Infrastructure Team Meeting

July 7, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Al Salgado, Stefanie Wittenbach, Charles Lampe, Julius Gribou, and Pam Bacon. Rene Colunga attended for George Morales. Not present were Paul Goodman and Dave Riker. Mauli Agrawal graciously agreed to Chair the team. Pam Bacon will be the secretary and will ask her ASO to attend team meetings and take notes. The team discussed the scope of the team's charge. Specifically, the team discussed how broadly to address "infrastructure" and whether to limit the breadth of our discussion to the built environment. Some team members expressed a strong desire to include in our discussions support services, which might include Define, telecommunications, access control, HR, etc. There was general agreement that "infrastructure" falls under two large umbrellas: support services and the built environment. The 3 pieces to be aware of with regard to the built environment are sustainability, funding for new infrastructure; and accommodating growth. Stephanie distributed copies of sample infrastructure strategic plans that she had found on the web. The discussion turned to how the team might interact or overlap with other teams and the importance on focusing on a manageable piece. The team decided to focus on one thread first and selected instructional space - where we are now, and where we need to be in 2016 if UTSA's enrollment goals are met. Pam will ask for clarification on UTSA's enrollment goal and will ask for copies of flip charts generated at the Strategic Planning Retreat. Pam will also find out what information currently exists regarding forecasts for the size of the various colleges 2016. Charles will provide information regarding THECB space formulas and UTSA's current deficit, particularly with respect to instructional space, and provide some guidance on how we might project the shortfall in 2016. Charles will also provide links to the Campus Master Plans posted on the web for team members' information and use. The team decided to communicate among themselves using an email list, and to meet monthly.

August 14, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Pamela Bacon, Charles Lampe, Dave Riker, eorge Morales, Stefanie Wittenbach, Jim Neff (guest speaker), Stephanie Cameron Absent: Julius Gribou, Paul Goodman, Albert Salgado Agenda Item: Overview of the Coordinating Board's 5 Factor Space Projection Model and UTSA Space Utilization Report. Presentation delivered by Jim Neff. Discussion: The committee discussed the basis of the Coordinating Board's 5 factor model to gain a better understanding of the Space Allocation report. There remains uncertainty about projected enrollment in 2016 and what kind of growth rate we can reasonably expect. . For the purposes of defining tier one status, UTSA is using the goal of obtaining $100 million in research expenditures by the year 2016 as our collective measure. Infrastructure utility capacity was also raised as an item of concern that should be built into the scope of the team's project. Conclusions: The Infrastructure Thematic Team needs the following information to continue working on the vision and deliverables of the committee: * Breakdown of all new square footage on campus since last year's report-follow up by Charles Lampe. * Breakdown of space by category- follow up by Charles Lampe. * Space deficits in each category- follow up by Charles Lampe. * Institution's projected 2016 enrollment-follow up by Mauli Agrawal. * Auxiliary space needs -will follow gathering the above information. * Benchmark institutions for next meeting- each member will investigate and bring comparisons to next meeting (looking outside as well as inside Texas). Stephanie has already done benchmarking work for the Library. Action items: * Share staffing predictions with other Thematic Teams- follow up by Charles Lampe. * Jim Neff will e-mail the CB presentation to the committee. * Pam Bacon will coordinate with the Research Thematic Team to identify research expenditure projections used in the CB formula for tier one status. Agenda Item: Library comparisons at peer institutions. Discussion: Stefanie Wittenbach compared UTSA's library space with peer institutions and discussed the grave deficit UTSA faces with our library resources. UC Irvine was identified as a peer due to age of institution and student population. Measurements are slowly changing from print volumes to electronic, virtual resources. Action items: Stefanie Wittenbach will e-mail comparison information to the committee. Agenda Item: Accountability Thematic Team update. Discussion: Pam Bacon is also serving on the Accountability Thematic team and Research Team. She will brief the group at each meeting on the initiatives the other teams are taking to provide useful information for achieving the goals of the infrastructure group. Conclusions: The Accountability Team is working on decentralizing accountability plan. She understands that the target date for completion of the work of the thematic teams is the end of the calendar year. Housekeeping: The team discussed meeting every other week on Tuesdays at 11:00 AM. Stephanie Cameron will send out meeting requests confirming the location and dates. The team also chose a Vice Chair, Charles Lampe, to run meetings in the event the Chair, Mauli Agrawal, is unable to attend. Next meeting date: August 29, 2006, BSE 1.406

