CLARION UNIVERSITY
2013-2033 Facilities Master Plan Clarion Campus

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Clarion University - President’s Executive Council Members
Dr. Karen M. Whitney, President
Dr. Ronald Nowaczyk, Provost and Academic VP
Pete Fackler, Interim VP for Finance and Administration
Harry Trip, VP Student and University Affairs
Jim Geiger, VP University Advancement
Chris Reber, Executive Dean - Venango
Jocelind Gant, Assistant to the President for Social Equity
Linda Campbell, Assistant to the President
Todd Pfannestiel, Faculty Fellow – Assessment and Improvement
Pete Fackler, Interim VP Finance & Administration

Clarion University - Facilities Planning Participants
Adam Roberts, Mathematics / Faculty Senate
Brenda Polatty, RN at Keeling Health Center
Bruce Exley, Computing Services
Chad Thomas, Director of Auxiliary Operations
Chris McCarrick, English Faculty
David Love, Director of Marketing and Communications
Deb Fleeger, Registrar’s Office
Debbie Sobina, Dir. of Financial Administration
Devin Earney, Student Senate
Diana Brush, Career Services Center
Glen Reid, Director of Public Safety
Jackie Knaust, Chemistry Faculty
Jennifer May, Coordinator of Disability Services
Jessica Miller, Green Team
John Massa, Public Safety
Jon Beal, Mathematics Faculty
Madeline Robinson, Student Senator
Marlene Kennedy, Financial Aid
Ray Puller, Field Services
Rein Pold, Director of Purchasing & Contracts
Richard Lane, English Faculty
Steve Selker, Computing Services

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Consultant Team
Perkins Eastman
Alan Schlossberg, Principal
Christine Albright, Project Director
David Levo, Project Manager / Senior Planner
Richard Northway, Facility Assessor
Stewart Gohringer, Designer
Julianna Valle Vélez, Designer
Linhart Consulting, Educational Programming
HF Lenz Company, MEP Engineering
The Gateway Engineers, Civil Engineering
Mahan Rykiel Associates, Landscape Architecture
Trans Associates, Parking
Urbanomics, Demographics
Crawford Consulting, Cost Estimating

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1: INTRODUCTION & APPROACH
1.1 FMP INTRODUCTION
1.2 FMP APPROACH

7
9
10

2: CAMPUS PROFILE
2.1 MISSION
2.11 Academic Mission
2.12 University Profile
2.13 Academic Vision
2.14 Academic Programs
2.2 HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT
2.21 Academic History
2.22 Campus Development
2.23 Architectural Styles
2.3 REGIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
2.13 Northwest Pennsylvania
2.32 Clarion Borough and Clarion County
2.33 PASSHE System
2.4 CHARACTERISTICS

13
14
14
14
15
16
17
17
21
21
27
27
29
31
33

3: CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT
3.1 LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
3.11 Cultivated Landscape Typologies
3.12 Natural Woodlands Landscape
3.2 CIRCULATION AND PARKING ASSESSMENT
3.21 Campus Pedestrian Circulation
3.22 Campus Vehicular Circulation
3.23 Parking
3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
3.31 Central Utility Systems
3.32 Water System
3.33 Sanitary System
3.34 Storm Sewer System
3.35 Natural Gas System
3.36 Electric/Telephone/Data System
3.4 BUILDING ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
3.41 Building Exteriors
3.42 Building Interiors
3.43 Climate Control Systems
3.44 Plumbing Systems
3.45 Electrical and Technology Systems
3.46 Life Safety and Fire Protection Systems
3.47 Accessibility

35
37
39
42
45
45
47
49
53
53
55
55
55
57
57
59
61
61
61
63
63
65
65

4: TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
4.01 Disruptive Change
4.02 New Forms of Digital Delivery
4.03 Increased Tuition Cost Sensitivity
4.04 Demographic Change
4.05 Asynchronous Learning
4.06 Synchronous Learning
4.07 Library Collections and Study Environments
4.08 The Changing Workplace
4.09 The Role of Greater Mobility
4.10 Variations in Work/Learn Styles and Place Design

67
69
69
70
70
71
71
73
73
74
75

4

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5: SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT
5.1 ENROLLMENT TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
5.2 INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERY
5.3 HUMAN AND LIBRARY RESOURCES
5.4 CAMPUS INVENTORY AND PLANNED CHANGES
5.5 SPACE NEEDS SUMMARY
5.6 FACILITY STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

77
79
81
82
83
85
88

6: CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES
6.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVES
6.11 Create Financially and Environmentally Sustainable Facilities
6.12 Create a Robust and Versatile Physical Plan
6.13 Create a Unifying “University Walk” Circulation Spine
6.14 Create a Daylong On-Campus Student Experience
6.15 Create Weekend Programming to Encourage Residents to Stay On Campus
6.2 LANDSCAPE OBJECTIVES
6.21 Create a Compelling, Unique and Progressive Campus Environment
6.22 Create a Cohesive Campus Environment
6.23 Utilize and Highlight Native Species and Stewardship
6.24 Emphasize Seasonal Interest
6.3 BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURAL OBJECTIVES
6.31 Create a Facilities Portfolio That Supports an Active, Always-Learning Platform
6.32 Visually Connect Open Spaces with Interior Activity Centers
6.33 Curate the University’s Material Palette
6.34 Go Blue and (LEED) Gold

91
92
92
93
93
93
94
94
94
96
96
96
97
97
97
99
99

7: MASTER PLAN SUMMARY
7.1 MASTER PLAN SUMMARY
7.11 FMP Major Moves
7.2 STRUCTURING OPEN SPACE
7.3 APPROACH TO LANDSCAPE
7.4 PARKING AND ACCESS
7.41 Parking
7.42 Vehicle Service Routes
7.43 ADA Access
7.5 MASTER PLAN PHASES
7.51 Master Plan at 2018 (Phase A)
7.51 Master Plan at 2023 (Phase B)
7.53 Master Plan at 2033 (Phase C)

101
103
107
108
110
118
118
120
122
124
124
126
128

8: MASTER PLAN – INITIATIVES
8.1 PHASE A INITIATIVES (2013-2018)
8.2 PHASE B INITIATIVES (2018-2023)
8.3 PHASE C INITIATIVES (2023-2033)

131
132
158
190

9: IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING
9.1 PHASE A (2013-2018)
9.2 PHASE B (2018-2023)
9.3 PHASE C (2023-2033)
9.4 FMP INITIATIVES PROJECT PLAN
9.5 FMP CLOSE OUT

225
226
228
230
232
234

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CLARION CAMPUS

INTRODUCTION & APPROACH

1

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

Graphic 1.01
Clarion University’s Water Tower

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

1

INTRODUCTION & APPROACH

1.1 FMP INTRODUCTION
Clarion University is a public institution of higher education located in rural northwest
Pennsylvania, and is a constituent member of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher
Education [PASSHE]. The University has two campus locations, both set within the beautiful,
rolling landscape of rural Northwest Pennsylvania:
▪ Clarion Campus
Located within the modest Borough of Clarion, PA, the Clarion Campus is attended
by over 4,200 students.
▪ Venango Campus
The Venango Campus is much smaller and located on the periphery of Oil City.
Venango services approximately 1,000 students, including many part-time and
online students.
As a public institution, Clarion University is not only dedicated to the educational
advancement of its students, but to the advancement of its regional context, economy and
environment.
In 2012, Clarion University engaged Perkins Eastman to conduct a Facilities Master Plan
[FMP] of the University’s two campuses and respective facilities. This process was initiated
in the Fall of 2012 and concluded in the Spring of 2014. The FMP establishes a thorough
understanding of the University’s existing and projected academic, facility, community
and cultural needs, and provides a flexible structure for improvements that align capital
capacities with Clarion University’s goals and needs.
The FMP process produced two plans, one for each of the University’s physical locations.
This report specifically addresses the needs and long-tern vision for the University’s Clarion
campus in the Borough of Clarion.

9

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

1

INTRODUCTION & APPROACH

1.2 FMP APPROACH
The FMP report is organized into nine sections, each of which corresponds to specific
phases in the overall facilities master plan process, as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Introduction & Approach
Campus Profile
Existing Conditions Assessment
Trends in Higher Education
Space Needs Assessment
Campus Planning Guidelines
Master Plan
Master Plan Initiatives
Implementation & Costing

The following summary outlines the scope of each section, the process used to gather and
generate information, and the relevance of each chapter’s findings to the overall Facilities
Master Plan.
1. Introduction & Approach
This portion of the document defines the purpose and scope of the Facilities Master Plan
and describes the role of the FMP in guiding the University’s future strategic and physical
planning.
2. Campus Profile
In order to establish a comprehensive institutional profile, the FMP’s initial discovery
phases examine the institution’s history, existing enrollment and demographics, as well as
institutional goals and objectives. This collection of data, and the discussions that result
from it, create a portrait of the University’s ambitions and identify areas of opportunity.
3. Existing Conditions Assessment
This part of the FMP’s initial discovery process includes the assessment and cataloging of
the University’s existing physical inventory and infrastructure.
4. Trends in Higher Education
This section defines the various elements of “disruptive change” occurring across the higher
education landscape and describes the increasingly competitive marketplace in which
the University must compete. This includes topics of pedagogy and delivery, technology,
socialization and workflow.
5. Space Needs Assessment
This portion of the FMP process considers the University’s existing physical space inventory
along with existing and projected enrollment and personnel figures. This data is combined
with the FMP design team’s knowledge of appropriate space standards that best match the
University’s mission. This analysis provides realistic space targets that correspond to the
University’s projected enrollment, staffing and pedagogy.

10

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

1

INTRODUCTION & APPROACH

6. Campus Planning Policies
The FMP’s guidelines pull together all of the previous discovery sections into a comprehensive
policy brief that set the objectives for the University’s physical assets including buildings
and grounds.
7. Master Plan
This is the summary of the FMP’s comprehensive and campus-wide moves, irrespective
of the particulars of implementation. This allows for a complete view of major projects
and of the landscape master plan, which is implemented over the course of multiple
initiatives. The last portions of this section define how the overall plan is organized into
three phases—2018, 2023 and 2033, representing five, ten and twenty year horizons.
8. Master Plan Initiatives
The initiatives section is organized by phase and details all of the FMP’s specific building,
landscape and infrastructure initiatives, including basic programming goals, conceptual
design and massing, architectural goals, and construction considerations. Each initiative
description can serve as a project “cut sheet” for inclusion in the University’s RFP process.
9. Implementation & Costing
This final material covers the logistics, schedules and costs associated with implementing
the FMP.

11

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

12

CLARION CAMPUS

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

2.1 MISSION
2.11 Academic Mission
It is the mission of Clarion University to provide “transformative, lifelong learning
opportunities through innovative, nationally recognized programs delivered in inclusive,
student-centered environments.” Central to this mission is the University’s commitment to
deliver an exceptional educational experience that looks toward the future while remaining
affordable to all students.

2.12 University Profile
In today’s urbanized world, Clarion University’s rural setting defines the institution
demographically, strategically and physically. As such, the University is inextricably linked to
its regional context and how northwest Pennsylvania tackles issues as diverse as improving
rural healthcare, retaining local human capital and responding to the effects of renewed
regional energy exploration. As one of the largest employers in its area, the University
is also directly tied to the success of the two communities in which it is situated—Clarion
and Oil City. Both communities have stabilized and are looking for new paths to renewal
after decades of demographic decline. While the University’s annual economic activity
certainly impacts regional success, its primary role in addressing regional development is
producing and educated workforce and citizenry.
To accomplish this task, the University seeks “diverse, motivated undergraduate and
graduate students who want to learn and grow in a safe, small and supportive environment
that promotes exploration and discovery.” The University sets itself apart through strong
faculty, a commitment to individual attention, undergraduate research opportunities,
hands-on learning experiences, and a focus on career preparedness. Additionally, the
University seeks a campus atmosphere that feels more like home and less like a large and
anonymous state institution. For an institution of its size, Clarion offers more accredited
degrees than any of its peers in the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education
[PASSHE]. The University also offers multiple distance learning options that are convenient
for its rural population and those beyond.

14

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.13 Academic Vision
If a university’s mission represents its core beliefs, then a university’s vision represents the
institution’s highest goals and aspirations. At Clarion University, that vision is centered
on leading “high-impact educational practices that benefit students, employers, and
community partners.” This means charting academic and institutional strategy based on
measured results that directly tie in with local business partner and regional employment
market needs. The University also highlights educational practices such as active learning,
clinical experiences, collaborative assignments, undergraduate research and capstone
projects. Clarion University offers associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degree programs
across three academic colleges:
▪ College of Arts, Education & Sciences
▪ College of Business
▪ Venango College

2.14 Academic Programs
Each of the University’s nationally accredited degrees conforms to strict academic standards
and undergoes regular examination by both local and external entities. The University’s
academic programs place particular emphasis on hands-on academic training that
prepares students for real-life employment situations and careers. In 2013, the University’s
top five areas of bachelor degrees, representing almost 70% of all degrees, were:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Business and Marketing
Education
Health Professions (and related programs)
Liberal Arts / General Studies
Communication / Journalism

19%
16%
15%
10%
8%

15

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.01
Founders Hall

16

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.2 HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT
Founded nearly 150 years ago, Clarion University began as Methodist seminary, and later
became a normal school prior to the creation of PASSHE. The institution also holds the
distinction of being Pennsylvania’s first community college. Understanding the University’s
evolution over time provides perspective for the FMP process and may inform future
decision-making.

2.21 Academic History
Clarion University was founded in 1867 as the Carrier Seminary of Western Pennsylvania.
A Methodist institution, the regional congregation celebrated its centennial in America by
creating a new seminary in the small Borough of Clarion. The seminary’s first years were
difficult and, in an effort to remain financially viable, it expanded its mission to include
teacher training. After two decades of difficulty and a protracted effort, the seminary was
sold to the Clarion Normal School Association. In 1887, the Clarion State Normal School
officially opened its two-year training program.
Clarion’s first president, A.J. Davis (1887-1902), initiated the school’s first academic and
facilities expansion beyond the original Seminary Hall, adding dormitories, a music hall,
science hall, boiler house, athletic programs, and even electricity to the growing campus.
Gaining momentum, the school had transitioned to a four-year curriculum by 1913. Two
years later, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania claimed sole ownership of the school. In
1926, Clarion gained accreditation from the American Association of Teachers Colleges.
By the early 1930s, economic challenges precipitated by the Great Depression threatened
the college. Mounting pressure from struggling taxpayers and competing private institutions
led to a state funding cut, which resulted in a withdrawal of the school’s accreditation in
1932. Despite these challenges, the College survived. In 1934, the institution successfully
fought to regain its accreditation; in the following decades, liberal arts education and a
library science program were added to increase student enrollment and provide a more
comprehensive education.
Graphic 2.02
Aerial View of Clarion Campus

17

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

CLARION UNIVERSITY TIMELINE
1867-2014

1867: Clarion Seminary Founded

1929:
Clarion State Normal School

Clarion Becomes PA Owned

ER

EM

RI
LE

EE

ST

EN

RE

G

T

E
ES
RE TH
I R
SM FE
AF

SH

H

C

18

R

Graphic 2.05
Clarion Normal School

BE

Graphic 2.04
Carrier Seminary

IE

Graphic 2.03
“Middle Year Girls,
Physical Training.
Clarion State Normal School”

W

S

I
AV
D

CLARION PRESIDENTS:

1915:

19
00

18
67

1867:

Clarion State

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

1982:

Clarion State College

Venango Campus Opens with131 Students

1969:

Clarion Foundation is Formed

20
14

1961:

Clarion University & PASSHE

20
00

1960:

e Teachers College

2

W
EY

N

IT

H
D

AL
EW

D

AR

H

N

IN

S

ER

M

D

N

RU

G

RE

BO

M

L

EL

R

LE

D

M

AN

EM

SO

G

H

C

By 1940, the struggles of the Great Depression had dissipated, but WWII posed more
significant challenges. The Selective Service Act resulted in an even larger downturn in the
school’s enrollment, which had reached 307 students. In another effort to keep the college
in operation, federally funded wartime training programs were added to the school’s
programs. Between 1942 and 1943, Air Force cadets arrived on campus for four-month
sessions of airplane and glider pilot training; such programs allowed the college to remain
solvent during WWII.

Graphic 2.06
Clarion University Timeline

Finally, having endured the Great Depression and WWII, Clarion was accredited by the
Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. Enrollment continued to
grow through the 1950s, and by 1960 the institution was renamed Clarion State College
(from Clarion State Teachers College) to reflect its broader mission.
During the 1950s, the college also partnered with private-sector interests that were pushing
for the creation of an institution of higher education in Oil City. This successful partnership
resulted in the privately financed Venango campus, Pennsylvania’s first community college,
which opened in the fall of 1961 with a class of 131 students.
By 1976, Clarion was no longer a small rural college, but an institution of over 5,000
students. This significant growth demanded a major expansion of the Clarion campus,
which had grown to 25 buildings. Teacher preparation continued to be a core focus of
Clarion’s academic mission, but new academic areas were added such as social sciences,
humanities, natural sciences, mathematics and even graduate-level studies.
In 1982, the college renamed itself a “university” and became part of the newly created
PASSHE system.
In 2010, Dr. Karen M. Whitney became Clarion University’s 16th president. A 90 day
listening tour informed President Whitney’s five major priorities for the University:
Academic Advancement, Campus Climate, Civic Engagement, Financial Stewardship, and
Institutional Leadership.

19

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.07
Clarion Campus

Graphic 2.08
Construction / Renovation Dates
Clarion Campus
Demolished
Pre-1900
1900-1950
1950-2000
2000 and Beyond

20

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.22 CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT
The Clarion campus was originally centered on Carrier Seminary Hall, which was located
on open land at the eastern edge of the Borough and close to the train depot. The Seminary,
not completed until 1871, was a brick building over three stories tall. It held commanding
views over the valley, and provided Clarion with an academic home in an iconic building
for nearly 100 years. The seminary remained the primary fixture on campus through the
mid-century.
Like many public colleges and universities in the United States, Clarion significantly
expanded between 1960 and 1975, adding 4,000 students in less than two decades. To
accommodate this growth, the campus purchased 30 additional acres in 1967 to be used
for academic facilities, housing, recreation and parking. Though the master plan for this
expansion appears lost to time, it yielded 15 new buildings that pushed the campus out
from the Seminary, over the hilltop crest and downward in almost every direction. This
expansion did not follow a formal spatial pattern such as a quad, but instead was dictated
by terrain and pre-existing circulation patterns. As a result, 70 buildings were demolished,
50 families were displaced, and the Borough’s tax base was significantly reduced. It also
resulted in the Borough’s first zoning laws.
During this same period, in a move that still reverberates today, the treasured Seminary
was demolished in 1968 to make room for the present Carlson Library.
New development slowed through the 1980s and 90s, but did not stop. Carlson Library was
renovated and expanded. Renovations to other buildings added handicap accessibility, and
student activities were expanded with the additions of Gemmell and the Student Recreation
Center. Construction was in full swing once more after the millennium, with three major
demolitions and six new buildings that altered the character of the Clarion campus.
Recently, Clarion University’s most striking transformations have been the construction
projects of the 2000s. A focus on improved student life and housing, the sciences, and
energy efficiency resulted in the demolition of three buildings and the construction of
eleven new buildings—five of which earned LEED sustainability certificates.
Today, three of the campus’s original buildings remain and continue to anchor the historic
campus core: Moore Hall (1890), originally the campus’s music hall; Founder’s Hall
(1894), first known as Science Hall; and Hart Chapel (1904), a combination gymnasium
and assembly building known simply as the Chapel, and the current campus covers 128
acres.

2.23 Architectural Styles
Clarion’s buildings range from four years to well over 100 years of age. Given such a
span, it is not surprising to find a broad array of architectural styles. Although the Clarion
campus is dominated by red brick buildings, there is a tremendous diversity in building
shape, size, and materiality.

21

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.09
Founder’s Hall

Clarion University’s oldest campus buildings are adorned with rustication
(stonework detailing of contrasting texture to the overall façade). The
arched entrance of Founder’s Hall (1894), the heavy base of Moore Hall
(1890), and the crenelated corners of Hart Chapel (1902) are relics of
Clarion’s past.
Examples: Founder’s, Moore, Hart

Graphic 2.10
Becht Hall

Spanish Mission Style

Graphic 2.11
Harvey Hall

Georgian Style

Graphic 2.12
Stevens Hall

Industrial School House

Graphic 2.13
Admissions Building

22

Rusticated Stone

Becht Hall is the only building on campus built in the Spanish Mission style,
as evidenced by its red clay tile gabled roof, dormer windows, and white
walls. Becht Hall (1925) is actually a replacement of the wood-framed
Navarre Hall (1908) which served as a women’s dormitory. Today, Becht
Hall is a stylistic outlier on the red brick-dominated campus.
Examples: Becht

Georgian style buildings are commonly associated with academia.
Characterized by red brick, grey gabled roofs and bright white trim, these
formal buildings emanate a sense of elegance and permanence.
Examples: Egbert, Harvey, Seifert-Mooney

The campus’s industrial style buildings are characterized by steel
structures, flat concrete roofs, exterior brick cladding and aluminumframed windows. Built during the population boom of the mid-century,
the use of industrial materials and prefabricated components allowed for
the quick construction of repetitively organized classrooms. The buildings’
brick cladding offers a nod to the older structures on campus, while larger
windows and a deliberate lack of ornamentation foreshadow Modernism.
Examples: Davis, Frame, Special Education, Stevens

Vernacular Residential
Due to the nature of its expansion, the Clarion campus features (through
acquisition) several examples of vernacular residential design. Given
their anonymous nature, exterior signage offers the only visual indication
that these buildings belong to the campus.
Examples: Thorn I, Thorn II, Admissions

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Modernist Dormitories
Most of Clarion University’s older dormitories exhibit a modernist style,
with a boxy shape and sparing fenestration. The buildings’ repetitive
interiors are expressed in punched windows stretched across broad
surfaces of brick on the exterior. Although they are efficient in terms of
student capacity, buildings such as Nair and Wilkinson do not necessarily
demonstrate sensitivity to human scale or their surrounding landscapes.
Examples: Ballentine, Nair, Givan, Ralston, Wilkinson

Modernist Brick Academic Centers
At a larger scale, Clarion’s academic centers echo the modernist style of
the University’s dormitory buildings. These massive, solid buildings tend
to focus the occupant’s attention inward, allowing relatively few views to
the campus. In addition, the buildings’ disproportionate scale and lack of
visual transparency create an uninviting feel from the outside. This has a
particularly strong impact along Greenville Avenue.
Examples: Carrier, Marwick-Boyd, Becker, Tippin

New Construction / Old Motifs
Although constructed in the 2000s, both the addition to Carlson Library
and the new Eagle Commons borrow stylistic references from the past.
Classic entry columns, “eyebrow” masonry arches, and traditional roof
dormers combine with contemporary glass curtain walls, structural steel,
and modern double-height spaces. Carlson and Eagle Commons attempt
to provide contemporary spaces that meld with the University’s older built
context.
Examples: Carlson, Eagle Commons

Suite-Style Housing
Similar to Carlson Library and Eagle Commons, Clarion University’s new
suite-style student housing provides new buildings wrapped in historically
and vernacularly familiar exteriors. Clarion’s most recently constructed
housing is a roomier and less aesthetically severe alternative to the older
dormitories.
Examples: Campus View, Valley View, Venango Housing

Contemporary
Clarion’s newest building, the Gruenwald Science and Technology Center
(2010), is the University’s sole example of contemporary architecture. Like
most of Clarion’s buildings, the STC is clad primarily in red brick, but
without historic embellishments. Unlike its modernist neighbor, Tippin,
the STC utilizes large expanses of glass curtain wall to connect interior
activities with campus life on the outside. The STC also features copper
shingle cladding around the volume of its otherwise unpunctured lecture
planetarium hall, a successful design detail that creates a warmer aesthetic.
Examples: Science & Technology Center

2

Graphic 2.14
Nair Hall

Graphic 2.15
Tippin Gymnasium

Graphic 2.16
Carlson Library

Graphic 2.17
Valley View Suites

Graphic 2.18
Science and
Technology Center

23

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.19
Open Space
Clarion Campus

Graphic 2.20
Clarion Campus Landscape

24

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

Open Space Development
Although the Clarion campus can be walked from end-to-end in about 10 minutes, the
hilly topography and disjointed pedestrian framework exaggerate the sense of separation
between campus zones. Large areas of asphalt parking define the northern and southern
ends of the campus, which are relatively flat. The campus midsection is loosely defined by
a winding open greensward as a result of the relocation of the science center, and to the
west of the greensward is a traditional college green. North of the greensward, a hilltop
grove with a stand of evergreens sits at the campus peak.
The campus landscape is assessed in more detail within Section 3.1 of this report.

