california community colleges - System Operations

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES

2011-12

FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL OUTLAY PLAN

CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE FACILITIES PLANNING & UTILIZATION UNIT July 2010

Members of the Board Manuel Baca Diamond Bar

Officers of the Board Deborah Malumed, President Scott Himelstein, Vice President Alice Perez, CPEC Representative

Geoffrey L. Baum

Pasadena Nadia Davis- Lockyer, Esq. Hayward Barbara Davis-Lyman Fair Oaks Benita D. Haley

Chancellor's Office Dr. Jack Scott Chancellor Steven Bruckman Executive Vice Chancellor of Operations/General Counsel

lvfanhattan Beach Scott Himelstein San Diego Lance T. Izumi

Sacramento

Erik Skinner Executive Vice Chancellor of Programs Barry Russell Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Peter MacDougall

Santa Barbara Deborah Malumed Long Beach Robert V. McDonald

Anaheim Hills Alice Perez Roseville Michelle Price Desert Hot Springs Henry A.J. Ramos San Luis Obispo

Gary Reed Porterville Tanna Thomas Yuba City

Marlene Linares Garcia Vice ChanceLLor for Governmental Relations & External Affairs Njeri Griffin Assistant to the Board Liaison Linda Michalowski Vice Chancellor.for Student Services and Special Programs Jose MiHan Vice Chancellor for Economic Development and Workforce Development Patrick PelTY Vice Chancellor for Technology, Research, and Information Services

E1ik Skinner Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Policy

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES 2011-12 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL OUTLAY PLAN

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 II. IDE.N TIFY DRIVERS OF NEED .......................................................................................... 9 ENROLLMENT P ROJECTIONS .... ..... ..... ... .. ... .. .. .... .. ..... .. .................................. .. . .. .. .. .. ...... ..... . ......... 9 FACTORS IMPACTING ENROLLMENT D EMAND .... .. ....... ..... .. . ..... ..... .. ........ ................................... 10 ENROLLMENT PROJECTION METHODOLOGY ............. ... ................................ ... ... .......... ............... 1 I TRANSLATE ENROLLMENT NEED INTO CAPITAL O UTLAY F AC!LITIES R EQUIREMENTS .. . . .. . . .. . .. . 12

III. INVENTORY AMOUNT AND TYPE OF EXISTING SPACE & fNFRASTRUCTURE .................................................................... 14 CURRENT CAPACITY ............................................... .. ............ ... ...... .......... ......................... ....... .. . 14 EXCESS CAPACITY ......... .. .... ....... ..... ... .... .... ..... ... .... .. ...................................... .... ... .... ................. 14 MODERNIZATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES ................................................................................. 15

IV. UNMET FACILITIES NEEDS .......................................................................................... 21 NET ENROLLMENT NEED .................................................. ... ....................................................... 21 ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF DELIVERY/ YEAR ROUND OPERATION .................. ... .... .... ... ..... .. ....... 21 NEW FACILITIES FOR ENROLLMENT GROWfH ............................................................................ 23 T OTAL UNMET NEEDS AND COSTS ..... .......... ................... ......... .. ........... ............ ... .. .................... 24

V. FACILITIES TO MEET UNMET NEED .......................................................................... 25 FACILITIES PROPOSED IN F rvE-YEAR P LAN ................ .................... ..... ............................... ........ SUMMARY .. ... .. .. ... ............. .. .. ........ ..... ...... .. ..... .. ... ...... ... ..... ... .. .... .............. . ....... .... .. ... ..... ...........

VL CONSEQUENCES OF NOT

~DRESSING

25 26

IDENTIFIED NEEDS ........................... 27

ENROLLMENT PRESSURES ......................................... .... .......... ....... ............................................. 27 MISSION CRIT1CAL IMPACTS ............................ . .......................... .. .... ..... ... .. .. ..................... ....... .. 28 FUNDING .................................................................................................................................... 28

VII. RECONCILIATION TO PREVIOUS PLAN ................................................................. 31 SUMMARY OFTOTAL COST INCREASE .............................................. .... ....... ........................ .. ..... CHANGES TO FIRST TWO YEARS OF PLAN ..................................................................................

APPENDICES Appendix A: Government Code sections 13100-13102, Education Code sections 67501 and 67503 Appendix B: Capital Outlay Five-Year Plan- Project List and Spending Plan Appendix C: Detailed Facilities Needs and Cost Estimate Appendix D: Board of Governors Priority Criteria for Funding Capital Outlay Projects Appendix E: Enrollment and WSCH Projections by District Appendix F: Temporary Buildings Report Appendix G: Ten-Year Need Analysis Appendix H: Year Round Operation Analysis

31 32

I. INTRODUCTION The California Community Colleges (CCC) form the largest postsecondary educational system in the world. The CCC system annually serves over 2.9 million students- 77% of the state's undergraduate public college students - in both vocational and academic program offerings. The system consists of 72 semi-autonomous districts encompassing 112 colleges, 70 approved off-campus centers. and 22 separately reported district offices. The system assets include over 23,151 acres of land, 4,982 buildings, and 68 million gross square feet of space that includes 43.1 million assignable square feet (ASF) of space. In addition, the system has innumerable offcampus outreach centers at various locations. The California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) projects approximately 81% of the enrollment growth in higher education over the next decade will occur in the community college system. Further, the statewide unemployment rate of 12.6% has resulted in students enrolling in community colleges to pursue education and retraining to get back into the workforce. [f the statewide economy continues to decline and the unemployment rate continues to rise, more and more workers will be depending on the community colleges for job retraining. Backgrou11d. Government Code sections 131 00-13 102 require the Governor to annually submit a five-year capital infrastructure plan to the Legislature in conjunction with the Governor's Budget. To accomplish this, every entity of state government is required to provide to the Department of Finance (DOF) information related to capital infrastructure needs and costs for a five-year period. Additionall y, Education Code sections 67501 and 67503 require the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office to prepare a five-year capital outlay plan identifying the statewide needs and priorities of the California Community Colleges. Summary of R esults. The 2011 -12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan for the California Community Colleges is presented here in compliance with the requirements of Government Code sections 13100-13102 and Education Code sections 67501 and 67503. This Five-Year Plan- covering the period from 2011-12 through 2015-16- includes $21 billion of capital facility needs for the CCC system as shown below in Table 1. This amount includes $13.1 billion for construction of new faci lities for enrollment growth and $7.9 billion for modernization of existing facilities. An additional $9.5 billion of cuLTently identified facilities needs are deferred to future years as shown in Table 2, with $4.4 billion of out-year costs for continuing phases of projects started within the Five-Year Plan time frame and $5.1 billion of need carried over into subsequent plan years, primarily for modernization projects. At this time, the total unmet facilities needs for the community college system have been estimated at approximately $30.5 billion.

20 11-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page I

Table 1- TOTAL FACILITIES NEEDS & COSTS Assignable Square Feet (ASF) A

~NMET

FACILITIES NEEDS:

New Facilities for Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities Total Unmet Needs

B

15,663,000 27,464,000 43,127,000

$15,672,405,000 $14,817,474,000 $30,489,879,000

15,663,000 16,906,000 32,569,000

$13,1 09,296,000 $7,927,456,000 $21 ,036,752,000

PROPOSED FACILITIES IN 5-YEAR PLAN: New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities Total Proposed Facilities

A-B=C

Costs

PEFERRED FACILITIES NEEDS: New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities Total Deferred Needs

- 10,558,000 10,558,000

$2,563,109,000 $6,890,018,000 $9,453,1 27,000

Table 2- DEFERRED FACILITIES NEEDS & COSTS

Assignable Square Feet (ASF)

C1

~ONTINUING PHASES OF PROJECTS STARTED IN PLAN:

New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities Total Continuing Phases C2

N/A N/A

$2,563,109,000 $1 ,825,629,000 $ 4,388, 738,000

~EED CARRYOVER:

New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities Total Need Carryover C1+C2 = C

Costs

Total Deferred Needs

20 11-12 Five-Ycar Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

--

10,558,00C 10,558,00C

$ $5,064,389,000 $5,064,389,000

10,558,000

$9,453,127,000

Page2

Areas of Understatement. The $30.5 billion need identified in this report is a conservati ve estimate of the total unmet facilities needs for the community college system. This estimate is likely to be considerably understated because the cost estimates used for estimating systemwide needs are understated for the following reasons (systemwide facilities needs and costs will be discussed in detail in the body of the report): •

The average cost for all space types is used to estimate costs. This assumption results in understated costs because the average includes the less expensive space types, while the facilities needed by the CCC system are projected to include the more expensive space types such as laboratory and library space.

•

Site development costs are not included in the cost estimates because it is impossible to estimate the average site cost per assignable square foot since site development costs vary substantially from project to project.

•

For the statewide modernization projects, it is assumed that the buildings over 25 years old will be modernized at seventy-five percent of the cost of a new building. Since many of the CCC systems buildings are over thirty years of age, it is likely that many of the buildings will need to be dropped and replaced at a significantly greater cost rather than remodeled.

Characteristics of the Plan. This Five-Year Plan has been developed to meet the requirements of Government Code sections 13100- 13102 and Education Code sections 67501and 67503. Individual projects have been evaluated with respect to: •

funding priorities for the system per the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) priority criteiia;

•

capacity/load ratios (i.e. existing faci lity capacity to enrollment load) for the various space types at each campus; and

•

the district's ability to successfully complete projects within the timcframe of the plan.

The first year of the plan, 2011-12, includes 260 projects totaling $2.3 billion. This includes 81 state funded projects at $878 million, including $474 million of state funding and $404 million of local funding. The remaining 179 projects are funded solely by the districts at an additional $1.4 billion. The projects in the last four years of the plan have been scheduled based on facility needs and logistics, irrespective of funding availability. This scheduling is a crucial step in moving toward a Five-Year Plan that truly demonstrates the unmet facility needs of the entire CCC system rather than one that simply reflects available funding.

Pla11 Constraints~ This Five-Year Plan quantifies and articulates all the capital infrastructure needs for the community college system to the greatest extent possible pursuant to the requirements of Government Code sections 13100-13102 and Education Code sections 67 50 l and 67503 . As with past submittals, the CCC Chancellor's Office (CO) has continued to refine 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page3

the comprehensive Systemwide Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan. Districts have made progress in submitting individual five-year plans that more accurately reflect actual unmet capital needs and these efforts are reflected in this plan. Despite this progress, the local five-year plans still do not completely represent the unmet capital needs of the CCC system. The Chancellor's Office will continue to estimate a portion of the unrnet needs throughout the system and, in consultation with the Association of Chief Business Officers Facilities Task Force, will continue to identify best practices and streamline existing processes in order to ensure high quality district capital outlay planning.

FUSION. The Facility Utilization Space Inventory Options Net project (FUSION) is a webbased project planning and management tool. The districts initiated the development of this system to assist with facilities planning efforts. The core of the data system is the Facilities Condition Assessment completed for all buildings in the CCC system. This assessment is providing a wealth of data regarding the modernization needs of the system. Districts are also able to use other components of FUSION for project planning, project management and administration, and other activities that will assist in identifying needed facilities and bringing those facilities on line in an efficient manner. Ready Access. The "Ready Access" program is a tool initiated by the Chancellor's Office to streamline the capital outlay process, thereby bringing facilities online faster and less expensively. The Ready Access program provides lump-sum state funding for all project phases in one Budget Act appropriation. The goal of Ready Access is to save state bond dollars, with no cost to the General Fund, while allowing local community college districts the ability to complete their projects faster in order to address growth and modernization facility needs. The program saves the state money because a local contribution to offset state supportable costs is required in order for distJicts to participate in the program and by shmtening the period to complete projects by at least one year. There is no change to the administrative and legislative oversight of capital outlay projects under the Ready Access program. Design Build. The CCC system received approval to take advantage of opportunities that may be provided by the Design Build project delivery system to reduce costs and expedite projects. Design Build allows a district to enter into a single contract with a design build team for design and construction of a building. Senate Bill 614 (SB 614) became effective on January 1, 2008 and gave all community college districts the option to enter into design build contracts for state and/or locally funded projects exceeding $2.5 million. SB 614 also extended the authority of community districts to use the design build delivery system to January 1, 2014. The 20 11-12 budget contains two Design Build projects seeking state funding for the design phase of their projects as authmized pursuant to SB614.

CCC Proj ect S ubmittal Process. To apply for state capital outlay funds, community college districts annually submit project proposals to the Chancellor's Office in two parts. The first part, an Initial Project Proposal (IPP), is a three-page concept paper and is used by the Chancellor's Office for systemwide need analysis and prioritization. The IPP step in the screening process allows the Chancellor's Office to more accurately assess the district's capital outlay needs on a 201 1-12 Five-Ycar Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Pagc4

systemwide priority basis before there is a significant investment of time and money in projects by the districts. Projects are initially submitted to the Chancellor's Office for review by July 1 using the three-page IPP form . After evaluating the IPPs, the Chancellor's Office notifies the districts of those IPPs to be developed into Final Project Proposals, which are due the following year for possible submission to the BOG for project scope approval. The second part of the capital outlay process, a Final Project Proposal (FPP), is a fully developed project proposal that is to be considered for inclusion in the Governor's Budget. The FPP provides a justification for the project and budget detail, and describes the relationship of the proposed project to the district's comprehensive educational and facility master plans. lt is also expected that the districts will explore why there are no viable alternatives to the proposed project.

Board of Govemors Priority Criteria. "Project scope approval" is defined as a project that meets the BOG criteria for primitizing capital outlay projects and may be eligible for funding pursuant to the requirements, standards, and guidelines outlined in the Education Code, title 5, California Code of Regulations, the State Administrative Manual/Capitalized Assets, section 6800, and the Facilities Planning Manual. Final Project PToposals for funding consideration in 2011-12 were submitted to the Chancellor's Office in July 2009. Staff began ranking capital outlay projects using the Capital Outlay Priority Criteria adopted by the BOG in November 1999. Requests for life-safety projects (Al) are of highest priority, followed by requests for equipment to complete projects (A2), followed by requests that address seismic deficiencies or potential seismic risk in existing buildings (A3 ), and infrastructure projects, when failure or loss would otherwise result (A4). The Capital Outlay P1iority Criteria provides that no more than 50 percent of the state funds available for community college capital outlay are committed to address Category A projects. Once continuing of phases of previously funded projects and new Category A projects are prioritized, projects in the remaining categories are piioritized based on various factors using the primity criteria. The funding configuration for the othet: categories B-F is as follows: Funding Formula 50 percent of remaining funds after funding Category A projects. 25 percent of remaining funds after C Modernize Instructional Space funding Category A projects. 15 percent of remaining funds after D Complete Campus Concept funding Category A projects. 5 percent of remaining funds after E Increase Institutional Support Services funding Category A projects. Capacity 5 percent of remaining funds after F Modernize Institutional Support funding Category A projects. Services Space

C ategory B Increase Instructional Capacity

20 I 1-12 Five--Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

PageS

Based on the Chancellor's Office review of the FPPs, the district Five-Year Capital Outlay Plans and projects previously approved by the BOG, the eligible "new start" (versus continuing) projects are prioritized and presented to the BOG annuall y for review and approval of project scope. This list of new start projects includes, at most, one qualified project from any Category 8 through F per authorized site.

Funding Approval Process. The Chancellor's Office develops an annual Capi tal Outlay Plan for submittal to the Department of Finance for consid eration of funding in the next budget cycle from this prioritized list of scope-approved projects. Projects in Categories 8 through F are ranked by eligibility points (highest to lowest). The Capital Outlay Plan includes a maximum of one project from any Category B through F per authorized site. This ensures that, with the exception of projects that address health and safety, seismic or infrastructure fai lure problems, only one "new start" project per year is funded per authorized site. If more than one project is eligible for potential fund ing from CategOties B through F per authorized site, the project with the highest local ranking from the district's Five-Year Plan is proposed for funding. Annual funding of these projects is contingent upon their abi lity to meet the Governor's priorities and the availability of funds to meet continuing needs. The Administration and Legislative Budget Committees scrutinize all capital construction projects to determine if projects meet current priorities, i.e., seismic, life-safety, vital infrastructure, major code deficiencies, an~ increased instructional access. The capital outlay plan is developed using a " zero-based" budgeting meth od in which all proposals eligible to compete in a specific fiscal year are evaluated to determine that the highest priority projects are included in the spending plan based on the funds available. Final Project Proposals not included in a specific year's spending plan must compete in a subsequen t budget cycle. Between budget cycles, districts may update or modify the proposals as needed to reflect changing local needs or priozities. Final Project Proposals that are submitted for state funding but do not receive appropriations in a Budget Act have no special standing in subsequent budget cycles.

Futu re Capital Outlay Needs. It is evident that the state's postsecondary student growth in the next decade will place a larger burden, relative to the other public postsecondary systems, on the community college system - a burden the CCC system cannot effectively bear without significant new, increased expenditures for facilities. The Chancellor's Office has done an analysis of the total facilities needs for the community college system over the next ten years (2011-12 thru 2020-21) (A ppendix G). The total facil ities needs for the next ten years, including the $30.5 billion of capital facility needs identified in this 5-Year Plan, are estim ated at approximately $35.8 billion . Resources currently available are estimated at $18.2 billion of local Proposition 39 bond funds. All available state General Obligation bonds have been programmed and/or expended. Generally, current and future local Proposition 39 bond funds will fund over 40% of state supportable faci lities and l 00% of non-state supportable faci lities such as parking lots/garages, stadiums, cafeterias, bookstores, and health centers. The remaining need fo r facili ties to be funded by state general obligation bonds is $17.6 billion based on this level of local contribution. This equates to a need for $3.5 billion of state general obligation bond funding every two years. 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Pagc 6

Given this great need, the state must continue to work closely with the districts to appropriately allocate scarce resources to adequately address the needs of the growing numbers of community college students in California.

Year Round Operations (YRO). The CCC system is the most aggressive California public postsecondary segment in the use of alternative scheduling and has been very successful in maximi:ling the use of existing facilities year-round. The average number of days of instruction for the 112 colleges has increased from 271 days per year in 1996-97 to 292 days for the current year. For the purpose of evaluating facility usage, 2008-09 summer FTES is 43% of average Primary term FTES. Winter FTES is 11.8% of average Primary tenn FTES (see Chapter [V and Appendix H for a detailed discussion ofYRO). Statewide General Obligation Bonds/Lease-Revenue Bonds. Proposition 47 (2002) and Proposition 55 (2004) provided community colleges with a total of $1.67 billion from state general obligation bonds. Proposition 10 (2006) provided $ 1.478 billion in state bond funds for community college projects. All of the existing state bond funds for community colleges have either been spent or are committed to projects. The 8 1 projects included in the 2011 -12 spending plan at $474 million (state funding) will require a new education bond approved by the voters in November 20 I 0. Proposition 39- Local Funds. The funding for community college facilities is a responsibility shared by the state and local community college districts. The primary source of financing for the local share of construction costs is voter-approved local bonds. From June 1998 through November 2000, when bond measures required two-thirds voter approval, only 10 community college districts passed local bonds, providing $875.5 million for community college facilities. Since passage of Proposition 39, voters have approved 83 of 96 (86%) local bond measures, authorizing $22.8 billion in bonds for 64 community college districts. Voluutmy Local Contribution. In November 1999 the BOG adopted new criteria for priotitizing capital outlay projects. The new priority criteria emphasize a "least cost to the state" policy. The " least cost to the state" policy stretches scarce state resources to help meet enrollment growth and modernization needs by providing an incentive for districts to contribute local dollars to projects. Thus far, the policy appears to be very successful in achieving that objective. In the 20 ll-12 Capital Outlay Plan, 7 4 of 81 (91%) of the 2011 state-funded projects provide for a local contribution. Total state funded projects for 201 1-12 equal $878 million including both state funding and local contributions, consisting of 77 new start projects at $656 million and 4 continuing projects at $222 million. Local contributions provide $404 million of the $878 million in project costs to support state funded projects in the 2011-12 budget, a "system" contribution of 46 percent. Additionally, local contributions will provide another $753 million in years 2012-13 thru 2013-14 to complete state projects funded in 2011-12. Districts construct many projects using only local funding. An additional $1.44 billion in projects is funded entirely with local funds in 2011-12, including 46 new projects at $ 0.04 2011-12 Pive-Year Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

Page 7

billion and 133 continuing projects at $1.4 billion. The local contribution is 80% for 2011-12 when these projects funded entirely by districts are taken into account. The local bonds must be used to fund non-state supportable but educationally essential capital outlay such as land acquisition, parking, cafeterias, bookstores, and health centers. The land acquisition is particularly significant because the land costs can be equal to or greater than the cost of the buildings depending on the area where the district is located. The State Allocation Board funds 50% of actual land costs for K-12 projects. The community colleges must fund all land costs locally. Additionally, the CCC does not augment project costs once costs are approved in the budget. Therefore, cost overruns at bid award are paid for by the district. Since this happens later in the process, these additional local contributions cannot be captured in this plan. The voluntary contribution has been very successful in providing incentive for districts to participate in the state capital outlay program; thereby, reducing overall state costs which then allows more districts to pruticipate in the state program.

Organization of the Plan. The body of the 5-year plan provides a description of the methodology used to estimate the unmet needs of the community college system. The Appendices at the back include the following: •

Appendix A - Government Code sections 11301 and 11302 and Education Code sections 67501 and 67503

•

Appendix B -Capital Outlay Five-Year Plan - Project List

•

Appendix C - more detailed information regarding the methodology utilized to identify the facilities needs and estimate the costs associated with those facilities needs.

•

Appendix D - a summary of the updated BOG ptiority criteria for funding capital outlay projects.

