rent a system from AEP consisting a pole, wire
and 400 watt HPS Cobra head D/D light and have it placed near the gas meter behind side
walk and near the center of the lot.

RENTAL COST - $153/year



YEARLY ENERGY COST - Savings of over $315/year

MAINTENANCE COST - If only one of the lights need replaced now and the other two in
the next ten years, a savings of $75/year.

REMARKS - This would increase light out put from 42,000 to 50,000 lumens and put light
where it is needed.

NET ON BUDGET - Savings of $237/year
                   MADISON STREET

AREA –Reported as Morris Street and is the street on the east side of Orndorff Hall.

PROBLEM –No lighting

SOLUTION – Rent a 100-watt HPS type II d/d light, wire and pole from AEP.

RENTAL COST - $96/year





REMARKS – While it may be possible to simply install a floodlight on Orndorff Hall or an
existing pole near this parking lot, those options would generate light trespass with houses
adjoining the lot.

NET ON BUDGET – Increase of $96/year
                        ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHTING


PROBLEM - Insufficient lighting and wrong fixtures used. There are about 86 1500-watt
quartz lights on wooden poles that illuminate the playing field. This type of light is suggested
for very small play areas, e.g., tennis courts. The bulbs in the lights are also very short-lived,
perhaps between 500 to 1000 hours maximum; therefore, if the lights were burning 500 hours
per year, within a three-year period almost all the bulbs would have to be replaced. At
present TECH pays nearly $1,000 per year to maintain these lights.

Energy costs based upon 500 hours is now $3225/year to burn these lights.

SOLUTION - Replace with 36 - 1000 watt metal halide lights; this should bring the lighting
up to 10-foot candles, which is the recommended standard for minimum athletic field
lighting. While there would be an increase in vertical weight loading, the difference in the
more important wind thrust loading is minimal.

(NOTE: The amount of light now generated can be achieved using only 24 1,000
Watt metal halide lights and will realize more savings than shown below.)

MATERIAL COST - $8,748, which may be reduced by buying all at once

LABOR - Possibly donated by AEP or the Montgomery Fire Department.


NET TO BUDGET - Assuming no maintenance is needed in the first five years, a savings of
$3,305/year will result which would help offset the initial cost. After the first five years,
savings of $2,305/year should be realized.        Additionally, the maintenance cost should
decrease by more than 50% since only 36 lights will need to be maintained as opposed it 86;
therefore, an additional savings of $500/year may be achieved.

SPECIAL REMARKS - While it is possible that some of the poles need to be replaced, they
would not need to be replaced just for this upgrade. If the pole were on site and AEP donated
time to replace these lights, then a pole could be replaced at the same time.


AREA- This covers the access road and parking lots

PROBLEMS - _ insufficient lighting, glare, no continuity of lighting and no lighting in
areas. Having a varied assortment of lights ranging from 175-watt mv to 400-watt metal
halide floodlights causes these problems.

SOLUTION- Replace this assortment of lights in house with 12 - 150 watt hps d/d type five



YEARLY ENERGY COST- Savings of $319.50/year

MAINTENANCE COST – Savings of $ 288/year

REMARKS – In additions to the savings, the light would increase from 79,000 lumens to
198,000 lumens, glare would be eliminated, and the light uniform and continuous throughout
the area.

NET TO BUDGET- The initial investment would be recovered in less than two years, and
Tech should then realize a savings of at least $ 400/year in energy cost and maintenance

AREA - The street and sidewalks that run behind Westmoreland hall to the rear of Davis
Hall and then on to Engineering Laboratories.

PROBLEM - Minimal to insufficient lighting

SOLUTION - It should not be Tech’s responsibility to light up city streets and side walks;
however, if a student flow pattern were established, excellent lighting would be an
inducement to use such a path. Because the city of Montgomery pays much less for the exact
fixture we would suggest the addition of one 200 watt hps street light, replacing two 100 watt
hps street lights with two 200 watt hps street lights and replacing a third 100 watt hps street
light with a 400 watt hps street light. This, of course, would have to be approved by the city
of Montgomery.