25

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.21
Clarion River Valley

Graphic 2.22
Marcellus Shale Field
New Drilling Site (2011)
New Drilling Permit (2011)

26

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.3 REGIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
The University has the important role of creating an educated workforce—as well as
being a large provider of employment itself—for the surrounding area. Therefore, the
institution is inextricably tied to its regional context, including initiatives towards its overall
improvement.

2.31 Northwest Pennsylvania
With a population of about 1 million residents, northwest Pennsylvania is dotted with small
rural towns and villages; the largest city in the area, Erie, has a population of 100,000.
While the region has a rich past, including a history of original Native American settlements,
Underground Railroad activity, and the nation’s first oil boom, the stagnant population and
economic growth continue to present challenges to future planning and job creation.
Forests, hills and the Marcellus Shale Field define the landscape of northwest Pennsylvania.
The Allegheny National Forest covers over 500,000 acres of land, offers year-round outdoor
recreation opportunities, and includes the largest area of old-growth trees in Pennsylvania.
The Marcellus Shale Field stretches along the western side of the Appalachian Mountains.
The recent expansion of natural gas drilling (hydraulic-fracturing or “fracking”) across the
U.S. has renewed interest in the energy resources of northwest Pennsylvania, although the
economic and environmental opportunities and consequences are uncertain.

Graphic 2.23
Population Change since 1960
+72% United States

+11% Pennsylvania
+6% Clarion County
-12% Clarion Borough
-16% Venango County

-40% Oil City

27

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.24
Campus Locations

Graphic 2.25
Clarion Borough, 1960
Graphic 2.26
Clarion Borough, 2012

Graphic 2.27
Clarion County Employment Sectors
2011

Education / Sci. & Tech Services
Wholesale / Retail
Manufacturing
Mining, Construction, Transport
Health Care & Soc. Assistance
Public Admin & Other
Tourism and Food Services
Info., Finance, Real Estate

28

Clarion County Employment Sectors

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.32 Clarion Borough and Clarion County
Clarion’s main campus sits in the heart of Clarion Borough (approx. 6,000 residents), the
largest urbanized area of Clarion County (40,000). Named after the Clarion River, the
region originally provided a hunting ground for the Seneca and Delaware Indian nations.
First settled in 1801, a population of 15,000 Scotch-Irish and German settlers established
Clarion County in 1839. Iron, lumber, oil and steel attracted new settlers to Clarion. The
oil industry is responsible for most of Clarion’s historic growth, but as the industry began
to diminish in the early 1900s, Clarion’s population reached a plateau and has been
declining since 1990. Today, Clarion county’s economic strengths include education,
manufacturing and tourism, as well as coal and timber. Clarion Borough’s Main Street
exudes small-town charm; its cultural highlight is the nine-day Autumn Leaf Festival, which
draws over 500,000 visitors to the area every year.

29

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.28
PASSHE Universities

Graphic 2.29
Regions of Student Origin, 2011
Northwest
Clarion County
Venango County
Southwest
Allegheny County
Southeast
Southcentral
Central
Southern Alleghenies
Northeast
Northern Tier

30

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.33 PASSHE System
The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education [PASSHE] is a network of 14 stateowned public universities and is the tenth-largest university system in the United States.
PASSHE schools are separate from state-related institutions, which receive public funds
but are not under the control of the State system (this latter group includes the University
of Pittsburgh, as well as Lincoln University, Penn State University and Temple University in
Philadelphia).
In 1857, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania created 12 normal school districts across
the state, and the Clarion State Normal School was recognized as one of these schools in
1887. Subsequent acts required the State to purchase its normal schools, transform them
into teacher’s colleges, and eventually into state colleges. Act 182 of 1982 established the
PASSHE system and converted its member colleges into universities. Today, each PASSHE
school competes in NCAA Division II athletics and is a member of the Pennsylvania State
Athletic Conference. Members include:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Bloomsburg University
California University
Cheyney University
Clarion University
East Stroudsburg
University

▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Edinboro University
Indiana University
Kutztown University
Lock Haven University
Mansfield University
Millersville University

▪ Shippensburg University
▪ West Chester University

Regions of Student Origin
Graphic 2.30
Regions of Student Origin, 2011
Northwest
Clarion County
Venango County
Southwest
Allegheny County
Southeast
Southcentral
Central
Southern Alleghenies
Northeast
Northern Tier

31

2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

Graphic 2.31
Full-Time vs. Part Time, 2011
Part-Time
Full-Time

Full-Time vs. Part Time
Graphic 2.32
Residency, 2011
International
Out-of-State
In-State

Residency
Graphic 2.33
Gender, 2011
Male
Female

Graphic 2.34
Housing, 2011

Gender

On Campus
Off Campus

Housing
Graphic 2.35
Student Diversity, 2011
Amer. Indian / Pacific Islander
Non-Resident Alien
Asian
Hispanic
Two of More Ethnicities
Unknown
Black
White

32

Regions of Student Origin

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PROFILE

2

2.4 CHARACTERISTICS
With a total enrollment of 6,991 students in 2011, Clarion University’s student body had
increased by 11% from 2001; however, enrollment has since dropped by 17% from its
2010 peak and is now at a similar level to the early 2000s, prior to the 2007-08 financial
crisis. The majority of growth was among graduate students, which accounted for 16% of
the student body in 2011.
Clarion University’s student body is a combination of on-campus residents, nearby offcampus residents, commuters, and distance learners. Three paths—associate, bachelor’s,
and master’s degrees—add to the mixture of students. Among the University’s student
body, significant demographic trends exist that are important for near- and long-term
planning. Clarion University remains primarily a full-time undergraduate institution; 84%
of students are undergraduate degree candidates and 76% of students attend classes
full-time. Three-quarters of those who attend Clarion University part-time are graduate
students. The overwhelming majority (80%) of Clarion students receive financial aid in
some form, and nearly two out of every three students (64%) are female. Although most
universities have slightly higher percentages of female students than male students, Clarion
University’s female representation is larger than most.
While Clarion University serves many types of students, its student body is less racially
diverse than most universities across the country. The vast majority (85%) of the student
body is described as white, followed by black students (5.8%) and Hispanic students (5%).
Although Clarion University’s diversity figures are comparable to its peers of Edinboro
and Slippery Rock, Indiana University of Pennsylvania has over twice the minority student
representation (32%). Indiana University’s proximity and regularly scheduled bus service
to Pittsburgh contribute to its diverse demographics.
Although Clarion University draws its students from each of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties,
46% of students come from Northwest Pennsylvania and 78% come from the western
half of the state. Not surprisingly, Clarion and Venango Counties are particularly well
represented among all students, contributing 11% and 10% respectively. More surprising
is Pittsburgh’s Allegheny County, which contributes 11% as well.

Graphic 2.36
Total University Enrolment,
2011-2011

33

CLARION CAMPUS

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

Graphic 3.01
Clarion Campus open space
between Stevens, Davis and
Harvey Halls and the Science and
Technology Center

Graphic 3.02
Mature trees on Clarion Campus

36

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.1 LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Outdoor space is a critical component of the campus environment. While landscaping is
often viewed as an afterthought or “luxury,” a successful landscape works with buildings,
topography and circulation to create memorable places and knit together disparate
campus elements into a cohesive and curated experience.
The University’s Clarion campus comprises the following two primary landscape zones,
each covering approximately 50% of the campus land area:
▪ A cultivated landscape, which is more diverse and includes a variety of spaces
that have been influenced over time by campus growth, topography and function
▪ A natural woodlands landscape, which is characterized primarily by forested
slopes
The existing campus has a solid landscape foundation upon which to build, including
traditional campus landscapes such broad lawns lined with canopy trees. Many smaller
landscape zones, however, are fragmented and detract from a positive campus image.
The campus’s various landscape zones are described below; these typologies provide a
basis for analyzing the campus landscape and targeting opportunities for improvement.

37

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.03
Clarion Campus
Landscape Typology
Urban
Undefined
Pastoral
Traditional Open Lawn
Traditional Treed Lawn
Natural Landscape
Utilitarian

Graphic 3.04
Natural Landscape
Graphic 3.05
Traditional Green

Graphic 3.06
Open Lawn
Graphic 3.07
Urban Streetscape

38

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.11 Cultivated Landscape Typologies
Traditional Campus – Open Lawns
This landscape type is characterized by broad lawns that are primarily open and have
little tree cover. The most significant of these is the space bordered by the new Science and
Technology Center [STC] and Harvey Hall, and the space defined by the STC and Greenville
Avenue. It also includes the open lawn on the north side of Harvey Hall.
▪ Analysis: Open lawns can serve as large gathering areas as well as places where
students can go when they are seeking sunshine. They provide visual relief to
treed areas of campus and, when combined with other types of landscape zones,
add variety to the overall campus. The two particular lawns that are the subject
of this analysis, however, lack sufficient plantings to reinforce their edges, define
circulation patterns and mitigate their expansive scale. In the case of the STC open
space, plantings were to be addressed as part of this master plan; the other open
space simply resulted from the demolition of Chandler Dining Hall.
▪ Opportunities: There is an opportunity to use landscape, particularly tree masses,
in both of these spaces to connect them with the rest of the campus and provide
context for the STC. It will be important to maintain significant open spaces in each
of these areas, using trees to define, rather than fill, the spaces.

Traditional Campus – Treed Lawns
This landscape type includes lawn areas with a significant overhead tree canopy. The most
significant of these is the historic campus landscape of the lawn near Carlson Library at the
corner of Wood Street and Eighth Avenue, extending along Greenville Avenue in front of
Davis Hall. It can also be found in front of Still Hall; in the space defined by Carlson Library,
Stevens Hall, Davis Hall and Egbert Hall; and along the Payne Street entrance and the lower
part of the space linking Gemmell Student Center with Ralston Hall and Tippin Gymnasium.
Remnants of this landscape can also be found behind Moore Hall and near the intersection
of Wilson Avenue and Wood Street.
▪ Analysis: This is one of the most successful landscape types on campus. Tall
canopy trees allow for views in and out of the spaces while providing shade and a
sense of scale. The mature trees reinforce a traditional campus image, providing
context for the buildings and helping to link disparate campus spaces. In the space
defined by Carlson Library, Stevens Hall, Davis Hall and Egbert Hall, the treed
lawn in combination with the topography provides a successful transition from
the Library Plaza to the larger lawn in front of the science center. For the grove
near the Library, most of the trees within the space are appropriate; however,
the weeping cherries and lone evergreen tree in the middle of the lawn do not
support the overall canopy theme of the landscape. While the University has done
an exemplary job of keeping the limbs trimmed, these low-canopied trees will
eventually grow to obstruct views in and out of the space.
In the vicinity of Still Hall, the formal landscape begins to transition to natural
woodlands, showcasing an attractive view of the campus from Main Street. In
the vicinity of Gemmell Student Center, the landscape provides a transition to the
more naturalized pine slopes of Clarion Hill. In other areas, such as along Payne
Street, this landscape typology is partially present, but not fully realized.
39

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

▪ Opportunities: There are opportunities to enhance and expand this landscape
typology throughout the campus to connect certain spaces and distinguish others.
For the grove near the library, inappropriate tree types should be removed and
canopy trees should be planted to replace some of the mature trees in decline.
For the area between the library and Davis Hall, additional trees would help to
distinguish it from the Library Plaza and lawn in front of the science building and
reinforce the distinction among these spaces; the trees recently planted adjacent
to the Book Center will eventually mature to provide a pleasing overhead canopy.
There are opportunities throughout the campus to use treed lawns as transitions
between open areas and other treed areas, as well as to provide stronger linkages
to the natural forested areas.

Urban Landscape
The urban landscape is limited to the historic gateway area along Wood Street, extending
from Eighth Avenue to Arnold Avenue and along Arnold Avenue between Wood and Main
Streets. This landscape is characterized by a strong building relationship to the street, broad
sidewalks and extended plaza areas, and street trees planted in tree wells.
▪ Analysis: Overall, this is a very attractive landscape that conveys a positive campus
image and reinforces the campus’s context within the town street grid. The section
along Wood Street is well defined, while the section along Arnold Avenue is less
defined.
▪ Opportunities: There are opportunities to further reinforce this landscape along the
Eighth Avenue frontage between Wood Street and Merle Road, as well as Arnold
Avenue between Wood and Main Streets. There is an opportunity for the landscape
to reinforce the significant pedestrian activity along these streets and create a
ceremonial connection to Main Street. The organization of this urban landscape
could further be distinguished from other campus landscapes, reinforcing this as
a unique place on campus.

Pastoral Landscape
This landscape is limited to the open grassy area/recreation field adjacent to Lot 3 and
extends along the slope between Lots 3 and 4.
▪ Analysis: This open, grassy area provides an attractive transition to the woodlands.
In addition, the planted slope is one of the few slopes featuring native grasses.
The plantings provide visual interest, require minimal maintenance and act as a
suitable transition to the forest.
▪ Opportunities: There are opportunities to apply similar native plantings on other
steep slopes, and to use the pastoral landscape to further reinforce connections
between the forest and the cultivated landscapes of the campus.

40

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

Streetscape
This landscape type refers to the formal tree-lined roads extending beyond the urban
landscape described above. Primarily, it includes the Main Street streetscape east of
Arnold Avenue and the Wood Street streetscape between Arnold and Wilson Avenues. The
landscape is comprised of a consistent street tree species planted with formal regularity in
the lawn.
▪ Analysis: This landscape typology is visually powerful and demonstrates how a
simple tree planting can reinforce circulation, separate one campus area from
another, and create a pleasing rhythm.
▪ Opportunities: Most other streets that define the campus edge lack formal plantings
and the order exhibited by tree-lined roads, such as Main Street. The University
has already improved upon Wood Street by adding trees along its edge, and there
is potential to create a strong campus image along the entire perimeter using this
same landscape treatment.

Utilitarian
This landscape type covers a significant portion of the campus, primarily north of Wood
Street and south of Payne Street, and includes parking and service areas. The landscape is
primarily located along the edges of the parking and service areas.
▪ Analysis: The tree cover in this landscape is minimal and not significant enough
to distinguish the parking areas or screen all of the service areas. The three large
shade trees between Lot H and Lot 5 are effective in breaking up the expanse
of parking, providing scale and distinguishing the two parking areas from one
another. Most of the parking lots, however, lack internal planting islands, which
can be helpful in delineating circulation routes and helping with storm water
runoff.
▪ Opportunities: There are significant opportunities to improve the pedestrian
experience through landscape improvements to the parking and service areas,
such as the introduction of canopy trees to provide shade and beauty. Recognizing
the need to clear parking areas of snow on a regular basis, it is not necessary to
provide a great number of small planting islands, but a few well-placed larger
islands and plantings along the perimeter could make a significant impact. It will
be important to focus on trees or low shrub massing to maintain sightlines through
the parking areas.

Undefined
This typology refers to those areas where a predominant landscape quality is not evident;
such zones are often perceived as “leftover” space. This landscape primarily exists between
many of the residential buildings and adjacent to larger buildings such as the Marwick-Boyd
Fine Arts Center and Becker Hall.
▪ Analysis: These landscapes are commonly characterized by tree or shrub plantings
that are out of scale with the space or randomly located. Although they are typically
neglected, the spaces between buildings are the portals through which connecting
pathways are often located.
41

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

▪ Opportunities: There are opportunities to enhance the landscape character of
these spaces and use the landscape to reinforce transitions. The most appropriate
landscape type for a particular space is dependent upon its adjacent uses and
landscape characteristics. For example, additional high-limbed evergreens
might be planted in the vicinity of Ralston Hall and Campus View Suites to better
connect the open hilltop landscape with the wooded slope and provide a natural
progression from one space to the next.

3.12 Natural Woodlands Landscape
The natural landscape is fairly uniform and comprises the northern half of the campus. It
is characterized primarily by steep wooded slopes leading down to the Clarion River. The
woodlands are mostly characteristic of the Appalachian oak/hickory forest but also include
significant areas of hemlock. Elsewhere on campus, remnants of the natural landscape
are found on some of the steeper slopes of Clarion Hill and are mostly comprised of slash
pine.
▪ Analysis: The forested hillside leading to the river is a spectacular mix of deciduous
and evergreen trees. The natural drainage channels are vegetated primarily by
hemlocks, which provide a cathedral-like quality with their towering branches.
There is little understory and the ground is carpeted with multiple layers of leaves
and needles, providing for a unique tactile and visual experience. While relatively
small in area, the naturalized slope along Clarion Hill is one of the most distinctive
landscape characteristics on the campus. Being predominantly evergreen, it creates
a sense of liveliness during the winter months. It also softens the unremarkable
architecture of Ralston Hall and accentuates the verticality of Clarion Hill.
With approximately half of the campus covered in forest, the cultivated portion of
the campus surprisingly includes little reference to this landscape. This makes the
views to the surrounding woodlands and mountains more important.
▪ Opportunities: There is a tremendous opportunity to bring the natural landscape
into the campus, both literally and symbolically. Additionally, reinforcing views
to the forested lands (campus-owned or not) and distant mountains is a way to
further connect the campus to its natural environs.

42

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

Graphic 3.08
Natural Woodlands Landscape

43

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.09
Campus Locations

Graphic 3.10
Clarion Campus Access

44

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.2 CIRCULATION AND PARKING ASSESSMENT
Interstates 79 and 80, as well as a network of rural highways, keep the region and the
University connected to other communities via car, but few other modes of transit connect
Oil City or Clarion Borough with surrounding cities. Without a personal motor vehicle,
even travel beyond campus boundaries can be challenging; although a bus line connects
Clarion Campus to the Borough’s Main Street and nearby Clarion shopping center, there is
no bus or shuttle to connect Clarion University’s two campuses. Students attending classes
at both Clarion and Venango are required to drive approximately 26 miles—about 40
minutes in one direction—between campuses; once they have arrived, students can use the
University’s bus service or navigate the campus by foot. However, the steep terrain, loosely
defined paths and large parking lots can impede pedestrian circulation.
Balancing the need for convenient commuter access and the desire for a pedestrianfriendly environment is a constant challenge for most universities. Assessing Clarion
campus’s existing circulation patterns will help inform a comprehensive and successful
strategy that benefits all parties.

3.21 Campus Pedestrian Circulation
As it exists today, Clarion campus offers a mixed pedestrian experience. The top of the hill
between Carlson Library and Moore Hall is a natural pedestrian hub, benefitting from a
concentration of buildings and program types. Pedestrian activity spills downhill, across an
awkward stair and intersection combination, towards Eagle Commons. Beyond Carrier,
activity towards Main Street dissipates; the gap in commercial activity between Eighth
and Arnold Avenues blocks a connection to Still Hall and the business students. South of
Carlson Library, a new meandering path travels through an open lawn between Harvey
Hall and the new Gruenwald Science and Technology Center. A second, less concentrated
pedestrian hub exists between Gemmell, Tippin, Marwick-Boyd and the Recreation Center.
Although this area is surrounded by academic, food and recreation programs, an unclear
path/street relationship exists around the Payne Street traffic circle; a line of parked cars
interrupts the pedestrian path, dividing the campus activity south of Marwick-Boyd and
the Recreation Center. Four large parking lots define the “pedestrian” landscape south of
Payne Street; like Still Hall to the north, the lack of pedestrian activity isolates Becker Hall
from the rest of campus.
Another pedestrian zone surrounds the water tower at the campus’s highest point. Although
disconnected by terrain, student apartments and dormitories are clustered on this hilltop to
form a residential “quad.” For students willing to pedal uphill, covered bicycle storage is
available outside most housing entrances.

45

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.11
Experience Along Greenville Ave.

Graphic 3.12
A Clarion Bus Stopping
Along Main Street

46

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.22 Campus Vehicular Circulation
Interstate 80, an approximate five-minute drive south of campus, is Clarion County’s
largest circulation artery and the route by which most visitors first arrive. Immediately
northwest of campus is Clarion Borough’s historic Main Street; from here, a five-minute
walk connects students, faculty, and staff to shops, convenience stores, restaurants and
cafes.
The University’s athletic facilities and fields are located at the opposite end of the Borough
and are only accessible via a 20 minute walk from campus or by private vehicle.
Operated by the Area Transportation Authority of North Central Pennsylvania, Clarion’s
small network of orange busses transport riders around Clarion along two routes:
▪ Campus Loop
▪ Mall Loop
Campus Loop travels through campus along Payne Street, circling around Main Street
and 5th Avenue to the north and Reinhard Village to the south. Mall Loop extends further,
reaching east along Main Street to Hillside Apartments, and stretching south along South
5th Avenue to the mall and commercial area surrounding the I-80 interchange (including
Clarion Hospital, Wal-Mart, and the Barnes Center). Campus Loop runs every 30 minutes,
from 7am to 10pm weekdays. Mall Loop runs every hour from 8am to 10 pm, Monday
through Saturday.
A vehicle sharing service provided by Zipcar is now available on the Clarion campus. The
cars are located in Lot 12 in specially designated spaces.
Except for its northern wooded area, two-lane roads and five foot-wide sidewalks border the
campus on all sides. Although none of the surrounding streets and avenues receives heavy
traffic, Greenville Avenue and East Main Street regularly experience high-speed traffic.
The design of East Main Street, in particular, with its straight wide lanes and absence of
curbside parking, encourages vehicular speeds well above the signed speed limits. Across
from Tippin Gymnasium, students cross Greenville Avenue to access university parking
without a stop sign or traffic light. Users of Still Hall and the northern residence parking
lots are confronted with drivers speeding to and from the Borough’s center. Other issues
compound the dangers between pedestrian and automobile traffic; changes in slope limit
visibility, while multiple types of pedestrian crossings have the potential to confuse both
drivers and walkers.

47

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.13
Clarion Campus Parking
Commuter Lot
Residential Lot
Employee Lot
Automobile Access

Graphic 3.14
Clarion Campus
Peak Parking Usage
(Wednesday, February 20, 2013)
Commuter Parking Space
Employee Parking Space
Resident Parking Space

48

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.23 Parking
The FMP planning team gathered information on parking supply by location and user / type
of space and parking permit costs. An on-campus parking demand study was performed
on an hourly basis for a typical peak day. Additionally, an inventory of adjacent offcampus parking spaces and restrictions was performed. This study also compares Clarion
campus’s available parking and the requirements of the Borough’s Zoning Ordinance.