•

Appendix E - Enrollment and Weekly Student Contact Hour Projections by District

•

Appendix F - Temporary Buildings Report

•

Appendix G- Ten-Year Need Analysis

•

Appendix H - Year Round Operation Analysis

2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 8

U. IDENTIFY DRIVERS OF NEED

The California Community Colleges (CCC) annually serve over 2.9 million students approximately 77% of public undergraduate college enrollment - in both vocational and academic program offerings. The California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) provides enrollment projections for public higher education in its June 2010 publication Ready or Not, Here They Come, Projections for Public Higher Education, 2009-2019. CPEC's report shows that California Community Colleges are currently serving approximately 77 percent of the public undergraduate college enrollment in both vocational and academic program offerings. CPEC projects enrollment increases for public higher education students of 387,000 students over a ten-year period (2009-2019), including 313,000 students for California Community Colleges, 54,000 for California State University and 20,000 for University of California. Based on this projection, approximately 81% of the enrollment growth in higher education over the next decade will occur in the community college system. Enrollment Projections

The CCC system serves approximately 2.9 million students annually. This number is the Actual Unduplicated Enrollment for the system, and represents the total number of students served over all school terms within an academic year. The number is "unduplicated" because a student enrolled in fall and spring semester would count as one student. The need for new facilities is not based on this number because the number would be too high since the total number of students served would not all be enrolled in one semester. The need for new facilities in this report is based on projected student enrollment and Week~v Student Contact Hours (WSCH) for each educational category in fall semester 2011 through 2015. This Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan is based on an enrollment of2.043 million students in 20 1112, growing to an enrollment of 2.348 million in 2015-16, an increase of approximately 305,000 students (Appendix E). The projections are based on enrollment at the fall census as traditionally used by DOF. The enrollment projections are calculated by the Research and Planning Unit of the Chancellor' s Office, and provided to districts for utilization in the districts' Five-Year Plans. The Chancellor's Office projection model uses a linear regression that equally weighs all the data back to 1973. A linear regression provides an even growth line over time, and as such is minimally impacted by emollment spikes or valleys experienced throughout the CCC system. The adult county population is derived from the Department of Finance May, 2004 Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail, 2000 to 2050 which is based upon the 2000 United States census. Table 3 below shows a projection of approximately 15 percent growth in enrollment over the Five-Year Plan period, and a corresponding increase in WSCH. As defined in title 5, California Code of Regulations, WSCH means " the product of the number of students and the scheduled 2011- 12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan CaJifomia Cormnunity Colleges

Page 9

class periods in which they are enrolled, in graded and ungraded community college classes convened prior to 10 o'clock pm during a census week. A class period is not less than 50 minutes and not more than 60 minutes." (tit. 5, CCR, §57001(e).) Enrollment in 2011-12 is estimated to be approximately 2,043,000 students, growing to 2,348,000 in 2015-16. WSCH is estimated at approximately 20,198,000 in 2011 - 12, increasi.ng to 23,236,000 in 2015- 16. Appendix E provides enrollment and WSCH projections by district.

Table 3 - SUMMARY OF ENROLLMENT AND WSCH

%

2011-12

Enrollment WSCH

2015-16

2,043,000

2,348,000

20,198,000

23,236,000

Difference

Difference

305,000

15%

3,038,000

15%

Factors Impacting Enrollmen t Demand The current economic and political environment has certainly had a negative impact on community college enrollments. District operating budgets have been cut necessitating cutbacks in course offerings and the number of sessions districts offer. Additionally, fees were increased from $20 to $26 per unit in fall 2009. Despite these negative trends, the decrease in student emoUment in the community colleges has been minimal. Approximately 1,795,000 students were enrolled in the community college system in fall 2008. By fall 2009, this number had only decreased by approximately 2,000 students to an estimated 1,793,000, a decrease of approximately -0.12%. Although student enrollment numbers decreased slightly from fall 2008 to fall 2009, the Fulltime Equivalent Students (FTES) in creased. Fall 2008 FTES was approximately 565,000 FTES. Fall 2009 FTES was 576,000, an increase of approximately 2%. This indicates that although there was a slight decline in student enrollment, the students that did attend took more units in 2009 than in 2008. Historical data indicates the slight decline in fall 2009 student enrollment is a short-term response to the fee increase and other negative economic trends. The community college system last experienced a decline in enrollment in 2003 and 2004 due to a difficult economic environment and the resulting fee increase to $26 per unit. The majority of the impact occurred in fall 2003 when student enrollment dropped by approximately 6%. Fall 2004 saw an additional decrease in student enrollment of approximately 2%. The system then had modest increases in enrollment for the next two years (less than 1%) indicating a recovery had started. The system then experienced over 5% annual growth in student enrollment in fall 2007 and fall 2008. There are other factors that indicate that the slight drop in enrollment will be short term. CPEC projects that approximately 8 1% of the enrollment growth in higher education over the next 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 10

decade will occur in the community college system. Addiiionally, students unable to enter the UC or CSU systems due to restricted enrollments are enrolling at community colleges throughout the state. To the extent that further enrollment restrictions and higher fees at CSU and UC cause students to re-evaluate college plans, the transfer function may become more attractive to students that might otherwise have spent four years at CSU or UC. Given the growth the system has been experiencing for much of the last decade, the capital outlay needs of the system are so great that a short-tenn drop in enrollment is likely to offset only a very small portion of that need. It is unlikely that the CCC system will experience a longtenn drop in enrollment that would result in the need for significantly less facilities because, dollar for dollar, the community college system is the best value for higher education in the state. It should be noted that the Education Code provides that students have "free flow" access to all community college sites. Students are therefore not restricted to any specific geographic area and can attend college at any campus in the state. While the overall system may appear to have excess facilities capacity, there are many individual campuses within the system that have severe capital facility shortages. Therefore, the capacity needs for the system have been estimated on a campus-by-campus basis.

EnroiJment Projection Methodology An econometric regression model is used to produce the fall enrollment forecast for each district. The independent variables that the model uses to explain and predict enrollments are:

I. Adult county population 2. College operating budgets 3. The apportionment growth cap (pre- and post- Proposition 13 factor) 4. Student "out-of-pocket" price of enrollment (tuition, fees, transportation, child care, books, and supplies) The assumptions, which drive future values for the model's independent variables, are: o

Student prices: the enrollment fee of S26 per unit is used throughout model.

o

Financing: current financing fonnulas continue with the apportionment growth cap.

o

Budget outlays: the most recent actual community college budget percent change is assumed to be the same throughout the projected years.

o

Adult population: as forecast by Department of Finance based upon the 2000 census.

Based upon the assumptions discussed above, the model projects future headcount enrollment for each district. The last year of actual enrollment and actual WSCH data is used to compute the 20 11 -12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page II

enrollment to WSCH ratio. This enrollment!WSCH ratio is assumed to be constant for future years and is applied to the projected headcount enrollments to calculate the future WSCH projections. This is consistent with the methodology used by the Department of Finance. The enrollment projections generated by the Chancellor's Office are then sent to the districts for inclusion in their annual Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan submittal.

Translate Enrollment Need into Capital Outlay Facilities Requirements Table 4 below shows a total of 61.6 million assignable square feet (ASF), shown by space type pursuant to title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, is needed to accommodate the enrollment projected over the five years of the plan. The assignable square footage needs for these space types have been determined based on the enrollment projections, utilizing the formulas provided by the title 5 regulations. Table 4 - GROSS ENROLLMENT NEEDS title 5 Category

6,585,000

Lecture

16,618,000

Lab Office

7,109,000

Library

5,892,000

AVfTV

1,476,000 23,968,000

Other TOTAL


ASF

61 ,648,000

Page 12

"Other" Space The total enrollment need of 61.6 million ASF includes approximately 24 million ASF of "Other" space. Title 5 lays out the parameters for calculating needed space for Lecture, · Laboratory, Office, Library and A V/TV based on a comparison of inventory and enrollment at a campus. ln addition to the instructional space specified in title 5, this Five-Year Plan must _also account for the "Other" space that comprises the whole of the physical inventory for each campus. As campuses add space that is included in title 5 categories, "Other" space is naturally also added. "Other" space is comprised ofboth instructional (physical education, performing arts, and child development) and non- instructional support space that is essential to fulfilling the educational mission at each campus. However, there are no formulas specified in title 5 with which to compare inventory capacity to projected enrollment to define "Other" space needed to support student enrollment. Since "Other" space is essential to support the space included in the title 5 categories, it must be added to campuses as title 5 space is added. This 5-Year plan therefore looks at two different factors to identify the need for "Other" space at each campus. The model first looks at the physical inventory for each campus to calculate "Other'' space as a percentage of total title 5 space. This answers the question "how much of the existing inventory is "Other'' space as compared to total titLe 5 space for each campus?" The physical inventory identifies each campus in the community college system as one of four types -Campus, Center, District Office, or Campus with District Office. The second factor the model looks at is the average ratio of"Other" space to total title 5 space for each of these campus types. This answers the question "on average, how much of the existing inventory is "Other" space as compared to total title 5 space tor each campus type?" Finally, the model compares these two ratios and bases the estimate of need for "Other" space at each campus on the higher of the two ratios. This is a conservative approach because the first ratio assumes the need for "Other" space will never exceed the ratio of "Other" space to total title 5 space as currently exists in the physical inventory at a campus. The need could be very understated if the campus has not yet constructed some of the facilities that are comprised of a majority of"Other" space such as a Child Development Center, Athletic Facilities, or a Perfomling Arts Center. With the second ratio, the need for "Other" space is based on the average of"Other" space for that campus type. This ratio is used to estimate the need for other space for over half (51%) of the campuses in the system. An average by definition means that the ratios for some campuses are higher and some are lower, and the need for "Other" space is essentially being capped by this ratio for over half the campuses in the system. In the long tenn this understates the need for "Other" facilities, but this is preferable to overstating tl1e need.


Page 13

III. INVENTORY AMOUNT AND TYPE OF EXISTING SPACE & INFRASTRUCTURE Current Capacity

The CCC system consists of 72 semi-autonomous districts encompassing 112 colleges, 70 approved off-campus centers, and 22 separately reported district offices. The system assets include over 23, !51 acres of land, 4,982 buildings, and 68 million gross square feet of space that includes 43.1 million assignable square feet (ASF) of space. In addition, the system bas innumerable off-campus outreach centers at various locations. These buildings provide the following assignable square feet in the various title 5 categories as shown in the first column in Table 5 below: TABLE 5 - NET CAPACITY

Title 5 Category Lecture Laboratory ·office Library AWTV Other TOTAL

Current Total ASF

Less Excess Capacity

Net Capacity

6,685 000

-1,369,000

5,316,000

12,228 000

-992,000

11,236 000

7,192,000

-1,359,000

5,833 000

3,819 000

-148,000

3,671,000

647,000

-26,000

621,000

17,806,000

-1,536,000

16,270,000

48,377,000

-5,430,000

42,947,000

This total ASF information is from the systemwide Space Inventory annually submitted by the districts to the Chancellor's Office adjusted to include projects currently in the pipeline. Excess C apacity

Some campuses within the system have excess capacity in various title 5 categories. As previously discussed, the Education Code provides that students have "tree flow" access to all community college sites. While the overall system may appear to have excess facilities capacity, there are many individual campuses within the system that have severe capital facility shortages. Therefore, the capacity needs for the system have been estimated on a campus-by-campus basis, and capacity exceeding I00 percent at individual campuses, approximately 5.4 million ASF (second column), bas been eliminated for the purpose of estimating the need for additional facilities. This was done so that campuses with excess capacity will not artificially decrease the true facilities needs on other campuses. ln its publications, the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) describes "mismatch problems" in the excess space capacity of the CCC system. Examples of this "mismatch" are improper size classrooms on a particular campus that do not fit courses planned 2011-1 2 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 14

to be offered in them, antiquated designs that cannot accommodate modern media presentations, insufficient wheelchair access, or improper wiling for computers or multi-media equipment. CPEC also points out that CCC space standards are the most restrictive of all the community. college systems nationally. These restrictions cause the amount of excess capacity systemwide to be overstated. Excess capacity currently comprises approximately 11 percent of the total system capacity. Given the operating realities imposed by the free flow of students, this level of excess capacity is within reasonable bounds of facility standards. The excess capacity level drops to 8 percent over the five-year timeframe of the plan. (Appendix C.5) The total net capacity for the system is therefore approximately 42.9 million ASF as shown in the third column of the table. Modernization of E xisting Facilities This Five-Year Plan defines total systemwide modernization needs of 27 million ASF at a cost of$14.8 billion. This includes $201 million for critical life safety renovations, $13.2 billion for the modernization/renovation of permanent facilities, and $1.4 billion for the replacement of temporary buildings. Because of the magnitude of the system's modernization needs, the proposal in this Five-Year Plan includes only a portion of the modernization needs of the system. Tllis Five-Year Plan includes only 16.9 million ASF to be modernized over the next five years at a cost of $7.9 billion. This amount includes the cost of: 1) critical life safety renovations, 2) the modernization/renovation of only those permanent buildings over fortv years old and buildings that have been reported by districts as being in need of major renovation and 3) the replacement of temporary buildings over ten-years old. Systemwide Facilities Needs The Five-Year Plans subnlitted by districts, although much improved over earlier efforts that only included projects that the state might fund, do not wholly reflect the total facility needs of the districts. This systemwide plan includes specific projects included in the district's individual 5-year capital outlay plans over the 5-year time frame of the plan. However, there are still systemwide needs that are not reflected in the district's individual 5-year capital outlay plans. For the purposes of submitting the Five-Year Plan pursuant to the requirements of Government Code sections 13100-13102 and Education Code sections 67501 and 67503, the Chancellor's Office has estimated some of these systemwide needs on a statewide basis. In the long tenn, the Chancellor's Office, in consultation with the Association of Chief Business Officers Facilities Task Force, will continue to seek to identify best practices and streamline existing processes in order to ensure high quality for disttict capital outlay planning. The systemwide facilities needs estimated in this section do not add or delete capacity from the system. However, these systemwide needs are in addition to the projects that have been submitted in the district Five-Year Plans, and they must be included in this analysis to provide a more accmate picture of the CCC's systemwide facility needs. 20 11-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

Page 15

Specifically, the Chancellor's Office has estimated the systemwide need for modernization of existing facilities, including critical li fe safety renovations, modernization/renovation, and replacement of temporary facilities projects. The rules for estimating these needs are shown in Table 6. Years one through five of the plan include actual projects submitted by districts in the individual district five-year capital outlay plans for these project types, including both state and locally funded projects. The systemwide facilities needs are estimated only after the space impacts of all projects submitted by the districts have been taken into consideration. Costs Estimates The costs for the additional systemwide needs were estimated based on the California Community Colleges building cost guidelines at California Construction Cost lndex (CCCI) 5276. The cost estimates include an allowance for preliminary plans, working drawings, and construction. Cost estimates tor the replacement of relocatables with permanent facilities include an additional allowance for demoUtion. The cost estimates do not, however, include an allowance for site development costs because it is impossible to estimate the average site cost per ASF since site development costs vary substantially from project to project. Cost estimates for the statewide needs are therefore substantially underestimated. Based on the assumptions provided in Table 6, the Chancellor's Office estimates that the statewide need for modernization of existing faci lities is approximately 27 million ASF at a cost of $14.8 billion. This estimate includes critical life safety renovation, modernization/renovation, and the replacement of temporary facilities projects. Due to the overwhelming need, this FiveYear Plan proposal includes only 16.9 million ASF of the modernization of existing facility needs at a cost of$7.9 billion as shown in Table 7 below: Table 7 - MODERNIZATION OF EXISTING FACILTIES Modernization Of Existing Facilities

Critical Life Safety Renovation Modernization/ Renovation

Estimated Need ASF N/A

Costs

$201,584,000

25,364,000 $13,1 87,392,000

Replace Temporary Buildings

2,100,000 $1,428,498,000

TOTAL

27,464,000 $14,817,474,000


Five-Year Plan Proposal ASF

Costs

Need Carryover

Outyear

$0

$0

15,140,000 $6,847,301,000 $1 ,503,581,000

$4,836,510,000

N/A

$201,584,000

Deferred Facilities Needs

$322,048,000

$227,879,000

16,906,000 $7,927,456,000 $1 ,825,629,000

$5,064,389,000

1,766,000

$878,571,000

Page 16

Table 6 - SYSTEMWIDE FACILITIES NEEDS METHODOLOGY Text No.

I

II

Driver

Critical Life Safety Renovations

Goal

To maintain

Basis for

Projects

Determining Need

(@ CCCI 5276) (@ EPI2928)

Average statewide spending for the

11-12 thru 12-13

Projects identified by the districts with costs.

13-14 thru 15-16

1 systemwide need project per year.

(includes fire/life safety,

ongoing funding

last 2 years for critical projects. ASF

seismic and infrastructure)

based on history.

is not applicable.

To modernize all

ASF for buildings in bad condition plus

11-12 thru 12-13


permanent

ASF for buildings over 25 years old;

13-14 thru 15-16

1 systemwide need project per year; projects

buildings over 25

projects address buildings over 40 years

years old.

old.

Modernization/Renovation

to start in each year. Cost Formula = ASF $469 $469 = (PW=$54,C=$415)

Ill

Replacement of Temporary Buildings

To minimize the

ASF for temporary buildings over 10

use of temporary

years old.

13-14 thru 15-16

Cost formula = ASF • $680 $680 = (PW=$72,C=$553, Demolition= $55)

buildings.

IV

Enrollment

(discussed in next section)

To address 100% of

Enrollment projections converted to

11-12 thru 12-13


the enrollment need

ASF using title 5, California Code of

13-14 thru 15-16

1 systemwide need project per year;

at all sites excluding

Regulations formulas.

projects to start in each year. Cost Formula = ASF • $669

needs met through alternative methods.

20 I 1-12 Five- Year Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

1 systemwide need project per year.

$669 = (PW=$72, C=$553,E=$44)

Page 17

I

Critical Life Safety Renovations - I Critical life safety means that a building poses imminent danger to the life or safety of the building occupants, has a potential seismic risk, or has potential for immediate infrastructure failure. Because of the immediacy of critical life safety issues, many of the projects are funded at the local level. If projects are submitted for state funding and are material enough to require state money to mitigate the critical life safety issues, those projects are funded as soon as possible. Therefore, district Five-Year Plans typically would not contain unfunded critical life safety projects. For the purposes of this submittal, the Chancellor 's Office has estimated the annual costs for critical life safety projects not yet identified on a statewide basis. Since the nature of these projects is such that they cannot be planned, the model includes a projection for critical life safety projects based on the average cost of these projects last year of approximately $17 million per year. lt should be noted that the scope of these projects is constrained to only those renovations that mitigate the critical life safety aspects of the facilities, and any building code upgrades required by the Division of the State Architect. Projects that completely modernize existing facilities are estimated below in the Modernization/Renovation category. Modernization/Renovation - II Approximately 71 percent of the CCC facili ties are 25 years or older and in dire need of renovation and/or modemization as shown in the chart in Exhibit 8A. This includes 2,643 buildings totaling 29 million ASF. Of the 2,643 buildings, 1,754 buildings are over 40 years old. Local districts have tried to maintain their stmctures to the extent possible utilizing the limited local resources and state funded local assistance facilities-related programs. However, funds have been too little and too late to keep pace with the deterioration and outdated condition of the system's facilities. Prior to 2002-03, the district's individual 5-year plans included only growth projects as the BOG priority criteria utilized by the Chancellor's Office prior to the 2002-03 fiscal year emphasized construction of new facilities over renovation/modernization of existing facilities. The BOG has since adopted new prioritization criteria which include two modernization categories, one for instructional space and one for administrative space. With the inclusion of two modernization categories, the district's individual five-year capital outlay plans include many modernization projects. Additionally, due to advances in technology, there is a need to incorporate more ·sophisticated technology into the CCC structures to enable the system to deliver state-of-the-art instntctional programs. In order to make buildings "smarter" by providing cabling and deliverance systems to the instructional space, major renovations will be required.


Page 18

Exhibit 8A PERMANENT ASF BY YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000

ASF Over 25 Years 2,643 Buildings 71% oflnv no

1,400,000 1,200,000 LL.

VI <{

1,000,000

ASF Over40 Years 1, 754 Buildings 47% of lnvento

800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0

Year

Because of the magnitude of the system's modernization/renovation needs, the proposal in this Five-Year Plan includes only a portion of the modernizatioolrenovation needs of the system. As shown in Table 7, the Plan includes a total of 15.1 million ASF to be modernized over the next five years and includes only those buildings over forty years old and buildings that have been reported by distticts as being in need of major renovation. This would result in the renovation of the oldest buildings and those in the poorest condi tion first, while buildings twenty-five years or older but less than forty years old would be modernized in a subsequent five-year timeframe. Therefore, 15.1 million ASF of modernization/renovation needs are included in this Five-Year Plan proposal at a cost of approximately $6.8 billion, leaving $1.5 billion in out-year costs for modernization/renovation projects started in the plan year and approximately $4.8 billion of modernization/renovation needs deferred beyond the plan timeframe. The cost estimate fo r modernization/renovation needs is based on 75 percent of the cost of a new building, excluding equipment ($469 per ASF). Replace Temporary Facilities - Ill The CCC system inventory includes temporary facilities that have in many cases been in operation far beyond their useful life. It is the policy of the Board of Governors that the districts provide permanent structures rather than relocatable buildings to meet student access requirements. Temporary facilities are not as effective for providing certain instructional programs, and are more costly to operate and maintain than permanent structures. 20 11-1 2 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan Calilomia Community Colleges

Page 19

Exhibit 8B shows that many of the "temporary" structures on community college campuses were placed ten or more years ago. Based on the assumptions provided in Table 6, the Chancellor's Office estimates the statewide cost for replacing temporary facil ities with pennanent facilities at $879 million over the next five years, leaving $322 m.iJlion in out-year costs. This cost assumes that the total ASF of temporary inventory over ten years of age in 20 11 -12 (1,766,000 ASF) will be replaced over the next five years at the average new building cost, with an added allowance for demolition ($680 per ASF: PW=$72, C=$553, Demolition=$55). Temporary buildings not yet ten years of age at the start of the plan, 334,000 ASF at a cost of $228 million, are deferred beyond the plan timeframe. Exhibit 88 TEMPORARY ASF BY YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION 140,000 120,000

-E

Temporary ASF OverlOYears

::;.

100,000

u.. V') q:

80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0

Year

20 11-1 2 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page20

IV. UNMET FACILITIE S NEEDS Net Enrollment Need Table 9 below shows that 18.7 million ASF is needed to accommodate projected enrollment over the next five years. This estimate is based on the ASF needed to accommodate projected enrollment growth less the net capacity currently available to meet that enrollment demand, and includes 11.5 million ASF of current facilities deficiencies and 7.2 million ASF of capacity needed to accommodate projected enrollment growth over the next five years. Table 9- NET ENROLLMENT NEED

title 5 Category Lecture laboratory Office

TOTAL ASF NEEDED Future Enrollment Current Deficiency Growth

Total

433,000

837,000

1,270 ,000

3,086,000

2,296,000

5,382,000

621,000

655,000

1,276,000

Library

1,646,000

574,000

2,220,000

AVfTV

798,000

57,000

855,000

4,911,000

2,787,000

7,698,000

11,495,000

7,206,000

18,701 ,000

Other TOTAL

Alternative Means of Delivery I Year Round Operation A portion of the capital facilities needs identified above can be offset by the use of alternative means of educational delivery. These alternative means of delivery involve modifying various components of the educational delivery process including scheduling, space utilization, and alternative instruction. Scheduling/Space Utilization - l The CCC system is the most aggressive California public postsecondary segment in the use of alternative scheduling and has been very successful in maximizing the use of existing facilities year-round. The average number of days of instruction for the 112 colleges has increased from 271 days per year in 1996-97 to 292 days for the current year. Community colleges schedule classes from the early morning through late evening as well as on weekends to provide for the required student access. The system also continues to expand course offerings by utilizing off-campus facilities such as leased storefronts, businesses, high schools and other joint-use facilities. Districts continue to provide space for University of California, California State University, and other private post secondary institutions on numerous campuses and sites.