August 29, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Charles Lampe, Julius Gribou, Stefanie Wittenbach, Stephanie Cameron Absent: Paul Goodman, George Morales, Albert Salgado, Dave Riker, Pamela Bacon Agenda Item: Data Gathering for Benchmarking Discussion: The committee continues to seek information for benchmarking the institution. Discussion focused on how to format the information once it is received. Once institution-wide projections are created, the committee will break numbers down to the college level. Research dollars and enrollment projections will be the two main factors used by the infrastructure committee. Conclusions: Strategically, benchmarks will be used only as guidelines. To determine the needs of UTSA, the committee will develop an independent analysis of projections to plug into the CB formula model. The committee may provide two projections, the CB ideal and the realistically attainable projection that identifies reasonable shortages. Agenda Item: How should we format and analyze the projections? Discussion: We considered analyzing needs based on 50% and 75% of goal for comparison. President Romo is projecting enrollment of 35,000 students by year 2016. Dr. Agrawal has also asked the Dean's of each college for their enrollment projections through year 2016 for comparison. Conclusions: Dr. Agrawal will provide the committee with Dean's projections once they become available. Agenda Item: How will facilities, power plant and support space needs be projected? What percentage of students do we want to project for on-campus housing? Discussion: Support space is built into the CB formula. In regards to the number of students to be housed on campus, the committee will look at other urban institutions as models. Arizona State University, The University of Washington, The University of Houston and UT Arlington were mentioned as good urban model comparisons. Conclusions: The committee will also offer suggestions for how to solve space deficit problems, including recommendations for partnering with the community and private sector. We will look at new models rather than existing models for our projections for the future. REMINDER: Discuss access roads to UTSA and a 4-lane road on UTSA Blvd. for the future. Action Items: * Dr. Mauli Agrawal will obtain the college Dean's enrollment projections through year 2016 (broken down by graduate and undergraduate students) by next meeting. * The committee will meet at the Downtown Campus every 4th meeting, with Mr. Gribou hosting the location. Next meeting date: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 at the Monterey Building, Glass Conference on First Floor.

September 9, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Charles Lampe, Julius Gribou, Stefanie Wittenbach, Dave Riker, Pamela Bacon, Stephanie Cameron Absent: Paul Goodman, Albert Salgado, Mauli Agrawal Agenda Item: Action Items and Deadline Discussion: Pam Bacon will circulate a list of categories and standards to use as a structure for the basis of a report. Each team member will volunteer to research benchmarking standards for items on the list. Efficiencies and service standards will also be addressed in the plan for several categories. Julius Gribou will send a link of benchmarking institutions to Stephanie Cameron for circulation. John White has been asked to provide information on campus housing and John McGowan has been asked to provide information on IT infrastructure. Dave Riker will research estimates on dollars per square feet for projected maintenance and roadway improvements. Charles Lampe will revisit the master plan and provide recommendations on useful information to be incorporated into the report. Conclusions: Mid-October is the targeted timeframe for the completion of a rough draft report. Next meeting date: Tuesday, September 26, 2006. BSE 1.406

September 26, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Pamela Bacon, Paul Goodman, Charles Lampe, John McGowan, John White, Stefanie Wittenbach, Stephanie Cameron Absent: Julius Gribou, Dave Riker Agenda Item: How do we start breaking projected enrollment numbers down into space usages and projections? Discussion: The committee needs to obtain FTE's to go with enrollment numbers. For housing, a good rule of thumb is 20% of students. Conclusions: Charles Lampe will work with Jim Neff to obtain FTE's for enrollment projections. John White will provide the group projected future housing needs using 20% on -campus housing as a rule. Agenda Item: How should we approach IT? Is there a way to build in a projected IT cost per square footage of space? What should be our routine annual investment in dollars for square foot for maintenance for IT? Conclusions: John McGowen will prepare total cost of ownership estimates for the committee using the master plan as a reference. Additional Action Items: * Paul Goodman will work on numbers for physical plant needs * Charles Lampe will work on Parking projections with Pam and Dave Kapalko * Draft report is due by Oct. 15th. Charles will circulate initial numbers to the group this week. * Mauli Agrawal and Pam Bacon will work on the final form of the report. * The committee will initiate an e-mail conversation to build discussion points for the report. Next meeting date: Tuesday October 10th, 11:00 AM, BSE 1.406

October 10, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Charles Lampe, John White, Stefanie Wittenbach, Stephanie Cameron, Stephen Bach Absent: Julius Gribou, Dave Riker, Albert Salgado, Pamela Bacon, Paul Goodman, John McGowan Agenda Item: Discussion of first-draft report structure Action Items: * Mauli Agrawal will go back and drop Pam Bacon's previous comments into the "recommendations" section of the draft. They were inadvertently left out of the version sent this morning. * Charles Lampe will verify instructional space numbers and work directly with Mauli Agrawal on any corrections. * Each individual will submit their numbers and recommendations according to their area of expertise. Summary is as follows: o ? Lab Space - Charles Lampe and Mauli Agrawal o ? Library - Stefanie Wittenbach o ? Auxiliary - Charles Lampe will predict space based on current model will contact Corinne Vela-Zapata. Staff FTE model will also be utilizes. o ? Parking - Pam Bacon o ? Utilities - Dave Riker o ? Housing - John White o ? Information Technology - John McGowan o ? Charles Lampe will also work on a prediction of dollar per square foot needed for each type of space projected as well as a prediction of total number of staff needed. o ? A note will be added to the draft by Mauli Agrawal indicating that the institution needs to evaluate athletic needs in its planning efforts. * Deadline: Information due to Mauli Agrawal as soon as possible. Draft due to Central Planning Committee by mid-October. Next meeting date: 11:00 AM, 10/24/06, BSE 1.406