On Campus Parking Supply
Clarion’s on-campus parking consists of surface lots restricted for specific users such as
employees, commuter students and residents. Employee and commuter lots are generally
located throughout campus, while the resident lots are located near the residence halls.
Each of the 33 designated numbered or lettered lots, plus eight areas reserved for handicap
parking are identified through color-coded signs as follows:
▪
▪
▪
▪

Red – Commuter Students
Grey – Employee Parking
Blue – Upperclass Resident Lots
Yellow – Freshman Resident Lot

Clarion’s Director of Facilities Management provided an inventory of on campus parking
spaces as of 4/28/11, broken down by user and location including the number of handicap
spaces and was updated to account for recent changes and to quantify metered and
pay station spaces in employee and commuter lots. Graphic 3.15 provides the updated
inventory. To summarize, the following number of spaces are assigned by user:
▪
▪
▪
▪

Commuter Students
Employee Parking
Resident Lots
Total

729 spaces
732 spaces
405 spaces
1,866 spaces

The recently acquired Rhea Lumber Lot was not designated by signage at the time of this
inventory, but is included in the resident category as it appears as such on the campus
map. Also, 44 spaces in commuter Lot 6 were occupied by a hockey rink at the time of this
inventory and not included here.
The following provides the campus-wide breakdown by type of space:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Permit Parking
Pay Station
Metered Spaces
Handicap Spaces
Total

1,691 spaces
60 spaces
40 spaces
75 spaces
1,866 spaces
Graphic 3.15
Clarion Campus
Parking Spaces by Lot Type, 2013
Commuter Parking Space
Employee Parking Space
Resident Parking Space

49

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.16
New Pay Station
Graphic 3.17
Wilson Avenue Parking,
50 Metered Spaces

Graphic 3.18
Parking Meter - Difficult to Read

Graphic 3.19
The Campus Entrance at 8th
Avenue and Wood Street

50

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

Public Parking Used By Students
Opportunities exist along Borough streets adjacent to campus for short-term metered
parking. There are 50 two-hour metered spaces along Wilson Avenue on the eastern edge
of campus, with a rate of $0.25 per hour. There are also eight 30-minute meters along
Arnold Avenue (Ninth Avenue) between Wood Street and Main Street, with a rate of $0.25
for 30 minutes. Significant use and turnover of the Arnold Avenue spaces was observed
along with lower usage of the spaces along Wilson Avenue.
The Clarion Borough Police enforce a snow removal ordinance on these streets between
December 1 and April 1, from 1 AM to 7 AM. A vehicle parked in violation of this ordinance
is subject to a $50 fine.
In an interview with the Borough Police Chief and Acting Manager, the primary concerns
about parking on Borough streets involve the fraternity and sorority houses, rental
properties and commuter students parking off-campus. The Borough diligently tags and
tows violators, and currently enforces a parking fine of $12.
Campus Parking Permit and Hourly Charges and Enforcement
For the 2012-13 school year, the University charges $150 annually for student parking
permits issued as hang tags. Commuter students who live within the radius of 4th Avenue
(four blocks from campus) are not eligible for a parking permit. Students may also obtain
a free permit to park at Memorial Stadium on North 1st Avenue, where approximately
430 spaces are available. Stadium permit holders are instructed to move their vehicles to
campus when there are stadium events. Permits are not required for meter or pay station
parking on campus, however, students with permits must still pay at these spaces. Daily
visitor permits as well as permits for overnight guests are available at the Public Safety
office.
All users may park at the short term meter or pay station spaces. The rates vary depending
on location as follows:
▪ Lots 11, 12, F & V
▪ Lots 5, 16A & H

$0.25/hour, 2 hour maximum
$1.00/hour, 2 hour maximum

Lot V behind the Rec Center also has one hour and 10 hour meters at $0.25/hour. At this
time, all on-campus meters accept only coins, but are scheduled to be replaced with multispace pay stations that also accept credit cards.
Permit violators at the resident lots are enforced 24 hours per day, Monday through
Friday. Students and visitors are permitted to park free of charge on campus from 4:00
PM Friday until 2:00 AM Monday morning. Parking fines are $15.00 if paid within 10
days of issuance, and double thereafter. The University also utilizes immobilizer devices for
vehicles with three or more outstanding violations.
Conformance With Borough Zoning Ordinance
Clarion Borough’s Zoning Ordinance specifies the following number of required parking
spaces for colleges and universities:
▪ One space for each two faculty and staff
▪ One space for each four resident students
▪ One space for each seven commuter students
51

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Based on information obtained from the University, the following chart compares zoning
requirements versus the actual number of parking spaces on campus:
Graphic 3.20
Clarion Campus
Parking Space Count, 2013

Category

Population

Required1

Actual

Faculty and Staff
Residents
Commuters

797
1,515
2,923

399 spaces
379 spaces
418 spaces

732 spaces
405 spaces2
729 spaces

Total

5,235

1,196 spaces

1,866 spaces

1
2

As per Clarion Zoning Ordinance
Includes 80 spaces in the Rhea Lot

As shown in the table, the current number of spaces on campus conforms to the Borough
zoning ordinance for each user category, as well as the overall total. Moreover, the campus
has 670 additional spaces, in total, than required by the zoning ordinance.
Parking Demand Study
Data was collected on a typical peak day to determine the usage of spaces by category,
type and location for the entire campus. Parking accumulation counts were conducted on
Wednesday, February 20, 2013 from 9 AM to 5 PM. In addition, parking turnover and
duration was observed at the pay spaces in Lots 12 and 16A. The maximum occupancy
of all spaces occurred between 11 AM and Noon, when 1,245 parked cars—67% of
all spaces—were counted. Maximum usage by category (commuter, employee, etc.) was
fairly consistent, with 54% of the resident spaces occupied, 69% of the employee spaces
occupied and 72% of the commuter spaces occupied. Several lots were observed at or
near capacity during the day, including commuter Lots 11 and 16A, resident Lot 8 and
employee Lots 7, 10, E, F, L and R. Regarding usage by type of space, the metered spaces
encountered the highest occupancy at 90%, followed by permit parking spaces at 68%,
pay station spaces at 60% and handicap spaces at only 32%.
The duration and turnover of parked vehicles in the 37 pay spaces in Lot 12 and the 19
pay spaces in Lot 16A were monitored during the same period as the accumulation counts.
All pay spaces monitored had a two-hour maximum limit. It was observed that the metered
spaces along Thorn Street in Lot 12 were heavily used, with a turnover rate of more than
four vehicles per day with an average duration of more than one hour. The 25 pay station
spaces in Lot 12 were less utilized, with a turnover rate half of the metered spaces. The pay
spaces in Lot 16A were used the least of those monitored, with the majority of cars parked
between 11 AM and 1 PM and light usage the rest of the day. These spaces had a turnover
rate of less than two vehicles per day. Several vehicles in both lots were observed parking
for more than the two-hour limit.
Parking FMP Recommendation
While the campus has significant surplus spaces beyond the Borough zoning ordinance’s
requirement, and only 67% of overall spaces were occupied at the observed peak
time, to maintain flexibility and a range of parking options a reduction of spaces is not
recommended in the early phases of the FMP. However, increasing the level of parking is
not required and levels should remain similar to existing during the lifespan of the FMP.

52

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
3.31 Central Utility Systems
Most buildings on the Clarion campus are fed with campus steam. The central plant
arrangement with redundant boilers and loop-fed campus piping arrangement offers
excellent redundancy for building heating. The central boiler plant has ample capacity,
and recent improvements have been made to the boilers, condensate return system, and
associated controls.
The majority of campus is serviced via a steam tunnel system which originates at the power
plant and boiler house located along Merle Street on the northwest side of the campus.
The steam tunnel system consists of various sizes of tunnels, with the main tunnel being
approximately 6’-6” in height and width. Some of the main tunnels on campus were
renovated in 1996, and additional tunnels were reconstructed and relocated in 2003. The
remainder of the campus piping distribution system is in relatively good condition (aside
from a small direct buried portion that is in need of replacement), and there are no known
capacity issues. Future buildings should utilize campus steam heat whenever possible.
Building cooling is provided through a variety of chiller types and direct expansion
equipment. Although a central cooling plant would be useful to help minimize maintenance
costs and improve redundancy, it is unlikely that this would be a feasible option. The
existing campus steam tunnel network is not large enough to house chilled water lines to
support the entire campus. However, creating several smaller “mini” chilled water plants
to serve groups of buildings is recommended when possible. When a new building is
being designed (or a cooling system replacement is needed for an existing building),
consideration should be given to extending the service to a group of nearby buildings from
a common chilled water plant. Doing so would help reduce the quantity of equipment to
be maintained. It is also likely that the existing steam distribution tunnels could house the
smaller chilled water pipe sizes needed for only a small group of buildings.
There are several steam-fired absorption chillers on campus. These can provide a costefficient method to cool buildings when steam generation costs are very low (typically from
waste steam), but they often have a higher first cost and maintenance cost than electric
chillers. Since Clarion does not have waste steam, electric chillers are recommended for
new and replacement chillers unless calculations based on current energy costs can justify
the use of steam absorption chillers.
Many of the buildings have central Johnson DDC controls that can communicate back to a
central workstation. Several of the older buildings, however, do not have this capability. To
improve remote monitoring and alarming capability in the buildings, the controls should
continue to be upgraded to central DDC.
The section of the direct buried steam and condensate piping in the campus steam loop
should be replaced immediately. The condensate line is leaking and unusable, and all
condensate return must currently be pumped through one side of the loop, thus limiting
capacity and redundancy. Consideration should be given to converting this section to a
tunnel which would put the entire campus loop in a walkable tunnel.

53

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.21
Communications And Water Tower
Graphic 3.22
Utility Plant

Graphic 3.23
Utility Plant Steam Boilers

Graphic 3.24
Clarion Campus Infrastructure
Steam - Tunnel
Steam - Direct Buried
Watertower
Electrical Source
Fiber Optic Node
Stormwater Drain
Stormwater Runoff

54

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.32 Water System
The campus is served via an above-ground water tower located within the inner loop near
Givan Hall. Several main lines truncate to smaller lines throughout campus from this
water tower. In addition to these service lines, there are 19 University-owned fire hydrants
throughout the campus and several Clarion Borough-owned hydrants in the immediate
vicinity of campus.

3.33 Sanitary System
The sanitary lines around the Clarion campus are divided into three areas:
▪ Sanitary Area 1 includes Admissions, Ballentine Hall, Givan Hall, Keeling Health
Center, and Receiving which has the University sewers in this area run into a sewer
authority manhole at the triangular area between the entrances into Rhea Lumber
Company.
▪ Sanitary Area 2 includes the portion of campus south of Peirce Science Center and
Ralston Hall, which runs into the sewer authority lines in the Corbett Street area.
▪ Sanitary Area 3 includes the building east of Chandler Dining Hall along with the
area north and east of Wilkinson Hall. This area runs into the sewer authority lines
in the Eighth Avenue area.

3.34 Storm Sewer System
The area of and around the Clarion campus has four stormwater drainage areas:
▪ Drainage Area 1 includes the area between Greenville Avenue, Wilson Avenue,
Corbett Street, and a drainage divide that runs approximately from the intersection
of Eighth Avenue and Wood Street to the intersection of Wilson Avenue and Payne
Street. Drainage Area 1 drains to a 54” pipe along Corbett Street. It is noted that
in Drainage Area 1, a 6” corrugated relief drain is routed to a curb along Wilson
Avenue.
▪ Drainage Area 2 consists of Lot 11 which drains into an 18” RCP pipe along
Frampton Street.
▪ Drainage Area 3 consists of the area south of Wood Street, East of Ninth Avenue,
and north of a drainage divide that runs approximately from the intersection of
Eighth Avenue and Wood Street to the intersection of Wilson Avenue and Payne
Street.
▪ Drainage Area 3 flows to an 18” pipe along Main Street/US Route 322.
▪ Drainage Area 4 consists of the part of campus north and east of the intersection
of Ninth Avenue and Wood Street and drains into tributaries of the Clarion River.
For any current or proposed construction activity to take place, Clarion University must also
consider the amount of stormwater runoff that will be associated with the activity. Clarion
Borough has a stormwater management ordinance that is also in line with the current
regulations set forth in the Pennsylvania Stormwater Best Management Practices [BMP]
Manual. These regulations are utilized in stormwater design for construction activities
associated with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] permits.
An NPDES permit is an environmental permit issued by the County Conservation District
which regulates stormwater runoff associated with construction activities; this permit also
55

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

incorporates the use of Post-Construction Stormwater BMPs. An NPDES permit is required
for all construction activities which would disturb an area greater than one acre in size.
In the event an NPDES permit is not required, stormwater management runoff, both rate
and volume, would be regulated by the Borough ordinances. The Borough Ordinance
requires that for rate control the rates leaving the site in post-development conditions shall
not exceed the pre-development conditions for the 1-year, 2-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50year, and 100-year storm events. This is standard practice in Municipalities in this area,
and is typically managed via a stormwater management facility with a staged orifice outlet
control structure to regulate the rate of discharge from the post-developed conditions.
Control for the volume of stormwater runoff is first determined by the size of the area of
disturbance, and for re-development activities, 20% of the existing impervious area in
pre-development calculations shall be considered as meadow cover. Additionally, all nonforested pervious areas must be considered as meadow in cover. Both of these stipulations
allow for an overcompensation of the project area to accommodate a management system
that accounts for impervious areas that were previously not controlled for volume runoff.
This is a new standard that was introduced by the issuance of the PA BMP Manual in 2010,
as well as to meet the requirements of the Clarion Borough’s Act 167 plan.
In order to accommodate the potential increase in both stormwater rate and volume of
runoff as a result of new construction activities on campus, the University would have to
implement several BMPs. These BMPs could include one or a combination of any of the
following: infiltration basin, rain garden, vegetated bio-swales, dry wells, cisterns, porous
pavement installation, etc.

Graphic 3.25
Underground Steam Tunnel
Clarion Campus

56

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.35 Natural Gas System
Natural gas is provided throughout portions of the campus and is supplied by National
Fuel Gas Company. Distribution main lines are located around the entire campus via
Greenville Avenue, Corbett Street, Wilson Avenue and East Main Street, and several lines
run through the campus along Payne, Page and Thorn Streets, as well as along East Wood
Street.

3.36 Electric/Telephone/Data System
The campus electrical distribution system is currently served by two separate 12,470V
electrical services from West Penn Power Company and is in good condition. This setup
allows the University to save the expense of having to pay individual meter charges for each
building, so if the campus expands, it would be beneficial to the University to maintain this
type of distribution. The system will need to be modified in order for the power company to
meet increased power demands in the future. Of the two separate services, one supplies
the North Switchgear and the other serves the South Switchgear.
Each of these services, through the campus switching arrangement, is capable of serving
the majority of the total campus load. The two services are broken down and distributed
throughout the campus via four feeder circuits, three of which are further separated into
north and south sections through the use of sectionalizing switches. The north and south
feeders can either be fed from the respective North or South Switchgear, or switched so
the entire circuit is fed from one piece of switchgear or the other. Circuit 4, which serves
Still Hall, can only be served from the North Switchgear. The power company plans to
discontinue the service that currently feeds the North Switchgear, and increase the capacity
to the South Switchgear. Under the current arrangement, the power company does not
have the capacity to serve the campus entirely from one service or the other during
periods of heavy air-conditioning use. This is one of the reasons that they are requiring
the consolidation of services—to enable other commercial customers to move off one of
the services and onto the other, and then provide a larger capacity, dedicated circuit to
the University. The other reason is that the University currently has the ability to transfer its
load—in part or whole—over to either service at any time via their sectionalizing switches.
This is a primary concern for the power company, as the transferring of a major block of
load onto a different circuit without them being able to plan for it. This could cause them
to overload a circuit and trip circuits upstream of the campus, detrimentally affecting other
customers on that circuit.
The highest simultaneous demand load between the two services the campus has seen is
4.1 MW. All of the feeder conductors are 15KV rated, 133% Insulation Level, copper, 2/0
in size. The distribution across campus is via underground ductbanks. The system was
upgraded approximately 10 years ago. Each feeder circuit can handle approximately 5.2
MVA of load and are served by 1,200A GE Powervac circuit breakers in outdoor walk-in
enclosures.

57

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.26
Building Condition Assessment
Clarion Campus
Excellent: 4
Good: 3
Fair: 2
Poor: 1
Not Assessed

957 Corbett Street

959 Corbett Street

961 Corbett Street

962 Corbett Street

963 Corbett Street

OVERALL SCORE

Central Serv. / Receiving Build.

McEntire Building

McEntire Warehouse

Pole Barn

Strohman Building

Utility Plant

OVERALL SCORE

Admissions Building

Becker Hall

Carrier Administration Building

Cntr. for Advancement and Dev.

Ceramics Laboratory

Davis Hall

Egbert Hall

Founders Hall

Harvey Hall

Keeling Health Center

Marwick Boyd Fine Arts Center

Ralston Hall

Science and Technology Center*

Sculpture Studio

Special Education Center

Stevens Hall

Still Hall

OVERALL SCORE

Clarion - Educational and General Buildings

915 Corbett Street

Clarion - Service Buildings

206 Wilson Avenue

Clarion - Single-Family Houses

Building Site

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.5

2.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.9

3.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.8

Building Structure

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.7

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.9

Building Exterior: Enclosure

2.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.0

2.5

2.3

2.0

2.5

2.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.8

3.0

1.5

2.5

3.0

1.0

2.5

3.0

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.0

1.5

4.0

1.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.4

Building Exterior: Roof

2.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.4

2.0

2.5

2.0

2.0

1.0

1.5

1.8

3.0

2.5

2.0

2.5

1.5

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

1.5

4.0

1.5

2.5

3.0

2.0

Building Exterior: Windows

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

-

-

1.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

1.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

4.0

1.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.6

BUILDING SUPERSTRUCTURE

2.0

2.0

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.1

2.2

2.1

2.4

2.7

2.3

2.0

1.2

1.7

2.0

3.0

2.5

2.6

2.9

1.5

2.7

2.9

2.8

2.8

2.9

2.4

2.3

4.0

1.5

2.8

2.8

2.7

7
2.7

Plumbing Systems

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.5

1.5

-

3.0

-

1.5

2.1

2.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

1.5

1.0

1.0

3.0

4.0

1.5

2.0

2.0

4.0

1.0

-

1.5

1.5

2.1

Heating, Cooling and Ventilation Systems

3.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

-

2.5

2.3

3.0

1.5

1.5

3.5

1.5

1.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.0

4.0

1.5

-

2.5

2.2

Fire Protection System

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

4.0

4.0

-

4.0

-

4.0

-

-

-

-

4.0

Fire Alarm System

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

1.5

4.0

2.0

2.0

-

1.5

3.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

1.5

4.0

-

-

1.0

1.0

2.5

Telecommunications and Security

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3.0

3.0

-

-

-

3.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

-

2.0

3.0

2.9

Electrical System: Lighting

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3.0

2.0

-

1.0

1.0

2.0

1.8

2.0

3.5

1.5

3.0

1.0

1.5

1.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

2.5

1.5

4.0

1.0

-

1.0

1.5

2.1

Electrical System: Power

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

1.0

-

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.6

1.5

1.0

1.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

3.0

3.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

-

1.0

3.0

1.8

BUILDING MEP

3.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.4

1.8

2.0

2.3

1.0

2.2

1.9

2.0

2.6

1.9

2.9

1.8

1.5

1.7

3.1

3.6

2.0

2.6

1.7

4.0

1.5

-

1.4

2.1

3
2.3

Building Enclosure: Doors/Door Hardware

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

2.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.7

Interior Finishes: Partitions

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

2.5

3.0

2.0

-

1.0

2.0

2.1

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.5

4.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.8

Interior Finishes: Ceilings

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

3.0

3.0

2.0

-

1.0

2.0

2.2

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

4.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

3.0

2.9

Interior Finishes: Floors

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

-

-

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.5

2.0

2.0

2.3

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

4.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.7

Interior Finishes: Door and Door Hardware

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

1.9

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

4.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

3.0

Interior Finishes: Toilet Rooms

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.5

2.0

-

-

1.0

1.5

1.8

3.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

1.5

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

4.0

-

3.0

2.5

2.5

2.7

Interior Finishes: Built-In Furniture

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3.0

3.0

-

-

-

-

3.0

3.0

-

-

3.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2.0

4.0

-

-

-

-

3.0

Accessibility (2010 ADA Standards)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.0

1.0

-

-

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.5

1.5

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

4.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.5

BUILDING INTERIOR AND FINISHES

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

1.3

2.0

1.9

2.4

2.6

2.0

1.8

1.1

1.8

2.0

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.9

1.8

2.4

2.2

3.1

2.9

2.6

2.4

2.0

4.0

1.9

2.5

2.4

2.6

OVERALL SCORE

2.3

2.0

2.1

2.1

2.1

1.7

2.1

2.1

2.4

2.3

2.1

2.0

1.1

1.9

2.0

2.6

2.6

2.4

2.9

1.7

2.2

2.3

3.0

3.1

2.5

2.5

2.0

4.0

1.6

2.7

2.2

2.5

LEGEND
Condition

58

Numerical Range

Color

1.0

2.0

2.4
3.0

4.0

3.0

2.1

3.1

4.0

2.8

2.4

6
2.6

3.0

4.0

2.8

2.0

5
2.5

3.0

4.0

2.9

2.2

2.7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.4 BUILDING ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Physical condition assessments were performed for 45 buildings on the Clarion campus.
Buildings constructed or renovated within the past five years, as well as those scheduled for
renovation or demolition, were not included in the condition assessment.
“Protected Building” Determination
At the outset of conditions assessments, building were evaluated for their landmark/
heritage status and/or value of their cultural contribution. Clarion’s FMP planning process
endeavors to preserve and restore buildings deemed “protected” because they are either:
▪ Legally bound to protect and preserve the building
▪ Though not legally protected, the building provides a significant and positive
cultural and aesthetic contribution regarding:
- History of campus development, or
- A seminal moment in campus and/or community history, or
- Is of significant importance to alumni
Buildings deemed “protected” are not to be removed from the campus’s inventory
regardless of condition, adaptability or utilization assessment unless they pose a significant
and serious threat to life safety that cannot be mitigated.
Buildings deemed “protected” on the Clarion campus:
▪ Hart Chapel – Protected due to its historic and aesthetic value
▪ Founders Hall – Protected due to its historic and aesthetic value
▪ Moore Hall – Protected due to its historic and aesthetic value

Graphic 3.27
Building Assessment
Table

Givan Hall

Valley View Suites*

OVERALL SCORE

Pole Barn (Venango)