20 11-12 Five- Year Capital Outlay Plan

Califom ia Commun ity Colleges

Page21

Year-Round Operation (YRO). In addition to the traditional Primary tenn (fall and spring tenns), many community college districts offer both summer and winter tenns. For the purposes of evaluating facility usage, 2008-09 summer FTES is 43% of average Primary term FTES. Winter FTES is 11.8% of average Primary term FTES (Appendix H for a detailed discussion of YRO). Ln 2008-09, 903,000 community college students attended summer sessions. These summer students generated approximately 146,000 Full-Time Equivalent Students (FTES) or 26% of the average FTES achieved during the Primary term (Appendix H). An additional 249,000 students attended winter session, accounting for 40,000 FTES (7.1 % of average Primary term FTES). However, in order to evaluate facility usage, a "Term Factor" must be used in order to have an accurate basis of comparison between Primary term FTES and summer and winter FTES. This is because summer and winter term calendars are compressed requiring students to spend longer hours in class over a shorter time frame. For the same reason, it also means the facilities utilized during summer term cannot support the same FTES generated dming the Primary tenn. The duration of Primary term and non-primary terms is individual to each district. However, the average Primary term session for a community college district is J 8 weeks. Summer Sessions oo average include two six-week sessions. CCC utilizes a tenn factor for summer FTES based on the average 6-week session in summer vs. the average 18-week session in the Primary term. This results in a CCC term factor of 1.67. Therefore, for the purpose of evaluating facility usage, 2008-09 summer FTES is approximately 43% of average Primary term FTES after the term factor is applied to actual FTES. The 2008-09 Winter FTES is 11 .8 % of average Primary term FTES after the term factor is applied. Alternative Methods of Instruction - II Alternative methods of instruction such as distance learning are also an important component in providing increased student access for the CCC system. Many districts are actively pursui ng online courses as a method of instruction in order to provide greater access for students as well as reducing the need for new facilities.

In 2008-09, distance education FTES (116,579) accounted for 8.8% oftotal FTES (1,316,485). The percentage of distance education FTES to total FTES is up from 7.6% in 2007-08 and 6.2% in 2006-07. An informal survey of districts done by the Chancellor's Office found that some of the larger districts report that reducing their facility needs by over 5 percent via alternative means of delivery is unachievable, whi le smaller districts report 2-3 percent is a stretch. Because the Chancellor's Office is committed to utilizing scarce state resources to the fullest extent possible, it has been assumed in this analysis that campuses with enrolhnent deficiencies will meet 5 percent of their total enrollment needs (-2,395,000 ASF) through alternative means of delivery as shown in Table 10. The 5 percent is a number that the Chancellor's Office assumed would be achievable for most districts and is intended to provide incentive to districts to first think of alternative means of instruction to solve facilities shortages rather than new facilities. 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

Page 22

Additionally, systemwide enrollment growth will lead to even greater efficiency in the use of existing capacity and, on average, excess capacity is anticipated to decline over the five years of the plan. It has been assumed that the amount of the decrease in excess capacity within the fiveyear timeframe (-642,000 ASF) has been offset against the estimate of total facilities needed to accommodate enrollment growth. Table 10- UNMET ENROLLMENT NEED

title 5 Category

ASF To Meet Enrollment Need

Excess Capacity Used to Offset Enrollment Need

Less Alternative Means of Delivery

Unmet Enrollment Need

Lecture

1,270,000

-249,000

-167,000

854,000

Laboratory

5,381,000

-205,000

-660,000

4,516,000

Office

1,276,000

-57,000

-226,000

993,000

Library

2,220,000

-32,000

-264,000

1,924,000

AVffV

855,000

0

-68,000

787,000

7,698,000

-99,000

-1,010,000

6 ,589,000

18,700,000

-642,000

-2,395,000

15,663,000

Other TOTAL

New Facilities for E nrollment Growth Therefore, 15,663,000 ASF is needed at a cost of $15.7 billion to accommodate cu1Tent and future enrollment as shown below in Table 11. This includes individual growth projects, both state and locally funded, submitted by districts for all five years of the plan plus identified systemwide facilities needs for each campus tor the final three years of the plan. The systemwide facilities needs are estimated only after the space impacts of all projects submitted by the districts have been taken into consideration. In the previous section, Table 6 summarized the rules for estimating the costs of these new facilities. An average building cost of $669 per ASF was utilized based on the California Community Colleges building cost guidelines at California Construction Cost lndex 5276 and Equipment Price Index 2928. This amount represents the average building cost for all space types and also includes an allowance for preliminary plans, working drawings and equipment (PW=$72, C=$553, and E=$44 per ASF). The estimate does not, however, include site development costs because it is impossible to estimate the average site cost per ASF since site development costs vary substantially from project to project. Because site costs have not been included in this estimat(on of the systemwide needs, the cost estimate for the statewide need is substantially underestimated.

20 11-1 2 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan Califomia Community Colleges

Page23

Table 11- TOTAL UNMET NEEDS and COSTS UNMET NEEDS

ASF

COSTS

New Facilities For Enrollment Growth

15,663,000

$15,672,405,000

Modernization Of Existing Facilities

27.464,000

$14,817,474,000

43,127,000

$30,489,879,000

To tal

T otal Unmet Needs and Costs Table 11 shows that the total unmet faci lities needs for the system are $30.5 billion. Tlus unmct need is comprised of two components: 1) new facilities needed to accommodate current and future enrollment growth ($15.7 billion) and 2) modernization of existing buildings ($14.8 billion).

2011-12 Five-Ycar Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleg
Page 24

V. FACILITIES TO MEET UNMET NEED

Facilities Proposed in Five-Year Plan

Ne w Facilities for Ellrollmellf Growth. This Five-Year Plan includes $13.1 billion for new facilities to accommodate existing and future enrollment as shown in Table 12. This amount includes individual projects, both state and locally funded, submitted by districts for all five years of the plan plus identified systemwide facilities needs for each campus for the final three years of the plan. Table 12- TOTAL FACILITIES NEEDS & COSTS

As signable Square Feet (ASF) A

UNMET FACILITIES NEEDS: New Facilities for Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities

15,663,000

$15,672,405 ,000

27.464.000

$14,817,474,000

4 3,127,000

$30,489,879,000

New Facilities For Enrollment Growth

15,663,000

$13,109,296,000

Modernization of Existing Facilities

16,906,000

$7,927,456,000

32,569,000

$21 ,036,7 52,000

--

$2,563,109,000

10,558,000

$6,890,018,000 $9,453,127,000

Total Unrnet Needs

B

Costs

PROPOSED FACILITIES IN 5-YEAR PLAN :

Total Proposed Facilities

DEFERRED FACILITIES NEEDS: New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Modernization of Existing Facilities A-B=C


10,558,000

Modernizatioll. The modernization needs of $7.9 billion contained within the plan were estimated based on the assumptions discussed in the previous section. As with enrollment projects, this amount includes individual projects, both state and locally funded, submitted by the districts for all five years of the plan plus identified systemwide facilities needs for each campus for the final three years of the plan.

2011-12 Five- Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 25

Deferred Costs of System Needs The deferred costs of systemwide needs include out-year costs for continuing projects and need carryover to future plan years as shown in Table 13.

Out-year Costs. The out-year costs to complete continuing phases of projects started but not assumed to be fully funded within the Five-Year PI an timeframe are estimated to be $4.4 billion, including approximately $2.6 billion for new facil ities and $1.8 billion for modernization of existing facil ities. Need Canyover. Additional facilities needs, 10.6 million ASF at a cost of $5.1 billion, have been deferred beyond the tirneframe of this Five-Year Plan because the need in this area is too substantial to be accomplished within the five years of the plan. There may also be carryover of new project costs from year-to-year within the Five-Year Plan tirnefrarne in order to accommodate project budgets and scheduling. Table 13 - DEFERRED FACILITIES NEEDS AND COSTS Assignable Square Feet (ASF)

C1

CONTINUING PHASES OF PROJECTS STARTED IN PLAN: New Facilities For Enrollment Growth

N/A


N/A

NEED CARRYOVER: New Facilities For Enrollment Growth Total Need Carryover

10,558,000 10,558,000


10,558,000


C1+C2 = C

$2,563,109,000 $1,825,629,000 $ 4,388, 738,000

Total Continuing Phases C2

Costs

$ -$5,064,389,000 $5,064,389,000 $9,453,127,000

Summary This Five-Year Plan proposal contains only a portion ($21 billion) of the estimated systemwide facilities needs. An additional $9.5 billion of currently identified facilities needs are deferred to future years as shown in Table 13, with $4.4 billion of out-year costs for continuing phases of projects statted within the Five-Year Plan timeframe and $5.1 billion of need carryover into subsequent plan years, primarily for modernization/renovation projects. At this time, the total unmet facil ities needs for the California Community College system have been estimated at approximately $30.5 billion. 20 11-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page26

VI. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ADDRESSING IDENTIFIED NEEDS Enrollment Pressures

In order to accurately assess the needs presented in this report and to examine some of the potential consequences of not providing the needed facilities, it is necessary to review the role of the California Community Colleges in terms of public postsecondary education. To restate a very important point, the CCCs form the largest postsecondary educational system in the world. The system annually serves over 2.9 million students - over 70 percent of the state's public college students - in both vocational and academic program offerings.

The current economic and political environment has certainly had a negative impact on community college enrollments. District operating budgets have been cut necessitating cutbacks in course offerings and the number of sessions distiicts offer. Additionally, fees were increased from $20 to $26 per unit in fall 2009.

' Despite these negative trends 1 the decrease in student enrollment in the community colleges has been minimal. Approximately_1,795,000 students were enrolled in the community college system in fall 2008. By fall 2009, this number had only decreased by approximately 2,000 students to an estimated 1,793,000, a decrease of approximately -0.12%. Although student enrollment numbers decreased from fa112008 to fall 2009, the Full-time Eqwvalent Students (FTES) increased. Fall 2008 FTES was approximately 565,000 FTES. Fall 2009 FTES was 576,000, an increase of approximately 2%. This indicates that although there was a slight decline in student enrollment, the students that did attend took more units in 2009 than in 2008. Historical data indicates the slight decline in fall 2009 student enrollment is a short-term response to the fee increase and otqer negative economic trends. The community college system last experienced a decline in enrollment in 2003 and 2004 due to a difficult economic environment and the resulting fee increase to $26 per unit. The majority of the impact occurred in fall 2003 when student enrollment dropped by approximately 6%. Fall 2004 saw an additional decrease in student enrollment of approximately 2%. The system then had modest increases in enrollment for the next two years (less than 1%) indicating a recovery bad started. The system then experienced over 5% annual growth in student enrollment in fall 2007 and fall 2008. There are other factors that indicate that the slight drop in enrollment will be short term. CPEC projects that approximately 81% of the enrollment growth in higher education over the next decade will occur in the community col1ege system. Additionally, students unable to enter the UC or CSU systems due to restricted enrollments are enrolling at community colleges throughout the state. To the extent that further enrollment restrictions and higher fees at CSU and UC cause students to re-evaluate college plans, the transfer function may become more attractive to students that might otherwise have spent four years at CSU or UC. Given the growth the system has been experiencing for much of the last decade, the capital outlay needs of the system are so great that a short-term drop in enrollment is likely to offset 20 l l-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan Cal ifornia Community Colleges

Page 27

only a very small portion of that need. ft is unlikely that the CCC system will experience a longterm drop in enrollment that would result in the need for significantly less facilities because, dollar fo r dollar, the community college system is the best value for higher education in the state.

Mission Critical Impacts

Two critical components of the CCC system are its transfer function and its preparation of students for the workforce. Transfers The transfer function is a critical mission of the CCC system, and the system has initiated a host of policies and programs to improve this function. Through its transfer function, the community college system is a vital component in assisting the other public postsecondary systems in achieving diversity goals and in reducing the facility needs placed on the other systems facility needs that the CCC system can provide at less cost to the state than the other public postsecondary institutions. Workforce Training The ability of the CCC system to prepare students for high-tech 21 51 century jobs provides support for the state's economy. The statewide unemployment rate of 12.6% has resulted in students enrolling in community colleges to pursue education and retraining to get back into the workforce. The system prepares students for careers relative to state and local workforce needs and for entry-level employment, occupational advancement, and career changes. Facilities are an important part of the job-training program. For example, buildings with inadequate electrical capacity cannot prepare students for a computer-based job market, automotive labs with inadequate ventilation cannot be used due to student and staff safety concerns, and science labs with antiquated equipment cannot prepare students for careers in the medical field. Funding

With this broad overview of the CCC role - as mandated by the Legislature and as contained in the California Master Plan for Higher Education- it is evident that the projected postsecondary student growth will place a larger burden, relative to the other public postsecondary systems, on the community college system - a burden the CCC system cannot effectively bear without significant new, increased expenditures for facilities. The Chancellor's Office has done an analysis of the total facilities needs for the community college system over the next ten years (201 1-12 thru 2020-21) (Appendix G). The total facilities needs for the next ten years, including the $30.5 billion of capital facility needs identified in this 5-Year Plan, are estimated at approximately $35.8 billion. Resources currently available are estimated at $ 18.2 billion of local Proposition 39 bond funds. All available state General Obligation bonds have been programmed and/or expended. Generally, current and future local Proposition 39 bond funds will fund over 40% of state supportable facilities and 100% of non-state supportable facilities such as parking lots/garages, stadiums, cafeterias, bookstores, and health centers. The remaining need for facilities to be funded by state general obligation bonds 2011-12 Five-Ycar Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 28

is $17.6 billion based on this level of local contribution. Tllis equates to a need for $3.5 billion of state general obligation bond funding every two years. Given this great need, the state must continue to work closely with the districts to appropriately allocate scarce resources to adequately address the needs of the growing mm1bers of community college students in California.

Statewide General Obligation Bonds/Lease-Revenue Bonds. Proposition 47 (2002) and Proposition 55 (2004) provided community colleges with a total of $1.67 billion from state general obligation bonds. Proposition ID (2006) provided $1.478 billion in state bond funds for community college projects. All of the existing state bond funds for community colleges have either been spent or are comnlitted to projects. The 81 projects included in the 2011-12 spendi ng plan at $474 million (state funding) will require a new education bond approved by the voters in November 2010. Proposition 39 - Local Funds. The funding for co1m11unity college facilities is a responsibility shared by the state and local community college districts. The primary source of financing for the local share of construction costs is voter-approved local bonds. From June 1998 through November 2000, when bond measures required two-thirds voter approval, only 10 community college districts passed local bonds, providing $875.5 million for community college facilities. Since passage of Proposition 39, voters have approved 83 of 96 (86%) local bond measures, authorizing $22.8 billion in bonds for 64 community college districts. Voluntmy Local COittribution. In November 1999 the BOG adopted new criteria for prioritizing capital outlay projects. The new priority criteria emphasize a "least cost to the state" policy. The "least cost to the state" policy stretches scarce state resources to help meet enrollment growth and modernization needs by providing an incentive for districts to contribute local dollars to projects. Thus far, the policy appears to be very successful in achieving that objective. Tn the 2011-12 Capital Outlay Plan, 74 of81 (91%) ofthe 2011 state-funded projects provide for a local contribution. Total state funded projects for 201 1-12 equal $878 million including both state funding and local contributions, consisting of 77 new start projects at $656 nlillion and 4 continuing projects at $222 million. Local contributions provide $404 million of the $878 million in project costs to support state funded projects in the 2011-12 budget, a "system" contribution of 46 percent. Additionally, local contributions will provide another $753 million in years 20 12-13 thnt 2013-14 to complete state projects funded in 2011-12. Districts construct many projects utilizing only local funding. An additional $1.44 billion in projects is funded entirely with local funds in 2011-12, including 46 new projects at $ 0.04 billion and 133 continuing projects at $1.4 billion. The local contribution is 80% for 2011-12 when these projects funded entirely by districts are taken into account. The local bonds must be used to fund non-state supportable but educationally essential capital outlay such as land acquisition, parking, cafeterias, bookstores, and health centers. The land acquisition is particuJarly significant because the land costs can be equal to or greater than the 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 29

cost of the buildings depending on the area where the district is located. The State Allocation Board funds 50% of actual land costs for K-12 projects. The community colleges must fund all land costs locall y. Additionally, the CCC does not augment project costs once costs are approved in the budget. Therefore, cost overruns at bid award are paid for by the district. Since this happens later in the process, these additional local contributions cannot be captured in this plan. The voluntaty contribution has been very successful in providing incentive for districts to participate in the state capital outlay program; thereby, reducing overall state costs which then allows more districts to participate in the state program.

2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Collc.::ges

Page 30

VII. RECONCILIATION TO PREVIOUS PLAN

Summary of Total C ost Increase The total unmet need identified for the CCC system in the 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan (hereafter "20 11-12 Plan") is $30.5 billion. Of this amount, $21 billion is included in the Five-Year Plan period and $9.5 billion deferred to future years. The 2010-11 Capital Outlay Five-Year Plan (hereafter "2010-11 Plan") included total unmet needs of $27.9 billion, with $18.6 billion included in the Five-Year Plan and $9.3 billion deferred to future years. The total increase in costs between the two plans is therefore approximately $2.6 billion as shown below in Table 14. This represents an increase in costs between the two planning ·years of approximately 9% percent.

Table 14- TOTAL COST INCREASE

2011-12 Plan (in billions) Proposed Facilities in Five-Year Plan $ 21.0 Defen·ed Facilities Needs $ 9.5 $ 30.5 TOTAL UNMET NEEDS

2010-11 Plan $ 18.6 $ 9.3 $ 27.9

Difference

$ $

2.4 0.2 2.6

The $2.6 billion increase in overall cost is largely attributable to l) an increase to the California Cost Index (CCCI) from CCCI 5065 to CCCI 5276; 2) increased costs to accommodate increased enrollment; and increased modernization needs. In previous years, the Department of General Services (DGS) provided yearly updates of the

projected CCCI which the state used to escalate construction costs for capital outlay projects. This was a fixed cost index that did not escalate after the initial construction budget was established. In response to the rapid escalation of construction costs in the state, DOF provided direction in Budget Letter 05-21, based on DGS recomm endations that construction costs are to be escalated on a monthly basis starting from the last updated CCCI to the estimated start and midpoint of construction at a rate of .42 percent. DOF has updated the original Budget Letter 5-2 1 with Budget Letter 09-26. CCC has implemented Budget Letter 09-26 consistent with the instruction from DOF and with other state funded capital outlay projects. There is an increase in the total ASF associated with space needed to meet enrollment growth of approximately L.8 million ASF reflecting higher enrollment projections throughout the system. This also reflects the lack of new state bonding funding in budget years 2008-09, 2009-10, and 20 10-1 1 such that planned growth projects have not gone forward resulting in a backlog of new asf needed to accommodate enrollment growth. The cost for these additional facilities ($1.6 billion), as well as the increase from CCCI 5065 to 5276 ($ 0.6 Billion), is approximately $2.2 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 31

Billion. Modernization costs in the 2011-12 plan have also increased by $ 0.4 billion, for a total increase between the plan years of $2.6 billion between the two plan years. The cost increase for modernization is largely attributable to the increase from CCCI 5065 to 5276. C hanges to Fir st Two Years of Plan

Plan Year 2010-11. Although the 2010-11 plan year is not included in the 2011 - 12 Plan, changes to this plan year impact the future years for continuing projects. State-funded projects. The 2011-12 Plan contains 13 state-funded projects with a total cost of $111 million for the 2010-11 year. The 2010-11 Plan included 82 state-funded projects with a total cost of $594 million for the 2010- 11 year. The 2010-1 1 plan year has decreased by approximately $483 million due to 69 projects being moved to later years as shown in Table 17. The projects were moved to later years due to concerns there would be no statewide General Obligation bond on the November 2010 ballot. The projects left in the 20 I 0-11 plan year are funded with existing bond funds. Table 17- CHANGES TO 2010-11

2010-11-10 in 2010-11 Plan Move 69 Projects to Later Years Final 2010-11 Budget in 2011-12 Plan

$

s$

593,678 482,662 111,016

Plan Year 2011-12. The 2011-12 budget year was the second year of the 20 I 0- I I Plan and is the first year of the 20 11-12 Plan. The 81 state- funded projects included in 201 1-12 at a cost of approximate! y $474 million (state funding only) in the 2011-12 Plan are therefore consistent with the budget proposal for the 20 1112 Governor's Budget submitted concurrently with this Five-Year Plan. This differs from the much larger number of projects included in the second year (20 11-1 2) shown in the 201 0-11 Plan, at a cost of approximately $1 billion. There are a variety of reasons that a project listed in the second year of the systemwide FiveYear Plan may not appear in the first year of a subsequent Five-Year Plan. The second year of the systemwide Five-Year Plan typically represents the Initial Project Proposals submitted by the districts that appear to be state supportable and may be developed into Final Project Proposals in the next budget cycle. However, inclu sion of a project on the lPP list, and therefore in the second year of projects on the systemwide Five-Year Plan, does not guarantee funding of the project in the next plan year. 2011-12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Page 32

The continuing phases of previously funded projects always have priority and first claim on funds available. New projects (those for which no previous phases have been funded) must compete every year for the remaining available funds. A project might appear to be very competitive when reviewed as an Initial Project Proposal, but may have changed or been redesigned such that it is no longer state supportable or as competitive as a Final Project Proposal. Although very competitive as an FPP, there may not be enough funding available to reach that particular project. A decision could have been made at the district level to delay the project. Ln short, the second year of the Plan will change as it becomes the first year of the subsequent Five-Year Plan, and the first year of the systemwide Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan will always reflect the budget proposal submitted to the Department of Finance for inclusion in the Governor's Budget.