RENTAL COST - Not applicable





REMARKS - If the city would agree to raise lighting to the good to excellent mark, it would
add about $22.00/month or about $264/year to the city street lighting budget.

SPECIAL REMARKS – A pedestrian route from the Student Union, Old Main. Library, etc
that reduces conflict with vehicular traffic should be established. The suggested route would
be to follow Lovers Lane to its western end, cross Fayette Pike and follow Madison Street
one-half block to Second Avenue to the rear of Davis Hall or on to Engineering Laboratories.
This item should be referred to the Traffic Committee.
                         COED TURN AROUND SPOT

AREA - Eastern end of Fayette Pike at dead end.

PROBLEM - Insufficient lighting. This is a very heavily traveled narrow street, which is
used for student parking and has a very small turning area at its dead end. It is mainly
illuminated by a 100 watt HPS street light one pole away from the turn around.

SOLUTION - Have the street light replaced with a 400 watt HPS street light and put it on
the pole nearest the turn around.




REMARKS - Because there is an increase in revenue, AEP should not charge for changing
the light. This change would increase the Montgomery Street light cost $3.15/month or
$37.80/year; however, the lighting would be increased from 9,500 lumens to 50,000 lumens.

PROBLEM: INSUFFICIENT LIGHTING. This problem was created in part by the
construction of Orndorff Hall. South Adams Street was relocated and the electric line through
the area was placed underground, which in effect eliminated several poles that held
streetlights. Another part of the problem is that the remaining power line is several feet above
the street level and the streetlights are not sized correctly for the mounting height.

SOLUTION: This should be a joint venture between the City of Montgomery and Tech.
TECH could rent a 400-watt HPS d/d light from AEP and have it placed behind the sidewalk
on TECH’S property at the eastern corner of Fayette Pike and South Adams Street.

The City of Montgomery could upgrade three existing streetlights to 400-watt hps lights

RENTAL FEE - $ 157.95/year to TECH



NET ON BUDGET- $ 157.75/year

Remarks – The City of Montgomery Street light budget would increase $148.68/year for
upgrading three lights.

PROBLEM – Insufficient Lighting. Tech now rents a 175-watt MV d/d light from AEP to
light this alley. Over the years this light has grown dimmer and dimmer which is a problem
with MV lighting

SOLUTION – Have AEP upgrade this light to a 400 watt HPS d/d light which will start to
cycle on and off when the light drops below 90% of its original illumination. This cycling
will alert AEP to replace the bulb if they are notified.

RENTAL FEE – $57/year



REMARKS – This would increase light from 7,000 lumens to 50,000 lumens with only a
minimal increase in budget, but would also light up several parking spaces that Tech uses.

NET ON BUDGET – Increase of $ 57/year
       Appendix G

Technology Recommendations

    WVU Tech is billed as “The Institute of Technology” in the State of West Virginia.
Technology must be integrated into both classrooms and daily life on campus to make this an
absolutely true statement. Academic technology is a must. However, we cannot overlook
the fact that all persons that set foot upon Tech’s campus should be able to quickly realize
that this is a cutting-edge technological environment.

•   Academic areas must be equipped to allow for technology to be completely used in the
    learning experience. The distinct levels of classroom technology are detailed below.

•   Wireless technology used to access campus networks and the Internet is a trend that will
    grow steadily in the future, according to the former CEO of a Fortune 500 technology
    company. Tech must be ready to adapt to this trend. Wireless access on a campus-wide
    scale should be the goal. With the transceivers in place, community-member access to
    the necessary computer equipment and upgrades must also be offered.

•   The current LAN system should be expanded to include ports in all academic areas.
    Although wireless will become the standard, LAN ports may be utilized in the event that
    transceivers malfunction or a certain amount of bandwidth is needed for a project. Once
    technology is adapted to the classroom, a malfunctioning wireless system should not alter
    the learning experience.

•   Technology should be incorporated into everyday quality of life, such as outdoor Internet
    access near green/seating areas, security systems on campus buildings utilizing I.D.
    cards, computer programs to handle class registration, event information, and graduation
    participation information.

•   Classrooms must be furnished to allow for the expanded use of student technology. No
    longer is a small desktop sufficient to handle a laptop computer and multiple reference
    books. Classrooms must be transformed into table/chair configurations that
    accommodate new technology.