OVERALL SCORE

Frame Hall

Montgomery Hall

OVERALL SCORE

Rhoades Center

Suhr Library

OVERALL SCORE

Barnes Hall (Housing)*

Black Hall (Housing)*

Hughes Hall (Housing)*

Leadership Hall (Housing)*

Peters Hall (Housing)*

OVERALL SCORE

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.7

2.5

4.0

2.0

4.0

3.1

2.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.8

3.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.8

3.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.4

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.7

2.5

4.0

2.0

4.0

3.1

2.5

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.8

3.0

2.0

2.5

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.4

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.0

1.5

2.6

3.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.0

2.3

2.5

2.5

2.5

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.6

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

1.0

1.0

1.5

2.4

2.5

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.4

-

-

3.0

2.5

2.8

3.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.1

2.4

3.0

2.7

3.0

1.8

1.8

2.2

2.6

2.7

4.0

2.6

4.0

3.3

2.5

2.5

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.9

2.5

2.7

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.1

3.0

4.0

2.5

2.5

1.5

4.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.5

1.0

2.3

2.0

4.0

1.5

4.0

2.9

2.5

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

1.5

2.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.2

3.0

4.0

2.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

1.5

1.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

2.2

1.5

4.0

1.5

4.0

2.8

2.5

2.5

2.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

1.5

2.3

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

3.5

2.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.3

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.5

3.0

4.0

-

2.0

-

-

-

1.5

-

-

3.0

2.7

3.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.5

-

-

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.9

3.0

4.0

3.0

3.0

1.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

2.5

2.5

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.4

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.1

4.0

4.0

3.0

2.5

1.0

4.0

2.5

1.5

2.0

1.0

1.0

2.4

2.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

3.0

1.0

1.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

1.8

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.5

1.0

4.0

2.5

1.0

1.5

1.5

1.0

2.3

2.5

4.0

2.0

4.0

3.1

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

1.0

2.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.3

3.1

4.0

2.8

2.4

1.4

3.8

2.1

1.5

1.9

1.4

1.5

2.4

2.2

4.0

2.3

4.0

3.1

2.1

2.1

2.7

2.5

2.6

2.8

1.9

2.3

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

2.5

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

2.6

2.5

4.0

2.5

4.0

3.3

2.5

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.8

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.7

2.5

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.4

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.9

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

1.5

3.0

2.8

3.0

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.5

2.0

2.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.5

3.0

2.0

1.5

2.5

2.6

2.5

4.0

2.5

4.0

3.3

2.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

2.8

3.0

3.0

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

3.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

2.5

2.8

2.5

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.4

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

2.8

3.0

2.5

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

3.0

4.0

3.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

3.0

1.0

2.0

2.0

2.6

2.0

4.0

2.5

4.0

3.1

2.0

2.0

3.0

2.5

2.8

2.5

3.0

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

3.0

-

4.0

3.0

-

2.0

3.0

-

2.5

-

-

-

2.9

-

4.0

3.0

4.0

3.7

-

-

-

3.0

3.0

3.0

-

3.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

1.5

3.5

4.0

1.5

1.0

1.0

1.5

1.0

2.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.7

1.0

4.0

1.0

4.0

2.5

-

-

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

1.5

2.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

Thorn II

3.0

2.5

Thorn I

2.5

2.5

Student Recreation Center

2.0

3.0

President's House

3.0

4.0

Moore Hall

4.0

3.0

Hart Chapel

3.0

2.9

Gemmell Student Union

2.8

Eagle Commons*

Campus View Suites*

Venango - Student Housing

Ballentine Hall

V - Auxiliary

OVERALL SCORE

2.1

V-E&G

Tippin Gymnasium

1.4

2.7

V - Service

Carlson Library

-

2.8

C larion - Student Housing

OVERALL SCORE
2.8

Stadium and Locker Rooms

C larion - Auxiliary Buildings

4.0

4.0

2.5

2.4

2.6

2.6

3.0

4.0

2.8

2.0

2.2

2.8

2.4

2.9

2.0

1.7

2.3

2.5

2.3

4.0

2.6

4.0

3.2

2.1

2.1

2.9

2.7

2.8

2.9

2.6

2.8

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

2.7

2.2

2.5

2.5

3.0

4.0

2.9

2.2

2.0

3.2

2.4

2.5

1.9

1.6

2.0

2.5

2.4

4.0

2.5

4.0

3.2

2.2

2.2

2.7

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.4

2.6

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

59

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Conditions Assessment Approach
The conditions assessment was conducted in November and December of 2012. The
assessment methodology consisted of the visual inspection of each building and discussions
with facilities personnel regarding building maintenance and operation. Twenty individual
building attributes were analyzed and graded on a four-point scale:
▪ 1.0-1.4 = Poor
▪ 1.5-2.4 = Fair
▪ 2.5-3.4 = Good
▪ 3.5-4.0 = Excellent
The principal assessment finding is that most of the University building inventory is currently
in good condition. However, it is projected that significant capital improvements will be
required within the next five to 10 years to replace major building components in as many
as one half of the buildings surveyed. These components include heating, ventilating,
cooling, electrical and plumbing systems. Window and roof replacement within some of the
University buildings should also be anticipated. The underlying reason for building systems
to be replaced is age; many of these building systems have reached, or are nearing, the
end of their useful service life. Increasingly, these systems will become less reliable, more
inefficient, and more costly to operate and maintain.
Cost of Deferred Maintenance
As part of the assessment, repair and replacement needs were estimated for systems that
are currently in fair condition. These needs are grouped into three categories:
▪ 2013-2014
Immediate (1-2 years)
▪ 2015-2022
Intermediate (3-7 years)
▪ 2023+
Long-term (8+ years)
Systems and major pieces of equipment that are in good and excellent condition and
would not need significant repair or replacement over the next 20 years are not included
in the above categories. The cost of deferred maintenance at the Clarion campus is (in
unescalated, 2013 hard costs):
▪ 2013-2014
$18.6M
over $130M in the next 7 years
▪ 2015-2022
$112.2M
▪ 2023+
$21.5M
Repair v Replacement
In the case of some buildings, the cost to repair an existing building approaches or exceeds
the cost of replacement. When a building’s repair costs near or exceed 70% of replacement
costs, a building must seriously be considered for removal from the University’s inventory.
Additionally, due to operational considerations, it is not recommended that the existing
domestic structures remain in the University’s facilities portfolio. Buildings where the repair
value approaches or exceeds replacement value include:

60

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Building
Tippin
Ralston Hall
Egbert Hall
Hart Chapel
Carrier Hall
Becker Hall
McEntire
Ballentine Hall
Marwick-Boyd Hall
Givan Hall
Stadium and Lockers
Davis Hall
Keeling Health Center
Stevens Hall
Recreation Center
Thorn I
Admissions
Still Hall
Ceramics Laboratory

Repair
$17.2M
$13.6M
$3.4M
$2.2M
$3.6M
$11.9M
$3.8M
$5.0M
$16.1M
$12.0M
$3.0M
$5.7M
$2.4M
$3.4M
$8.2M
$0.3M
$0.8M
$8.6M
$0.3M

Replacement
$14.9M
$12.6M
$3.2M
$2.1M
$3.7M
$12.4M
$4.0M
$5.4M
$17.4M
$13.2M
$3.4M
$6.4M
$2.7M
$4.4M
$9.8M
$0.4M
$1.0M
$11.0M
$0.4M

Repair as % Replace
116%
108%
106%
101%
98%
96%
94%
92%
92%
91%
90%
89%
87%
84%
84%
82%
82%
78%
77%

3

Graphic 3.28
Comparison of repair and
replacement costs

Buildings Recommended for Removal
In addition to repair versus replacement value, buildings were also examined for:
▪ Adaptability – The ability for a facility to be easily repurposed for a new use/
function
▪ Utilization – Amount of building occupied and regularly used
Buildings are to be removed from the campus facilities inventory when they are found to
have all of the following:
▪ High repair v replacement costs and
▪ To be inflexible and
▪ To have low utilization
Based on these criteria, these buildings on the Clarion campus are recommended for
removal/demolition:
▪ McEntire
▪ Ballentine Hall
▪ Givan Hall
▪ Keeling Health Center
▪ Ralston Hall
▪ Thorn 1

61

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3.41 Building Exteriors
Though only one building’s exteriors are in “poor” condition, most of the smaller service
buildings on campus, as well as buildings that began as domestic residences, are in poor
condition. Building exteriors with the greatest level of need are:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Strohman
Ceramics Laboratory
Sculpture Studio
Thorn I
Thorn II

Poor
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair

1.2
1.5
1.5
1.8
1.8

3.42 Building Interiors
Building interiors on campus vary considerably, though the interiors of most academic and
administration buildings are in good condition. Auxiliary and housing building conditions
reflect recent investment in these facilities and are generally in good to excellent condition.
Some of the older academic buildings on campus, such as Davis and Stevens Halls,
however, have interior masonry load bearing walls that are cost-prohibitive to modify to
contemporary room-size dimensions. Building interiors with the greatest level of need are:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Strohman
962 Corbett Street
Thorn II
Pole Barn
Utility Plant
Ceramics Laboratory

Poor
Poor
Fair
Fair
Fair
Fair

1.1
1.3
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8

3.43 Climate Control Systems
Climate control systems on the Clarion campus vary greatly, with many of the older
academic buildings serviced by a combination of steam radiators and window cooling
units. Building mechanical systems with the greatest level of need are:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Davis Hall
Egbert Hall
Ralston Hall
Tippin
Recreation Center

Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

3.44 Plumbing Systems
The condition of the plumbing systems on campus varies greatly. The majority of the piping
has been installed with copper distribution piping and cast iron drain, waste and vent
piping. The lavatories, water closets and urinals for the most part are vitreous china; the
condition of these fixtures typically matches the overall condition of each building. In some
instances, the faucets and restrooms have been upgraded with sensor flush valves and
faucets. The campus maintains its own water distribution system, which saves the University
individual meter charges and is a concept that should be maintained and expanded as
the campus grows. The buildings that do not have backflow prevention on them should
62

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

have them installed as early as possible. Building plumbing systems with the greatest level
of need are:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Davis Hall
Egbert Hall
Sculpture Studio
Tippin Hall
Recreation Center

Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

3.45 Electrical Distribution, Lighting and Technology Systems
The electrical systems within the buildings vary greatly, from old and obsolete to new
distribution equipment and updated emergency generators. The lighting fixtures have
been retrofitted to energy-saving T-8 lamped fixtures throughout the campus, an update
that will pay for itself in energy cost savings. In general, the condition of electrical systems
matches the overall condition of each building. With the exception of the electrical systems
that have received recent updates, the electrical system for each building should generally
be upgraded when the building is renovated. Building electrical systems with the greatest
level of need are:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Moore Hall
Strohman
Egbert Hall
Stevens Hall
Tippin Hall

Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor

1.0 (distribution, lighting and technology)
1.0 (distribution and lighting)
1.0 (distribution and lighting)
1.0 (distribution and lighting)
1.0 (distribution and lighting)

Technology systems are generally in good to excellent condition across the entire campus.
Graphic 3.29
Campus Utility Plant Room

63

3

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 3.30
Ramped Entrance
Admissions Building

Graphic 3.31
Stepped Entrance
Founders Hall

64

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT

3

3.46 Life Safety and Fire Protection Systems
The fire alarm systems in the majority of the buildings have been updated with Johnson
Controls Metasys systems. This standardization makes it convenient when gathering data
from the remote buildings and reporting to the police station. Only one or two buildings
have no fire alarm or sprinkler system installed, but when the buildings are renovated the
code will dictate if a manual or automatic fire alarm system is required. In either case, it is
preferable to have a central fire alarm system installed in each building.
Another item that should be considered for the future is the installation of a campus-wide
warning system that can alert students and employees of a threat on the campus, either
weather-related or terroristic in nature. This could be achieved through the installation of
a voice system, or as simple as a unique siren. The University already utilizes an Eagle
Alert mass notification system which messages registered cell phones of life-threatening
situations on campus.
The majority of the buildings are provided with emergency lighting systems either through
battery pack fixtures or the emergency generator. There does appear to have been periodic
maintenance performed on the generators, but based on the age of some of the battery
packs, it is unlikely that they would be able to provide the 90 minutes of operation that is
required.

3.47 Accessibility
Many of the buildings on the Clarion campus scored low on assessment of handicapped
accessibility, as evaluated according to the Americans with Disabilities Act [2010 ADA].
Many of these buildings predate current accessibility standards, so their non-compliance
is largely legal, if no signiifcant changes are made to the building. The purpose of
incorporating accessibility into the building assessment is to measure the capacity of the
building to provide access for users with disabilities and adapt over time.
Adapting Existing Buildings for ADA Compliance
While all new public buildings and additions must meet ADA requirements, correct at the
time of permit, the rules are more flexible for existing construction. Generally, existing
non-compliant buildings are exempt from newer regulations unless they are significantly
“altered.” Alteration is defined by the 2010 ADA as “remodeling, renovation, structural
changes, wall changes, reconstruction, [and] historic restoration” with compliance
required to the “maximum extent feasible.” Additionally, if accessibility alterations to
meet compliance exceed 20% percent of the cost to alter a “primary function area,” the
alteration is deemed “disproportionate” and not required.
As noted above in the “Interior Conditions” section, buildings such as Davis and Stevens
Halls have interior masonry load bearing walls that are cost-prohibitive to modify. Not only
does this impact the ability to adjust walls to meet contemporary space requirements, the
entries to many spaces pass through these bearing walls. It is not feasible to adapt these
doorways to meet contemporary code requirements. Small scale alterations to these and
other buildings with similar conditions are recommended, we also suggest avoiding fullbuilding renovations.

65

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

66

CLARION CAMPUS

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

4

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

Graphic 4.01
Informal and group study
areas in the Science and
Technology Center

Graphic 4.02
Group study room with digital
media in the Science and
Technology Center

68

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

4

As highlighted by Clarion’s senior leadership, higher education in the United States and
globally is experiencing a period of disruptive change that offers significant opportunities
for both of Clarion University’s campuses. This section identifies the drivers of “disruptive
change,” including new technologies, economics, evolving student demographics, and
new instructional delivery methods.

4.01 Disruptive Change
The impact of technology on many industries is well documented, but higher education has
yet to undergo the changes seen in industries such as music, journalism, telecommunications,
travel, and publishing. In each of these industries, technology (particularly when combined
with mobility) has dramatically altered consumer patterns and their relationships with service
and content providers. In some markets, for-profit online institutions have displaced their
not-for-profit brick and mortar counterparts (in the same way Amazon.com and iTunes
have displaced book and music stores, respectively). In the last few years, the quality of
their higher education counterparts have come under increased scrutiny and enrollment
has suffered as a consequence. However, this is likely a temporary situation that will resolve
itself as institutions retool and consolidate gains. Higher education has thus far avoided
such cataclysmic shifts, but that is likely to change in the future.

4.02 New Forms of Digital Delivery
Yet another front of competition comes from educational publishing companies, such as
Pearson, as they become more digital and replace lost textbook income with consulting
and digital application services (apps). In the future, it is likely that such applications will
serve as surrogate instructors, and firms like Pearson will receive volumes of performance
data from the apps. These firms have a long tradition of—or are acquiring—exciting
and effective graphic interface capabilities, and are also able to apply (video) gaming
approaches to the design of their interfaces. Once these programs receive the necessary
credentials (some already are licensed), they will become formidable partners or
challengers to traditional institutions of higher education. In 2012 alone, according to the
Economist Magazine, over $1.1 billion was invested by venture capitalists into educational
technologies, a figure that was almost as high in nominal terms as the dot-com peak.
At the same time, the quality of exclusively online course offerings, both synchronous and
asynchronous, has vastly improved over the past few years. This is partially market-driven,
but it is also a result of new technologies being continuously developed by a greater
variety of firms, such as Amplify, to assist universities in developing and running online
programs. The public’s wariness of online education is gradually being overturned as this
method of course delivery becomes more commonplace and less stigmatized. According
to the US News & World Report, the number of colleges offering degree programs that
are administered solely online has almost doubled in the past decade. As of 2012,
approximately 62% of postsecondary education institutions offered fully online programs. It
is likely that institutions leading this sector will increasingly resemble technology companies
in terms of their business model, branding and digital sophistication.

69

4

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

With respect to facilities planning, the impact of online delivery is most directly felt on the
need for traditional face-to-face instructional environments. Increasingly, classrooms and
lecture halls will not be used as frequently for traditional face-to-face instruction. In some
cases, the demand for class labs will also be reduced, especially for fixed, computerbased rooms. The need for experiential class lab environments, particularly those related
to “hand memory” (learning though kinetic action) is anticipated to remain stable.

4.03 Increased Tuition Cost Sensitivity
From the consumer’s side, the recent recession has left many students and their families
less able and less willing to pay for college. Many families no longer view a university
education as a rite of passage into adulthood, but rather as a strategic investment that must
be approached with prudence. Like much of American consumer spending over the past
two decades, higher education has been increasingly financed by debt. This is exacerbated
by cost escalation that exceed inflation. With national student debt now exceeding national
credit card debt, the financial relationship between universities and students must change.
The return-on-investment of a college degree is now one of the top considerations for
many students, and it is of vital importance that the experience translates into a wellpaying job in a desired field of work. With the consumer market moving in a downward
pricing direction, institutions that fail to respond may risk their continued viability.

4.04 Demographic Change
Another transformation in the landscape of higher education is evident in the demographics
of today’s student population, which is not only more diverse ethnically and economically,
but also in terms of life experience and age. The international student population in the U.S.
continues to rise, as does the percentage of non-white students enrolled in post-secondary
degree-granting institutions. But perhaps the most notable shift in the demographics of
higher education is in the average age of students pursuing post-secondary studies. A
large part of the increase in adult learners can be attributed to the economic recession,
which spurred many people to seek new skills or pursue a higher degree. According to
the National Center for Education Statistics, approximately 23% of college students in the
U.S. were between the ages of 25 and 34—and nearly 18% were 35+ years of age—as
of 2010. The enrollment of students 35+ years of age increased 32% between 1996 and
2010 and is projected to increase 25% between 2010 and 2021.
In order to remain competitive in today’s market, institutions of higher education must
adjust to meet the needs of a more mature student demographic. Non-traditional students
often work full- or part-time and may have family or other obligations to attend to in
addition to their coursework. Unlike traditional students who are younger and attend
school full-time, adult students may require more flexibility in class location (such as online
learning options) and schedule (evening and weekend courses).

70

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

4

4.05 Asynchronous Learning
Asynchronous learning, which allows students to work at their own speed, has helped meet
the growing demand for instructional flexibility. This type of learning may be especially
appealing to non-traditional students who have the advantage of practical, real-world
experience and the maturity to self-manage. As opposed to a traditional lecture environment
in which the instructor delivers information at a set pace, online instruction supports selfpaced learning and often allows students to skip or move quickly through content that they
have already mastered. With course materials available at any time online, students may
select particular areas on which to focus their energies.
Another variation of asynchronous learning is the “flipped” course. Flipping courses
involves lecture materials, whether textbook-based, online, or both, to be read outside of
class, and “homework” completed during class time with the guidance of an instructor or
through small group assignments. This instructional strategy changes not only the role of
the faculty member but also the type of facilities needed.
Asynchronous learning also calls on the institution to make learning resources such as
specialized labs, simulation environments and librarian services widely available.
One asynchronous method that has received a great deal of attention in the past several
years is the massive online open course [MOOC]. Since 2008, MOOCs have exploded in
popularity, gaining traction and legitimacy from a number of top-ranking universities. In
the United States, esteemed institutions such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, UC Berkeley,
and UCLA have launched a variety of free online course offerings available to students
around the globe. While the benefits of MOOCs are debatable, it is undeniable that
they have and will continue to change the way that higher education is delivered and
consumed. Just as importantly, MOOCs have also become powerful marketing tools,
helping to publicize super-star faculty and promote an institution as a center of excellence
for a specific field of study.

4.06 Synchronous Learning
The approach to synchronous teaching and learning (face-to-face and online) has
also undergone a paradigm shift, moving away from traditional methods of “passive”
instruction to more effective and student-focused “active learning” tactics. Following this
trend, student expectations for their higher education experience are changing. Today’s
student demands a more personalized, face-to-face [F2F] educational experience,
including frequent interaction with instructors and a high level of engagement within a
collaborative environment. This is generally met through the concept of student-centered
learning, which emphasizes the active participation of the student as a key component
of effectively learning and processing course material. Active learning methods can be
applied to online or distance-learning classes as well as in-person instructional settings. A
wide variety of virtual tools exist to support long-distance collaboration, allowing students in
multiple locations to interact with each other and the instructor through web-conferencing,
document sharing, instant messaging and more.

71

4

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Graphic 4.03
Carlson Library, Clarion Campus

Graphic 4.04
Carlson Library, Clarion Campus

72

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

4

Because active learning is a newer form of instructional delivery, traditional classroom
environments may need to be adapted for optimal support. For example, flexible seating
(movable tables and chairs) allows students to work individually or in groups of various
sizes; in a tiered lecture hall, the depth of the tiers may be extended to accommodate two
desks per tier, allowing students to turn their seats and work in pairs. Another instructional
strategy is the use of breakout spaces where large group sessions are complemented with
small group work in breakout rooms or informal study areas. Best practices for campusbased programs in disciplines such as English writing and reading, mathematics, and
accounting now favor more specialized learning environments such as SCALE-UP (student
centered active learning environments with upside down pedagogies) rooms. These rooms
typically feature clusters of student computer stations to allow collaborative work, and are
sometimes supported by small recitation studios for targeted instruction.
Along with active learning environments, there is a high demand for experientially-based
learning environments. These learning environments simulate actual workplaces—a pre-K
classroom, a business boardroom, a hospital room, a speech clinic—and allow students
to learn and practice where they can be mentored by faculty and peers before entering an
actual work site. Importantly, such facilities are not necessarily scheduled for fixed times as
traditional classrooms, but are made available for open use.

4.07 Library Collections and Study Environments
Libraries are being transformed from mere repositories for reading materials to places for
study and assistance in knowledge wayfinding. Desired library study spaces are no longer
furnished with individual carrels or open worktables, but are fitted with study rooms to
accommodate groups of various sizes. Furnishings should support a variety of work/learn
modes, with seating options such as rocking chairs, soft chairs, task chairs and ottomans.
It is important to note that the demand for study environments extends beyond the library
proper; formal and informal study spaces are incorporated throughout the campus, with
electronic information services available to students and faculty at multiple convenient
locations.
In terms of the library’s operations, reserve materials are now often provided in electronic
format, requiring different preparation activities on the part of library staff. Traditional
distinctions of reference, circulation and periodicals are fading, with a greater emphasis
on professional information services.

4.08 The Changing Workplace
In addition to changes in higher education’s academic spaces, the workplace is
undergoing a change of its own. Over the past few decades, office environments have
become increasingly collaborative, with less time spent on “heads-down,” solitary work.
In situations where team members are located in different geographic locations, and even
different time zones, workplace interaction may occur in person, via conference calls,
through e-mail, instant messaging, or through voicemail and text.
Technology has given workers the ability to connect anywhere, anytime, using smaller
and more portable devices. Often, employees could perform the majority of their work
73

4

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

outside of a formal office setting, but they continue to commute to a physical office in
order to interact with their colleagues. They want to remain “in the loop” and to be part
of an environment where there is a social “buzz.” Of course, much work requires solitary
focus, but workers typically do not want to be too isolated from their colleagues. Many
workplace designers and managers have realized that the physical office setting must
now be designed to attract and hold the attention of employees, who are increasingly
Generation X and Y-ers.
The shift towards collaboration has impacted workstation and office sizes. Over the past
few decades, there has been a gradual shift away from the “space by rank” method of
assignment (where the size of the individual workspace is related to the organizational
hierarchy) toward a new set of workplace standards, where there is one size office and
one size workstation, or even one size workstation with no enclosed offices. Because the
technology has gotten smaller (or has become obsolete, such as personal printers), the
standard size of workstations has also decreased.
When workers have the freedom to choose where, when, and how they work, the
work that is performed within an office setting is usually more collaborative. Since they
spend more time on-site in meetings (formal or impromptu), assigned workstations are
typically underutilized and the demand for variously sized meeting spaces is unmet.
Some organizations have addressed this mismatch by asking employees to use space
on an as-needed basis, as opposed to “owning” a dedicated workspace (workers with
dedicated workspaces are called “resident workers”). Often, these arrangements involve
the assignment of employees to an office “neighborhood,” where a team owns a set of
workspaces (fully enclosed and more open) that accommodate different types of work.
The underlying principle is that most workers—not only those who would traditionally be
assigned to a private office—perform some tasks that require an enclosed room, and most
would also benefit from the knowledge sharing that occurs in a more open setting.