Page 33

APPENDIXB B.1 - Summary of Capital Outlay Five-Year Plan (By Class Code) B.2 - Capital Outlay Five-Year Plan- Project List (By Class Code) B.3 - 2011 -12 Spending Plan

20 l l -12 Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan California Community Colleges

Appendix B

Appendix B.1 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES SUMMARY CAPITAL OUTLAY FIVE-YEAR PLAN FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 2011-12 2012· 13 2014-15

Priority Critical Infrastructure Deficiencies A-1 State Funded Non-State Funded S ubtotal A-1 A-3 State Funded Non-Sta te Funded Subtotal A-3 A-4 State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal A-4 Subtotal CID State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal CID

so

Total

Outyear

so

$17,426

S17,426 $0 $17,426

$17.426

$1.510 $1 ,510

so

$11,426

$52,278 S1.733 $54,01 1

so

$0 $0

so

$2,563 $1,038 $3,601

$20.762 $10,1 20 $30,882

$33.460 $89 $33,549

$5.602 $1,276 $6,878

$62,387 $12.523 $74,910

so

$2.454 $0 $2,454

$27,064 $0 $27,064

$4,775 $1.200 $5,975

$10,882 S11 ,700 $22,582

$14,588 $0 $14,588

$59,763 $12.900 $72,663

so $0 so

$2,454 $223 $2,677

$29.627 S2.548 $32,175

S42,963 $11,320 $54,283

$61,76!;1 $1 1,789 $73,557

$37.616 $1.276 $38,892

$174,428 $27,156 $201 ,584

$0 $0 $0

State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal B

$264,378 $872,331 $1,136 ,709

$749,967 $713.993 $1,463,960

$1,224,639 $554,968 $1 ,779,607

$3,188,525 $383,588 $3,572,113

$2,574,168 $139,880 $2,714,048

$8,001.677 $2,664,761 $1 0,666,438

$2.444,348 $32,530 $2,476,878

State Funded Non-State Funded Subtota l 0-1

$79,134 $201,652 $280,786

$242,625 $158,142 $400,767

$305.196 $113.319 $418,515

$131.685 $99,985 $231 ,670

$19,182 $52,301 $71,483

$777,822 $625,399 $1,403,221

$13,687 $13,093 $26,779

State Funded Non-State Funded S ubtotal D-2

$241,812 $241 ,812

so

$771 $33,844 $34,614

$11,484 $31,861 $43,345

$12,071 $64,787 $76,857

$3,992 $33,551 $37,543

$28,317 $405,854 $434,171

$10,255 $42,933 $53,188

State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal E

$9.361 $11 1.834 $121 ,195

$12.927 $55,136 $68,063

$77,204 $160,281 $237,485

$45,275 $109.497 $154,772

$1 3.795 $10,156 $23,951

$158.561 $446,905 $605,466

$600 $5,664 $6,264

Subtotal ECP State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal ECP

$352,873 $1,427,629 $1 ,780,502

$1,006,289 $961,115 $1,967,404

$1,618,523 $860,429 $2,478,952

$3,377,555 $657,857 $4,035,41 3

$2,611,137 $235,888 $2,847,025

$8,966,377 $4,142,919 $1 3,1 09,296

$2.468,890 $94,219 $2,563,109

State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal C

$117.466 $335,678 $453,144

$345,143 $454,335 $799,478

$740,387 $385,278 $1 ,125,666

$2.675,499 $283,736 $2,959,235

$1 ,946,602 $52,072 $1,998,675

S5,825.098 $1,511,099 $7,336,1 97

$1,688,839 $97,879 $1 ,786,718

State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal F

$847 $81.687 $82,534

$29.256 554,068 $83,324

$30,432 $24,832 $55,263

$30.429 $52.144 $82,573

$20,263 $65,717 $85,980

$111,226 $278,449 $389,675

$8,039 $30,872 $38,911

Subtotal FIM State Funded Non-State Funded Subtotal FIM

$118,313 $417.365 $535,678

$374.399 $508,403 $882,802

$770,819 $410,110 $1 ,180,929

$2,705,928 $335,880 $3,041 ,808

$1,966.865 $117,790 $2,084,655

$5,936,324 $1,789,548 $7,725,872

$1,696,878 $128,751 $1 ,825,629

$473,640 $1,845.217 $2,318,857

$1,410.315 $1,472,066 $2,882,382

$2.432,305 $1,281,859 $3,714,164

$6,145.252 $1,005.526 $7,150,778

$4,615,618 $354,954 $4,970,571

$15.077,130 $5,959.622 $21 ,036,752

$4,165,768 $222.970 $4,388,739

$0 $223 $223

$17,426

2015-1 6

$0 $0

$0

so

Enrollme ntJCaseload/Po!;!ulation ~

0·1

0 -2

!;

Facilitl£/lnfrastruc ture ~

f.

M Qd~rnization

TOTAL ALL PROJECTS Sta te Funded Non-State Funded TOTAL ALL P ROJECTS

Appendix B.l

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Fiw Year Plan - PrOjoctlost Cal .

District

2011

Project Title

Campus

Ph.

Crlt!callntrawuctyro Deficiencies &1 To provide aplo fpcii!Ucs and actlvato existing space: lilo/s afoty proloctl Ohlono Chione Coligso SArETY ISSUES (pa:llways & !rips) System Gon System Gon CID 2013 System Gon Syslom Gon Sys1om Goo System Gon

I

P,W

S

2012 Ph. S

N

0

223

C

2013 Ph. S

N

0

2014

Plo.

N

S

Ph.

N

2015 S

P

17,426

17.426

0

17,426

0

P 223

Ou t Years S

N

0 P

0

Ph.

1,510

CIO ?Oit. CtD 2015 Total

N

0

1,510

285

0

17.426

0

2.423

0

17,426 17.426

0 0

5.602

1,276

0

ol

0

0

&1 !2 arg~jgg J!i}fg (iU:III11£~ i!nd i!SCliViiSRg~IIIIUD IUi!~O: ~~ilml' dgfls;lsm'll: nr212~t~ Mt San Jaclnlo Roowoods

Menifee Valley Renovate Oldg. 3000 - Field /let Compliance Cooler College 0! rno 11r1 Ou•ldong Rod.,.,'Oods Rodwooas CO' ege Of Tho UL~Iy lnfrastruc:ure Repjacomonll Scism'c Rod'...'OodS Sl!onglhon•ng San Nom any Cc Cemor SEIS MIC UPGRADE & REMODEL ALEMANY FranCisco CAMPUS Santa Monica Santa Monica Corsair Sladtum Seismic Upgrade Colle e Total

P.W

p

1.1 51

0

w

1.336

0

P.W

1.127

0

c

17,003

0

c

P,W

0

C,E

0

0

1,038

2.563

1,038

313

0

0

10,120

20,762

10,120

C.E

3,551

200

P,W

1,224

0

p

263

c

33,197

E

44W,C.E 0

0

45

33.460

89

5,602

1.276

9.656

0 0 C.E 11,700

14,588

0

M To provldg ulo [3clll!lcs and act!yato oxla!lnn space: Immediate Infrastructure failure prolocts M1 San JaCinto Ohlono Ohlono Ohtono

MI. San Jacinto Coltego Ohlono Cotege Ohlone College Ohlone CoHego

Ronovato BLDG 2 RENOVATE BLOGS 4 AND 9 RENOVATE Building 5

Ohtono Solano

Ohlono Couoge SolanoCollogo

Renovmo Buildongs 3 and 6 Dldg. 1200TheatorRemodol

I I

Replace F.ro Alarm System - SJC

P.W

P,W P.W P.W

1,307 ! ,147

Total

2.454

0 0 0

CIIUcallnfrastructuro DeRcloncles Total

2,454

223

Enrollmoni/Cnsgload/Popu1a!lpn To prpv!do adgguatc and usablo lnstruct!pnal space: proJects to lncroalo Instructional C!!PaciiY Fino llr1s Complex Allan Allan l~ancc<:\ C,E 0 35.816 Hancock Collogo lndusufal Technology Modemlzallon. Phase I 1\Uan Allan Hancock 5,825 0 C.E Hancock College lilian Hancock lnoustrial Technology ModcmlzaJion. Phase II Allan Hancock College Public Safety Secondary Effects Allan Allan Hanc:ock P.W 87 Hancock College

C C

0

1,000

Appendix B.2

C.E

1,226 0

14,678 12,073 27,064

0 0

0

4,775

1,200

10.882

11,700

14,588

0

0

ol

29.627

2.548

42,963

11.320

61 ,768

11,789

37,6i6

1,270

0

ol

0

244

C,E

0

2.047

C.E

0

913

§

P,W

C.E P,W

Page 1 of31

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan • Project Ust Cat.

Dlatrlcl Nlan Hancock Nlan llancock Allan Ha~cock

Campus Allan Hancock College A.lan Hancoc~

Project TIUo

Antelope Valley Antolopo Valley Antolopo Valloy Antolopo Val!oy Barstow Bulto-Gionn Ouno-Gionn Caonllo Cornlos Corlllos

Bars:ow Col1ege Ourto Collogo Dune Col ego Watsonville Contor Cerrnos College Cerritos Co!logo

Chobo:-Las Posuas Chabot -las Pos.tas Chaboi·Las Pos.tas Chabol·laS Pos•tas Cnaffey Ch&ffoy Citrus

las Posttas College Las Positas College las Posilas Collage Las Positas College Chaffey Collogo Chaffey College Citrus College

Coast

Coast!lne

Thoatro 1\rt$ • Romodol E & F

CoaSI Coast Coast Coast Coast

Appendix B.2

Ph.

N

2013

s

Ph.

N

P.W

0

140

LVC Sno Dove!opment/Ciassroom Bullo•ng Arts Complex Replacement, Expanston

P.W

2,601

0

High-loch MuiU·Oisclplinary Learning Cantor

2014

s

Ph.

N

P.W

1.380

0

C.E

0

1.536

P,W

1.380

0

C,E

32,525

0

P.W

4.356

0

011/0n Silo Oevelopmom and lntua! Factlitios Spaco and Tochnology Cent91' Automollvo TOchnology Sc·once Faclhty Regional Training Center Classroom Lnb Offico 2 Fino Aria Cantor #2 Roplacomont and EJ
Lib
P.W P,W P,W P,W

0

c

0

516 17,954

P,W

1.098

1,672

P,W

c

1,885

0

799

23.936

Cnm111al Jus Leo Tram.ng Cen:or Language Arts Complex SclencofMathomalics Bldg Business, Math & Comp Ctr Chemistry £lutldlng RonovauonfExpanslon

E P.W,C,E

Replace & Expand Academic Spaco Uboral Arts & Loiters Complex llbrary/LRC Renovation Expansion Engines, Enorgy and Sustainabillty Technologies Building Newport Beach Learning Conter

c

P.W

3,574

1,531

c.e

1.300 1,048 854 0 0

475 0 854 5,948 474

27,309

2.994

13,445

c c.e

4,200

C.E E

17,500 12,937 21,789 0

P,W

370

0

Ph.

N

s

Ph.

N

C.E

16,820

0

C.E

16.820

0

C.E

62.925

0 P.W

786

P.W

1,853

432 C.E

22.508

6,456

E

1.500

400

C.E

4 ,015

0

E

2,716

0

c

17,817

4.454

E

0

0

c

21.507

9.217

E

943

404

0 C.E

0 2,148 1,385

2:',580

P.W

554

0

C,E

6 .681

0

P.W

1,165

877

C.E

15,859

8.974

C.E P,W

21.236 t,990

9.859 0

P,W

1,093

0

0

1,632

P,W

945

p

E

Out Years

2015

s

Tochnical Building II

C~munity

College Golden West Col'ege Go~don West College Golden West Collogo Orange Coast College Orango Coast College

s

Technology Contor

Co~togo

Lompoc Valley Cantor Antelope Valley College Antol ope Va!loy Collogo Antelope Valley Collogo Palmdale Centor

2012

2011 Ph.

c

22.627

0

C,E

14,343

0

509

C.E

12.,454

6.551

613

153

w

713

178

C,E

48,723

20.116

P.W

1,688

723

P,W

1.441

480

Page 2 of3 1

c.e

17,255

5.751

s

N

8,210

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNrTY COLLEGES Capllal Outlay Five Year Plan • Project List Cal.

Distric t

Campus

Coast

Orango Coast College Coast Orange Coast College Contra Costa Contra Costa College Contta Costa Olab•o Va.ley College Contra Costa los Modanos Collogo Copper Coppor Mountain Mountain College Oosort Collage Of Tho Oosor1 Col!ege or The Desert Dosor1 Modd!efleld Center FoolhiH·

Project Tltle Language Arts & Social Sciences Building ~ant,mo

2011

s

Ph.

P.W

2012 Plr.

N

2,731

910

N

36,737

Ph.

B~ild1n9

p P,W

4,761

0

C.E

28.688

N

Ph.

398

s

N

Ph.

21

w

235

12

Out Years

s

Plr.

N

c

5,468

288

P.W

1.386

403

C.E

18,738

5,611

OU!roach Cantor (Brentwood/Byron Aroa)

P,W

240

272

c

8,000

8,000

E

300

316

5,863

1.888

462

462

c

10.265

10,265

E

683

683

c

15,869

0

P,W

1,174

0

Vocational Facility Communlcallon5 and Classroom Bulld,ng Laamlng Resource Center

0

1,010

P,W.C.E 26,239

12.551

E

Mounla n View Education Center at NASA

COYOTE VALLEY.SITE DEV & PH 1 ACADEMIC FACILITIES Gavilan SAN BENITO COUNTY CENTER • Sll E DEV Gavilan Collego & PH 1 ACADEMIC FACILrrtES Glondalo Garfield Campus Garfield Campus Expansion Glondato Glondalo Col:ogo Laboratory/Colloga Ser'V!ces Buildlng Grossmont· Grossmcnl Col~ogo MODERNIZATION/REMODEL Of r!NE ARTS Cuyamaca COMPLEX Uat111oll Hat1119ll CoCege Hoa.th Sc.ence and Nursrng Bu>IOmg Hartnot: Hartnell Collego Sclonco Building lmporlal Imperial Valley CAREER TECHNICAL BUILDING Vat!oy Co,Jego lmporlal lmportal Valley LIBRARY REMODEUADDITION Valloy Colloge 1 ECHNOLOGY BUILDING lmporlal Imperial Valley Valloy Coltoge CC East Wing Expansion Kom CornoCoso College CC Vocational Faci~ty Expansion Kom CO!TOCoso CO!' ego Kom Delano CMtcr DC Aclldomoc Facilibes Pllaso II Oc•ano Cantor OC Acadomic Facililios Phase Ill Kom Kem Delano Centet DC Loarnlng Resource Centor Mulli·Purpose Building Kern r>ortorvillo Collogo PC Ag~cullural Science Facility Kem Porterville Collogo PC All>od Hoalth Facility Kom J>onorville Collogo PC Applied Toclmology Bu•lding

E C.E

P.W

0 46,027

1,317

P,W

472

224

c.E

p

358

358

w

P.W

1,419

0

C,E

13,820

0

c .E

9.799

2,450

C.E

0

22.847

1,500 15.450

1,316

s

N

E

131

E

1.562

31,798

Art Bu.ldlng Consolidabon

Gallllan College

Appendix B.2

2015

.2014

s

12,346

Acadomy

SClonco and AILed Health • Roptacomonl

OoAn;w

Gallllan

C.E

2013

s

P,W

1,863

207

C,E

20,182

2.242

P.W C.E

369 16.333

600 15.819

C.E

5,511

5.280

P.W

344

1.789

C.E

15,868

14,352

P,W

758

189

P.W

466

640

C,E

8.507

8,319

P,W

527

200

C,E

7,157

650

P,W

989

433

C.E

16.792

1.521

P,W P,W

812 245

338 300

C.E C.E

12.261 4,400

1.938 871

P,W

0

1.821

C.E

17,177

2.923

P,W

1,927

657

C.E

24.113

3.656

P.W

849

315

C,E P.W

9,259 1.228

4,465 493

Page 3 of3l

7

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Ava Year Plan • ProJocl List Cat .

District Lako lahoo

Long Doach longiJoach Los Angelos Los Angolos Los Angolos Los Angelos Los AngO'os Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Ango os los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos

Los Angelos los Angoras los Angelos los Angelos Los Angelos

Campus

Project TIUo

Lake Tahoe Ctauroom/Faculty Offices Community College LlboralMs Ma!hemat.cs and Tecnnology Campus Llberai Ms Mulb-O.sctpianary Facility Ropiacemont (Du~d Campus M & N) East Los Angelos Math & Science Complex College East Los Angolos Public Sorvlce Careers Building Collogo East Los Angeles Studonl Success & RolenUon Contor (Lang College Ms) Los AngelOS C.ty Now Academic Buolding Cottcgo Los Angeles S1udon1 Un•on !lu!lding Hal1l0< Col>ego los Angeles East Campus Complex Mission College Los Angeles Pierco Agrlcunurol Educauon Center Colle go Los Angelos Pierce Digllal Arts and Media Building Cotto go los Angeles Plorco Expanded Automo:ivo and Now TeChnical Cot:ago Educauon Faciotlios los Angelos Piorco Groon Toehnologios BuJdmg College Los Ange:es Pierce Now Ubrary lRC College Caroer and Applied Technology Oulld•ng Los Angeles Soulhwest College Middle High School Building tos Angeles Southwest College rransponallon Bulldrng and Parlc.lng Los Angeles Trado-Tech College Los Angeles Valley Bustrooss Tochno:ogy Building Co:lege Los Angelos Val!ey Community Wor~forco Deve'oprnont Con tor College Los Ango!cs Valley Enllironmontal Conter Collogo Los Angelos Valloy Multi·purposo Community Sorllicos Conl.or Collogo Los Angeles Valley Planotanum Building Expansion Co!logo

Appendix B.2

2011 Ph.

P,W

2012

s

N

1,759

P/1,

P,W

112

N

Ph.

988 P,W

2014

2013

s

1,824

s

N

Ph.

P.W

200

0

C,E

24,052

\3,382

1,281

5,959

39.976

38.431

P.W

0

9,178

P,W

1.101

1.101

C.E

0

33.887

E

0

7.382

3,3gg

E

0

c

0

(,393

E

0

639

c

0

36,301

E

0

2,648

c

0

20,776

E

0

1,515

c

0

38.8A6

E

0

?.833

E

0

4,950

C.E

0

46,535

E

0

2.826

E

0

2,145

c

0

49,350

c

0

22,634

E

0

2.270

c

0

27,536

E

0

2.762

c

0

12,488

E

0

1.253

c

0

11,064

E

0

1.110

c

0

3.799

E

0

381

Page 4 o:f 3 1

N

P/1.

C,E

2.600

0

C,E

23,970

16,879

C,E

0

87,430

P,W

c

2015

s

0

s

Ou t Yoars

N

C.E

15.420 15.420

6.403 C.E

0 60.997

Ph.

s

N

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Cap1tal Outlay Five Year Plan • Project Ust C3t.

District

Project Tltlo

Campus

~gotos West Los Angeles Nllod Health and Wollness Con lor Collogo los Angeles West los Angelos Col!ogo Los RIOS Amencan Rlvot Collogo Los R1os American River College Los Rlos American River College American River Los Hies College los R•os Cosurnnes River College Los Rios Cosumnos Rivm

2011 Ph. c .E

2012

s

N

0

P/1.

Public Safety Conter Modornizalion and Expansion Archllocturo and Construc~on Education Bu11d•ng Aulomot•vo Toch Building Expansion El< Grove laguna Center Phase I

LOS Hies

Cosumncs River College Cosumnos Rivor Collego Cosumnos Rivor Collago Davis Center

El~ Grove

Laguna Center Phaso 2

El~ Grovo

Laguna Con lor Phase 3

losRiOs Los RIOS los Rros los Rlos Los !~los Los Rlos LOS Hies Los rliOS los Rlos Los R1os Los Rlos

DaV's Cen!er Fotsom Lake College Folso'Tl Lake College Folsom Lako Collogo Folsom Lako College Folsoml~e

College Folsom Lake Coltogo Natomas Educat'on Center Sacramonlo City College Sacramento City Collogo Sacramento City College

Appendix B.2

s

Ph.

N

P,W

0

698

P,W

0

1,591

E

0

676

676

P,W

127

611

C.E

0

18.985

P,W

49

222

P/1,

N

Davis Conlor Phase 2 DaVIs Cooter Phase 3 Now lns!rucbonal Space Pnaso 2A

C.E

4,825

3,44()

P.W

247

1,218

C,E

0

7.169

C.E

2.204

991

P,W

150

730

P,W

213

1,045

P.W

153

745

C,E

5,807

4,132

P,W

357

900

C.E

10,647

1,849

P,W

478

2.3n

Now lnsttuctional Space Phase 20 Now Instructional Spaca Phase 2C c.e

0

c.E

9,965

9,1165

C.E

9,410

6,884

C,E

C.E

5,692

P,W

564

150

728

2,002

C,E

20,779

N

p

125

674W,C,E

8.800

6,627

I',W

150

728 C.E

5.670

4,034

8 ,066

P,W

150

728 c,E

5,670

4.034

P,W

476

C.E

5,670

5.692

4,050

5.729

C.E

18.273 12,965

2.364 C.E

18,173 12,894

4,034

Now lnsltucUonal Spaco (Mohr 2) P,W

P,W

150

1,130 C,E

8,928

730 C.E

10,580

tusk Aoro Modomizalion and Expansion

Student Services Modom1zation end Expansion (Bldg 20/21)

s

4,050

Rancho Cordova Center Pnase 3 P,W

P/1,

N

9.597

Rancho Cordova Center Phase 2

Natomas Con tor Phase 2 and 3

s

561

Now Instructional Space

Rancho Cordova Con lor Phase 1

Out Years

2015

s

Now Instructional Space 2

Col1ege

Los Rlos

P,W

Now lnstrucbonal Space 1

Cosumnes River College

Los f~los

Ph.

N

25.579

Llbrarylleammg Resource Center RoconstrucllOn & Expansion Cutina.y IItts Buijding

Los Rios

LOS fliOS

2014

2013

s

126

Page 5 of 3 I

714

I',W

150

725

C,E

4,887

3.389

P.W

230

C,E

5,644

4,014

6,362

CALIFORNIA CO MMUNITY COLLEGES Capllal Oullay Fivo Year Plan • Project List Cat .

District

----ui'SR101

Los R10s MondOCoM()o

Ulko MondOCIOO· lake Mendocino·

Project TIUe

Campus

2011

Ph.

s

2012 Ph.

N

Sacramenlo City Wosl Sac Center Phase 2 Co,lege Sacrnmento Ci:y West Soc Contor Phase 3 College Lake County LAKE:: COUNTY C ENTER Center Mendoc•no College LIBRARY!LEARNING RESOURCES Wllhts Center

W ILLITS CENTER

Morced College

Aglicullure Science and Industrial Tochnologios Complex Vocational Comp!ex Renovation/Expansion

s

2013 Ph.

N

P.W

P,W

134

1.207

P,w.c .e

15,605

20,933

1,625

C ,E

11,774

10,251

1,230

P,W w

830 0

182 1.355

la~o

Mercod Merced

P,W

407

Merced Co::ege p Mrn Costa CoiJege lntord•scon I Si!e Dove!opment • Center Temecula I Wl:domar San Gorgonio Pass - Ponmanent Faco
M raCosta Ml San Antonio Mt.San Antonio Mt.San Antonio Mt.San Jacinto MtSan Jacinto Mt San Jac•nto Napa Va.1oy

Palomar Palomar Palomar Peralta Peralta Peralta Peralta Peralta Rancho Sanl
Palomar Collage Palomar College Palomar 1\'
library Learning Resource Cooter Southam Educatioo Center Northam Educatooal Center

c

P,W,C,E P,W L

402 632

3,701

1,025

0

25.750

745

5,188

6. 188

P.W

35

321

C.E C,E

8,771

2,160

0

35.007

P,W,C.E

91,139

81 ,461

c

46,955

5,218

1,166

0

C,E

14,447

0

0

4,000

P,W

0

520

w w

0

491

c

0

11,037

c

0

15,745

0

1.047

P,W P,W,C,E

1,298 25,8 70

0 17,224

C.E

56,318

7,869

0

3,000

282

282

E P,W

Borkoloy Cdy College Annex P,W,C,E 21.387

!53

Out Years

2015

s

Ph.

N

C.E

5,807

P.W

150

728 C,E

E

198

198

c

2,416

2,416

E

0

3,538

E

c P,W

Borko'oy City College 1\eadornic Space •

Loamlng Resource Center Horticulture Building Renovation Modemlte Bldg 0 lor Classrooms

Ph.

N

s

Ph.