October 23, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Stephen Bach, Pamela Bacon, Charles Lampe, Gary Mabry, Deborah Mangold, John McGowan, Stefanie Wittenbach, Stephanie Cameron Absent: Paul Goodman, Julius Gribou, Dave Riker, Albert Salgado, John White Agenda Item: Introduction of new members Gary Mabry from Department of Music and Deborah Mangold from Department of Psychology Discussion: Conclusions: Agenda Item: Projecting future research space needs. Discussion: Charles Lampe will add assignable classroom and research space from the engineering building project into the current research space projection. Conclusions: The master plan is proving to be an accurate prediction of needs for the estimates the committee is currently making. Updates on data collection of resource projections for: Parking: Pam Bacon- The current projected need for parking is one space for every 2.5 FTE on campus. Pam will provide parking projections and staff ratios to the committee. Parking and Transportation Services projects a future need of approximately 20 acres for parking lots, which coincides with the current master plan. This projection assumes parking will be needed for 31,000 at the 1604 campus and 4,000 at the Downtown Campus. Library: Stephanie Wittenbach reviewed the library projections she previously submitted to the committee via e-mail. She may provide updates in the next month as more information becomes available. Technology: John McGowan will provide accurate technology need projections to the group within the next week. Housing: The committee reviewed data John White previously submitted for housing projections. Auxiliary: Charles Lampe will determine a way to pull Auxiliary needs out of the master plan and form some overall categories for the committee to review. Agenda Item: Next meeting. Discussion: John McGowan announced that the Provost Office will be outlining a desired format of the final reports. The committee would like to finalize all data-gathering/reporting by the next meeting date. Conclusions: The goal of the next meeting will be to discuss and formulate strategies for acquiring and managing the projected infrastructure needs of the campus. Next meeting date: November 7th, 11:00 A.M., BSE 1.406

November 7, 2006

Present: Mauli Agrawal, Pamela Bacon, Julius Gribou, John McGowan, Dave Riker, Fred Weiss, Stefanie Wittenbach Absent: Stephen Bach, Charles Lampe, Gary Mabry, Deborah Mangold, Paul Goodman, Albert Salgado, John White, Stephanie Cameron Agenda Item: Discussion of Content and Format of Committee Report Discussion: The committee discussed how to craft metrics to produce uniform numbers. The faculty ratio provided by the Provost Office will be used for the team report. Issues that arose from the recent team leader meeting were also discussed in detail. Members took assignments to review other team drafts as follows: Accountability Team- Pamela Bacon; Community Engagement- John McGowan; Enrollment Management- Charles Lampe; Faculty/Staff Success- Stephanie Wittenbach; Globalization- Julius Gribou; Research- Mauli Agrawal; Resource Development and Student Success- Dave Riker. Conclusions: Mauli Agrawal is unable to attend the Central Planning meeting on December 4th. Pamela Bacon agreed to attend on behalf of the committee. The team report will be converted to the standardized four-column template. Next meeting date: November 21st, 11:00 A.M., BSE 1.406

December 5, 2006

Present: Pamela Bacon, Charles Lampe, Stephanie Cameron, Stefanie Wittenbach Absent: Mauli Agrawal, Stephen Bach, Julius Gribou, Gary Mabry, Deborah Mangold, John McGowan, Paul Goodman, Dave Riker, Albert Salgado, John White, Fred Weiss Agenda Item: Infrastructure Meeting with Development Board Members 11/29. Discussion: A meeting was held at the Downtown Campus with the following Development Board Members on 11/29/06: Kathleen Weir Vale, John Arias, Boone Powell, Alicia Trevino and Danny Zimmerman. Mauli Agrawal, Pamela Bacon and Stephanie Wittenbach attended from the Infrastructure Team. Dr. Agrawal delivered an infrastructure Power Point presentation to the board. A hard copy of this presentation will be delivered to all Infrastructure Team members via campus-mail this week. Agenda Item: Recommendations for Finalizing Report Discussion: The final report needs to include a recommendation regarding effectiveness of staff support services. It also needs to address the need for a performing arts center, or special use facility. Conclusion: Pamela Bacon will finalize the report in Dr. Agrawal's absence. A Draft will be provided to the committee for review prior to the December 15th deadline. Agenda Item: Review of Central Planning Committee Meeting on 12/4. Discussion: Pamela Bacon attended the meeting behalf of Dr. Agrawal and provided the committee with a review of the discussion. The Central Planning Committee determined that the following 3 team areas actually interconnect with all other areas: Accountability, Infrastructure and Resource Development. Thus, the content of these 3 plans will be wrapped into the other thematic team plans as appropriate. An outside consultant working with Dr. Welch's Office will perform the melding of all reports into one document. The Next meeting date is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, January 2nd in the BSE 1.406. Please note there will be no meeting on Tuesday, December 19th.

« previous