4.09 The Role of Greater Mobility
One change that affects most workers is the increasing prevalence of distance collaboration.
It has become commonplace for managers to oversee teams that are geographically
dispersed; workplaces can support such distance collaboration through better and more
widely distributed video and audio conferencing technology.
The transition to greater workplace mobility has not only been motivated by improved
technologies, but by an improved understanding in employee health and performance.
There is growing focus on wellness and sustainability in the workplace, and an increasing
recognition that long commutes are not the healthy choice either for people or for the
planet. Offering employees the option of working from or close to home, rather than
commuting to the office every day of the week, is becoming more common. Likewise, the
realization that sitting for extended periods of time at a desk or in conference rooms is not
a healthy choice has led more organizations to provide opportunities for standing during
meetings or while working on a computer. It has also become popular to incorporate
opportunities for short walks during the workday, usually between different workplace
settings and on-site amenities. In general, there is more internal mobility (on-site) and
external mobility (off-site).

74

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

TRENDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

4

4.10 Variations in Work/Learn Styles Mean Variations in Work/Learn
Place Design
It has become clear over the last decade that variations in work style are not simply the
result of job function. A person’s work style is largely affected by individual personality.
Many employees develop their optimal working habits while in college, when they have
the freedom to study at the time and location of their choosing. However, when students
enter the workforce, they often conform to a routine that does not necessarily align with
their optimal work style.
Some workers are most productive when personal activities and work activities take place
in distinctly different places—these would have been the students who used the library, a
coffee shop, or other shared spaces to study. Others perform best when personal and work
activities occur in the same location, exemplified by the students who chose to study in their
dorm rooms or apartments. The students who preferred to blur the lines between work and
life may become the employees who would be most productive when working from home,
where they are able to work at odd hours and incorporate breaks into their schedule.
Remote-work, however, is not the best option for everyone. For people who prefer a
separation between work and life activities, working from home for long stretches of time
may be problematic; with a lack of boundaries and social interaction, these workers may
tend to overwork and feel isolated. Because individual employees often thrive in different
types of settings, it may be beneficial to provide multiple options to suit a variety of work
styles and preferences.
One option that has been utilized with great success is the concept of co-working spaces.
These shared spaces, originally used by freelancers and start-ups, have become more
popular in corporate settings. As an alternative to working from home, co-working
environments provide a comfortable workspace with the convenience and social interaction
of a true office setting, while eliminating or diminishing lengthy commute times.
The trends discussed in this section offer Clarion University the opportunity to significantly
rethink its workflow and workplace design. In many instances, responding to these trends
requires little to no facilities change; in others, the need can be met with simple furniture
solutions. Notably, Clarion has already responded to many of these trends. The FMP
provides the University with an opportunity to closely coordinate future facilities investments
with exciting work already underway.

75

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

76

CLARION CAMPUS

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

The facilities needs assessment for the Clarion campus provides significant perspectives on
how well it is positioned to respond to the programmatic and pedagogical trends in higher
education, including:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Program enrollments
Instructional delivery strategies
Human resources
Library resources
Existing and planned space inventories

Using space planning guidelines from the Pennsylvania System of Higher Education
[PASSHE] and a modified set of guidelines developed specifically for this facilities master
plan [FMP], the existing and planned inventories were examined to identify gross needs
for the campus. Importantly, while these two sets of guidelines indicate the same general
issues, they differ significantly in the relative amounts of space needed. As such, only the
FMP recommended guidelines are used as a planning baseline in this report (comparisons
of the PASSHE v FMP Guideline recommendations can be found in the appendices). For
the Clarion campus, specific strengths and issues include:
▪ Despite the addition of the Science and Technology Center, the learning space
platform more broadly does not fully support an instructional culture that is
technology-based and driven by active learning:
- Classroom space is underutilized and not sized for active learning
- Changes in pedagogy and increased online enrollments will significantly
reduce needs for such space
▪ Specialized teaching labs are inadequately sized, lack sufficient technology, and
do not meet the needs of various programs. In addition, the fragmentation of
the visual arts program is especially pronounced, and the education labs are
particularly dated. Also, the demand for entry-level science instruction is not
sufficiently supported.
▪ Clinic space at Keeling is not well integrated with instructional space.
▪ Given the recent renovation of Carlson Library, the campus has sufficient aggregate
space for study and collections. However, the following issues were observed:
- The range of furnishings in Carlson does not meet contemporary needs for
multimedia and group study
- Informal study space could be more distributed into other buildings to
completely support collaborative learning
▪ Designated workspaces are oversized, although they are functionally aligned with
needs—particularly with the planned renovation for Becht Hall and the co-location
of enrollment management and student and health services.
▪ Campus life will be enhanced with the planned facilities within the Tippin
Hall expansion (natatorium and athletic facilities), the addition of a pool in
the Recreation Center, and a new theatre, food facilities, and a bookstore in the
replacement residence halls.
▪ More institutional support spaces for technology support, physical plant, and
central services are needed.
▪ The planned renovation of Becht Hall will result in near-term opportunities to
reduce the number of buildings and the amount of maintained space on campus
and to align Clarion’s space needs with its envisioned future as an institution of
the 21st century.
78

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5.1 ENROLLMENT TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
The Clarion campus has been the home for Clarion University since its founding in 1867.
Having evolved from a seminary to a normal school to a college to a university, it now
specializes in preparing students for professional careers in fields such as education,
business, and science. In its continued evolution, the Bachelor of Science in Nursing [BSN]
program of Venango College is planned to be housed on the Clarion campus. With the
advancement of instructional technology, programs offered in 2013 at the Clarion campus
are either:
▪ Campus-based, delivered primarily face-to-face [F2F], although courses may be
offered online [OL]
▪ Web-based, delivered primarily or exclusively OL
This instructional modality does not distinguish courses which blend face-to-face and
online modalities; they are considered a variant of the face-to-face modality.
University-wide, total headcount fall term enrollments increased by 4% from 2003 to 2012
(Table 5.1), although this was primarily due to the following figures:
▪ 197% growth in web-based OL programs
▪ 46% growth in campus-based FTF programs at the Venango campus
Total enrollments at the Clarion campus declined by 2%, partly resulting from an 11%
decline in campus-based enrollments; this downturn was somewhat offset by increases
in web-based program enrollment. Campus-based enrollments in fall 2013 continued to
decline, from 4,613 in 2012 to 4,080, while web-based program enrollment increased
from 674 in 2012 to 1,085.
These enrollment trends have focused Clarion University on taking strategic action,
increasing enrollments in business, science and technology, and health science professions,
where it has had historic growth. Focus has also been placed on revitalizing teacher
education professional programs and eliminating academic programs where student
interest has declined. There are future opportunities in the development of new degree
and certificate programs, delivered both online and face-to-face. Web-based program
enrollments at both the Clarion and Venango campuses are projected to more than
double, reaching 2,828 students by 2023 (Table 5.1). Campus-based programs appear
to remain relatively stable, growing overall by only 7% in 2023 to 5,644 students. At the
Venango campus, campus-based program enrollment, however, will grow by 30% to 844,
while the Clarion campus will only grow by 4%. The result is that the Clarion campus will
reduce its respective share of program enrollments at the University (Table 5.2).
In 2003, 91% of the University’s headcount enrollment, regardless of delivery modality,
was associated with the Clarion campus; by 2012 that had dropped to 86%. By 2023,
the University expects enrollment at Clarion campus to decline to 81%. (All projections are
done to 2023, although the FMP covers the planning period to 2033, since capital project
funding requires a longer time frame.)

79

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Instructional delivery modality will have a pronounced impact on program enrollments
at the Clarion campus (Table 5.2). Campus-based program enrollments have decreased
from 87% of total university enrollments to 75% in 2012, and this share is projected to
decline even further by 2023, to 56%. Enrollments in web-based programs, in contrast,
are expected to increase from 4% (2003) to 25% (2023). These projected changes for the
Clarion campus are dramatic and have significant implications for future space needs.

Table 5.1
Headcount Enrollment and
Projections for Web-based and
Campus-based Programs
University

5929

6464

6368

6645

6865

6917

7078

7098

6587

6150

6102

6023

6298

6722

6996

7311

7559

7818

8116

8269

8472

Venango

517

642

652

789

793

849

928

965

939

863

937

857

968

1135

1226

1311

1359

1418

1466

1519

1572

82%

5412

5822

5716

5856

6072 60568

6150

6133

5648

5287

5165

5166

5350

5587

5770

6000

6200

6400

6650

6750

6900

31%

299

456

505

555

676

859

803

853

966

887

1402

1402

1535

1735

1916

2110

2237

2368

2536

2657

2828 219%

72

83

96

124

127

130

168

204

232

213

317

271

370

475

546

610

637

668

686

707

728 242%

227

373

409

431

549

729

635

649

734

674

1085

1131

1185

1260

1370

1500

1600

1700

1850

1950

2100 212%

Clarion

Web-based
Venango
Clarion
Campus-based

38%

5630

6008

5863

6090

6189

6058

6275

6245

5621

5263

4700

4621

4763

4987

5080

5201

5322

5450

5580

5612

5644

7%

Venango

445

559

556

665

666

719

760

761

707

650

620

586

598

660

680

701

722

750

780

812

844

30%

Clarion*

5185

5449

5307

5425

5523

5339

5515

5484

4914

4613

4080

4035

4165

4327

4400

4500

4600

4700

4800

4800

4800

4%

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

Year

*Clarion includes Venango College BSN program

Table 5.2
Changing Enrollment Share for
Web-based and Campus-Based
Programs

80

University

In 2003

In 2012

In 2023

Web-based
Campus-based
Clarion

5%
95%

14%
86%

33%
67%

Web-based
Campus-based
Venango
Web-based
Campus-based

4%
87%

11%
75%

25%
56%

1%
8%

3%
11%

9%
10%

%
2023 change
from
2012

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5.2 INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERY
As discussed in Section 4, the advent of online instructional delivery has changed the
character of higher education, whether through the development of web-based programs,
targeted online courses in a campus-based program, or blended/hybrid delivery of a specific
course. These changes in instructional delivery have significant implications for facilities
planning. Online delivery, whether the result of web-based programs or campus-based
program courses delivered online, will result in a reduced need for traditional classrooms.
But even online instruction requires the support of some physical resources, such as open
class labs, library and study spaces, food services, lounges, and other services. Headcount
enrollment alone is no longer a sufficient planning tool; additional enrollment data are
required in the form of full-time equivalents [FTEs] by program delivery, both face-to-face
[FTE F2F] and online [FTE OL].
At the Clarion campus, total FTE enrollment is expected to grow by 30%, to 6,341 by
2023 (Table 5.3), assuming that the average credit load per headcount remains at 13.5
credit hours and the 2012 mixes of undergraduate and graduate students and full-time
and part-time students remain the same. Assuming that students enrolled in the campusbased programs will take 85% of their credit hours face-to-face and 15% of their credit
hours online, and that students enrolled in web–based programs will take 100% of their
credit hours online, FTE F2F is expected to grow to 3,758 (9%), while FTE OL will increase
significantly to 2,584 (252%).

Full-time Equivalent (FTE)

Year

FTE

Includes all programs
Assumes 13.5 course credit load
Assumes 2012 mix of UG/GR and FT/PT

2012
2023

4,873
6,341

% change

30%

Full-time Equivalent Face to Face (FTE F2F)
Assumes campus-based programs take
85% courses F2F and 15% online

Year
2012
2023
% change

4,138
3,758
9%

Full-time Equivalent Online (FTE OL)
Assumes web-based programs take
100% courses online

Year
2012
2023
% change

734
2,584
252%

Table 5.3
Full-time Equivalent Enrollment
Projections by Delivery Modality

81

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5.3 HUMAN AND LIBRARY RESOURCES
Projections of full-time equivalent faculty (Table 5.4) for the Clarion campus are based on
the projected student/faculty ratio of 18:1, regardless of delivery mode. By 2023, based
on the enrollment projections, 357 FTE faculty are expected.
The number of projected FTE staff is based on an increased staff to faculty ratio of 1.92:1,
and includes contract staff in addition to employees. This ratio is better aligned with such
ratios at similar institutions and recognizes that Clarion will be adding and developing
a strong institutional advancement function, and that technology and more specialized
learning environments will require additional support staff. The focus for facilities planning
will be on FTE employees, which are expected to total 512 by 2023. Clarion will continue
to have a constant number of student employees.

Table 5.4
Human and Library
Resource Projections

FTE Faculty
Stud./Fac. Ratio F2F
Stud./Fac. Ratio OL
FTE Staff*
Staff/Faculty Ratio
FTE Employees
FTE Administrators
FTE Secretarial/Clerical
FTE Technical/Paraprofessional
Student Workers
BVEs

2012

2018

2023

294
17:1
17:1
523
1.78
362
146
96
23
673
439,533

320
18:1
18:1
617
1.93
456
188
123
29
673
439,533

357
18:1
18:1
625
1.92
512
210
138
33
673
439,533

*Includes contract employees

Carlson Library (Table 5.4) serves the Clarion campus as the major resource for library
materials and services. It also supports Suhr Library at the Venango campus. This strategy is
expected to continue, and the overall collection size of 439,533 bound volume equivalents
[BVEs] is expected to remain at the current size or slightly diminish.

82

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5.4 CAMPUS INVENTORY AND PLANNED CHANGES
The Clarion campus inventory (Table 5.5 and detailed in Appendices E.2, E.3, and E.5)
reflects the definitional standards of the federal Facilities Inventory Classification Manual
[FICM], promulgated by the US Department of Education’s National Center for Educational
Statistics (Washington, 2006). FICM provides for eleven major categories of net assignable
square foot [NASF] space, comprised of sub-categories, as well as non-assignable space
such as circulation, building service, and mechanical space (in facilities master planning
the focus is on NASF for the campus). For local space management purposes, other subcategories can be added, and PASSHE has added sub-categories of office space to reflect
specific types of faculty, staff, and student positions. In addition, PASSHE categories athletic
space (FICM code Special Use, Athletic) used for recreation purposes as recreation space
(General Use, Recreation). For Clarion University, specific sub-categories were added
to distinguish these types of spaces. In addition, classroom sub-categories for distance
learning classrooms and distance learning lecture halls were added to facilitate analysis
and qualitative understanding of the learning resources available. Also added were codes
to distinguish conference rooms from auxiliary meeting space to be more consistent with
PASSHE space planning guidelines.
Base
NASF

Becht Renovation
Adds

Vacates

Deletes

Tippin/Natatorium
Adds

Deletes

Rec Pool
Adds

Residence Halls
Adds

Deletes

NASF on
Completion
of Planned
Projects

Change
in NASF
due to
Planned
Projects

Classroom

66,608

1,299

0

701

1,875

2,442

0

0

0

66,639

31

Laboratory

87,965

2,158

0

1,194

2,000

2,250

0

0

0

88,679

714

Office

144,309

23,968

0

20,536

9,180

6,787

245

0

0

150,379

6,070

Study

79,756

0

0

1,046

0

0

0

0

0

78,710

(1,046)

Special Use

88,378

215

0

0

79,025

56,863

0

0

0

110,755

22,377

General Use

149,710

476

0

0

3,800

234

8,334

13,635

0

175,721

26,011
500

Support

49,878

0

0

0

500

0

0

0

0

50,378

Health Care

1,004

1,692

0

1,004

0

0

0

0

0

1,692

688

Unclassified*

51,074

0

24,481

29,723

0

0

0

0

0

45,832

(5,242)

w/o Residential

718,682

29,808

24,481

54,204

96,380

68,576

8,579

13,635

0

768,785

50,103

Residential

316,984

0

0

0

0

0

0

189,078

169,930

336,132

19,148

1,035,668

29,808

24,481

54,204

96,380

68,576

8,579 202,713 169,930

1,104,917

69,251

TOTAL

Table 5.5
Base 2012 and
Projected 2023
Inventories Upon
Realization of Current
(Prior to FMP) Projects

* Unclassified includes space which is available for use but has not yet been assigned.

The Clarion campus currently has 718,682 NASF (Table 5.5) in 34 academic, student, and
institutional support buildings and 316,984 NASF of residence space in 14 residence halls
for a total of 1,035,666 NASF.

83

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Becht Hall Renovation
Over the planning period, Clarion has initiated a number of facility projects. Becht Hall is
to be renovated, providing the following programmatic elements:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪

Three classrooms and a writing center
A “One Stop Shop” for enrollment management functions
Student facilities for Academic Enrichment Services and Career Services
Office facilities for Graduate Studies, Student Affairs, and others
A Health Center

This project will involve the relocation of offices from six campus buildings, leaving most
buildings with significant amounts of unassigned space:
Admissions

Admissions

3,115 NASF vacated

100% unassigned

Carrier

Budget & Accounting
Graduate Studies
Registrar

6,607 NASF vacated

26% unassigned

Egbert

Career Services
Counseling Services
Financial Aid
Student & University Affairs

7,241 NASF vacated

86% unassigned

Keeling

Health Center

3,148 NASF vacated

32% unassigned

Ralston

Academic Enrichment
Educational Talent Search
Student Support Services

21,123 NASF vacated

65% unassigned

Still

Learning Technology
Center

862 NASF vacated

3% unassigned

This project will afford the University opportunities to re-think the use of vacated buildings
and to re-purpose many of the spaces. In sum, the Becht renovation project will add
29,808 NASF from the current 29,723 NASF of Becht unassigned space, and it will
eliminate 24,481 NASF from the University’s assigned inventory.
Tippin and Recreation Center Renovations/Expansions
A second major project for the Clarion campus will be the renovation of Tippin Gymnasium
and the addition of a natatorium. This project will result in a building with 96,380 NASF. A
new pool will also be built as an extension to the Recreation Center, adding 8,579 NASF
and resulting in a building of 49,137 NASF.

84

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Main Street Housing
Finally, two new Main Street Residence Halls will be constructed. In addition to residence
hall facilities, the project will add a coffee house, restaurant, bookstore and theatre/lecture
hall. A total of 202,713 NASF will be added to the campus inventory. The Wilkinson and
Nair Residence Halls will also be demolished, eliminating 169,930 NASF. The following
report sections consider a quantitative analysis of space needs and interpret this analysis
in terms of a comprehensive needs assessment.

5.5 SPACE NEEDS SUMMARY
2013 Needs
In 2013 the Clarion campus has a surplus of 80,682 NASF, or 8.5% of its total. This surplus
is driven by major excesses of:
▪ Vacant space (surplus of 51,074 NASF), attributable to significant obsolete
building stock
▪ Office space (surplus of 48,184 NASF), attributable to oversized offices
▪ Classroom space (surplus of 15,400 NASF), attributable to too many general
classrooms
▪ Class lab space (surplus of 11,728 NASF), attributable to too many class labs
▪ Study space (surplus of 11,065 NASF), attributable to an oversized library
These excesses are countered by significant deficiencies of:
▪ General use space (need of 21,110 NASF), which consists particularly of unmet
food, lounge/merchandising and recreation space needs
▪ Special use space (need of 15,382 NASF), consisting primarily of athletic space
needs
▪ Support space (need of 14,009 NASF)
2023 Needs
This surplus remains in 2023, at 79,595 NASF, or 7.7% of its total (refer to Graphic 5.6).
Surpluses include:
▪ Vacant space (surplus of 45,832 NASF), attributable to significant obsolete
building stock
▪ Office space (surplus of 23,824 NASF), though still a surplus, it is significantly
reduced from 2013
▪ Classroom space (surplus of 20,158 NASF), attributable and exacerbated by the
changed and hybrid pedagogy of the Clarion campus which anticipates increased
online course content and credit hour delivery. Any shift from this model will result
in increased classroom space needs not anticipated in the FMP.
▪ Class lab space (surplus of 16,934 NASF), attributable to too many class labs and
an increase over 2013
▪ Study space (surplus of 8,513 NASF), attributable to an oversized library but a
reduction from 2013

85

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Areas of significant deficiencies include:
▪ Support space (need of 20,175 NASF), driven by increasing technology support
needs
▪ Research space (need of 7,385 NASF)
Space Needs of a “Hybrid Campus”
Based upon the above sections, the Clarion campus will be developed as a hybrid campus
that supports a broad array of programs, students and instructional delivery modalities.
For Clarion, a “hybrid campus” is one where facilities programming is predicated on
pedagogies that significantly utilize online delivery, thereby lessening their need for general
classrooms but increasing the need for class labs and study space.

86

General Use2

Special Use1

2023 Need 180,595

2013 Need 172,593

2013 Exst 149,710

2023 Need 122,596

2013 Need 111,364

2013 Exst 88,378

2023 Need 126,555

2013 Need 96,125

2013 Exst 144,309
Office

14,280

11,760

6,895
Research Lab

2023 Need 64,850

2013 Need 69,342

2023 Need 46,481

2013 Need 51,208

2013 Exst 81,070
Teaching Lab

Classroom

2013 Exst 66,608

It is not yet known how these issues will impact housing needs on a residential campus.

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

2023 Need 336,132

0

Unclassified

0

51,074

2023 Need 70,553

2013 Need 63,887

2013 Exst 49,878
Support3

2,460

2,407

1. Special Use includes: Athletics, Media,
Animals and Greenhouse
2. General Use includes: Assembly, Exhibition,
Food, Daycare and Merchandising
3. Support includes: Computer, Central
Storage and Vehicular Storage

1,004

2013 Need 316,984

Graphic 5.6
Clarion campus 2013
space inventory charted
alongside 2013 need and
projected 2023 requirement

Health

2013 Need 68,691

2023 Need 70,197

Residential

Study

2013 Exst 79,756

2013 Exst 316,984

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

87

5

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

5.6 FACILITY STRENGTHS AND ISSUES
With the evolution of instructional delivery and higher education in general, the question
to be addressed by this needs assessment is Clarion’s current and future ability to serve its
students with the facilities it has and plans to add.
Of critical importance is the learning environment:
▪ The recent addition of the Science and Technology Center has significantly
enhanced instructional facilities on campus. The Clarion campus has too much
classroom space, however, and the program enrollment and instructional delivery
changes planned for this campus will reduce, not increase, demand for such space
in the future. Furthermore, classrooms are not appropriately sized to promote
active, collaborative learning, although right-sizing will result in a classroom curve
more compatible with current section demand.
▪ Most Clarion classrooms have appropriate instructional technology; less than 9%
of classroom space was indicated as having no technology.
▪ Most class labs at Clarion do not appear to have appropriate levels of instructional
technology; over 63% of the lab space was indicated as having no technology.
▪ Discipline–based labs are limited in scope and are undersized, which can have
a potential impact on Clarion’s program development and its ability to compete
for students. The clinic space associated with the Speech and Hearing Clinic could
be better integrated with instructional types of spaces to optimize professional
training.
▪ The campus has sufficient space for study and the collections, given the recent
renovation of Carlson Library. The campus, however, would benefit from a greater
number of informal study spaces in additional buildings to support collaborative
learning.
▪ The workplace, while reasonably aligned functionally, is oversized. Individual
offices for faculty and administrators tend to be large, and service and reception
areas have been designed for handling larger face-to-face pools of students. As
described in Section 4, the higher education workplace is smaller, more efficient,
and more flexible. The planned renovation of Becht Hall will co-locate enrollment
management functions and student and health services, creating a more
student-centered functionality for the campus. It will also leave several buildings
substantially vacated and hence provide opportunities for reducing the number of
campus buildings and the amount of space to be maintained.
▪ Campus life will be enhanced with planned additional and/or renovated facilities
supporting athletics and recreation, theatre, dining, and merchandising, and
additional space is not needed.
▪ More institutional support spaces for technology support, physical plant, and
central services, such as security, are needed.
These issues are detailed further in the appendices.