N

s

4,132 5.670

4.034

190

190

26,304

Phaso II

Morrill College Santa Ana Cortege RUSSELL HALL REPLACEMENT

Appendix B.2

P,W

2014

s

c.E

4,057

4,057

P,W.C,E

9,381

0

P,W

307

307

c.E

15,9 31

15,024

E

1,383

0 C.E

0

337

0

1,900

C,E

14,29 1

0

P,W

3.250

C.E

3,507

E

0 C.E

0

626

16,1<:3

0

28.750

0

43,857 3,507 P,W P,W

1.112

1.599

Page 6 of 3 1

229

0 C.E

2,071

N

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Avo Year Plan· Project Ust

-Cat.

Dtatr1et Ran Clio Santiago Hodwoods Redwoods Rio Hondo Rio ltondO Rivors>de Ri vorsido Rlvorsldo Rivors•do R1vorsodo Rtvorsldo Rlvorsldo

San llomardtno San Bomarc:t.no San Bomardino San Bornnrdlno San Bernardino San 0 1ogo

San Oiogo San Oiogo Snn Diogo San O.ego San O.ogo San Diogo

Campua

Projoet TlUe

Santa Ana Colfogo SCIENCE BUILDING Del Norte Cantor Mendocino Coast Contor Rio Hondo College Rio Hondo COIIogo Moreno Va~oy Center Moreno Valley Center Moreno Volley Center Norco Contor RIYOfSido Coty College Rtverslde Cuy College Rovcrsldo Clly Coli ego Crafton Hills College Crafton IIliis Colloge Crafton H01's Co!lego Crafton HJIIS College Crafton I IIIIs College San Diogo Centro City Campus and Sld.ls Cantor San Diego C1ty College San Diego City College San Diego C1ty Cotlego San Ologo Ctty Conege San O.cgo City CoUoge San Diogo Educatoonal Cultural Complex

Appendix B.2

2011 Ph.

P,W

2012

s

N

1,679

Ph.

1,679

C,E

p

lloalth SoMees Building Construction nno Woodworking building Fine Ms Cantor S. F. Spr1ngs Ed.Conter Phase Ill Bon Clark Tra nlng Conter

P,W

Health Scionco Contor

2013

s

N

Ph.

22,140

21,540

105

0

804

w

2014

s

N

0

Ph.

126

Ufe Sc!ence/Physh;al Scioneo Reconstruction P.W.C,E 47.04!

P,W

0

1.199

C,E

0

17.096

P,W

1, 143

0

C,E

10,497

2,100

P,W

1.041

1.041

C.E

19,335

3.454

P,W P,W,C,E

0

1.364

P,W

947

947

0

8.608

0

525

8.247

8,724

c

P,W

974

973

CESAR CHAVEZ CAMPUS E

0

350 2.500

E

0

c bldg.· Language and Speech Therapy

c

0

17.000

E

0

2,600

Enginoonng Technology Building

c

0

30.000

E

0

2.875

E

0

2.000

E

0

2.700

E

0

150

LAND ACQUISITION GENERAL CLSRM OLD

10,622 3,254

10,346 3,254

6,128

7.325

0

0

C,E

13,341

13,341

c

8.558

8.558

e

1,100

1.100

16,231

Science £lulldlng

HUMANITIES BUILDING

2.91

C.E

5.943

Humanities Building II

BUSINESS TECIINOLOGY BUILDING

0

4.892

0

19,107

Emergency Sotvfcoa Building

Humanities (Gonoral Education) Bldg.

0

w.c

P.W.C.E

South Cotona Academic FacUlties Phase 1 Cosmetology llul •d •ng

GymJFio!ds lmprovoments!Ronova~on

E

70

220

Humanltlos Backfill

RIVERSIDE SCIIOOL OF THE ARTS

500

220

C.E

Ph.

N

239

1,202

1,210

Out Yoan

s

3,031

P,W

1,210

Ph.

c

P,W P,W

N

p

C,E C,E

794

2015

s

NORTH/SOUTH WING. PHASE 110

Page 7 of 3 1

e P,W

1,000

1.000

c.e

13,266

1?,goa

E

s

N

0

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Flve Year Plan· Project L
Olotr1et San O.ogo San Diogo San Diego San Diego San Oogo San D>ogo San Oiogo San Oogo San Dtogo San Francisco San Francisco San Franosco San Franc.sco San FranciSco San Joaquin Della San Joaquin Doll a San Joaquin

Projoet nue

Campua

San !logo Mosa Fitness Center College San Otego Mose lnstrucbonal Technology Building College San Diego Mesa MATH AND SCIENCE llUILDING College San Diogo Mosa Social Behavioral Sclonces College San 0!090 Mramar UBRARYJtEARNING RESOURCES CENTER College San O!ego M.ramar PUBLIC SAFETY TRNG INSTITUTE BLDG. College San Diogo Miramar Science Bldg/ renova1e clsrms Collego San O!ogo North NORTH CITY CAMPUS City Campus San Ocego Wosl UNDA VISTA ADULT EDUCATION BLOG C.lyCampus JOHN ADAMS ADDmON John Adams Cc Center San Franc1sco City ADVANCED BIO/STEM CELL TECHNOLOGY Cotlago CENTER San Francisco Ctty LIBRARY/LEARNING ASSISTANCE PHASE II 1 Co1 ege San Francisco City VISUAL ARTS COMPLEX C(l(lege Southeast Contot BAYVIEW-HUNTER'S POINT OIC CENTER

San Joaquin Doll a Collego San Joaquin Doll a Co!logo San Joaqu.n Dolta Do;ta Co!logo San Joaquin San Joaqu.n Della Delta College San Joaquin San Joaquin Della Doha College San Joaquin San Joaquin Dolla Doita College San JosoSan Joso Ctly EI/Ofgroon College Sen Lu.s Cues!a Conogo ObiSpo San LuiS North County Obispo Center

Appendix B.2

2011

2012

s

Ph.

N

Ph.

2013

s

N

Ph.

201 4

s

N

Ph.

P,W

0

2.225

c

0

10.500

E

0

180

p

0

1.000

w

0

1,600

c

0

37,000

c

0

92,000

E

0

4.500

c

0

26,850

E

0

825

E

0

3.964

p

0

400

w

0

600

c

0

7,600

E

0

700

w

822

0

1,757

1,757

c

0

32,500

E

0

1.250

C,E

0

10,320

p P,W

3,019

4,328

N

Ph.

E

0

2.875

E

0

1,400

C.E

20,939

0

c

22,482

22,482

E

419

0

981

0

C,E

38,648

56,106

P,W

3,260

0

c

32.795

0

P.W

1,938

0

C,E

25.622

0

P.W

0

325

C,E

0

6,175

P,W

0

700

C.E

0

9,300

P,W

4,027

884

C.E

41 ,444

14,931

P,W

Dan nor Hall Reconstruction Establish Contor In l.odVGalt Establish Conlor In Manteca Establish Tracy/ Mtn. House Center Phase I

C,E

0

74,788

Holt Building Reconstruc~on and Expansion Planelarium MuiU·Disc;plinaty V1sual and Por1.Arts llldg Math !lotldmg SLO Humanit1os Complex

P,W E

387

441

0

1,920

C,E

7.449

1,608

P,W

912

0

C.E

11 ,779

0

P,W

626

0

C,t;

17,429

0

Page 8 of3 l

Out Yoara

2015

s

s

N

Ph.

E

1,227

1.227

P,W

1,180

1,180 C.E

s

N

6,196

6,196

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Five Yoar Plan· Project List Cat.

District

-s;,;-Matoo

Campus

Project Tille

2012

2011 Ph.

s

N

P/1.

College Of San Emerging Tocnnologies Con!or Ma!oo Santa Ba:bara C•ty Drama MuSlc Bulld;ng Ad
Santa Ba:bara Santa Barbara Santa Clanta Canyon Country Canyon Country Educat
Appendix B.2

P,W,C.E

P,W C,E

12,578

3.144

P,W

136

685

C.E

9.456

1.733

P,W

339

C.E

4,117

0

P,W

1,565

1,565

0

19.908

•180

480

0

684

2,703

5.168

C,E

30,211

75,824

683

C,E

0

p

1,952

1,643

0

9,471

28,236 1.016 59,164

2.276 677 19,719

P,W

280

0

P,W

1,479

1.117

P.W

2,449

2.448

C,E

21.992

9,227

C,E P.W 651 W,C,E 0

705

P,W

P,W

0

w

2,499

2,401

1,599

Ph.

223

649

w

N

Out Years

2015

s

N

Ph.

s

N

Ph.

s

N

4,223

0

P,W

P,W

11,525

2014

s

889

P,W

P,W

P/1.

N

5(6

P,W

p

2013

s

1,772

c

0

1,646

792

C.E

32,221

20.944

P,W

0

1.240

Page 9 of3 1

7,596

0

C,E

10,442

30,819

c

5,513

5.513

E

0

1,700

9,705

6,470

650

0

C,E

c

3.000

0

C.E

20,681

15,264

C,E

28,105

28,103

P,W

624

538

E

23,236

9,677

c

0

14,729

P,W

0

148

C,E

522

E

153

153

8.834

7.256

C,E C,E

780

P.W

C,E

P,W

21,012

9,005

E

0

1,746

C.E

0

1.524

0 C.E

7,023

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Flvo Year Plan • Project List Cat.

District

Campus

2011

Project Tlllo

Southwostom Soulhwes:om SCIENCE llUILDING College CTC Suo Oovelopment & Phase I Slate Contor Career & T ochnology Center Acaoem.c F8CIIibes State Center Madora Center

Ph.

2012

s

Pit.

N

P.W Faoil~es

P.W.C.E 44,990

2013

s

Ph.

N

739

0

Systom GGtt System Generated 2014 System Gon Syslom Generated 2015 Moorparl< Collego MC • Ans Complex Oxnard Co!lege OC ·Classroom BlJildtng 1

Venlura

Oxnard Co:Jege

Ventura Oxnard College VIctor Valley VIctor Valloy Community College Victor Valley Victor Valley Community College Victor Valloy V1etor Valloy Community CoUege Victor Va•ley Vtelor Va!.oy Commuruty

Ph.

N

0

10.221

2015

s

Pit.

N

Ou t Yoars

s

Ph.

N

P,W

807

0

C.E

10.222

0

P,W

1,274

0

C,E

15.538

0

P.W

309,858

0

2.379,882 247,886

0 0

c P.W

OC • Oontal Hygiene Expansion and ModcmtZatton OC • ElustJng LRC ReconstrucUon

P,W

2,089

0

C.E

23,143

P.W

481

0

c.e

5,1 15

0

P,W

1.091

0

C.E

17, 192

0

C,E

14,37'1

10.665

E

189,358

c

1.903,905 P,W 268.544

Appendix B.2

N

0 0

151 ,486 E 0 C.E 2.226.674

0

0 P,W

945

0 C.E

12,386

P,W

1,345

0 C.E

17.367

P.W

1.089

E

1.534

0

Eas"tdo Publtc Safety Trairung Center C,E

0

29.384

P.W

1,186

792

Science Ouild,ng Addition

VtsuaV Performing Arts Lab BlJifid,ng

Vocatlonal Technology Bu~o.ng

545 C.E

Co~ege

Vlclor Valley Victor Valley Communily College Victor Valloy Victor Va!ley CommuO!ty Colle go West Hills Nof1h DistJict Center West ~lli:S Wast Hills CoDcgo Coal!nga West Hit:S Collogo West llltls Lemoore West ~ijJis Col.ego Wost ~hila Lemoore Wost Hills College Wost Htl!a Lomooro WostKem Taft College WestKom laft College WostKem Taft Col!ego

s

30,312

State Cantor WlllownntemationaiVoca~onal Fac.l.hes Center System Gonoratoo 2013 Systom Gon Syslem Gen Systom Gon System Gon Vontura Ventura

c.e

2014

s

Weststdo • Phase I C,E

0

34.193

Wests•do Conter • Phase II

Nof1h Dstrict Center Health Caroors Facility

P.W

1.146

984

P,W

270

30

P,W

1,173

0

C.E

26.971

511

c

11,213

0

C.E

3.780

420

library Expans1on

P,W

630

70

C,E

6,480

720

WHCL 500 Building Expans•on

P,W

367

274

C,E

6.165

1.359

435

C,E

16,169

464

755 8,800

515 1,050

C,E

12,500

1.225

86

P,W C,E

WHCL Instructional Center

P.W

Library Expanslon Technology Center VocaLonal Cantor

P,W

1.234

571

P,W C,E

903

415 19,708

1.848

Page l0of31

0

15.163

7,582

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan • Project Ust Cat.

District

Campus

Wost Valley· Wost Valley M•sslon College Yosomno Modosto Jun1or Colle o

2011

Project Tttlo

Ph.

2012

s

N

Ph.

Ph.

N

Fino Arts Bulld1ng

P,W

West Sldo loamtng Cen:er (Pallorson)

c

0

s

N

271

P/1.

Out Yoars

2015

s

N

Ph.

C.E

271

s

N

3,169

P/1.

s

N

3,633

4.55? 749,967 713,993

264,378 872.331

Total

2014

2013

s

1,224,639 554.988

3.168,525 383.568

2.574.168139.880

2.444.348 32.530

J1:1 !Sl iUQmsUg i1 ~~HnQI2tg ~~MQJ.II 'SUl'-QQii IIUQJg~li 12 grgxf~bz fw: e~. 101. 1ibll51 !li!'!l Allan Hancock Antolopo Valley Oarstow Corr.tos Comtos Comtos Cornlos Chabot·Las PosltOS Chabot·Las Positus Compton

Allan Hancock College Antolopo Valley College Barstow College Comtos College Comtos COticge Comtos COI'ege Comtos COI.ege Chabot College Chabot College

Compton Community Co'lege Compton Compton Communty Col'ego Contra Costa Contra Costa Colloge Contra Costa l os Medanos College Contra Costa los Modanos College Contra Costa Los Modanos Collogo Ooson co:logo or Tho Oosor1 CoCego Of Tho Ooson Oesorl Ocson co•logo 0! The Desert Feather Rlvor Feather Rivor Collogo ~ooth1ll College Foothill· DoAnza Foothill· rootlllll College

DeAnu

Appendix B.2

Physical Educauon Remodel FUnoss & Wollnoss Center Field Spans Reid llouso Health 8 werrnoss Complex Now Chold Oovelopment Cantor Physiclll Education Renov/Repl GrandCour1 Ronovalo Performing Arts Theater Complex and Plazo Uullding 1200, 1300 Performing Ar1s and Recreation Complex • Phase 2

P,W

0

P.W P,W P,W,C P.W P.W

0

372

C,E

1.406

0

C.E

13,680

0

1.642 0 0 1. 196

634

C,E

24,611

970

3.000 600 0

c C.E

0 14,871

3,850 0

3.156

P,W,C c

0

1,844

E

0

49

9,075

1,008

P,W

-116

E

41

536 C,E

Phys cal Educar.on COmplex Roptaeomont Gymnasrum and locl
P.W

0

Gym • Renovation

p P,W c

551

551

0

11,560

C,E

115

115

6,096

6.092

MuiU Uso (Performing) Arts Fac•Lty Pnyslcat EducaUon Bul!ding Ronovar.on ~8 Gym Modernization

0

6,803

P,W

1,320

0

P,W

0

386

c

FAPP$ Smithwick Theater Renovation

53

218

0

9,988

P,W

367

367

c

3,844

3,844

w

140

140

c

3,171

3,171

p

0

895

w

0

c

1,444

1.444

E

147

1,104

Gym • Modernization Men's and Women's Locker Room Uuildlngs Roplacomont Physical Educahon Building

P,W

C,E

10,803

P,W

124

124

C.E

0

4,526

C,E C,E

2.651

682

895 C.E

0

Page 11 of 3 1

147

0

0 19,103

0

0

CALIFOHNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Fivo Yoar Plan· Projccl Ust Cat.

Olaltlcl

Campus

Gavtlan

Ga.,tan C
Gavllan Glondalo

Gavilan Co/logo Glonda!o Collogo

Grossmonl· Cuyamaca

Projoct nuo MODERNIZE P~IYSICAL EDUCATION BUILDING THEATER HEPLACEMENT

1937 Physical Education Building

Replacement Grossmonl Collogo ·rHEATER AA1'S BUILDING

Kom

Ba~ersfJCid Col.ogo DC Wollness Con! or Modomozabon

Kom

CC Perfonrnng Ms Cerro Coso Co!loge Portc.rvll:o Collogo PC Child Devotopmont Center (Permanent)

Kom

Kom Portorvlllo Collogo PC Gymnasium Hoplacomant los Angoles East Los Angelos Sports Compte• C<)!loge Los Ange'os Los Ango'os C'IY Performing Ms Centor Build'ng Co:toge Los Angeles los Angelos Coly Tennis Coort ConslrUcllon CoUego Vosual and Performing Arts Center Los Angelos Los Angeles Southwest Collogo Los Angelos Los Angelos Valley NO\v Media Ana Conler College Los Angelos Los Angelos Valley Porfonnance Ms Conl er College los Rios AmercanRoVO< Physiall Educa~on I Atnlotic Foelds Improvements College los Roos Folsom Lake NO\v Child Devolopmont Conler Coil ego los H1os Folsom Lako Now Physical Education Spaco Collogo Physical Educa~on Gymnasium Los Rlos Folsom lako Co:lege Chold Development Centor MaM CoftcgeO! MaM Morcod Morcod Coftege Thoa:oriMs Remodol Monterey FOil Ord Con!er Public Safoly Center Pn. II Peninsula Monloroy Muslcffheator Monloroy Peninsula Penins\Jia College Montoroy Monterey Physical Education· PooVfenn!s Coons Pononsuta Peninsula Collogo Moruorey Monterey Physical EdLcaiiOn·Lockor Rooms Peninsula Peninsula Col: ogo Mt.San MI. San Antonio Now Physical EducaLon Complex AniOniC College

Appendix B.2

2011 Ph.

2012

s

Ph.

N

P.W

664

664

P.W

1.468

87

P.W

1,837

494

E

0

4,282

E

0

3.753

c.E

0

4,504

P.W

648

648

c

0

2,757

Ph.

N

6,772

2014

s

Ph.

N

1,396

0

C,E

19,023

1,161

C,E

24.768

6,417

P.W

921

333

Ph.

N

C.E

16.025

s

Ph.

N

0

C,E

11,957

1,590

P,W

0

1,412

C,E

0

12.158

P,W

0 29,072

537 1,180

C,E

0

4,442

P.W

1.635

764

P,W

1.287

1.287

C.E

17,169

17,169

P.W

2.365

0

C,E

33,109

0

P,W

627

627

0

338

C,E

w.c

0

6,113

P,W

105

506

C ,E

10,230

4.378

P,W

43

43

P.W

234

1,1 21

C,E

6,970

6.970

P,W

1.237

1,237

c

11,569

11,569

P.W

0

337

c

0

4.663

E

0

0

24,162

10,356

P.W,C,E

Out Years

201 5

s

6,490

P.W

p

C ,E

2013

s

Page 12 of31

P,W

0

C.E

8.511

8.511

C ,E

3.998

3,160

P,W

0

C.E

435

435

E

414

414

29 C ,E

1.573 C.E

0

327

0 16.635

s

N

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Five Year Plan • l>rojoct List

Cat.

Olatrtct

Campus

Mt.San Mt . San JaCJnto Jae•nto CoUoge Nonh Orange Ful!orton Col•ege

Project Tltlo

2011

2013

2012

s

Pll.

Pll.

N

s

PI>.

N

Thoator Arts/Communication Stud'os W.lshiro Aucftom B'cfg 2100 Ronovat>On

w

0

353

c

0

2014

s

PI!.

N

P,W

1,707

0

P,W

0

594

Ohlono College

Ohlono

Ohlone College

PaloVerdo

Palo Verde College Child Dovolopmont Center

P ,W

902

0

Palomar

Palomar College

Child Dovolopmont Center

P,W

478

478

Palomar

Palomnr College

Thootre 1\ddllionl Renovation

Peralta

College Of Alameda tl.emtt College

1\ud•torlum!Ciassreom Bldg

Peralta

ATHLETIC FIELDS CONSTRUCTIONIUPGRAOES NEW FITN ESS CENTER/FIELD HOUSE

Ch•ld Dovolopmont Contor

Pora!ta

Momtt College

Modomizo Gym and Athletle Facit>toes

Porata

Momt College

wognoss Contor

Rancho Santago R•oHondo

San11ago Canyon Fino and Porformrng Arts Cantor Cot:oge Rio Hondo College MusiCIWray Thoator Renovation

R•vorsldo

Conlor lor Hoallh and Wellnoss

RIVorsldo

Morono Valley Con tor Norco Center

San Francisco San Joso· EvOfljfoon San lu•s Ob>spo San Mateo

San Francisco City Cotlogo San Jose City Col'.ego North Co~nty Cen1er Canada College

PCRrORMING ARTS COMPLEX

San M atoo

Collogo Of San Maino College Of San Mateo Skyline Col!ego

San Matoo San Matoo

Santa Monica Santa Montca Colloge Santa Mon11:a Santa Monica College Sequoias Tulare Conlor

Center lor I Iuman Perform an co

Ma•n Gym Roolacomont

815

358

857

Physical Education Conversion and Renovation. Ouild'ng 1 Gym Modemlzatlon, Bullding 8

P.E. Ronovatlon/El
Siski you

Cello go Of Tho S:skiyous

fiElDIIOUSE

0

1,576

C ,E

18,787

19.4n

909

C,E

8,476

8,411

P,W

1,475

0

c.E

18.933

9,357

P,W

544

0

P,W

1.279

1,280

C,E

38.274

101,920

0

183

P ,W,C,E 13,114

5.4 14

P.W.C,E 13,049

7,034

E

c

c

S1erta Coliege

687

908

Replacement Health, Fitness, P.E. Bund;ng

Slorra

P.W

1.4n

p

Child Dovolopmont Center

10,8 37

P,W

Center ror KineSIOlogy and Human Performance Early Ch,ldhood Education ContOf

Sierra College

4,739

P,W

Modornizo llulld1ng 3, Theater

Tulare Cent01' Phase 4- Farm Animal Complex

C,E

P,W,C ,E

Ea~y Ch;tdl>ood Educat1011

S ierra

Appendix 8.2

P,W

0

139

736 w .c .e P.W

0

27,797

E P,W P,W

0

4.967

13,798

7,034

195

558

0

2.300

3,031

75

1.108

PI!.

N

C,E

20.572

0

C,E

0

13, 100

P.W

0

500

s

Ph.