Classroom Configuration

       Classrooms should be configured as Level 1 rooms or Level 2 rooms, as each are
defined below. Each academic center on campus should have, at the least, one Level 1
classroom. Level 1 classrooms are video interactive and allow for distance learning
programs. The goal should then be to equip all other classrooms as Level 2 rooms.
Level 1 Classroom:
• Instructor’s console with computer and all necessary control hardware and software
• Camera to capture instructor
• Speakers mounted throughout room
• Camera to capture students
• Document camera
• Microphones
• Interactive whiteboard (projection screen and diagram transmission)
• Projector with ceiling mount
• Printer
• Electronics necessary to track voices and focus cameras by sound

Equipment cost for Level 1 classrooms is $38,000.

Level 2 Classroom:

•   Instructor’s console with computer and all necessary control hardware and software
•   Projector with ceiling mount
•   Interactive whiteboard (projection screen and diagram transmission)
•   Graphics tablet

Equipment cost for Level 2 classrooms is $11,000
        Classroom equipment for student learning should include a table and chair setting,
which will cost $350.00 (one table, two chairs). At Tech’s current 17:1 student to faculty
ratio, an average classroom would require 10 sets at an overall cost of $3500.00.

“High-Tech” Classroom

Current unacceptable conditions
Phasing for Technological Improvements

Phase 1 - Involves establishing an academic technology center with equipment and
personnel, installation of one Level 1 classroom, and installation of one Level 2 classroom -

Phase 2 - Installation of one Level 1 classroom and four Level 2 classrooms - $355,000

Phase 3 - Installation of one Level 1 classroom and ten Level 2 classrooms - $355,000

Phase 4 - Installation of one Level 1 classroom and ten Level 2 classrooms - $355,000

Phase 5 - Installation of one Level 1 classroom and ten Level 2 classrooms - $355,000
                                       Index by Building

Alumni House – 17

Baisi Athletic Center – 17, 23, 25, 27, 28, 38, 40, 54, 65, 74, 77, 81, 84

CATBD – 17, 24, 28, 29, 39, 71, 77, 81, 82, 84, 86, 89, 94, 105, 109

COBE – 17, 24, 37, 38, 57, 65, 71, 72, 78, 81, 84, 89, 90

Coed Residence Hall – 17, 21, 23, 24, 28, 38, 40, 52, 53, 65, 72, 78, 81, 85, 89, 91

Conley Hall – 17, 22, 25, 39, 49, 50, 65, 89

Davis Hall – 17, 27, 37, 39, 50, 51, 65, 72, 74, 77, 90, 116, 117

Engineering Classroom – 17, 24, 27, 32, 38, 58, 66, 73, 77, 81, 84, 90

Engineering Laboratory – 17, 24, 27, 32, 39, 59, 66, 74, 77, 81, 82, 84-86, 90, 95, 116, 117

Faculty Residences - 17

Hirise Residence Hall – 17, 20, 24, 25, 27, 28, 38, 39, 51, 52, 73, 78, 90, 91

Lanham Building – 17, 38, 53, 67, 81, 82, 85, 87

Maclin Hall – 17, 25, 36, 39, 55, 66, 72, 78, 90

Martin Field House – 17, 23, 25, 28, 29, 39, 82, 86, 87, 93, 94

Old Main – 17, 22, 29, 35, 38, 60, 61, 67, 71, 77, 80, 81, 84, 89, 90, 108, 117

Orndorff Hall – 17, 24, 27, 36, 38, 62, 67, 70, 72, 77, 81, 85, 89, 112, 119

President’s Residence – 17, 28, 67, 73, 78

Ratliff Hall – 17, 20, 25, 27, 29, 36, 40, 61, 62, 67, 73, 78, 81, 83, 85, 90

Tech Center – 17, 22, 23, 25, 29, 31, 38, 60, 67, 72, 78, 82, 86

Vining Library – 17, 22, 23, 39, 60, 61, 68, 71, 77, 81, 82, 84, 86

Westmoreland Hall – 17, 39, 56, 68, 74, 77, 90, 108, 116