88

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

5

SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Graphic 5.7
Science & Technology Center,
Clarion Campus

Graphic 5.8
Carlson Library, Clarion Campus

89

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

90

CLARION CAMPUS

PLANNING GUIDELINES

6

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

Section 3 demonstrates that the University has significant facility deficiencies that range
from obsolete and failing building systems, to a number of facilities that do not meet
contemporary accessibility codes. The challenge of simply bringing these buildings to a
state of good repair is costly and does not include the alignment of these facilities with
contemporary programmatic needs.
Section 5 demonstrates just how misaligned the academic and administrative facilities are
with the University’s contemporary space needs. Unlike both residence and student life
facilities, the available capital financing options have made it difficult to effectively invest
in academic facilities, which has resulted in significant deferred maintenance.
The following sections describe how these challenges are addressed within a strategic
framework that provides flexibility, financial prudence and a path towards a dramatically
improved campus and facilities portfolio.

6.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVES
Objectives include:
▪ Create Financially and Environmentally Sustainable Facilities
▪ Create a Robust and Versatile Physical Plan
▪ Create a Unifying “University Walk” Circulation Spine
▪ Create a Daylong On-Campus Student Experience
▪ Create Weekend Programming to Encourage Residents to Stay On Campus

6.11 Create Financially and Environmentally Sustainable Facilities
▪ Strategic Rationale:
One of Clarion’s strengths is that it is a financially affordable option, with one
of the lowest accumulated bond debts of all 14 state-owned institutions. The
University must find a way to improve its campus and facilities, pursue its mission,
and still remain affordable.
▪ Planning Framework:
To maintain affordability, the University must balance investment in new facilities
while preserving as much of the existing building portfolio as possible. The
previous sections of this report have demonstrated that in most instances, existing
facilities can be maintained and incrementally improved without jeopardizing the
grandfathered state of their code-compliance requirements. These sections have
also demonstrated that in the many of the same instances, repair cost does not
equal or exceed replacement cost. Preserving these buildings and bringing them
back to a state of good repair helps the University save money and pass that
savings on to future students.

92

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

6.12 Create a Robust and Versatile Physical Plan
▪ Strategic Rationale:
The financial and physical planning framework should be flexible enough to allow
the plan to achieve realistic milestones that are also natural “pause points.”
▪ Planning framework:
The plan should be organized into distinct phases that terminate in “pause points.”
These points allow the University to gauge how conditions have changed since the
initiation of the plan and:
- Continue to move forward with the plan
- Pause
- Change direction to respond to new market and financial conditions
At each of these points the physical campus should be “complete.” This means
that at the end of each phase, the physical plan does not leave large residual and
unfinished open spaces.

6.13 Create a Unifying “University Walk” Circulation Spine
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Creating a strong campus organizing element leads to clearer campus impressions,
easier wayfinding, more chance encounters, and an obvious way to organize
capital investments.
▪ Planning Framework:
Pedestrian flow should reinforce a singular “University Walk” concept to minimize
the impact of circulation on vegetated areas and to promote impromptu interaction.
Where possible, buildings should open onto this “University Walk” in order to
increase a sense of vibrancy and chance encounters. Additionally, building design
should promote transparency to make interior activities visible to passers-by.

6.14 Create a Daylong On-Campus Student Experience
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Promoting the perception of the University campus as a vibrant, “daylong” campus
will go a long way to combat some of the perceived drawbacks of Clarion’s rural
setting.
▪ Planning Framework:
Activity in the morning starts in the residential areas, campus edges, and areas
adjacent to parking lots. It then moves inward as students populate academic and
student activity hubs. In the late afternoon this shifts back to the student activity
hubs, the library and the housing areas. Evening activity is almost exclusively
confined to these areas. The geography of the campus makes it possible to build
a more vibrant “college street” campus edge neighborhood.

93

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

6.15 Create Weekend Programming to Encourage Residents to Stay
On Campus
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Clarion’s sizable residential population should be encouraged to stay on
campus over the weekends by adding increased programming and employment
opportunities on Friday evenings, Saturdays and Sundays.
▪ Planning Framework:
While Clarion is primarily a commuter campus, the University has a significant oncampus residential population. The Borough’s Main Street and the campus remain
somewhat lively on weeknights, but they experience a significant depopulation on
the weekends. In many cases this may be unavoidable as students leave campus
for their parents’ homes and weekend jobs elsewhere in the region, but the
perceived and actual lack of weekend programming does little to entice students
to stay.

6.2 LANDSCAPE OBJECTIVES
Objectives include:
▪ Create a Compelling and Unique Campus Environment
▪ Create a Cohesive Campus Landscape
▪ Utilize and Highlight Native Species
▪ Emphasize Seasonal Interest

6.21 Create a Compelling, Unique and Progressive Campus Environment
▪ Strategic Rationale:
The campus’s dramatic terrain, varied zones/neighborhoods and extensive
woodlands make it one of the University’s most compelling and competitive
resources. Its natural beauty is unmatched by many of its regional peers; these
positive characteristics should be protected and reinforced.
▪ Planning Framework:
Following the strength of the University’s academic programs and faculty, the
physical campus is one of the University’s most important assets. Though not
fully realized as such, much of the existing campus can be characterized as the
interplay between cultivated and natural landscapes. Investment should reinforce
this narrative with the strategic positioning of new buildings to organize open space
and restore woodlands. This should be accompanied by significant investment in
landscape features such as infill vegetation, public gathering spaces and clear
circulation. The natural beauty of the campus is complemented by a progressive
and contemporary approach to landscape and building design.

94

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CAMPLUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

Graphic 6.1
The campus’s topography,
landscaped areas and
mature trees are compelling
features of the university

95

6

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

6.22 Create a Cohesive Campus Environment
▪ Strategic Rationale:
The campus should have a consistent (though not restrictive) palette of materials
and plantings to unify the landscape.
▪ Planning Framework:
The use of a unified palette of landscape materials and plant species can knit
the different parts of the campus together and provide continuity among campus
spaces. It can also help minimize operating/maintenance expenses, and create a
backdrop for unique spaces to stand out. One approach is to create an arboretum,
but contrast individual non-native plantings with large clusters of native species.

6.23 Utilize and Highlight Native Species and Stewardship
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Native species should be heavily used to highlight and inform ideas of regionalism
and local environmental stewardship.
▪ Planning Framework:
The use of native plant species acknowledges the history of northwest Pennsylvania
and the Appalachian Mountains. Sustainable practices, such as managing storm
water runoff, using strategic vegetation (such as increasing tree canopy for shade),
emphasizing a palette of native plant materials, utilizing recycled materials and
replacing unusable lawn areas with lower maintenance and more habitat-friendly
plantings can benefit the campus in many ways. The campus’s “green” initiatives
can be highlighted with educational signage and academic programming to build
an awareness and appreciation of the natural environment.

6.24 Emphasize Seasonal Interest
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Campus activity generally occurs between the fall and spring seasons. Therefore,
landscapes that offer seasonal interest—particularly during the winter months—
are generally more successful.
▪ Planning Framework:
Seasonal interest can be achieved through the use of evergreens, trees with
interesting bark or branch structure, early flowering plants and the use of plants
that color late in the fall season. This approach complements existing regional
second-home usage and fall foliage tourism. The establishment of a campus wide
arboretum is recommended to celebrate and help manage existing and new trees
at Clarion University.

96

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

6.3 BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURAL OBJECTIVES
Objectives include:
▪ Create a Facilities Portfolio That Supports an Active, Always-Learning Platform
▪ Visually Connect Open Spaces with Interior Activity Centers
▪ Curate the University’s Material Palette
▪ Go Blue and (LEED) Gold

6.31 Create a Facilities Portfolio That Supports an Active,
Always-Learning Platform
▪ Strategic Rationale:
The University’s facilities portfolio should incorporate the principles of active
learning platforms across all space types—not only classrooms—in order to foster
a curious and engaged campus community that is “always learning.”
▪ Planning Framework:
The principles of active learning are detailed in Section 4. Applied beyond
the classroom, these principles have the ability to transform purely functional
circulation space into connective and collaborative space that serves as an
essential compliment to formal classrooms. Ideally, areas for informal gathering
and conversation are liberally located across all building areas, particularly at
nodes where chance encounters are likely to occur.

6.32 Visually Connect Open Spaces with Interior Activity Centers
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Visually accessible spaces bolster a shared awareness of campus activities,
institutional vitality and security.
▪ Planning Framework:
Section 7 details where new buildings should be located and how they should be
oriented to better define and activate open spaces on the campus. These buildings
should be designed so that interior activity centers, such as meeting rooms, group
study areas, major circulation routes and cafeterias, look out onto principal open
spaces. The potential to activate open spaces by relocating internal activity centers
to more visible locations should also be considered during any major renovation.

97

6

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

Graphic 6.02
Ballentine Hall

Graphic 6.03
Eagle Commons

98

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

6

CAMPUS PLANNING GUIDELINES

6.33 Curate the University’s Material Palette
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Like the approach to landscape, it can be useful to have a consistent (though not
restrictive) material palette across all campus facilities. This contextual approach,
however, serves as a background for a select number of “landmark” focal
points.
▪ Planning Framework:
The University’s architectural palette should reinforce historic materials in their
use, but not necessarily in their manner of treatment. For example, a new building
design may echo the stone base of Founders Hall, but not attempt to replicate
the rustication. It should be noted that the purpose of selecting from a palette of
existing materials is not to create a homogenous campus image, but to create a
background from which to celebrate the University’s history and evolution.

6.34 Go Blue and (LEED) Gold
▪ Strategic Rationale:
Like the landscape, buildings are an invaluable tool for educating the campus
community on the importance of environmental responsibility.
▪ Planning Framework:
All buildings should be designed to a baseline Leadership in Environmental and
Energy Design [LEED] Gold designation, with consideration for LEED Platinum
designation when possible and financially appropriate. Buildings designed to these
standards are not only more environmentally responsible—they are also evidence
of the University’s commitment to progressive values, regional leadership and
planning for the future.

99

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

100

CLARION CAMPUS

MASTER PLAN SUMMARY

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

102

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

7.1 MASTER PLAN SUMMARY
This section provides an overview of the FMP initiatives. The initiatives seek to:
▪ Prioritize change to the buildings with most need (Section 3)
▪ Adapt the campus to changing pedagogies (Section 4)
▪ Better align the campus with its identified space needs (Section 5)
▪ Realize the FMP campus planning objectives (Section 6)

Graphic 7.01 (overleaf)
Campus on completion of the FMP
(c.2033)

The FMP is divided into three standalone phases of development:
▪ 2013 to 2018
▪ 2018 to 2023
▪ 2023 to 2033
Graphic 7.01 (previous page) represents the campus on completion of the FMP.

103

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.02
Existing Campus (2013)

104

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.03
Campus Envisaged by Facilities
Master Plan c.2033
New building
Renovation (Major)
Renovation (Minor)
Retained building
Demolished building

105

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.04
FMP Spatial Framework
University Walk
Main Street
Campus Woodlands
Sloped Lawns
Main Parking Zones
Ridge Line
Views to Landscape
Vehicular Entry
Ceremonial Entry

106

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

7.11 FMP Major Moves
The initiatives within the FMP, while responding to individual building and landscape
opportunities, are structured to achieve the following spatial objectives:
▪ Establish Three Distinct Aesthetic Zones
Three aesthetic zones have been identified in response to the existing characteristics
of the Campus. These zones fulfill different functions and their identity will be
strengthened through a combination of landscape treatment and new buildings.
The zones are:
- University Walk – This is the primary pedestrian route through the campus
connecting the majority of its academic buildings. A wide, distinctive and
continuous pathway will be created with landscape features that celebrate
the route and distinguish it as the main spine of the campus. Modern design
features and street furniture will help communicate Clarion as a forward
thinking university.
- Main Street – The primary connection between the University and downtown
Clarion, Main Street is the most visible part of the campus and its main
gateway. Interventions will be heritage-led, providing aesthetic connections to
downtown Clarion and showing the University to be respectful of its neighbors.
- Campus Woodlands – One of the greatest strengths of the University is its
landscape setting. The treatment of this zone will be simple, sustainable and
natural in respect of the existing woodlands.
▪ Consolidate Parking
Primary parking lots are kept to the edges of the campus where they are easily
accessed, but largely hidden from, Main Street or Greenville Avenue.
▪ Open Hill Top and Landscape Views
A ridgeline runs across the campus resulting in several attractive long views of the
surrounding countryside. The FMP seeks to protect these views and create a pair
of sloped lawns as focal points from which to enjoy them.
▪ Structure Open Space
New buildings are positioned and oriented to front the key open spaces within the
campus and Main Street.
Graphic 7.04 identifies the three aesthetic zones, consolidated parking areas and key views
from the ridgeline, and Graphic 7.05 identifies the building force lines which structure the
open spaces of the campus. In addition, the campus landscape strategy (Section 7.3)
represents one of the FMP’s most important major moves.

107

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.2 STRUCTURING OPEN SPACE
The renovation of existing buildings and the construction of new ones will seek to enhance
the definition of the Clarion’s open spaces. Force lines (sometimes referred to as streetwalls)
are highlighted on Graphic 7.05 which show how buildings within the FMP should be
oriented. The fronts of buildings should run along these lines with entrances in prominent
positions, a relatively high level of fenestration, and, where possible, ground floor uses
which are visible from outside.

108

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.05
Facilities Master Plan Force Lines

Force Line / Streetwall

109

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.3 APPROACH TO LANDSCAPE
Improving Clarion’s landscape quality will be an ongoing objective and, over the lifetime
of the FMP, there will be many opportunities for enhancement projects. These will be
implemented with regard to the following strategic themes:
▪ Establish a Consistent Material Palette within and across Aesthetic Zones
Hardscape features for individual landscape projects should be chosen from a defined,
constant palette to provide a consistent positive identity throughout the campus.
Consistent materials include signage, railings, lighting, paving and furnishings
(benches, trash/recycling, tables, bike racks, etc.). The materials list/palette should be
consistent for most items across the whole campus while providing lighting and limited
paving and furnishing variations for the three aesthetic zones which contribute to their
distinct visual identities. The locations of the aesthetic zones are shown on Graphic 7.01
and are University Walk, Main Street and Campus Woodlands.
▪ Create a Network of Named Open Spaces
Buildings and landscape treatment will be designed to provide a connected network
of defined open spaces. These spaces will fit within a hierarchy of scale and function,
ranging from significant gathering spaces which serve the entire campus to intimate
courtyards for specific buildings. Each open space will be named to elevate their
importance and make the campus more legible to users. Additionally, naming spaces
will provide opportunities for donors to contribute to or sponsor specific landscape
enhancements and will aid the programming of outdoor events and meetings.
▪ Reinforce a Clear Hierarchy of Pedestrian Circulation Routes
University Walk forms the main pedestrian spine of the campus and its landscape
treatment will signify its primary status within the hierarchy of pedestrian routes. The
primary pathway will have a consistent width, which is wider than adjoining routes, and
use unique furnishings and materials. When the walk intersects other paths, the walk
will be the primary, continuous and distinguished route. Consistent tree species should
be used along the spine, marked by the use of a dominant, but not single, species.

110

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.06
Lighting and Furniture Strategy
across Aesthetic Zones

University Walk
Lighting:
▪ Only column light
▪ Runs in even spacing
from Main Street past
Tippin - coordinated with
“datum trees”
▪ All other lighting in zone
is discreet/hidden
▪ Occasional up-lit trees
▪ Silver/aluminum finish
▪ No bollard lights
▪ LED
Furniture:
▪ Contemporary style
▪ Silver/aluminum finish (to
match lighting)
▪ Wood planking
▪ Mounted/anchored legs

Main Street
Lighting:
▪ Identical to existing
Clarion Borough
standard
▪ Black paint finish
▪ Can hold banners
▪ No bollard lights
▪ LED

Campus Woodlands
Lighting:
▪ Maintains existing light
standard
▪ Grey concrete post
▪ Can hold banners along
(campus edge only)
▪ No bollard lights
▪ LED

Furniture:
▪ Heritage style
▪ Black paint finish
▪ Wood planking
▪ Clean lines, balance
between heritage and
contemporary style
▪ Spread legs

Furniture:
▪
▪
▪
▪

Contemporary style
Silver/aluminum finish
No wood planking
Spread legs

111

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

▪ Adopt a Campus-Wide Planting Strategy
Graphic 7.07 programmatically splits the campus into loosely defined landscape zones
within a campus-wide planting strategy. These zones respond to the development pattern
of the campus and its existing landscape character. Individual landscape enhancement
projects will adhere to these landscape zones (the boundaries of which are not fixed).
▪ Reinforce the Campus Edge
A cohesive character along the campus perimeter is important for establishing a positive
image from adjacent roadways and neighborhoods. The treatment of the campus edge
will include:
- Stone walls at significant gateways which follow a standard campus design
- The addition of high canopy street trees where gaps exist, with the exception
of locations such as Greenville Lawn, which will maintain a more visible street
presence
- The regular spacing of pedestrian lighting (of consistent design), with street banners
used to advertise the University and extend its identity within the streetscape
- The extension of the streetscape design established within Downtown Clarion
along Main Street
▪ Accommodate a Phased Approach to Implementation
The landscape recommendations of this master plan will be implemented over many
years as new buildings are developed, areas of the campus are reconfigured and as
funding becomes available. The FMP outlines a number of significant landscape projects
during the phasing milestones of 2018, 2023 and 2033. Additionally, alumni and
donors will want to contribute their mark to this landscape plan. To the extent possible,
the University will seek to match donors with FMP identified initiatives. Consideration
will be given to planting some new trees early on to take advantage of their growth
over time. Young trees are relatively inexpensive and a few planted in 2015 will make a
significant positive impact to the campus in 2033. Consideration does need to be given,
however, to only planting in areas likely not to be disturbed by future construction.

112

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.07
Landscape planting strategy

Hardscape
Formal Lawn
Informal Lawn
Light Woodlands
Woodlands
Evergreen Stands
Campus Edge

113

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

▪ Extend and Celebrate the Forest and its Seasonal Color
Rather than drawing a distinct boundary between the forested natural landscape and
campus’ cultivated landscape (as currently exists along the northern perimeter of the
campus), the idea of the forest should extend into the campus. In most instances this
will be more of a figurative expression rather than a literal one, but it will allow for a
stronger connection between the campus and the surrounding natural environment.
Seasonal interest will be intensified by fulfilling the following requirements for new tree
planting:
- Evergreen Foundation: Evergreen trees will provide a green “constant” throughout
the seasons and a backdrop to other plant materials during specific seasons.
On the hilltop and northern part of the campus, evergreens will be dominant,
accentuating the campus’s landform and providing a green backdrop throughout
the year.
- Fall Color: Deciduous trees with outstanding fall leaf color will provide visual
interest along key sightlines and throughout the campus. In particular, tree species
with yellow fall leaf color will delineate the key pedestrian spine of the campus
(University Walk).
- Spring Color: Spring color in the form of flowering trees and shrubs will provide
visual interest throughout the campus, particularly along woodland edges and
adjacent to gathering areas and building entrances. Unlike fall color, used to
distinguish different areas of the campus, spring color will be used to unify the
campus.
- Winter Interest: Winter interest includes plant materials with interesting forms, bark
textures and colors, leaves that persist late into the season, and colorful berries.
For example, trees with light colored bark against a backdrop of evergreens can
be visually powerful.
Graphic 7.08 indicates where tree species should be planted within the campus to
enhance its seasonal color.
To celebrate and help curate Clarion’s trees and woodlands, a campus-wide arboretum
has been established as part of the FMP. This provides the opportunity to better utilize
the campus’s living collection of trees for scientific study, landscape donor opportunities
and an attraction for visitors. A detailed arboretum plan and program need to be
developed. Points to consider include the predominate use of native tree species, a
consistent identification system with tree tags, interpretive signage and brochures,
online links to the University’s website and how built development projects can expand
the arboretum.

114

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.08
Seasonal interest tree planting
plan
Brilliant fall color along
pedestrian spine - species
to include: Thornless
Honeylocust, Ginkgo, Tulip
Tree, Littleleaf Linden
Species on Hilltop Oval
and Grove to serve as
vibrant accents in fall when
contrasted against a backdrop
of evergreens - species to
include: Shagbark Hickory,
White Birch, Tulip Tree
Sugar Maple
Red Maple
Red Oak
Mixed deciduous shade trees
- species to include: White
Oak, Red Oak, Scarlet Oak,
Pin Oak, Black Oak, London
Plane Tree
Mixed ornamental understory
trees to provide spring and fall
interest along pedestrian ways
and at the termini of desirable
sight lines - species to
include: Eastern Redbud, River
Birch, Flowering Dogwood;
Crabapples and Cherries may
be used sparingly in formal
areas

115

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.09
Tree species within the seasonal
interest tree planting plan

116

Gingko

Tulip Tree

Honeylocust

Sugar Maple

Sugar Maple

Red Maple

Black Oak

Pin Oak

London Plane

Crabapple

Flowering Dogwood

Cherry

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Littleleaf Linden

White Birch

Shagbark Hickory

Red Maple

Red Oak

Red Oak

Seasonal Color

Mixed Deciduous Shade

White Oak

Red Oak

Scarlet Oak

Mixed Ornamental Understory

River Birch

Eastern Redbud

Cherry

117

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.4 PARKING AND ACCESS
7.41 Parking
The FMP significantly alters parking within the campus, this includes:
▪ Expanding the size of Lots E, F, N, R, Rhea, 6 and 8
▪ Reducing the size of Lots P, 5, 7, 9 and 11
▪ Eliminating Lots H, K, S, U, Z, 12, 14 and 15
▪ Creating Lots Hilltop Circle, Residence East and Residence West
The cumulative impact of these alterations is a slight increase in parking:

Permit Spaces:
Metered Spaces:
ADA Spaces:
Total Spaces:

2013

FMP / 2033

1,691
100
77
1,868

1,626
206
80
1,912

The most significant change is the increase in size of Lot R to the south and Lots F, 6 and 8
to the northeast of the campus.
At the southern end, Lot R will increase in size from 50 to 416 spaces (C20). This facilitates
the closure of neighboring lots for conversion to landscaped open space and provides a
consolidated, high-capacity, parking area which is easily accessed from Greenville and
Wilson Avenues.
At the northeastern edge of the campus, Lots F, 6 and 8 cumulatively expand from 230 to
546 spaces. These lots are easily accessed from Main Street and Wood Street via a new
connecting road (C16).
The expansion of the south and northeast lots will keep the primary parking zones at the
edge of the campus (where they are easily accessed), while limiting vehicular movements
within the main collegiate areas.