N

s

N

5,890

Oh1ono

E

Out Years

2015

s

1,108

C.E

7.464 7,799

0

C,E

13,378

3,700

C.E

7.516

0

c.E

2.571

5.951

C.E

35.457

919

C.E

7,724

C,E

10 ,7 13

0 t0,713

C,E

4,500

0 8,964

P,W

925

0 C,E

10,537

0

0

150 C.E

0

2,550

0

5.685

0

p

Page 13 of31

5.685

c C.E

0

60

w

CALIFORNIA COMMUN ITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Flvo Year Plan • Project List CaL

District

Campus

2011

Projoct TlUo

RELOCATION OF MAINTENANCE FACILITIES Solano Bu•tdlng 2110 Pool and Pool Renovat•on Solano Sports/Soccor Restroom Sonoma IlEALTH. PHYSICAL EDUCATION & WELLNESS COMPLEX (PHYSICAl EDUCATION REPLACENTIREMODEL) Sonoma Santa Rosa Jun•or PERFORMING ARTS CENTER Cot:ege II'Vlne Valioy COMPLETE BASEBALL STADIUM South Orange College South Sadoteback STADIUM liND SOCCER FIELDS Orango College Stato Cantor Fresno City Clllld Dovolopment Contor Col! ego Stato Conlor Reedley Col!oga Child Dovelopmont Conte< Sislciyoo

Ventura Von1uro

N

Ph.

Cotlege 0! Tho Sisl
P.W C,E

0

Wosl Valley· Mission Collogo Mission Wost Valley· Mlsslon Collogo

0

175

P.W

792

0

P.W

733

0

P,W

1,525

508

Gymnasium Modom!zaliol! Elcpansion Physical Ed. Centor P.E. AddJUon Performing Arts Bul!dlng

Yuba

Mission Col'ogo

Soccer Field

West Val'ey

Ch1ld Care Oevo!opmont Center

2.317

2.559

w c.e

0

219

10.002

0

C.E P,W

9.334 673

0

P,W

730

0

s

N

Ph.

P.W

210

0

C.E

P,W

'12

0

c

C.E

29.421

33,394

18.225

6,077

P,W

1,113

440

599

c

I

Ph.

Out Yoara

s

N

Ph.

2,495

0 P.W

227

466

0

E

62

0

0

300

c

0

2.700

294

294

s

N

1,673

0

E

85

0

c

0

8,930

1,392

1,613

o C.E

3,282

C.E C,E

8.923 9.1n

0 49

P,W

208

208

c

2,592

2,592

C,E

8.922

730

P,W

128

110

P.W

603

470

C.E

17,252

594

P.W

504

504

599

C,E

P,W

8.156

E ~

c

1,950

125

C ,E

6,303

7.113

P,W

0

818

9.139

146

146

131,685

99,985

C,E

Mum-Purpose 1\t.hlotic Facil.ty

Performing Arts Facllity P,W Total

993

1.712

79,134

201,652

~ !2 IU:SU!lSU2 a ~QmQiglg Sii!l!QYI ~211S£,U2li IU21QSCII Ul Q[S~vfgg SCi!fQl2tJill.lb5Ulllwi!rghgylgl MI\INTENANCE/OPERIITIONS/WIIREHOUSE Chabot·Las Chabot Collogo Posit as

Appendix 8.2

N

0

Corlcgo Woodl and Community College Woodland Commu1111y Co'lego

201 5

s

0

C,E

P.W

M SSIOn

West Valley· M•SSion West Va•royMission Yuba

Ph.

N

12.000

Moorpar1< Collogo MC • Gymnas:um Modotn•zaticn Ventura CoiiCjjO VC · Now 1\quotlc Concnr

Taft College Taf\Co!lego

2014

2013

s

P.W

p

Victor Valloy Victor Valley Pracbce Fiolds!Track Fields Community Colle go West Hills Co:lego WHCL Field Sports Wost IIIlis lemoore Tall Col1oge Fiotd Sports West Kom Wos:Kom Wos1Kom

2012

s

Ph.

P,W

730

759

c.e

14,350

23.471

242,825

158.142

402

0

P,W

Page 14 of3 1

C.E

C.E

8.950

9,431

305.196

113,318

3,960

0

19,182 52,301

13,687 13,0931

CAUFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capllal Outlay Five Year Plan • Project List Cat.

District Chabot-las Posltas Grossmont· Cuyamaca Kem lcs Angoles lcs Angelos Los llngolos Los Angelos Lcs Ango•os Los Angeles Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Ango'os lcs Angelos Los R•os Los RIOS Los Rlos lcs Rlos Los Ros Los R•os Los Roos Los Rlos Los Hlos

Campus Chabot College

Project Tltlo Modomlzo Conltal Services • Bldg 2300

Grossmont Dlstrtd MAINTENANCE/WAREHOUSE COMPOUND Office· Bakersr101d Co!:oge BC Malntonanco and Oporabons Bulld>ng Los Ange:es City Physical Plant Building College Refurbishing ol Building Exteriors Los Angelos llarbor College Los Angeles Plant Factllllos '-'Lsslon College Los Angeles l'iorco Stadium ADA Improvements Col•oge Los Ange!cs NOC1hoast Quadrant Parl(ing Structure Soutnv.est Col'ego Los Angeles Parlung Structure and A!hlelic Fiold Trado·Tech College Los Angeles Relocate 011d Consolidate Plant Facol11ies Trade-Tech College Los Angeles Valley General Landscaping. Signs, Walkway, College Parking Lot Los Angeles VaOoy Pal'kong Structure Cot•oge Los Anga_es Valley PWGPL ·General Col:ego Los Angeles Valley Student Support Sorvlces (Cafetot!aJDookstoro Co•logo Ronovat•on & Now Food Services Venues) American Rivl1!' Transponatlon. Access and Parl
Appendix 8.2

2011 Ph.

P,W

2012

s

N

0

P/1.

550

C,E

2013

s

Ph.

N

0

P,W

0

C.E

0

11.420

c

0

19.660

C.E

0

29,000

w

0

571

c

0

33.442

c

0

16,188

c

0

6.236

c

0

13,017

0

Out Years

2015

s

Ph.

N

s

Ph.

N

s

N

5,454

607

757

0

C,E

6.762

P,W

0

C,E

4.412

4.411

w.c

0

9 13

p

0

259

0 882 C.E

0

8.398

0

0

6,231 P,W

p

Ph.

N

8,450 P,W,C,E

c

2014

s

97

339

339

c

0

4,710

E

0

t.306

E

0

1.094

p

0

66

P,W

0

80

c

0

861

P,W

0

75

c

0

808

W.C

0

1.803

P,W

0

80

Page 15 of3 1

c

0

E

w,c

0

4,710

P,W.C

0

941

P,W

0

75

c

0

808

P,W

0

80

c

0

992

992

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan· Project Ust Cat

Dlst,ct Los Rlos Los Rios Los R•os LO$ RtO$ LO$ RlO$

Los Rlos Los R•os Moreod

Campus Folsom Lake College Folsom Lake College Natomas Education Center Natomas Education CentCI( Sacramento C•IY Collage Sacramento C>ty College Sacramento City College Merced conogo

Projoct

nuo

TranspOtlation. 1\ccoss and Paoong Improvements Phase 2A Transportation, Access and Parking Improvements Phase 2B Natomas Center TAP 2 Natomas Center TAP 3

2011 Ph.

2013

2012

s

Ph.

N

c

0

947

c

0

901

s

Ph.

N

c

0

1,827

P,W

0

276

c

2014

s

N

0

Ph.

West Sac TAP 3 P,W

0

75

1\rchltectural Barriers Removal· Basic Access

Monterey Mon:eroy Student Center Pon.nsula Penonsu'a Coilogo Mt San Mon.foo Val'oy CorporaLon Yard Jaconte Center North Orange Fullerton Collogo Parking StnJeture 2

c

0

4,265

c

0

13,982

E

0

Ph.

N

c

0

808

P.W

0

100

0

61

w.c

0

1.136

P,W

0

75

c

0

808

c

0

939

P,W

Ohlono Collogo

NEW ENERGY SYSTEM

P,W

0

1,200

c

0

13,800

Chione Cohogo

P,W

0

1,213

c

0

18,787

Peralta

P,W

0

235

Peralta

Coiloge Of Alameda Col!ogo Of Alameda Merrill Cotlogo

NORlli ACCESSIBLE PARKING STRUCTURE O
Poralto

Morrill Cottogo

Parking & Paving Upgrades

P,W

0

140

MomllCottogo

Student Housing

R&l'chO Sanuago RedWoods

Park•ng and PaVIng Upgrades Oemol•Uon of Building II

Dis!rictwido Parking and Me:orsPeralta Disltict Office· Santa flna Col ego PARKING SlRUCllJRE Del Norte Center

Rio Hondo COIIogo Malnlenanco & Oporollons Budding

San Bernardino San Dlogo

Crafton H,l[s Maintenance and Operations College Cafetena/Bool.ogo Miramar CAFE/BOOKSTORE & STUDENT CAMPUS College CENTER BUILDING San Diego Mromor MAINTENANCE FACILITY Collogo San Diogo Miramar PARKING STHUCTUI~E NO 1 College

San Dogo San Diogo San Diogo

Appendix 8.2

0

64

c

0

6.417

c P,W

0

1.820

0

19,058

p

Studont Center !liJifd,ng

Hlo Hondo

P.W

P,W

c c

s

N

139

01\lono

Peralta Peralta

Ph.

N

p

Ohlono

Peralta

s

2,955

TAP· Hand G Lotlmf)'OVQITU!n!s

West Sacramento TAP 2

Out Years

2015

s

0

30

w

38

0

c P,W

c

0

6,705

E

0

408

c

0

31.000

E

0

2.000

E

0

1,750

E

0

275

E

0

50

Page 16 of3 1

c

867

0 C,E

0

400

0

181 0 0

0 c 1,320 1,174 C.E

1,505

574 142

300 E 142 C,E

45 1,575

0 13.500

0 1,575

E

10,255

0

0

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital ouuay Five Year Plan • Project List Cat.

Dtatrlc t

Campus

San O.ego

Proj ect Title

2011 Ph.

San Diego "-tramar PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE c College San San Francisco Ctly ENERGY CONSERVATION & PRODUC110N P.W Francisco College Soquooas Tulare Center Tulare Phase 5-Farm Anunal Compte• w Storm S1orrn College Arch Bamor Removal ADA Ph II South IN!noValloy ADD/ REMODEL CAMPUS ENTRANCES & c Orange College BUS STOP ATEP· UTILITIES FOR HANGAR & CHAPEL South Irvine Valley Orango Collego BUILDINGS South !Nine Valley STUDI:NT SERVICES ANNEX Orango College South NEW TRANSPORTATION BUILDING AND Saddleback Orange College YARD South REMODEL SWING SPACE FOR TAS Saddleback P,W Orango Collego South TENNIS COURTS RELOCATION AND Saddteback Orange College EXPANSION OF LOT 5A UPPER QUAD MASTER PLAN South Saddlebaok c Orange College IMPLEMENTATION Soulhwostorn Southwestern REPLACEMENT OF DEVORE STADIUM C.E FIELO~IOUSE, ETC. College State Contor rresno Clly Arehitoctural Barner Removal • Phase 1 Collogo Stato Ccntor Frosno Cny Archltectural Bamor Removal-Ph 2 Collage State Contor Rooclley Co'Jogo ArcMoctural Barrier Removal-Ph I State Contor Roodtey College Archltoctural Barrlnr Removai·Ph 2 Ventura Oxnard College OC • Calotona Reconstruction Ventura Ventura College VC • Storage Warehouse P,W,C,E lnlrastrucluro Upgrade·Eiccttical, West Valley· Mission College Mission Data/Teloco111·Phase 11 Pedestrian/ Wayfind!ng - Phase I Wost Valley· Mission Collogo Mission West Va'ley- Miss•on Col!ego S. W. Patl
Appendix 8 .2

2012

s

N

Ph.

2013

s

N

P/1.

3.750

E

0

200

0

712

c

0

6.46t

0

432 C,E

0

1.300

P.W

0

347

0

0

2014

s

N

Ph.

C,E

0

8,697

c

0

4,660

P,W

0

375

253

0

900

0

7,993

c

0

0

P,W

0

448

P.w P,W

0 0

169

s

N

Pll.

s

N

c

0

0

90

4,169

c

0

910

E

0

268

E

0

393

P,W,C

0

2,900

60

c

0

P.W

0

90

0 0 1,275

1.737 658 0

c c

P,W

0

626

c

0

7,529

P.W

0

732

c

0

6,922

P,W

0

406

c

0

4.481

P,W

0

403 C,E

4,565

c

0

850

3,517

1.051 P,W

0

Ph.

3.873

P,W,C 0

N

1,085 P,W

0

Out Yea,.

2015

s

81

c

0

0

764

569

Page1 7of3 1

C.E

0

9,110

P,W

0

1,024

c.e

0 10.778 0

6,714

CAliFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Flw Year Plan · Project Usl Cat.

Olstrtct YosOm·iO

Modesto Junoor Coilogo

s

Ph.

Turtoclt Leamong Contor

I .5

2011

Projoct Title

Campuo

L Total

2012 Ph.

N

0

872

0

241,812

P,W

s

2013 Ph. s

N

0

66

771

33,844

2014 N

Ph.

1 1.484

31,86 1

27.116

0

0

126

413

413

s

2015 Ph. s

N

12,071

84,787

4,583

4,583

0

275

C,E

0

38.498

c.E

15,040

15,040

C.E

1.616

1.616

c.e

0

3,393

Out Yoa~

Ph.

N

3,992 33,551

Ig IUg~jsJg ln§lructiQDi!II!.IUQQ[l :U~r:YJ'g~ fi~IIUIS~Ii IU2l£!,11 l2 I!J''QiUUI IIlll!ll,tlQD~IIIUU2SUl15U:~J'DI 'i!I.UU,U.~ Antolopo VaJ'oy Fooll\•11· DoAnza Footn•ll· DeAnzn Foolholl· DoAnz.a GaVJian

Antelope Vatloy College Do Anu Coil ego

Student Soo'\licos llulld•ng

Foo:hiU C041ogo

Conwrt to Aanpbvo loaming.Center

Foothill Collogo

Conwrt to Learning Support Canter

Gavolan Co!lego

STUDENT SERVICES/ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER Parlclng Lot

Ronova~on

ofTeJovosoon Stuaoo

Le
Appendix 8.2

P.W

2,290

0

C,E

0

1,739

c.E

c

0

2,499

C,E

0

3.933

E

P.W

C,E P,W,C

C,E

0

24,073 P,W P.W

1,122

1,122

w

0

350

c

0

4,350

P,W

0

361

c

0

3.439

P,W

0

1,538

C,E

0

14,654

P,W

162

162

P,W

216

1.049

c .E

8,113

4,041

E

0

250

P.W

0

306

r

0

59

5.581

P,W P.W P,W

0

2.3 14

Page 18 of31

144

C.E P,W,C.E

w.c

0

823

E

0

0

P.W

0

276

c

0

2,955

0

c.E

13,954

0

0

215

C,E

0

6.300

14,900 15,666

16,417 15,666

1.189

s

N

10.255 42,9331

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Cap.tal OuUay Five Year Plan • Project Ust Olstr1ct

Cal.

Campus

Project TIUo

Poralta

Poralta District D.strict Offic;o Bldg Expansion Office• Rancno Sant.ago Canyon STUDENT SERVICES BUILDING San~ ago College Studonl Contor San Crafton H:ns Bomardtno Co!lege San Diago Mosa Stocl
I

Enrollmont/CasoloadiPopulatlon Towl

2011 Ph.

P,W

2012

s

N

0

P/1,

800

E

0

2.000

E

0

120

p

0

150

C,E

0

5,640

C.E

6,855

6,203

C.E

1.211

c

0 0

C,E

0

65.697

903

2013

s

N

Ph.

C,E

0

8,904

P,W

740

1,037

P.W

0

600

w

0

825

P,W

0

700

P,W

0

4.922

E

0

C,E

10,292

9,711

P,W

0

3.411

C,E

0

8,980

111,834

0

P,W

0

450

C.E

0

65,960

f>,W

683

171

f>.W

0

2.100

C.E

0

25,100

476

65

C.E

6,59 1

901

P.W

354

354

352,8731.427.629

12.927

N

Pit.

c

0

21,516

C,E

0

7,800

C,E

0

6,250

C,E

9,547

2.387

P,W

9,361

2015

s

OutYoars

s

N

E

0

P.W

0

Pit.

s

N

1,312

7,750

C.E

P,W

535

740

530 C.E

c

9,150

115

C,E

4,645

5,244

55.136

77,204 160.281

45,275 109,497

13,795 10.156

1,006,289 961,115

1,618,523 880,429

3,377,555 657,857

2,611 ,137 235,888

To orovldo adcauate and usable lnstmctlonal soace: orolocts to modornl7o Instructional snaco

Appendi x B.2

2014 Pit.

N

100

Fa~III!Xlln!!:DII!I!"~!e Mogerni•!IIRD

£

s

Page 19 of 3 J

E

0

5,649

600

15

600

5,664

2,468,890 94,2191

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COUEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan- Project Ust Cat.

District Antelopo Valley Antelope VaPey Antelope Va"ey Barstow Cabrillo Cemtos Cerritos Cerritos Cerritos Chabot-las Pos.tas Chabot·Las Positas Chabot·Las Posltns Cllrus Citrus Citrus Citrus Coast Compton Compton Compton Compton Compton Compton Compton

Project Tille

Campus Antelope Vanoy College Anlolope Valley College Antolope Va~ey CoLege Oars low CoCege CabrUlo College Cerntos Coltoge Cerntos College Cemtos College Cerntos College Chabot Col!ego Chabot College Chabot College Citrus College Cilrus College C1t.rus College CitruS College Orange Coast College Compton Community Coli ego Compton Community Collage Compton Communrty Co!logo Compton Communrty College Compton Community College Compton CommuRIIy College Compton Community College

Append ix B.2

Applied Ar~s Bldg - Reuse Vacated Space

2011 Plr.

C.E

s

2012 Ph.

N

0

s

2013 Ph.

N

s

2014 Ph. s

N

Elclsung Student Servtces 111 Ropla<;Omont

p

EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER RENOVATION FINE ARTS/COMMUNICATIONS BUILDING liaydon Hall #12 Renovation TeCh C Remodel Music Mod(ll'nrzation

823

491

33,898

4,452

0 0

675 100

c P,W

c P,W

12.604 161

1.046 161

691

0

0

4,000

430

430

C.E.

1,634

1,634

P,W,C

11,345

1,542

c

4,425

4,425

672

0

E

0

1.191

c

0

1,300

P,W

0

P,W

0

P,W

803

N

Ph.

392

C.E

w.c.e

p

0

86

c P,W.C.E

0 1,581

13.299 1,532

C.E

3 ,489

3.835

P.W

8.944

5.143

0

3.565

0

195

c

w

638

0

P.W

~62

0 C,E

16.107

0

3,928

0

131

131

6.780

0

E

0

91

411

c

0

3.250

83

C.E

0

1,539

P.W

172

747 C.E

8.843

2.304

P,W

616

0 C,E

6.880

0

C.E

0

Adm•nlsltaLon Bu1!amg RomodOI

E C.E

Delta Building Renovation for Pollee lnstnrc11onal Building 1 Replacomont P.W.C.E lnstruCI!onal

Bwl~lng

5.965

516

2 Replacement

Modla At1S Center Replacement MIS Building #21 Upgrade (Print Shop) C.E

0

s

N

2.691

Leamtng Center Moderruzation lnital Buildings ModetnizaUOII P,W Health and Wollnoss Modemizallon Bumighl Center #21 Replacement P,W.C Health Sciences Bldg 1126 Renova:ron Ubrary/LRC Building #10 Renovation c Siudenl SeN1ces Consolidat•on w FACULTY OFFICE BLDG· REPLACE BLDGS 1100, 1500, 2000 MODERNIZE BUILDING 2100 • Biolog<:al Se-toncos Modemtze Eng:noering. B!dg 1600 P,W

Out Yoa.rs

20 15 Ph. s

N

9.450

Studont Aclivil•es Center Roplacomonl

P.W

Page 20 of3 1

0

531

5.701

E

2.401

0

E

2,535

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Cap•tal Outlay Fi\.., Yc.3if Plan· Projoct t..st

Cat.

District

Campus

Contra CO$ta Contra Costa Collogo Contra Costa Contra Costa Collego Contra Costa Contta Costa Colle go Contra Costa Contra Costa Co'iego Contra Costa O•ablo Valley COiiogo Contca Costa Olabio Valley COI.ogo Contra Costa O'ablo Va~oy Collogo Contra Costa Los Modanos Co!logo College Of The Oosort Oosort Desert College Of The Ooson Do sort Collogo Of Tho Doson Oosari Collogo Of ThO Do son COIIogo Of lho Oosort llosort El Camtno 0 Cam·no Conogo EJ Cam•no Conego EJ Cam•no El Cam•no El Cam•no College E1 Cam•no 8 Camillo Cellogo Foo:l>
Appendix B.2

Proj ect Tltlo

2011

2012

s

Ph.

N

Ph.

N

Ph.

Bio!oglcal Sclonces Roconstrucuon for Nt Classroom Bldg· Roplacemont Facihty

E

0

Physical Education Modorni181lon p,w

895

s

N

Ph.

P,W

8<12

281

P,W

0

681

c.e

4,119

3.945

830

P.W

422

413

c.e

9,751

9,351

Facuhy Office Bu1lding 1163 Roplacomont Liboral Mslloamlng Ctr Roplacomt NU!$11l9 and EMT Ronova~on Administration Bulld
P,W E

0

325

c

0

5,642

Advanced Transponatlon Bu1ldlng

p

Ag Sci· Environmental Doslgn #12·13 Renovation Engineering Building #15 Ronovatlon llboral Nts 115 Ronovauon Math & Computet Se>onco Bu:lding Romodol

MBA Bwldlng Student Services Con:or Roplacomont Vocational Sh09s ReP' acomont Learning Cantor Ronovahon

P,W

c P.W E

0

5,775

1.260

1.260 2.600

0

Remodel of L-4 Quad Bu
P.W

0

93

C,E

0

7,221

P.W

0

11 7

Biology 5100 Bultding Renovation Library & ISC Renovat on Rad;o StatiO'I

P.w .c.e P.W

c

Out Years

2015

s

P/1.

N

7.163

s

N

Ph.

2.388

s

N

E

220

484

c

6.500

800

900

Performing Arts Reconstruction

Engineenng Technology Ronovauon

2014

2013

s

7.054

6.74 2

0

130

0

402

c .e

15,664

15,035

P,W.C.E

11.551

11,552

P.W

1.466

1.466

P,W

159

159

0

799

c

C.E

0

1.221

P,W

136

136

c .e

0

1.186

Page2 1 of3 1

C.E

p

350

50 1855

1,492

170

c

16,733

w

0

E

0

0

260

C,E

3.557

450

P.w.c.e

4.451

495

P,W.C.E

15,296

15,295

c .E

17.433

16.590

c

1,643

1,643

c.e

1,814

1,813

w

260 C.E

0

0

6.700

350

50

0

4,681

CALII"ORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Fove Yoar Plan • Project Ust Cat.

District GaVJian Glonoalo Glendale Grossmonl· Cuyarnaca Imperial Va'loy lmpenal Val'oy Imperial Valloy Kom Kom Kern Kom Kom Kom Kom Lasson long lloac~ Long Boach long Boach Longlloach Los Mgolos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angoles Los Angelos Los Ango'os

Campus G3Vllan Cotogo Glendale Collogo Glondalo Conogo Cuyamaca Collogo

Project Tide

2013

2012

s

N

Ph.