118

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.10
Parking within the completed FMP

Lot Name
Total Spaces
ADA Spaces
Lot 8
22

0

184

0

New or
Retained Lot

Lot 15
42
0

0

2013#

0

2033#

Demolished
Lot

119

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.42 Vehicle Service Routes
Graphic 7.11 illustrates the vehicle access strategy for the campus. There are three
classifications of route within the FMP:
▪ Full Access – can be used by all vehicles and are the primary routes to parking lots
and building service zones
▪ Service/Emergency Access – only suitable for university service trucks and
emergency vehicles; these are primarily pedestrian routes but will be reinforced
and proportioned to handle vehicle movements; access for emergency vehicles will
be required along University Walk and turning zones will need to be considered
when placing trees and street furniture
▪ Light Service – university service vehicles only; these could be smaller vehicles
providing assistance to those with reduced mobility as well as maintenance vehicles
Key points to consider when implementing the FMP initiatives (numerically referenced to
Graphic 7.11) include:
1. The walkway through the lawn near Still (B4) to the front of Still Hall should
accommodate emergency vehicles
2. A connecting route for emergency and service vehicles between Lot 5 and Merle
Road is required
3. The new curved ramp at Seminary Plaza should be wide enough for light
maintenance vehicles
4. Emergency vehicles will need to turn west from University Walk to the pathway
through the grove near the library (C12); space will also need to be provided for
them to perform a 3-point turn in front of Carlson Library
5. The existing steps to the south side of Carlson Library will need to be removed and
the path made suitable for vehicles
6. Service vehicles will have access to University Walk; a spur connecting to Silar
Road should be included
7. Service vehicles will have access to curbcuts and walkways directly from Greenville
and Wilson Avenues; the design of these curbcuts will need to discourage use by
the general public

120

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.11
Vehicle service routes within the
FMP

Full vehicular access

1
University service and
emergency vehicles only

2

University service
vehicles only

3
4
5

6

121

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.43 ADA Access
The steep topography of much of the Clarion campus poses a significant challenge to
those with limited mobility. The FMP seeks to enhance accessibility by utilizing the internal
circulation of buildings to navigate changes in level where possible and through the
provision of routes with gradients which meet ADA standards. These routes are shown
on Graphic 7.12 and must be considered when implementing landscape enhancements
across the campus. Key points to consider (numerically referenced to Graphic 7.12)
include:
1. The demolition of Carrier Hall and landscaping of the site (A17) should provide a
more gently sloped alternative to Arnold Avenue
2. The new curved ramp as part of Seminary Plaza landscape initiative (A13) must be
ADA compliant
3. The refurbishment of Egbert Hall (A8) provides an accessible route between
University Walk and Recreation Slope (C9) and Hilltop Oval and Grove (C15)
4. The earth forming within the Chandler Drive (C8) and Recreation Slope (C9)
initiatives must provide an ADA compliant route to Hilltop Oval and Grove (C15)
5. The Science and Technology Center provides an alternative route to the lawn in
front of the building
6. The expansion to Tippin Hall (A4) provides an alternative route to University Walk
from Payne Street
Accessible parking spaces will be located as near to building entrances and the ADA
compliant routes through the campus as possible.

122

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.12
ADA access within the FMP

ADA route (external)
ADA route (internal)

P

ADA parking

1

2

3
4

5

6

123

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.5 MASTER PLAN PHASES
7.51 Master Plan at 2018 (Phase A)
This phase primarily incorporates on-going initiatives and lays the groundwork for more
substantial initiatives found in the 2018-2023 phase of the FMP. This phase includes a
number of projects soon to be under construction or already significantly into the planning
and design process. Other projects identified within the FMP are those which meet urgent
space or campus needs or are target buildings in the most need of renovation. Highlights
include the:
▪ Reorganization of the northern portion of campus to include housing on Main
Street
▪ Expansion and enhancement of the University’s athletic and recreation facilities
▪ The first two stages of the University Walk project - Seminary Plaza (A14) and
Arnold Avenue (A20)
▪ Addressing of most pressing deferred maintenance
▪ Creation of prototype classrooms to help guide later renovations and experiment
with new teaching pedagogies (Carlson Library, Level A)
▪ Removal of obsolete, domestic-scale building inventory
Graphic 7.10
FMP Initiatives 2013 - 2018

Number Name
A1
Becht Hall
A2
A3
A4

A13

Main Street Housing 2 New building (in design)
Tippin Hall
Renovation and extension of existing building
(construction pending)
Rec Center Expansion Renovation and extension of existing building
(construction pending)
Stevens Hall 1
Accessibility enhancements to the existing building
Moore Hall 1
Minor addition to building to enhance its accessibility
Egbert Hall
Renovation of existing building for administration
Carlson Library
Creation of prototype classrooms on Level A
Gemmell Center 1
Aesthetic enhancements to the interior of the building
Ralston Hall
Minor renovation of the building for health sciences
Greenville Ave
Landscape enhancement project
Campus Edge
Admissions Hall
Minor renovation of the building for public safety

A14

Seminary Plaza

A15
A16
A17
A18
A19

Nair Hall
Wilkinson Hall
Carrier Hall
Thorn I
Thorn II

A20

Arnold Avenue

A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12

124

Description
Renovation of existing building for student services
(construction pending)
Main Street Housing 1 New building (in design)

Major landscape project to realize the first phase of
University Walk
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building
Landscape enhancement of 9th Av. (phase two of
University Walk)

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.13
Facilities Master Plan Phase One,
2013 - 2018
New building
Renovation (Major)
Renovation (Minor)
Retained building
Demolished building

125

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.52 Master Plan at 2023 (Phase B)
Beginning in 2018, Phase B includes projects of relatively high importance, with much of
the planning and fund raising occurring during Phase A. Highlights include:
▪ Construction of a new health sciences building
▪ Major renovation of Still Hall
▪ Continuation of deferred maintenance
▪ Continuation of updating of the University’s facilities inventory
▪ Removal of obsolete building inventory

Graphic 7.12
FMP Initiatives 2019 - 2023

Number Name
B1
Lower Grove

B10

Description
Landscape enhancement tied to the renovations of
Tippin Hall and the Rec Center (the third phase of the
University Walk project)
Moore Hall 2
Renovation of the building
Still Hall
Major renovation of the building
Lawn near Still
Landscape improvements either side of Main Street
near Still Hall
Gemmell Center 2
Renovation of the building
Hilltop Pavilion and Landscape enhancement project
Firepit
Health Sciences
Construction of the University’s planned new health
Building
sciences building
Stevens Hall 2
Minor renovation of the building teaching spaces
Hart Chapel
Renovation as a large active-learning classroom and
blackbox event space
Davis Hall
Minor renovation of the building

B11
B12
B13

Ralston Hall
Strohman
Keeling

B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9

126

Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.14
Facilities Master Plan Phase Two,
2019 - 2023
New building
Renovation (Major)
Renovation (Minor)
Retained building
Demolished building

127

7

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN

7.53 Master Plan at 2033 (Phase C)
Beginning in 2023, Phase C addresses longer term space needs including:
▪ Replacement of outdated housing with new buildings
▪ Major renovations of Marwick-Boyd and Becker Hall
▪ Establishment of a grove at the hilltop, which will include the campus’s water tower
as a prominent feature, and Recreation Slope as a signature pair of connected
open spaces (C8 and C15)
▪ Completion of the University Walk landscape project
▪ Re-organization of parking with new north and south vehicular entries and better
defined ceremonial gateways
Graphic 7.14
FMP Initiatives 2024 - 2033

128

Number
C1
C2
C3

Name
Hilltop Residence (A)
Public Safety Building
Lawn near Grunenwald

Description
New housing residence
New purpose built public safety building
Landscape improvements connecting Lower Grove
(B1) and Seminary Plaza (A13); phase four of
University Walk
Major renovation of the existing building
Demolition of the building
Major renovation of the existing building
Demolition of the building
Landscape enhancement project
Landscape enhancement project
New classrooms in basement of building
New purpose built facilities building
Landscape enhancement project
Demolition of the building
Landscape enhancement project
Landscape enhancement project
Landscape and vehicular access enhancement
project
Landscape enhancement project
Demolition of the building
Demolition of the building

C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16

Marwick-Boyd
Admissions Hall
Becker Hall
Ballentine Hall
Chandler Drive & Lot E
Recreation Slope
Harvey Hall
Facilities Building
Grove near Library
Givan Hall
Lot 11
Hilltop Oval & Grove
North Access & Lot 6

C17
C18
C19

Hilltop Connector
McEntire Building
McEntire Warehouse

C20

South Access & Lot R

C21
C22

Grove near Marwick
Wood Street

Landscape and vehicular access enhancement
project
Landscape enhancement project
Landscape enhancement project

C23

Hilltop Residence (B)

New housing residence

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

7

MASTER PLAN

Graphic 7.15
Facilities Master Plan Phase Three,
2024 - 2033
New building
Renovation (Major)
Renovation (Minor)
Retained building
Demolished building

129

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

130

CLARION CAMPUS

MASTER PLAN INITIATIVES

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8.1 PHASE A INITIATIVES (2013-2018)
A1 – BECHT HALL
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Becht Hall is to be the consolidated home of most student services with programs relocated
from:
▪ 21,123 NASF from Ralston Hall (which will be 65% vacant)
▪ 7,241 NASF from Egbert Hall (which will be 86% vacant)
▪ 5,178 NASF from Carrier Hall (which will be 41% vacant)
▪ 3,148 NASF from Keeling Hall (which will be 32% vacant)
▪ 3,115 NASF from Admissions (which will be 100% vacant)
These co-located programs will help to provide a more effective and efficient student
service experience as well as to enliven the center of campus.
Massing, Heritage and Architectural Considerations:
As an interior renovation, this initiative respects the curious Spanish Mission-style
architectural heritage of Becht Hall.
Landscape Considerations:
There are no significant landscape elements to this initiative.
Servicing Considerations:
Becht Hall will continue to be serviced from the east (or back side) of the building. Future
work reconstructing the existing access road (C8, Chandler Drive and Lot E) should provide
better definition of parking and service areas.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This building was vacant at the initiation of the FMP in preparation for the planned
renovation. It enables the:
▪ Renovation of Egbert Hall (A8)
▪ Partial renovation of Ralston Hall (A11)
▪ Eventual full demolition of Ralston Hall (B11)
▪ Partial renovation of Admissions (A13)
▪ Eventual demolition of Admissions (C5)
Graphic 8.01
Becht Hall location

W

Seminary
Plaza

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

Carlson Library
Becht Hall
(A1)

132

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

8

2013 NASF Per FMP NASF
Classroom

0*

1,299

Class Laboratory

0*

2,158

Office

0*

24,043

General Use

0*

476

Healthcare

0*

1,831

Total NASF

0*

29,807

51,280

51,280

GSF

*Building vacant at initiation of the FMP

Graphic 8.02
Becht Hall

133

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A2 – MAIN STREET HOUSING 1
Recommended for New Construction
Proposed Programming:
In order to remain competitive in the student housing marketplace, the University realizes
that it needs to replace most of its obsolete dormitory stock which still has gang toilets
and showers, few or poorly integrated group study areas and no suites. The Campus
View and Valley View housing facilities have made significant strides in regaining market
competitiveness, but the large and out-of-date Nair and Wilkinson Halls remain moored
in the past. Main Street Housing 1 [MSH1] serves to replace these halls and will bolster the
campus’s attractiveness to prospective students, and improve recruitment and retention.
Additionally, the ground floor programming will engage MSH1 and extend downtown
towards campus. The on-campus coffee store (Starbucks) will be relocated to Main Street
from Eagle Commons, and the building will feature conferencing space and an events
center.

Residential
Special Use
Total NASF
GSF

2013 NASF
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

Per FMP NASF
98,458
10,254
108,712
147,470

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The Main Street Housing facilities are designed to establish and extend the streetwall as it
exists to the west along Main Street through the Borough’s downtown. In order to avoid the
oppressive monotony of an unmodulated four and five-story mass, the façades are to be
articulated with modest bump-outs and recesses that mimic the changing storefronts and
masses of the historic Main Street. Additionally, MSH1 stops short of Arnold Avenue on its
western side in order to frame the open space in front of Carrier Hall (this is the future B4,
Lawn near Still).
Landscape Considerations:
The Main Street Housing buildings will dramatically change the character of this portion of
Main Street and the experience of traveling through campus by car. This portion of Main
Street will transform from a bucolic “campus pastoral” setting to a largely urban one. The
landscape approach of this portion of campus is to extend the Borough’s lighting standard
found elsewhere along Main Street, and to select furniture standards that balance the
Borough’s historicism with the University’s contemporary aesthetic.
Servicing Considerations:
MSH1 is to be serviced on its southwest corner from Lot 5. Efforts should be taken to
mitigate the appearance of this area from passersby who are moving between Lot 5 and
Main Street.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
MSH1 and MSH2 are anticipated to be built concurrently. The construction of MSH1
will remove a significant number of parking spaces. Though the campus has a more
than adequate functional parking capacity, this does not always align with the Borough’s
expectations. Consideration needs to be given to the dislocation of parking while MSH1
is in construction. MSH1 and MSH2 enable the demolition of Nair (A15) and Wilkinson
Halls (A16).
134

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.03
Main Street Housing 1 location

MA

Lot 5

IN

ST

RE

ET

Main Street
Housing 1 (A2)

Graphic 8.04
Main Street Housing 1

Main Street Housing 1 (A2)

135

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A3 – MAIN STREET HOUSING 2
Recommended for New Construction
Proposed Programming:
In order to remain competitive in the student housing marketplace, the University realizes
that it needs to replace most of its obsolete dormitory stock which still has gang toilets
and showers, few or poorly integrated group study areas and no suites. The Campus
View and Valley View housing facilities have made significant strides in regaining market
competitiveness, but the large and out-of-date Nair and Wilkinson Halls remain moored
in the past. Main Street Housing 2 [MSH2] serves to replace these halls and will bolster the
campus’s attractiveness to prospective students, and improve recruitment and retention.
Additionally, the ground floor programming will serve to engage Main Street and extend
downtown towards campus.

Residential
Special Use
Total NASF
GSF

2013 NASF
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

Per FMP NASF
90,620
3,381
94,001
114,932

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The Main Street Housing facilities are designed to establish and extend the streetwall as it
exists to the west along Main Street through the Borough’s downtown. In order to avoid the
oppressive monotony of an unmodulated four and five-story mass, the façades are to be
articulated with modest bump-outs and recesses that mimic the changing storefronts and
masses of the historic Main Street. From Main Street, MSH2 appear one-story shorter than
MSH1. Additionally, MSH2 stops short of Still Hall on its western side in order to frame the
open space in front of Still Hall (this is the future B4, Lawn near Still).
Landscape Considerations:
The Main Street Housing buildings will dramatically change the character of this portion of
Main Street and the experience of traveling through campus by car. This portion of Main
Street will transform from a bucolic “campus pastoral” setting to a largely urban one. The
landscape approach of this portion of campus is to extend the Borough’s lighting standard
found elsewhere along Main Street, and to select furniture standards that balance the
Borough’s historicism with the University’s contemporary aesthetic.
Servicing Considerations:
MSH2 is to be serviced from Lot N, which will be reconstructed as part of this initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
MSH1 and MSH2 are anticipated to be built concurrently. The construction of MSH2 will
temporarily remove Lot N from service during construction. Though the campus has a more
than adequate functional parking capacity, this does not always align with the Borough’s
expectations. Consideration needs to be given to the dislocation of parking while MSH2
is in construction. MSH1 and MSH2 enable the demolition of Nair (A15) and Wilkinson
Halls (A16).

136

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.05
Main Street Housing 2 location

Lawn near Still
Lot N
Lot 3

MA

IN

ST

RE

ET

Main Street
Housing 2 (A3)

Graphic 8.06
Main Street Housing 2

Main Street Housing 2 (A3)

137

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A4 – TIPPIN HALL EXPANSION
Recommended for Renovation and Expansion
Proposed Programming:
The existing programming of Tippin Hall is to be expanded with a new athletic natatorium
and a new practice gymnasium (which replaces the existing natatorium).

Classroom
Class Laboratory
Office
Special Use
General Use
Support
Total NASF
GSF

2013 NASF
2,442
2,696
6,514
56,417
234
0
68,303
101,990

Per FMP NASF
1,875
2,719
8,907
78,579
3,800
500
96,380
134,130

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Tippin Hall’s exterior wall systems are to be largely replaced with new systems. Much of
this will be of glass and a stark departure from the existing opaque brick walls. These new
glass facades (echoed with the largely glass expansion to the Recreation Center, A5) will
provide better visual connectivity between indoor and outdoor activity environments, and
help portray the Clarion campus as a vibrant place.
Landscape Considerations:
The additions encroach on existing open space and services routes, including severing the
campus’s primary north-south vehicular route (which is not to be replaced). Due to funding
limitations, no significant landscaping is included in this initiative, but rather is included in
initiative B1 (Lower Grove).
Servicing Considerations:
Servicing of the expanded Tippin Hall will be from an expanded service court off of
Greenville Avenue.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This project does not require any enabling initiatives and was in planning upon the initiation
of the FMP. It does not enable any future initiatives as identified by the FMP.

138

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.07
Expanded footprint of Tippin Hall
viewed in relation to final phase of
FMP, including adjacent landscape
projects Lower Grove (B1) and
Lawn near Grunenwald (C3)
Lawn near
Grunenwald (C3)

Extension

Tippin Hall
Lower Grove
(B1)
Extension
PAY N E S T R E E T

Graphic 8.08
Tippin Hall in 2013

139

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A5 – RECREATION CENTER EXPANSION
Recommended for Renovation and Expansion
Proposed Programming:
The existing programming of the Recreation Center is to be expanded with a new
recreational natatorium.

Office
General Use
Total NASF
GSF

2013 NASF
509
40,049
40,558
48,660

Per FMP NASF
754
48,383
49,137
58,280

Massing and Architectural Considerations
The expansion will feature a significant amount of glazed facades, providing visual
connectivity between indoor and outdoor activity environments and helping to portray the
Clarion campus as a vibrant place. It will also relate to the Tippin Hall expansion (A4).
Landscape Considerations:
The extension encroaches onto an existing car lot and open space. Due to funding
limitations, no significant landscaping is included in this initiative, but rather is included in
initiative B1 (Lower Grove).
Servicing Considerations:
Service of the Recreation Center will remain largely as it exists from the south.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This project does not require any enabling initiatives and was in planning upon the initiation
of the FMP. It does not enable any future initiatives as identified by the FMP.

140

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.09
Expanded footprint of the
Recreation Center viewed in
relation to final phase of FMP,
including Tippin Hall expansion
(A4) and Lower Grove (B1)
Tippin Hall (A4)
Lower Grove
(B1)

Recreation
Center A5
Lot 16
Extension

Grove near
Marwick (C21)

Graphic 8.10
Recreation Center

141

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A6 – STEVENS HALL 1
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
In 2014, Clarion University successfully applied for $5 million in state funds to implement
accessibility enhancements to key buildings across the campus, including Stevens Hall.
This project will not alter the programming of the building, but instead focus on improving
the building’s compliance with the American Disabilities Act.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
No alterations to the existing massing are proposed. However, care should be given to the
detailing of accessibility improvements to avoid purely utilitarian upgrades which could
create a sterile aesthetic rather than a collegiate one. Due to the building having internal
load-bearing masonry walls, increasing door widths will be costly and funds will need
to be spent judiciously. Improvements to vertical circulation (stairs and elevators) should
remain within the existing envelop to the extent possible.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The renovation and reconfiguration of nearly 9,000 SF of Stevens Hall’s classrooms is
proposed as initiative B8 of the FMP. The accessibility enhancements as part of initiative
A6 should exclude any areas which will be impacted by the later classroom renovations.

Graphic 8.11
Stevens Hall location and
photographs
Stevens
Hall (A6)

UN

IV

ER

SI

TY

W

AL

K

Carlson
Library

142

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A7 – MOORE HALL 1
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
In 2014, Clarion University successfully applied for $5 million in state funds to implement
accessibility enhancements to key buildings across the campus, including Moore Hall.
This project will very minimally impact the programming of the building, as the focus is
on improving the building’s compliance with the American Disabilities Act. Initiative B2 is
for a more comprehensive internal renovation of Moore Hall which will alter the program.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The existing garage will be demolished and a small extension to the building added. The
extension will contain an elevator and stairwell, and be located on the northern side of
the building adjacent to Becht Hall. The extension should not protrude past the edge of
the front of the building facing Carlson Library and must be sympathetic to the historic
character of Moore Hall. Existing toilet facilities will be renovated/expanded and made
ADA compliant.
Landscaping Considerations:
The landscape to the north of Moore Hall will need to be reconfigured in response to the
small extension, including an ADA compliant ramp.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The new stairwell and elevator will enable the further proposed renovations to Moore Hall
in initiative B2 by providing wheelchair access to the second floor and an additional fire
escape route from the building.

W

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

Extension

UN

IV

ER

SI

TY

W

AL

K

Carlson
Library

Graphic 8.12
Moore Hall location and
photographs

Moore Hall (A7)

Recreation
Slope (C9)

143

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.13
Moore Hall 1- Level 1

Only the area within the red dotted line is
impacted by Moore 1 (A7), with the remainder
of the building renovated in Moore Hall 2 (B2)

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

ADA compliant toilet

Office
General Use
Circulation

144

FMP (A7) - LEVEL 1

N

Non-Assignable

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Only the area within the red dotted line is
impacted by Moore 1 (A7), with the remainder
of the building renovated in Moore Hall 2 (B2)

Graphic 8.14
Moore Hall 1- Level 2

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

Office
General Use
Non-Assignable
Circulation
N

FMP (A7) - LEVEL 2

145

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A8 – EGBERT HALL
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Egbert Hall will be renovated to provide updated office space for the University’s academic
staff, most of which will be relocated from Carrier Hall.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

7,613

6,973

Special Use

471

0

Support

182

0

Office

General Use
Total NASF
GSF

0

833

8,266

7,806

17,890

17,540

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The existing massing is to be retained and the primary architectural consideration will be
making the building ADA compliant. This will require the installation of a ‘LULA’ elevator
at the intersection of the single and double height sections of the building which are at
different floor levels. The existing elevator will also need to be replaced with a larger model
which meets minimum ADA dimensions. Public access through the building should be
included to provide a safe way of navigating the change in elevation across the site during
inclement weather.
In addition, the front entrance will be enhanced by restoring the original open porch to
provide a more generous transitional space into the building. The single story section at
the front of Egbert Hall will be converted to an open lounge to facilitate collaboration
between the users of the building.
Landscape Considerations:
The landscape to the rear of the building will be updated as part of initiative C8 (Chandler
Drive & Lot E).
Servicing Considerations:
The service arrangements to the building are not anticipated to be altered as part of this
initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This project is enabled by the relocation of Student Services to the renovated Becht Hall
(A1). It also allows for the demolition of Carrier Hall (A17).

146

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Offices converted to an open lounge
as a relaxation and meeting point at
the entrance to the building

Enlarged elevator

Porch opened out
to provide covered
outdoor seating facing
University Walk

Graphic 8.15
Egbert Hall - Level 1

Office area (combination of private
and open offices as required)

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

New LULA lift

FMP - LEVEL 1

ADA compliant access through
the building open to the public

Graphic 8.16
Egbert Hall - Level 2
Office area (combination of private and open offices
as required). Meeting/conference rooms should be
included and separated by glass partitions

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

Office
N

FMP - LEVEL 2

Special Use
General Use
Support
Circulation

147

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A9 – CARLSON LIBRARY
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Half of the A-level of Carlson Library will house a prototype active-learning classroom
and attendant group study and collaboration spaces. This prototype will repurpose
existing underutilized space, and provide a new classroom addition to Clarion’s classroom
inventory. This complement of spaces will be used to experiment with various pedagogies
and to train faculty in active-learning techniques. Lessons learned from this space will
inform the contemporization of classrooms across the University, but specifically in Still,
Davis and Stevens Halls.
The former exhibition space to the rear of the building (facing Greenville Avenue) is to be
opened out to level A of the library, bringing in light and providing a lounge. Wide steps
and a LULA lift will be included due to the change in level.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

1,121

6,174

Class Lab

2,279

2,279

Office

9,340

9,340

Study

74,025

68,972

2,458

2,651

89,223

89,416

115,000

115,000

General Use
Total NASF
GSF

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
New interior partitions associated with this project should have expanses of interior glazing
that allow for borrowed light into classroom and group study space. Finishes should
promote group work and include writable wall surfaces and multimedia support.
The former exhibition space at the entrance to the building is to be expanded to provide
a generous lounge with wide steps leading directly to the library study area, and a LULA
elevator installed.
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
There will be no general access to the A-level from outside (presently the gallery space can
be accessed from outside). Internal access to Carlson’s existing service/loading dock will
be maintained.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The southern portion of the A-level, where the prototype space is to be located, does not
have much furnishing and can be easily repurposed with modest interior partitions and
furniture selections.