LIBRARYFMEOIA RCMOOEL Auditorium Modomlzauon Secondary Effects Avtation/M Building Modomlzabon MODERNIZATION OF BUILDINGS B·G

Imperial Valley ACADEMIC BUILDINGS MODERNIZATION Collogo lmponal Va~oy BLDG 10 · COUNSELING/FIN. AIO College MODERNIZATION 1mpenal Valloy BLDG 7 ·GYM · MODERNIZATION Collo9o Bakersfield Collogo BC Hort Lab and Groonhouso Reconstruction Bakorsfiold Collogo BC Auto Technology Ronovaijon Bakersfield Co• loge BC Business/CIS Bulld•ng Bakersf!Oid Co!'ogo BC Language Ms Remodel for EffiCiency Bakersfield COI!ogo F'mo Ms Remodel for Effiocncy CC Main Bulld•ng Modernization Cerro Coso Collego Portorvll!e Collogo PC Fine Arts Complox Remodel for Efflcloncy Lassen Collego Modemlz.e Homanillos Liberal Arts Language Arts Renovat
A ppendix 8.2

2011 Ph.

s

N

Ph.

201.(

s

N

Ph.

P,W

536

536

C.E

5,528

5.528

P.W

1.091

0

C.E

9,826

0

P,W.C

7,589

843

C.E

5,846

5,378

P.W

P,W

575

548

P,W

P,W

1.092

~25

P,W P,W C.E

c

P,W

503

~30

0

5.009

1,563

1,562

w

0

707

E

0

133

c

0

1\,607

554 491 3,156

P,W

1,133

398

C,E

7,053

7,256

p

370

0

w

330 517

330 0

P,W

518

0

c

5,236

0

P,W

649

0

P,W

P,W

0 491 10.680

C.E

P.W

238

238

C,E

0

7.752

P,W

1,010

1.010

C.E

Page 22 of3 1

5,060

16,707

201 5

s

N

1.1 tO

0

Ph.

N

Ph.

o c.e

11,207

0

P,W

0

95

260 C,E

0

2,000

P,W C,E

0 0

3.676

E

235

0

E

125

0

E

0

0

~56

P.W C,E C,E

0 0 5.019

5,195 3,178

C.E

3.593 5.748

2.106 0

c

Out Years

s

c

6,210

0

c.e

2,241

2.241

C.E

12,535

12.535

4,408

17,904

s

N

c.e

0

1,620

111<1 c.E

0

1.509

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Out!ay Five Year Plan • Project List Cal.

DlalriCI

Campus

Los Angelos los Angelos Southwest College Lcs An go lee Los Angeles Trado-Tach COllege Los Angelos Los Ango'es rradc-Toch College Los Angotos Los Angeles rrade·Tech Collage Los Angelos Los Angeles Trade·Tech College Los RJos Amencan River College Los Rios Amonca11 River College American River Los Rlos College Los Rlos Cosumncs River College Los Rlos Sacramento City College los RIOt Sacramento City C<>lege los R.os Sacrarronto City Collego Marin College Of Mann Marin Coltoge Of Marin Marin Monterey Peninsula MontOroy Poninsuta Mt San AntonJO ML San Jac1nto M~ San Jacinto Napa Valley Napa Valley Napa Valley Napa Valley

Indian Valley Campus Montoroy Peninsula College Monterey Peninsula College ML San AntonJO Cotege Mon.leo Valley Center Mt. San Jacmte College Napa Valley Colloga Napa Va•tey College Napa Valley College Napa Valley College

Appendix 8.2

Project nue Modem,za~on of Locturo

Lab Bu,lding

Cu'lnary AIU Modomizabon. BUIId'ng H

2011

s

Ph.

2012 Ph. s

N

2013 Ph.

N

2014

s

Ph.

N

p

0

252

w

0

1.666

C.E

0

1a.2n

p

975

2.025

w

1.123

2.332

C.E

23.297

43,906

P.W

1.270

3.707

2015

s

Ph.

N

Out Yoars

s

Ph.

N

s

N

D·BuiJd,ng RonovabOn & Modemlzat•on C.E

15,324

41,882

P,W

2.249

2,249

C,E

15,610

15.610

P,W

405

2.003 C.E

P,W

116

560 C.E

F Building Reconstruction C.E

29.623 29.623

C.E

0 16,120

K·Buildlng RonovaUon & Modernization 1,256

P.W

1.256

P,W

348

1.836

C,E

14,490

6.641

P.W

275

1,660

1.143

C.E

11,646

4,851

Oav•os HaY ModomtzatJ<:n Licoral Ms BuiJd.ng Modem\zat.on Technical Building Modernization

P,W

665

1.514

C.E

14.257

6,756

C.E

10,207

8,308

C.E

18.404

15,610

Llbral)l Modernization (move sludenl services) Llllnrd llall Modernr
P,W

501

P,W

0

1.341

C,E

0

2.949

c c

0

14.826

E

0

14.811

E

0 0

913 840

C.E

6,139

6.139

P.W

1,3g1

1.391

E P.W

0

64

610

6 11

Business. Math. and Scionco Buildings Loam ng Technology Centor (LTC) Renovation Buila•ngs 100. 200 and 300 Modomizabon Modeml7abon & Reconstruct•on ol Budd1ngs 200, 1200, 1250 3700 Art Center . Phase II or Modoml:ration 800 Catacula MODERNIZE following LLRC Completion Butldtng 700 Modernization

P,W

C.E

0

8.623

P.W

189

710

C.E

1,836

5.108

0

C.E

19,088

P,W

Page 23 of3l

118

4.471

3,193

1,264

P,W

0

P,W

1,408

0 C.E

14,036

0

P.W

140

1•10 C,E

1,768

1,768

C.E

1.215

0

4,147

MODERNIZE BUS 3. COMP ST BLDG 1400

14,789 13,207

118

1.269

CALIFORNI.A COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capllal Oullay Fivo Yoar Plan • Pro)octllsl Cat.

District

Campus

Napa Valley Napa va:loy Coilege Napa Valley Napa Valloy College Napa Valley Napa Valley College Napa Valley Napa Va:loy Col'ege Nonh Orange Cypress CO:logo North Orange Cypress Collogo North Orange Cypress Collogo North Orango Fullerton Collogo Nollh Orange Fullerton College

Project TitJo

2012

2011 Ph.

s

MODERNIZE GYM LOWER LEVEL BLDG 600

MODERNIZE LITTLE THEATER llLDG 1200

Del Norto Cantor

Appendix 8 .2

2014

2013

s

Ph.

N

P,W

523

537

P,W

263

263

P,W,C,E

13.513

12.972

P,W,C,E

10.698

4,585

P,W,C,E

8.354

8.514

MODERNIZE INDUSTRIAL TECH BLOG 3100

RENOVATE GEN CLASSROOMIMESNMATH BUILDING 1600 F1no Ar1s B:dg 2 & Lee Hall Renov SclonCQ/Math Bldg 3 Renovation P.W.C,E 21,405 Tech EOI Blog 10 Ronov - Pll 2 Ool'koley Centor Honovatlon c 0 Ouslnoss/Humenillos Com pie~ 300/500 P.W.C,E 12,488 Modernization North Orange Fullerton Collogo Music 11tl0 Budding Ronovatlon LEARNING RESOURCE CENTER Ohlono Oh'one Coilogo RECONSTRUCTION Ohlooo Ohlone College ORCHARD HOUSE REMODEL REPLACE BLDG 8 ·SCIENCE & Ohlone Ohlone Collogo ENGINEERING Palomar Escondido Conttlf ESC Renovation modemrzatlon of R Building Pasacono Pasadena Clly Coile;o Pasadena C,ty Pasadena V building remodel College Peralta College or ModomiZO Gymnasium • Bldg G Alameda Peralta College Of Modomize Ubral)'. llldg 17 /\lameda Poralta College or Renovate Aviation Comp'ox Alameda Peralta Co1ege Of RenovatiOns to Bul!dong B (Auto ToehnO!ogcos) Alamoda Sc en co Oultd ngs Replacement Poralla College Of Alamoda Pomila Modernize Gym & Lockers - Bldgs 4, 10 & 13 Laney Coli ego Potall a Laney College Modomizo Thoator. Bldg 15 Ronovat•on of Building D Peralla Merrill College Rancho Santa Ana Co,lego I lAMMOND & TECI INICAL BLDG$ Santiago REPLACEMENT SantJago Canyon BUILDING A & ll COMPLEX RENOVATION Rancho CoOege Santiago Redwoods College Of Tho Ronovation/ModemiLat•on Health w 0 OccupaUon/Appllod Technology Building Redwoods Redwoods

Ph.

N

C,E

s

N

5.026

Ph.

2015

s

Ph.

N

Out Years

s

Ph.

N

5,156

P.W

232

232

C,E

2,753

3,117

C.E

2,199

P,W

131

2,199

131 C.E

t,742

1,742

c

0

1,520

E

602

601

E

34

0

20.505 5.000 11.984

P,W

P,W P,W,C.E

P.W

722

722

2.004

2.204

400

800

c

349

349

7,747

7,747

P,W

0

3.084

C,E

12.270

9,800

P,W,C,E

3.351

3.351

c

3,656

3.656

P,W

0

210

C.E

0

65.810

12,496

17.673

0

3.691

2,634

2.000

P,W.C

P,W

466

~66

P,W,C,E

23.336

45,376

P,W,C,E P.W.C.E

7.305 19,045

10.806 35,761

P.W

279

839

P,W

279

839

296

Modomizatlon & llddillons lo the Dol Norto Con tor

Page 24 of31

P,W

0

290

C,E

4,751

4,751

P.W.C.E

5,631

5,631

C,E

7.468

6,910

C.E

7.464

6.905

C,E

0

6,538

P,W

435

0

C.E

c

s

N

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COllEGES Caphal Outlay Fi\10 Yoar Plan · Project Ust Cat.

District

~oods Rio Hondo

Campus

Projoct TIUe

Mendoctno Coast Modorruza1.on & 1\ddi~ons 1o MendoCino Cenlor Center Rio Hondo Coflogo Library Conversion to Instructional Build ng

San Oomardtno Sao Bomardloo Sao Bornardtno San Bernardino

Crafton Hills Chemistry & Heallh Sorvicos Renovation Colle go Crafton Hills LADM Ronovallon (3rd Floor) Col'ege Se~onco Bui:ogo San Diogo Crty M Bul!dlng ReroovaUon College San O.ogo San D.ogo City SCIENCE BUILDING College San Diego Mosa Flno and Dramalic Arts Honova~on San O.ogo College San Diogo San Diogo Mosa I 300 Building Renovailon Co!lego San Diogo San O~ego Miramar AVIATION MAINTENANCE TECHNOLOGY College CENTER John O'connell Sao EVANS CAMPUS PtiASE 2 ALTERNATIONS Franosco Trade Tocll Contor San San Franctseo City CLOUD HI\Ll·PHASE 2 ALTERATIONS Francisco College San San Francisco City REMODEL SCIENCE OUILOING Francisco Colle go San San Francisco DOWNTOWN CM1PUS MODERNIZATION Francisco DowotownCc Cen1er San Joaqutn San Joaqum Dolta Alhorton AudJtotlum Roconstruction and Dolta College Modnm1zabon San Joaquin San Joaquin Dolta Loc~o Building RoconstnJction Doli a College

Appendix B.2

2011

s

Ph. p

c

c

2012 Ph.

N 0

0

0

109

s

2013 Ph.

N

P,W

0

6,275

P,W

1,471

1.490

p

0

800

P,W

0

725

E

0

3.500

Ph.

N

w

0

135

c.e

0

2.979

P,W

988

1.361

C.E

10,329

14.588

P,W

515

515

c.e

6.011

6.011

E

0

0

p

0

0

P.W

0

3n

1,200

10,863

2014

s

E

0

662

P,W

0

1,256

c

0

8.407

c

0

47,923

E

0

2,853

C,E

10,894

10,894

P,W

1,200

1,200

C,E

19,415

19,075

w

0

1,200

C.E

0

26,825

c

0

7,235

E

0

1,100

C.E

0

1.920

E

(}

575

P,W

1,260

0

c

35.629

0

C,E

12.324

2.229

p

0

100

w

0

200

P,W

0

950

c

0

9.500

E

0

70()

E

()

767

P,W

3.165

0

P,W

1,131

125

Page 25 of3 1

Out Yoara

2015

s

Ph.

N

s

Ph.

N

w

0

0

c

0

0

c

0

2.3n

E

0

145

14.361

0

P,W

0

1,050 C,E

P,W

777

777 C.E

C.E

E

s

N

0

0

0

9,452

11.894 12,448

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Five Year Plan· Pro)O<:t Ust Cnt.

District

Campus

San Joaquin Dolla SanJosoEvorgfoon San .JosoEvotgroon San Matoo

San Joaquln Delta College Evergreen VaJ;ey Cot' ego San Jose C.ty College Canada Colloge

San Matoo San Mateo

Canada College Coltoge Of San Mateo College Of San Mateo SKyltne Col1ege Skyl111o College

San Matoo San Mateo San Mateo San Matoo San Matoo

Project Tille

Santa Monica Santa Monica Co4!ogo Sequoias College of the Sequoias Sequoias CoUogo of the Sequoias SisKiyou Collogo or The Slskiyous Solano Solano College

Appendix 8.2

2012

s

N

Ph.

Shima Building Reconstruction

P.W

2014

2013

s

N

1,501

Ph.

1,501

Cluster Roble

s

P/1.

N

C,E

16,081

16,081

P,W

651

651

General Education Building r..1odom zatton Btdg 3 ·Performing Arts Center Technology and Envtronmontal Modemlz.aUon Multiple Program Instructional Canter Bldg 12 Modernization • 2nd Floor

P,W.C.E

8.4 14

P,W,C,E

1,886

814

P.W.C.E

3,712

928

P,W

P.W

2,068

465

116

0 p

818

368

P,W

0

63

c

0

756

P,W

1,180

0

c

12.648

0

Wako Centor Modarniz.allon Droschor Hall • Acadcmrc Modom.. BOOI
w

0

1,677

c

0

39,639

c

0

50,368

E

0

3.000

638

613

P,W

N

Pll.

C.E

7,944

8,563

P.W

99

559

P,W p

P,W

2015

s

c

Out Yoars

s

Pll.

N

3,306

3,306

3,184

809

7.384

1.721

s

N

E

0

567

E

216

0

5.127

Modornl:to Building 20. Vocational M s

Bldg 1 Fino Ms Modomizauon Bldg 5 • Loarnong Resource Center Ta<:hnology and En~~~ronmental Upgrade Skylllle Co!lego Domot,~on ol Se,slllic Ha:tardous Buildings and Nonh Campus Improvements Skyl>no College WORKFORCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROSPERITY CENTER Santa Barbara City Administration Building Modernization College Santa Barbara City Humanities Building Modernization College Santa Barbara City Occupational Education Vacated Spaoo Col1egu Renovation Santa Barllata Coty PhysJCal Sc.onee 101 Modorn•wt•on Co:tege Santa Barbara City Physical Science East Wing Modomlzat·on College Schott Cantor Modernlztlon Schott Center

Santa Oarbara Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Santa Baroara Santa Barbara Santa Wako Center Barbara Santa Monica Santa Monica Collogo

2011 Ph.

McCLOUD HALL MODERNIZATION Bulld.ng 1000

Page 26 of31

885

2G5 W,C,E

0

370

C,E

4.323

1,081

C,E

22,849

0

w

86 18,036

346 C.E 6,159

P.W

80

c

0

3.710

716 C,E

1,310

534

C,E

23.02g

10,4 t9

P,W

78

41

C.E

1,165

253

P,W

361

0

P.W

750

168

0

2.400

E

P,W

648

0

C,E

9,178

2,281

P,W

296

0

c

8.518

1,g55

C.E

6.461

0

C,E

3.003

0

P,W

251

0

c

4,051

c

1,632

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan • Projocl Ust Cat.

District

---Solano

Campus

So1ano College Solano Solano CoUogo Solano Solano CoJ.ege Santa Rosa Junoor Sonoma College South IMneValley Orange College Irvine Valley Soulh Orange College South Irvine Valley Orange College Soulh Irvine Valley Orange College Socth Sadd.cback CoUoge Orange South Sadd>oback Orange Col logo South Sacklleback Orange College Southwestern Southwestern College Southwestern Southwestom College Southwestern Sou!hwestom College State Cooter Fresno C1ty College State Center Rood:ey College State Center Reedley Cottego Systom Gon System Gon Systom Gon System Gon Systom Gen System Gon System Gon System Gon System Gon System Gon System Gon System Gen Ventura Moorparl< College ventura Moorparl< College Ventura Moorpark College Ventura Moorpark College O)(flatd College Ventura Ventura Ventura College Ventura Ventura College Vonlura Ventura College Ventura

Ventura Col1ogo

Appendix 8.2

Project TliJo Bullcl!ng 200 • 200A Build ng 300 Library Bu•lo•ng 1DO Replacement Burbank Aud :orium Rehab!Lta:Jon Pro;ocl A-200 LIBERAL ARTS MODERNIZATION/ REMODEL REMODEL A-400 FOR CLASSROOM

2011 Ph.

s

P,W,C,E 17,931

C,E

2012 Ph.

N

0

s

2013 Ph.

N

s

N

P,W

862

2014 N Ph. s P.W 383 5,597 0 c

2015 P/1. s N D c 2.487 742 0 E

P,W

594

804

c.E

6,614

7,484

P,W

488

86

C,E

5,212

919

N 330

0

0

2,470 P.W

0

223

c

0

2.824

REMODEL B-1 00 AND 8-300

P,W

0

580

C,E

D

11,124

GATEWAY BUILDING SECONDARY EFFECTS RENOVATE McKINNEY nlEATER REPAIR TAS BUILDING C.E

0

2.032

P,W

0

517

P.W

D

390

c

0

5.172

NEW HORTICULTURE CLASSROOM BUILDING Academic Fac.I•Ues Modem1zabon Academic Facihues Modemiza~on Physical Education Complex Modeml:utbOn Modemlzallon Deficiencies 2013 Modemlzollon Dofictoncios 2014 Modorni1.allon Deficiencies 2015 Replace Tomoorary Bul1d1ngs 2013 Roptaco Temporary Bull
s

17,435

REMODEL A·300 FOR CLASSROOMS

CLASSROOM BUILDING 510 MODERNIZATION MYAN HALL RENOVAnON & ADA ACCESS

Out Yoars Ph. 0 E

P,W

1,048

918

C.E

D

5,066

E

0

337

P,W

0

91

P.W

1.333

P.W C.E P,W

631 8,781 226.043

P,W

p

331

0

P.W

1,046

0

P.W P,W

853 180

853 180

w.c

725

0

Page 27 of31

w

50.850

C.E

D

0

c.E

14,240

0

0 9,300 0

c.E

7,643

0

c P,W

1,737,181 169,532

0 0

0

c c.e

406 497 362 12.525 981 9,316 1,629

0 D 0 D 0 9,316 1,926

P,W,C

1,451

0

P,W P.W C,E P,W

149

E

0

P.W

D

1,754 C,E

P,W

D

641 C,E

D 17.976 D

7,280

1,176

c P,W

429,398 38,137

0

c.e C,E c

7.241 5,438 3,857

0 D

c

10.981

0

0

0

c

1,302,885 169.532

0

P,W

0

c

1.302.885

0

c P,W

322.048 38,137

0 0

c

322.048

0

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Fivo Year Plan· Project List Cat.

District

Campus

VtciO
I

2011

Project Tltlo

Pit.

Pt1.

N

S

2013 S Ph.

N

uboral Arts Modernization 874

P.W

0

c

2014 Ph.

N

7.528

0

E

S

Ph.

N

586

2015 S

N

Ph.

Out Years S

t0,186

N

0

Old An and ~-l
1.073

0 C.E

0 C.E

4,244

0

0

Old Nursong Bldg #32 MO
P.W

830

92

C,E

0

58,846

P,W

2,290

2.191

P.W

834

1,250

WHCC SAM Modernization Maon Bullding Replacement Phase I M.aln Bu !dong Replacement Phase II MT Roplacomont Bu·lding

Arts and Sciences Building Language Arts I Social Sciences Ronovotlen Loaming Rosourco Center Ronovabon

C.E

8.985

998

P,W

699

228

C.E

36.235

40.01?

P.W

493 493 117,466 335.678

P,W

463

C,E

8,295

781

C.E

7,501

8.443

P,W

577

577

C.E

10.133

15. 11 2

P.W

542

542

C.E

5.599

6,902

1,192

1,192

C.E

13.108

15.077

P,W

Building 500 Reconstnlebon Total

f.

2012 S

C,E

4,654 4.674 345,143 454,335

740.387

385,278 .

2,675,499 283.738

t,946.602 52,072

1,688.639 97,8791

TQ(!rQYhi2 !0I!f!i!~llon al SUQ~O!l 12rvls;:~1 facllltlos: (!tOJCC1'!

Antolopo Valley Barstow CitnJS Compton

Contra Costa Contra Costa Contra Costa Contra Costa Contra Costa

Antelope Valley College Barstow College CitnJS College Complon Communoty Co:tege Contta Costa Coltoge Conlra Costa College Contra Costa Collogo Contra Costa Collogo Los Medanos Collogo

A ppendix 8.2

tg msuf!UIJ!zg I[!§I'!:YCtlonal &U[!QSUJJgtviSC!I115Cli.Q3S:l!x Student Contor Expansion & Renovation

Support Modernization ADMINISTRATION BUILDING RENOVATION Student Sorvieos Center Reptacomont

P,W C,E

0

150

30

C,E

1.470

P.W.C.E

7.110

2.035 C,E

P,W

0

51 C.E

0

546

C,E

0

3.112

0 22,461

2.371

Maintenance and Opetations Reconstruction

Student Activities Contor

0

5.245

Foolba't Press Box ReconstnJction

Physical Selonco Reconstruction for Conforonco Center Student Actlvltoos·Rop!acoment Building

P.W 150

P,W E

0

1.255

E

0

440

Page 28 of 3 'I

0

1.000

P.W

0

309

c

0

2.900

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capllat Outlay Ave Year Plan • Project List Cat.

District

Campus

Feather RiVer Feather River College FeathOf Rovor Feather R •ver College Foothill· FoothlU CoUoge DoAnza Foothill College Foothill· DoAnza Gallilan Gavilan College lmporlal Valley Kom t
Long Beach Los 1\ngetas Los Angelos Los Angelos los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angelos Los Angolos Los Ango'os Los Angelos Los Angolos Los Angelos

Project Title

s

2012 Ph.

N

Ubrary Convorsoon

P.W

s

2013 Ph.

N

180

0

Vacaung Temporary Suucturos Admlnlstrauon Bu•lding Renovat•on TV Conlor Conversion

MOI)ERNILE OCC ED PHASE II • FOR COMMUNITY EO AND MIS BLDG 1 · ADMINISTRATION Imperial Valloy Collego MOOERNIZIITtON Bakersfield College BC Hoallll Center Renovation

Bakersfoeld CoUoge BC Student SeMces Modomiza~o n Corro Coso CC 2nd Floor. Student Center College Lake Tahoo Warehouse 8 Venode Storage Community College Student Sorvieos Center Pacific Coast Campus East los Angelos Academic Products Sorllicos Dellvory Notwol1< COI!ege Project (IlPSON) East Los Angeles Campus Center (FS) and Bookstore (K5) COllege Reconstruction Los Ange'.es City Caesar Chavoz Adm;nistra(on Building College RonovaLon Los Angeles Cily RWGPL • Landscaoe!Hardscapo Co!logo Improvements Campuswodo Landscape/ Hardscapo Los Angeles ~l afbor Collogo Los Angelos Campus Sorllices Reconstruction Mission College Los Angelos Campus Wldo Infrastructure. East Pump Southwest College I l ouse & nro Water Los Angeles Campus Wldo Security Upgrade Southwest cor"1l0 Los AngeleS Landscape Improvements Southwest CoCego l.os Angeles VaHey Campus Cantor Renovation· Basement 8 1st Floor College Los Angeles Valley Campus Modernization Collage

Appendix B.2

2011

Ph.

C.E

0

2.661

p

0

75

c

0

920

C,E

0

594

P.W

847

1.040

C.E

0

1,249

w

0

90

2014

s

Ph.

N

2015

s

Ph.

N

c

1,620

0

E

114

0

p

673

0

w

589

0

c

0

1,405

E

0

213

c

P,W

P,W

0

C.E

0

Ph.

N

12,614

0

0

0

2,197

975

975

P,W

85

0

C.E

0

9,919

C.E

990

0

C.E

11.423

11,423

w

0

1.424

3.904 P,W

p

w

0

425

c

0

26.888

c

0

8.779

P,W

0

288

C.E

0

2.313

c

0

14,828

c

0

21.823

C,E

0

2.543

c

0

2.742

E

0

1.487

Page 29 of3 1

0

216

c

E

100 C,E

879

937

c E

17,189

Out Years

s

0 15.621

s

N

2.943

0

0

1,222

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital OuUay Fi110 Year Plan • Project list Cat.

Olatr'lcl

Campus

Los Ango•os Wosl Los Angeles Co!loge Los Rlos All'etlcan River College North Orange Fu!letton CoCege Ohlone Ohlono College Porol ta Laney Collejje Poral1a Mornu Cofiege Peralta Peralta District Office' Riverside R•vorsido City College San Crafton H;lls BemanMo COllege San Crafton H.J;s BemardiJlo College San San Bernardino Bernardino Valley College San Matoo College Of San Matoo Santa Santa Barbara City Collogo Barbaro Sisk.you CoUogo Of Tho Siskiyous StSki)'OU Collage Of Tho Siskiyous Sonoma Santa Rosa Junior Collogo South lfVlno Va!loy Orange College South Sadd!oback Orange Collogo Southwestorn Southwestern Cotlogo Victor Va:ley V•ctor Valley Community Collogo West Va!toy. W.ss1011 College

2011

Project Tillo

Ph.

Building Damolltlon Phase II

c

[_ _ _

A ppendix 8 .2

N

0

Plr.

2013

s

N

P/1.

2014

s

N

P/1.

2015

s

N

Ph

Student SOtVces 8klg 2000 Renovation DISABlED ACCESS (vorticalltansportatlon) Romodol Old Ubraty lor Student Services Modernize Bldg R for Administration Be novato District Office Bldg

P.W P,W

0

1,218

c P,W

One Stop Snop Renovation

p

915 0 473

0

392 10,019 473

333

DamoliSll Old UOraty

c

9,315

3.993

C.E

4,912

4,880

P,W

0

824

w

0

390

P,W,C

0

482

Studnnt SOIVic:os Rono•allon Campus-wide Silo Wor1<1Slgnago/ADA·Phase II Modernize Building 1. Administration

P,W,C

4,805

C.E

0

P,W

400

0

C,E

4,448

0

c

0

P,W

428

0

C,E

4,424

0

6.000

E

0

371

1,291

1.291

0

5,786

Studont Serviecs & AdministraUon Bulld.ng P,W Campus Entty Realignment

P,W

0

480

c

Technology Infrastructure Student Services Building

P,W 847

P,W

132

0 C,E

2,065

E

100

P.W

215

C.E

0

8.161

C,E

0

6.676

P,W

0

2.300

P,W

0

1,736

P.W

436

P,W

0

450

P,W

0

10,847

c

Main Plaza Canopy/ Landscaping

Tot al

Ph .

s

N

749 C.E

5,096

3.529

42

c c

0

0 14,506 0 11,613

o c,e

4,834

0

0

7.2 11

263

c c

0

2.191

10.847

E

618

618

1.582

STUDENT SERVICES SECONDARY EFFECTS CENTRAL PLANT REPAIR REMODEL OF CAFETERIA BUILDING 610

N

1,693

Campus Conlor Modomfzallon ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/MEETING CENTER RENOVATE BLDG 4 FOR ONE.STOP STUDENT SERVICES BAILEY HALL SPACE CONVERSION

Out Years

s

5&7

Admlnialtation Building Modernrzat.on

M .ss~on

West Valley. M.ss•on College Mission West Valloy· Mission Collog.e Mission Yuba Yuba College

2012

s

81.687

295 29,258

295 54.088

Page 30 of 31

30.432

24.832

P,W

0

549

P,W

0

458

C.E

4,245 30,429

4,245 52.144

c c.e

0

5.538

0

5,485

20,263 65,717

8,039 30,8721

CAUFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES Capital Outlay Five Year Plan • Project List

Cat.

Dlatrlct

Campus

I

2011

ProjeeiTIIto

Ph.

Faclllty/lnfrastnucluro Modomlulion Total

2012 S

N

118,313 417,365

P/1.

2013 S

N

374,399 508,403

Ph.

2014 S

N

770.819 410,110

Ph.

2015 S

2,705,928

Tol.a l473,640 1,845.2171,410,315 1.472.0662,<:32.305 1 ,281.8596, 145,2~ GrandTotal 2.318,857 2,882,382 _ 3,714,1 64 7,150,n8 CMticaJ lnfra.stnucturo Ooflcloncl~ Roeap Enrollmont/Caseload!Populatlon Roeap Faclllly/lnftastnuc!uro Modorni:rotion Hocap

Appendix 8.2

2,454 223 352,8731,427,629 118,313 417,365

29,627 2.548 1,006,289 961.115 374,399 508,403

Page 31 of31

42,963 11.320 1,618,523 860,429 770.819 410.110

N

335.880

Ph.

S

1,966,865117,790

1,005,5264.615~

61,788 11,789 3,3n.5ss 657,857 2,705,928 335.680

Out Years N

Ph.

S

N

1,696.878128,7511

3~9544,165,766

222,970

4.970,571

4 ,388.~

37,616 1,276 2.611.137 235,888 1,966,8651 17,790

2,468.890 94,219 1,696,878 128,761

0

0

California Community Colleges 2011-12 Spending Plan

Appendix B.3

2011-12 TYPE

BOG Cat

301

E

Antelope Valley Community College District, Antelope Valley Colleoe

40.03.1 19 Student SeiVioes Building

PW

2,290,000

301

c

Barstow Community College District, Barstow College

40.04.106 Initial Buildings Modernization

PW

823,000

303

c

Cerritos Community College Dlstric~ Cerritos College

40.07.122

301

c

301

B

Chabot·las Posltas Community College District, Chabot Colleoe Chabot Las Positas Community College District, Las Posltas Colleoe

Bumight Center i21 PWC Reolacement Modernize Engineering, Building PW 40.62.118 1600 Library Expansion and Integrated 40.62.218 PW Learnloa Center

301

B

Chaffey Community College District, Chaffey College

303

c

Citrus Community College Dlsllict, Citrus College

40.09.127

301

B

Coast Community College District, Golden West College

301

c

301

B

301

B

301

c

301

D1

303 301

District, Loe.1tion

CAS I 01 avaJO

Project Name

Ph.

StateS

2013-1 4

2012-13 Ph.

c

StateS

Ph.

StateS

CE

27,116,000 CE

Ph.

State $

StateS

27,1 16,000

29,406,000

12.604,000

13,427,000

0

33,898,000

CE

8,944,000

9,747,000

CE

13,445,000

14,541,000

CE

21 ,236,000

23,101,000

0

1,581 ,000

48,723,000

52,297,000

c

12,604,000

Total

Outyear Cost

33,898,000

-803,000

CE

8,944,000

1,096,000

CE

13,445,000

40.08.1 13 Liberal Arts and Letters Complex PW

1,865,000

CE

21 ,236,000

Hayden Hall Building # 12 Renovation

PWCE

1,581,000

40.1L207 Science/Mathematics Building

PW

3,574,000

Coast Community Colleg~ District, Orange Coast College

40.11 .313 Music Buildings Modernization

c

3,489,000

Coast Community College District, Orange Coast College

40.11.314

CE

48,723,000

-

CE

--

3,489,000

Language Arts and Social Science Blda. Science and Allied Health 40.13.109 Relllacemen! B!!;!g Engineering Technology 40.13.222 Renovation

PW

2,731,000

CE

36,737,000

CE

36,737,000

39,468,000

PW

4,761,000

CE

28,688,000

CE

28,688,000

33,449,000

PW

895,000

CE

9,751,000

CE

9,751,000

10,646,000

Contra Costa Community College District, Los Medanos Colleae

40.13.318 Physical Education Building

PW

551,000

CE

6,096,000

CE

6,096,000

6,647,000

B

Desert Community College District, College of the Deser1

40.10.116 Learning Resource Center

PWCE

0

26,239,000

c

E.l Camino Community College District, El Camino College

40.14.117

301

D1

Feather River Community College District, Feather River Colleoe

40.73.106 Gym Modernization

303

c

Foothiii·DeAnza Community College District, Foothill College

301

D1

Gavllan Community College District, Gavilan College

301

B

301

D1

301

D1

301

B

301

r--- -

Contra Costa Community College District, Contra Costa Colleae Contra Costa Community College District. Diablo Valley Colle~

Glendale Community College District, Glendale College Glendale Community College District. Glendale College Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District, Grossman!

Math and Computer Science Buildina Remodel

26,239,000

-

--

PW

1,260,000

CE

15,664,000

CE

15,664,000

16,924,000

PW

1,320,000

CE

10,803,000

CE

10,803,000

12,1 23,000

7,054,000

..

0

0

7,054,000

664,000

CE

6,772,000

6,772,000

7,436.000

I

40.15.215 Library and ISC Renovation PWCE Modernize Physical Education 40.17.109 PW Buildlna 40.18.124 Laboratory College SeiVices CE Bui!Qing 1937 Physlcal Education Building 40.18.127 PW Replacement

CE

46,027,000

46,027,000

-

1,468,000

CE

19,023,000

CE

19,023,000

20,491 ,000

-

40.19.211 Theater Ar1s Building

PW

1,837,000

CE

24,768,000

CE

24,768,000

26,605,000

Har1nell Community College District, Hartnell College

40.20.104 Science Building

PW

1,317,000

CE

16,333,000

CE

16,333,000

17,650,000

c

Imperial Valley Community College District, Imperial Valley Colleae

40.21.106

PW

575,000

CE

5,646,000

CE

5,646,000

6,221.000

301

F

Kern Community College District. Bakersfield College

PW

847,000

CE

17.189.000

CE

17,189,000

18,036,000

301

c

Kem Community College District, Cerro Coso College

40.22.216 CC Main Building Modernization PW

1,092,000

CE

7,053,000

CE

7,053,000

8,145,000

301

B

Kern Community College District, Delano Center

40.22.402

1,927.000

CE

24,1 13,000

CE

24,113,000

26,040,000

July 1, 2010

Co~e

Academic Buildings Modernization BC Student Services 40.22.114 Modernization DC Learning Resource Center Multi·Puroose Buildlna

PW

Page 1 of 4

-

-

-

California Community Colleges 2011·12 Spending Plan

Appendix B.3

I-

2011·12

TYPE

BOG Cal

301

B

Kem Community College Dislrict, Portervine College

301

B

Long Beach Community College District, Long Beach City Colleae. Liberal Arts Camous Long Beach CCD, Long Beach City College, PacifiC Coast Camous Los Angeles Community College District, East Los Angeles Colleae Los Angeles Community College District,los Angeles City Colleae Los Angeles Community College District, Los Angeles Trade· Tecb._Colleae

301

c

301

B

District, Location

CAS I

(II

aval~

Project Name

CE

9,259,000

40.25.204 Mathematics and Technology

PW

1,759,000

-

0

40.25.122 Construction Trades, Phase 1

PW

503,000

40.26.111 Malh and Science Complex

PW

112,000

Da Vinci Hall and P.E. West 40.26.213 Reconstruction Culinary Arts Modernization, 40.26.708 Buildino H

E

-

r----

301

B

Los Rlos Community College District, Natomas Center

301

c

Los Rios Community College District, Sacramento City College 40.27.314 Mohr Hall Modernization

301

B

Meroed Community College District, Merced College

301

D1

301

c

1-

PW

Ph.

CE

24,052,000 CE

·- -

Total

StaleS

CE

0

1,563,000

Outyear Cost

StaleS

Ph.

849,000

301 301

Los Aios Community College Dislrict, American River College

Ph.

2013·14

Slate$

PW

301

301

StaleS

2012-13

40.22.308 PC Allied Health Facility

c c c

301

Ph.

SlateS

9,259,000

10,108,000

24,052,000

25,811,000 5,563,000

--

--

CE

5,060,000 CE

5,060,000

CE

39,976,000 CE

39,976,000

16,707,000 CE

16,707,000

18,270,000

23,297,000 WCE

24,420,000

25,395,000

CE

40,088,000

- -

.

975,000

w

1,123,000

665,000

c

14,490,000

CE

14,490,000

15,155,000

PW

216,000

c

8,113,000

CE

8,113,000

8,329,000

40.27.601 Natomas Center, Phase 2 and 3 PW

564,000

c

20,779,000

CE

20,779,000

21,343,000

PW

501,000

CE

11,846,000

CE

11,846,000

12,347,000

Agriculture Science and Industrial PW Technoloaies Comolex

407,000

CE

11,774,000

CE

11 ,774,000

12,181,000

p

40.27.107 Technica.l Building Modernization PW

Los Rlos Community College District. Cosumnes River Col!ege 40.27.215 College Center Expansion

CE

-

1--

l-

Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Fort Ord Center Monterey Peninsula Community College District, Monterey Penillsula Colleoe Mt. San Antonio Community College District, Mt. San Antonio Colleae

40.30.120

~ -

40.32.201 Public Safety Center Ph. II

PW

648,000

CE

6,970,000

CE

6,970,000

7,618,000

40.32.108 Arts Complex

PW

610,000

CE

6,139,000

CE

6,139,000

6,749,000

Business and Computer 40.33.118 ITechnolocvCenter

PWCE

0

27,075,000

Napa Valley Community College Dislrict, Napa Valley College

40.35.105 Building 700 Modernization

PW

5,108,000

5,297,000

North Orange County Community College District, Cypress Colle.lle North Orange County Community College District, Fullerton Colleae

Science /Math Bldg 113 Renovation Business/Humanities Complex 40.36.206 300/500 Modernization

Ohlone CCD, Ohlone College

40.16.115 Renovate Buildings 3 and 6

PW

1,307,000

c

14,678,000

B

Palomar Community College Districl Palomar College

I.Jbraryll.eaming Resource 40.38.115 Center

PW

3,701,000

CE

56,318,000

303

B

Peralta Community College District, Laney College

40.40.304 Learning Resource Center

PWCE

301

D1

Peralta Community Conege District. Merritt College

40.40.407 Child Development Center

PW

358,000

CE

4,739,000

301

B

40.41.125 Science Building

PW

1,679,000

CE

301

01

40.41.202 Fine and Performing Arts Center PW

1,477,000

301

01

Rio Hondo Community College District, Rio Hondo College

40.43.112 Music/Wray Theater Renovation PW

301 301

D1

Riverside Community College District, Norco Center

40.44.307 Center for Human Performance

Jnlv1

1n1n

303

B

301

303

c c c

301

A4

303

-

301

-

1-

Rancho Santiago Community College District, Santa Ana Colleae Rancho Santiago Community College District, Santiago r.anvon College

40.36.103

27,075,000 189,000

CE

5,108,000

CE

PWCE

21,405,000

0

21,405,000

PWCE

12,488,000

0

12,488,000

CE

14,678,000

15.985,000

CE

56,318,000

60,019,000

0

21,387,000

CE

4,739,000

5,097,000

22.,140,000

CE

22.140,000

23,819,000

CE

18,787,000

CE

18,787,000

20,264,000

908,000

CE

8,476,000

CE

8,476,000

9,384,000

1,279,000

c

18,933,000

,CE

18,933,000

20,212,000

PW

---

Page 2 of 4

21,387,000

L _

J

-· .

-.

California Community Colleges

Appendix B.3

2011-12 Spending Plan

2011-12 TYPE

BOG

303

8

District, Location

Cat

303

8

301

c

301

D1

301

B

301

8

303

01

--

303

D1

305

D1

c c

301 301

Riverside Community College District, Riverside Community Colleae San Bernardino Community College District, Crafton Hills Colleoe San Bernardino Community College District San Bernardino Vallev College San Francisco Community College District, City College of San Francisco. Phelan Camous San Francisco Community College District, City College of San Franciscg. Ocean (Phelan) Camous San Joaquin Delta Community College District, San Joaquin DeltaColleae San Mateo County Community College District Canada CoDeS~.e

San Mateo County Community College District, College of San Mateo San Mateo County Community College District, Skyline Colleae Santa Barbara Community College District, Santa Barbara City Colleae Santa Barbara Community College District, Schott Center Santa Clarita Community College District, College of the Canvons Santa Monica Community College District, Santa Monica .QolleQe

CASI(If

Project Name

avail)

Ph.

40.44.106 Riverside School or the Arts

PWCE

Humanities (General Education) PWCE 8uildina

40.46.107

40.46.218 Technical Building 40.48.113 Performing Arts Complex 40.48.112

Advanced Bio/Stem Cell ITechnoloov Center

40.49.111 Planetarium

7,449,000

7,836,000

0

13,114,000

0

13,049,000

-

13,798,000

28,236,000

D

1,952,000

BE

59,164,000

PW

1,147,000

c

12,073,000

17,931,000

-

0

1,643,000

CE

21,992,000

Solano Community College District, Solano College

40.60.105 Library Bldg 100 Replacement

Building 1200 Theater Modernization IH&Sl

South Orange County Community College District, Irvine Valley 40.45.132 Ane Arts Building South Orange County Community College District, 40.45.218 Sciences Building Saddleback Colleae State Center Community Conege Distric~ Career Technology Site Development and Phase I 40.64.502 Facilities Center

PWCE PW PW PWCE

BE

13,798.000

13,937,000

2,401,000

CE

c

12,648,000

22,849,000 CE CE

.

--

22,849,000

24,917,000

12,648.000

13,828,000 6,855,000

CE

32,221,000

-

CE

30,211 ,000

32,914,000

CE

28,236,000

30,735,000

BE

59,164,000

61,116,000

CE

12,073,000

13,220,000

0

17,931 ,000

CE

21,992,000

23,635,000

CE

32,221,000

34,622,000

0

44,990,000

44,990,000

-

State Center Community College District, Fresno City College


PW

792,000

CE

10,002,000

CE

10,002,000

10,794,000

State Center Community College District, Reedley College


PW

738,000

CE

9,334,000

CE

9,334,000

10,072,000

-

Victor Valley Community College District, Victor Valley College

40.66.118 Science Building Addition

PW

1,186,000

CE

14,377,000

CE

14,377,000

15,563,000

West Hills Community College District, West Hills College at Coalinoa West HiUs Community College District West Hills Conege at Lemoore Colleae

lnttial Buildings Modernization 40.67.106 Phs It

PW

830,000

CE

8,985,000

CE

8,985,000

9,815,000

40.67.207 FIE!Id Sports

PW

1,525,000

CE

18,225,000

CE

18,225,000

19,750,000

West Kern Community College District, Taft College

40.68.106 Vocational Center

PW

1,234,000

CE

19,706,000

CE

19,706,000

20,940,000

------

July 1, 2010

BE

c

c

B

CE

2,499,000

303

301

7,449,000

PW

Tulare Center Phase II, Academic Bulldlnas

40.60.106

D1

CE

30,211 ,000

Solano Community College District, Solano College

301

387,000

CE

A4

c

PW

2.703,000

301

301

41,667,000

PW

40.58.109 Science Replacement Facility

Dl 1 -1301 B

38,648,000

40.55.111 Math/Science Addition

Sierra Joint Community College District, Sierra College

301

CE

6,855,000

-

Dt

38,648,000

40.54.117 Administration/Student Services CE

B

301

20,886,000

CE

1,180,000

305

B

19,415,000

3,019,000

PW

40.53.201 Schott Center Modernization

i-

303

8.247,000

38.274,000

2,068,000

40.56201

B

0

-- --

PW

Sequoias Community College District, Tulare Center

301

47,047,000

1-

B

-

CE

0

PW

139,000

19,415,000

Stat.eS

38,274,000

D

301

1- B

.

c

Total

StateS

CE

13,049,000

B

~

Outyear Cost Ph.

1.471,000

PWCE

301

~

State S

PW

40.52.211 Gym Modernization, Building 8

E

--

Ph.

8,247,000

13,114,000

Center for Kinesiology and Humrul..f,erlormance Administration Building 40.53.126 Modernization

2013-14

State S

'

PWCE

40.52.315

Ph.

47,047,000

Physical Education Conversion and Renovation Buildino 1

40.52.107

301

,_

StateS

2012-13

Page 3 of4

California Community Colleges

Appendix 9.3

2011-12 Spending Plan

2011-12 TYPE

BOG

301

c

301

c

301

D1

~

c

-

Cat

-

District, LocaUon

CAS I Ot

Project Name

evatO

West Valley-Mission Community College District, West Valley Col!eoe West Valley-Mission Community College District, Mission Colleae

40.69.111 Arts and Sciences Building

Yuba Community College District, Woodland Col!ege

40.71 .308 Perlonning Arts Facility

Yuba Community College District, Yuba College

Ph.

StateS

2012-13 Ph.

State$

2013·14 Ph.

Outyear Cost Ph.

State$

Total StateS

PW

834,000

CE

10,133,000

CE

10,133,000

10,967,000

40.69.211 Main Building Replacement Ph. II PW

2,290,000

CE

36,235,000

CE

36,235,000

38,525,000

PW

993,000

CE

14,350,000

CE

14,350,000

15,343,000

493,000

c

4,654,000

CE

4,654,000

5,147,000

40.71.110 Building 500 Reconstruction

PW

473,640,000

TOTAL

Page 4 of 4

159,057,000

995,116,000 ---

,,.,.,, "'"'n

State$

-

1,154,173.000

1,627,813,000 .

california community colleges - System Operations

Recommend Documents