148

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.17
Carlson Library - Level A

EXISTING - LEVEL A

New LULA lift

New active learning
prototype classrooms
Events entrance only

Breakout rooms accessed
from classrooms
Partition wall to be removed
with new wide steps
connecting the former art
gallery to the library at level A

Classroom
Office
Study
N

FMP - LEVEL A

General Use
Circulation

149

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A10 – GEMMELL CENTER 1
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
This renovation of the Gemmell Center will not alter the current programming of the
building.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
This renovation will focus on cosmetic enhancements to the interior of building, refreshing
wall finishes and introducing new furniture.
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
The servicing of Gemmell Center, as well as its food service functions, are not expected to
be impacted by this renovation.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
A further interior renovation of the Gemmell Center is proposed for initiative B5. The scope
of renovations to be undertaken in B5 should be clearly defined before work is undertaken
in A10 to ensure minimal overlap in areas impacted by the initiatives.

Lawn near
Grunenwald

WIL

SON

AVE

NUE

Graphic 8.18
Gemmell Center within campus
context at the end of phase A of
the FMP

Gemmell Center
Lot 16

150

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A11 – RALSTON HALL
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
The lower two floors of Ralston Hall are to be renovated and repurposed in temporary
support of Venango College’s expanded health sciences programs at the Clarion campus.
These facilities will serve to incubate the health sciences programs until the new health
sciences building (B7) is complete. These two lower floors will hold a selection of class
lab and faculty office space, with the upper portions of Ralston Hall remaining largely
unoccupied. Ralston is to be vacated and demolished upon the completion of the health
sciences building.
The FMP does not include a program chart for this initiative given the planned demolition
of the building (B11).
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Design and finishes should be simple, durable and specified for an anticipated five to seven
year life span. As much as possible, equipment should be demountable and transferrable
to the anticipated health sciences building.
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
n/a
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling projects are required for this initiative.

Graphic 8.19
Ralston Hall within campus
context at the end of phase A of
the FMP

WIL

SON

AVE

NUE

Lawn near
Grunenwald

Ralston Hall

Lot 16

151

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A12 – GREENVILLE GATEWAY AND CAMPUS EDGE
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
A major new gateway sign is to be located on the northeast corner of Greenville Avenue
and Corbett Street. This sign should be:
▪ Significant
▪ Well designed with stone and brick as appropriate
▪ Announce entry to the University precinct
▪ Scaled for legibility at vehicular-speeds
▪ Coordinated with campus-wide facilities branding (reflecting the University’s
design sensibilities, and progressive brand)
The sign should be fronted with lawn and coordinated with the rest of Greenville Avenue’s
landscaping. Plantings behind the sign should be primarily of evergreen trees and
understory.
In addition, the campus edge along Greenville Avenue will be assessed and enhanced
where possible. A cohesive character will be established, including planting of high
canopy street trees where gaps exist, views to lawns where possible and regular spacing of
pedestrian lighting of consistent design (per the woodlands aesthetic) with street banners
extending the University’s presence within the streetscape.
Servicing Considerations:
Existing servicing arrangements will be unaffected.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling projects are required for this initiative. However, the construction of the
gateway sign at the corner of Corbett Street will require the demolition of one of the
University’s domestic scale buildings.

152

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.20
Greenville Gateway and
the section of campus edge
included within the costing
of initiative A12. Potential
landscape enhancements along
the campus edge for the entire
length of Greenville Avenue
should be investigated as part
of A12.

CORBETT STREET

Greenville Gateway

Graphic 8.21
University of Cincinnati gateway
sign - a precedent for initiatives
A12 and C16

153

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A13 – ADMISSIONS HALL
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Admissions Hall is to be renovated to provide a temporary home for Public Safety until they
can be transferred to the new purpose-built building delivered by initiative C2. Admissions
Hall will be vacated and demolished once initiative C2 is completed.
The FMP does not include a program chart for this initiative given the planned demolition
of the building (C5).
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Design and finishes should be simple, durable and specified for an anticipated ten year
life span. As much as possible, equipment should be demountable and transferrable to the
anticipated new Public Safety building.
Landscape Considerations:
N/A
Servicing Considerations:
As a temporary home for public safety, the building will need to be ADA compliant to the
minimum extent possible. Proximate parking for public safety vehicles is required.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The relocation of admissions services to the renovated Becht Hall (A1) enables initiative
A12.

Graphic 8.22
Admissions Hall within campus
context at the end of phase
A of the FMP

Lot 5

Admissions Hall

W

154

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A14 – SEMINARY PLAZA (UNIVERSITY WALK, PHASE 1)
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
Seminary Plaza is the first stage in realizing ‘University Walk’ as the key pedestrian spine of
the campus and the organizing element of the landscape design. The area for landscape
improvements stretches from Wood Street to Harvey Hall between Carlson Library, Stevens
Hall, Davis Hall, Egbert Hall, Moore Hall and Becht Hall. This area represents a key
concentration of campus activity with a high volume of pedestrian movement; it is essential
that the design of the space is of the highest quality. Seminary Plaza consists of three
landscape areas: Wood Street Steps, Seminary Grove and Egbert Garden.
Wood Street Steps forms part of the main pedestrian spine and responds to the high
volumes of pedestrian activity at Wood Street and Arnold Avenue. The space at the junction
will be an attractive gathering area and prominent pedestrian gateway to the core of the
campus. The overall landscape typology is a maintained urban plaza with areas of turf
and a ceremonial route. Specific enhancements include:
▪ Terraced hillside that extends the existing steep grade change from Wood Street
over a longer distance to provide a more gradual transition. The terraced hillside
features flanking walkways with several sets of stone risers. Seat walls extend
between the walkways and define a series of terraced lawns, providing multiple
options for students to gather in this very active area.
▪ A walkway on the west side of the space that splays to create a generous transition
to the west along Wood Street, while accommodating an accessible ramp.
The ramp and stairs on this side frame the reconstructed bell tower base (the
surrounding low walls and pergola are to be removed).
▪ A broad paved area at the base of the steps adjacent to Wood Street and crosswalk
treatment at the intersection of Wood Street and Arnold Avenue.
▪ A broad walkway with a distinct design treatment which delineates University Walk
as the principal route.
▪ Regularly spaced ginkgo “datum trees” on the building side of both east and west
walkways to reinforce the open space and frame distant views.
▪ Regularly spaced columnar lighting poles and signage of the standard design
adopted for University Walk.
▪ Street furniture as per the University Walk aesthetic zone standard, with a high
number of benches which encourage pedestrians to dwell in the space and are
oriented to help initiate conversation.
▪ Flowering and ornamental trees as accents near building entrances and building
facades. These trees are not proposed within the space (between the walkways)
where they would obscure distant views.
▪ Retaining walls and seat walls that utilize stone as part of the campus standards.
▪ Plant tagging and interpretive signage for new and existing plantings within this
area as part of the campus arboretum.
▪ Placeholders for public art, integrated into the overall design of the space.
Seminary Grove is a lightly wooded area between Carlson Library and Davis Hall which
borders the spine of University Walk. Its pathways are to be realigned to form sweeping
connections to, and across, University Walk with the wooded lawns providing attractive
areas for student use on pleasant days. If requirements for vehicular access to Stevens Hall
allow, the length of Carlson Drive could be reduced to increase the size of the landscaped
155

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

area of Seminary Grove and make the space asphalt free. Mixed ornamental understory
trees are to be planted along the edges of Davis and Stevens Halls to provide spring and
fall interest at the edge of the Grove.
Egbert Garden is the area between Egbert and Harvey Halls. Its pathways will be realigned,
existing planting will be supplemented with a campus garden, and red Maple trees will
be planted to contrast with the yellow Gingko planted along University Walk. An open
wooden loggia will follow the curve of University Walk at the edge of Egbert Garden,
visually promoting the primacy of University Walk while providing a point of transition
between the landscape areas.
Servicing Considerations:
ADA parking and access must be incorporated into the redesign of the south curbside of
Wood Street along Carlson Library. It may be desirable to design the ADA ramp to allow for
small cart / light vehicle access between Wood Street and the entrance to Carlson Library. A
reduction in length of Carlson Drive will only be possible if the loss of handicapped parking
spaces adjacent to Davis Hall is viewed as acceptable. This loss could potentially be offset
through the provision of additional spaces to the west of Carlson Library. University Walk
needs to provide emergency and service vehicle access to the core of the campus.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
With the completion of the renovation of Becht Hall (A1), the steam tunnel that runs parallel
and just south of Wood Street is no longer needed. While some electrical utilities will need
to be retrenched deeper, the hillside just south of Wood Street is steep primarily because
it is covering the steam tunnel. Removing the steam tunnel allows this hillside to be regraded. Additionally, the low-walls and pergola surrounding the bell tower are in poor
condition and need to be removed. The area where these features exist will be lowered
closer to street-level and the foundation of the bell tower will need to be reinforced.
Graphic 8.23
Seminary Plaza shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Wood
Street
Steps

Seminary
Grove
Egbert
Lawn

156

SEMINARY PLAZA

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.24
Seminary Plaza shown within
the final phase of the FMP

1
2

3
U

N

IV

E

R

S

IT

Y

W

A

LK

4
5
6

7

1. Reconfigured plaza
encompassing Wood Street
and bell tower
2. Terraced hillside with series of
lawns and stone risers (Wood
Street Steps)
3. Gingko datum trees with
yellow fall color along edge
of University Walk
4. Seminary Grove
5. Egbert Lawn
6. Open loggia marking edge
of University Walk and
transition to Egbert Lawn
7. Lawn near Grunenwald
(initiative C3)
157

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A15 – NAIR HALL
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Nair Hall (along with its sister facility Wilkinson Hall) is no longer competitive in the student
housing marketplace, rendering it obsolete. It also has significant deferred maintenance.
The beds it currently holds are to be replaced by the new suite-style Main Street Housing
buildings (A2 and A3). Nair Hall should be demolished and replaced with new parking.

A16 – WILKINSON HALL
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Wilkinson Hall (along with its sister facility Nair Hall) is no longer competitive in the student
housing marketplace, rendering it obsolete. It also has significant deferred maintenance.
The beds it currently holds are to be replaced by the new suite-style Main Street Housing
buildings (A2 and A3). Wilkinson Hall should be demolished and replaced with new
parking.

A17 – CARRIER HALL
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Carrier Hall is to be vacated with functions relocating to the renovated Becht Hall (A1) and
Egbert Hall (A8). The building has notable deferred maintenance needs and the modernist
brick character of Carrier Hall fails to contribute positively to the campus. The building will
be demolished once it is vacated.
The building will be replaced by an open lawn with dense tree planting at its eastern edge
to enclose the open space and screen parking Lot 5 from Arnold Avenue. Arnold Avenue
is a principal connection between the core of the university campus and Main Street and
it is important that the landscaping of the space avoids the perception of the empty site
being a ‘missing tooth’ when walking along the Avenue. However, the potential of the site
to accommodate longer term development, beyond the timeframe of this master plan,
should be retained.

A18 – THORN 1
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Thorn 1 has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and is in poor condition; it is
not appropriate for the University to continue to hold on to obsolete domestic building
stock and it will be demolished. The demolition of these domestic structures reduces the
University’s operating/maintenance outlays and allows for the eventual reconstruction of
Lot R (C20).

158

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A19 – THORN 2
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Thorn 2 has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and is in poor condition; it is
not appropriate for the University to continue to hold on to obsolete domestic building
stock and it will be demolished. The demolition of these domestic structures reduces the
University’s operating/maintenance outlays and allows for the eventual reconstruction of
Lot R (C20).

Graphic 8.25
Location of Phase A demolitions
shown upon the completion of the
FMP

CARRIER HALL

Lot 5

NAIR HALL
Lot 6

WILKINSON HALL

THORN 2

THORN 1
Lot R

159

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

A20 – ARNOLD AVENUE (UNIVERSITY WALK, PHASE 2)
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
Arnold (9th) Avenue plays an important role within Clarion campus as the principal
connection between Main Street, Wood Street and the campus core. The avenue is a
gateway to the campus and initiative A20 is the second phase of University Walk.
Arnold Avenue will be converted to a pedestrian priority ‘shared surface’ with:
▪ Asphalt replaced by stone or unit paving
▪ Boundaries with the sidewalk blurred
▪ Road markings and signage removed
The intention is for the avenue to feel like a public space, distinguished by its special
landscape treatment. The palette of street furnishings and signage established within the
prior sections of University Walk will be extended along the avenue to Lawn near Still (B4).
The landscape upgrade to Arnold Avenue will help address the perceived separation of the
buildings to the north of Main Street and the rest of the campus.
Servicing Considerations:
The closure of the right turn lane of Arnold Avenue at the junction with Main Street is a
landscape objective of the FMP. This would be replaced by a conventional T junction.
Access to Arnold Avenue north of Main Street was previously eliminated by the creation of
Lawn near Still (B4). Removing the right turn lane will increase the landscaped open space
at this entrance to the campus and reduce the visual dominance of the roadways. A20 also
sets up the closure of access from Arnold Avenue to Lot 5. This closure is fully implemented
in initiative C16.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative could be brought forward at any time. It neighbors and potentially overlaps
the Lawn near Still landscape initiative (B4). The intersection alteration could be delivered
as part of the Lawn near Still initiative (B4) or Arnold Avenue (A20).

160

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.26
Arnold Avenue shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Graphic 8.27
Arnold Avenue shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Lawn near Still
MA

IN

ST

RE

ET

Temporary
connection
Lot 5

W

Seminary
Plaza

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

161

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES
8.2 PHASE B INITIATIVES (2018-2023)
B1 – LOWER GROVE (UNIVERSITY WALK, PHASE 3)
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
The Lower Grove will include existing, reorganized and new pathways, the third portion of
University Walk (the campus pedestrian spine), lighting, accent plantings and opportunities
for public art. The grove will continue to be an important passive recreation and gathering
area for students and will create an attractive entrance to the campus core from Greenville
Avenue and from the parking areas to the south. The overall landscape typology is one of
loose trees and informal lawns. Specific enhancements include:
▪ University Walk from Greenville Avenue to the lawn near Grunenwald, aligned in
a graceful sweep along the south and east facades of Tippin Hall.
▪ The northern portion of the sidewalk that connects to the southern parking fields
(future Lot R, C20), providing a clear gateway to the Lower Grove from the
southern part of campus.
▪ Regularly spaced ginkgo “datum trees” on the building side of University Walk,
and occasional canopy shade trees and tree groupings on the opposite side of the
University Walk.
▪ Light spacing of canopy shade trees throughout the space to reinforce the “grove”
quality, while leaving some areas more open than others to allow patches of
sunlight into the space. Deciduous species are to be predominant.
▪ Low canopy and flowering trees used as accents near building perimeters and
hillside edges, however, they should not be planted within the space so views
throughout (and beneath canopies) can be maintained.
▪ Plant tagging and interpretive signage for new and existing plantings within this
area as part of the campus arboretum.
Servicing Considerations:
University Walk needs to provide emergency and service vehicle access to the core of the
campus.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative provides an enhanced landscape setting in conjunction with the expansions
of Tippin Gymnasium and the Recreation Center.

162

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.28
Lower Grove shown within the
final phase of the FMP

Graphic 8.29
Lower Grove shown within the
final phase of the FMP
Grunenwald
Lawn

LOWER GROVE
Tipping Hall

Recreation Center

163

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B2 – MOORE HALL 2
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Both levels of Moore Hall are to be fully renovated in a way that combines the historic
character of the facility with interventions that improve the utility and appeal of the facility. The
main level of Moore will become a club-like space for student/faculty meetings, including
a lounge for Honors Students. The upper level of the building will be reprogrammed to
serve as swing faculty office space.

Office
Study
General Use
Total NASF
GSF

2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

514

2,533

0

1,115

2,733

1,722

3,247

5,370

10,280

11,180

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Moore’s renovated interiors should respect the historic physicality of the building, but
contemporize interior finishes and furnishings to create an artistic counterpoint with
modern furniture, lighting and art. The gathering and lounge rooms on the first level
should be spaces that support conversation, meetings, salons, small speaking and cocktail
events. Moore should be a very special place on campus where the 19th and the 21st
centuries meet.
Along with general window replacements, the closed-in section of the second floor balcony
on the southern elevation will be opened out to increase the effective size of the balcony
and restore the building to its original appearance.
Landscape Considerations:
The east side of Moore, presently a small garden space, will be improved with better
seating walls, a gas fire pit, and it will become another type of space that complements
the special nature of Moore Hall’s programming. This outdoor space should be seamlessly
connected to the ‘Salon Room’ at the east end of the first floor.
Servicing Considerations:
Moore will be serviced from Page Street (future Chandler Drive), as existing, with the new
stairwell and elevator provided through initiative A7 providing an additional access point.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The accessibility enhancements to Moore Hall in A7 enable the buildings renovation
within this initiative. Design of the surrounding landscape should be mindful of the future
reconstruction of Chandler Drive and Lot E (C8).

164

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.30
Moore Hall location and context
upon completion of the FMP

W

O

D

ST

RE

ET

Moore Hall

UN

IV

ER

SI

TY

W

AL

K

Carlson
Library

O

RI

VE

CHAND

LE

R

D

Recreation
Slope

Graphic 8.31
Moore Hall viewed from University
Walk

165

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

French doors to
garden

Graphic 8.32
Moore Hall 2 - Level 1

Connected lounges
and salon room

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING - LEVEL 1
ADA compliant toilet

Donor named
study room

Donor named
study room

Office
Study
General Use
Circulation

Graphic 8.33
The Norwood Club in New York
will provide a precedent for the
interior design of Moore Hall

166

FMP (B2) - LEVEL 1

N

Non-Assignable

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.34
Moore Hall 2 - Level 2

Flexible office
space

Balcony to be
opened out

Open lounge for
offices and students

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

ADA compliant toilet

Office
Study
General Use

N

Non-Assignable

FMP (B2) - LEVEL 2

Circulation

Graphic 8.35
The Norwood Club in New York
will provide a precedent for the
interior design of Moore Hall

167

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B3 – STILL HALL
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Still Hall is to be renovated to provide contemporized general classroom space and
accommodate Clarion’s business school space needs. This is achieved by contemporizing
existing classrooms, better utilizing existing office space and the introduction of learning
commons spaces on each floor.
Food service is not to be included in the renovated Still Hall to encourage occupants to
leave the facility. Further effort should be taken to identify programming opportunities that
will breakdown intellectual and departmental silos; so that Main Street is not a physical
and cultural divide.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

14,936

6,477

Class Lab

1,238

5,251

11,581

10,804

Office
General Use

700

6,937

3,407

3,407

Total NASF

31,862

32,876

GSF

53,170

54,370

Support

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Still Hall’s 1980s architecture does not allow much penetration of natural light into the
depths of the building, despite extensive perimeter glazing and some of the best views
over the Clarion River Valley. The learning commons, located adjacent to the circulation
core on each floor, will span the width of the building, bringing light into its interior and
providing visual connections to Main Street and the Clarion River Valley. These will be key
spaces in encouraging interaction between all users of the building. They will generally
be open to neighboring circulation routes, but will also include smaller meeting rooms for
group or quiet study.
Additionally, a new lobby/atrium should be added to the existing Main Street entry. This
space will provide a contemporized face for the Business School and the University, and
signify the enhanced status of the building following its renovation. The entrance expansion
will primarily be glazed and include bold splashes of color and/or material to contrast with
the monotone beige brick of the existing building. The atrium will be three stories in height
with no internal vertical division. This allows for a more generous first floor lobby, as well
as visual connections to the second and third floor learning commons which will have floor
to ceiling internal glazing.
Landscape Considerations:
There are no significant landscape elements to this initiative, though its phasing is linked
to the Lawn near Still landscape initiative (B4).
Servicing Considerations:
This project should not significantly impact building servicing.
168

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Still Hall represents one of the FMP’s larger scale renovations and the building could be
offline for up to 24 months. Teaching spaces will need to be found across the campus to
facilitate taking the building out of service for this period of time. The search for suitable
spaces will be aided by the new active learning prototype classrooms in Carlson Library’s
A-level (A9), the accessibility enhancements to Stevens Hall (A6), as well as scheduling
efficiencies.
It may be possible to renovate Still Hall over the course of three summers, but this is
not deemed desirable due to increased costs, logistical hardships and the length of time
required to replace many of the building mechanical systems.

Graphic 8.36
Still Hall context upon completion
of the FMP and photographs of
the building
Expanded entrance

Lawn near Still
MA

IN

ST

Lot N
RE

ET

169

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.37
Still Hall - Level 1

N

Commons with glazed partitions
allowing for views through building

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

New/expanded
entranceway

Commons adjacent to
entrance and open to
neighboring circulation routes

Contemporized
class lab

FMP - LEVEL 1

Graphic 8.38
Still Hall - Level 2

Study and meeting rooms with
glazed partitions allowing for
views through building

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

Classroom

New entrance atrium

Class Lab

Commons adjacent to main
circulation core with views
over new entrance atrium

Office
Study
General Use
Non-Assignable
Circulation

170

FMP - LEVEL 2

Meeting
rooms

Contemporized classroom
capable of subdivision

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

N

Graphic 8.39
Still Hall - Level 3

EXISTING - LEVEL 3

New entrance atrium
Commons adjacent to main
circulation core with views
over new entrance atrium

FMP - LEVEL 3

Classroom
Class Lab
Office
Study
General Use
Non-Assignable
Circulation

171

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B4 – LAWN NEAR STILL
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
This project responds to the renovation of Still Hall and the western edges of Main Street
Housing buildings 1 and 2. The landscape area for enhancement within this project is
to the north and south of Main Street at the western edge of the campus. This is a highly
prominent location, is the first part of the University seen when traveling from Clarion town
center, and will constitute the campus’ primary ceremonial gateway. The landscape design
needs to consider and respond to the following:
▪ The gateway status of the site – a high quality landscape is important to help
form a good first impression of Clarion University and a formal collegiate lawn
incorporating artwork and large scale Clarion University signage is proposed.
(This signage should coordinate with the initiatives at the main vehicular gateways
at the north and south parking fields C16 and C20, as well as the stone facing
used at Seminary Plaza A14.)
▪ Main Street Housing developments – the new housing which is planned to the
north and south of Main Street will dramatically alter the campus’s relationship to
the road. The landscape treatment of the lawn must respond to the footprints and
access points of the new housing.
▪ Main Street material palette – the extension of downtown Clarion’s aesthetic street
treatment is a key component of the FMP’s landscape strategy and the lawn near
Still Hall provides another opportunity to deliver this.
▪ University Walk – The lawn near Still Hall is strategically positioned at the intersection
of Main Street and the north terminus of University Walk. Both aesthetic zone
landscape treatments must be incorporated, but University Walk must signal the
entrance to a special landscape environment.
Servicing Considerations:
There is potential for 9th Avenue north of Main Street to be closed to allow for the expansion
of the lawn in front of Still Hall. This would require servicing vehicles for Still Hall and
access to the rear parking lot to be diverted along neighboring streets which might not
be possible. This would also need to be done in coordination with adjacent land owners.
Alternatively, this section of 9th Avenue could remain open to vehicles but be treated as a
shared surface as part of the Arnold Avenue improvements (A20).
South of Main Street, the eastern spur of 9th Avenue could be removed with the remaining
road converted to two way and forming a conventional T junction. This would increase the
landscaped open space and reduce the dominance of roadways at this key gateway to the
campus.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The landscape enhancements should be delivered alongside the renovation of Still Hall
(B3) and after the new Main Street Housing developments (A2 & A3). Proposals which seek
to alter access arrangements from Main Street could be deferred to a later phase of the
FMP, most appropriately as part of A20 Arnold Avenue, if too problematic to be delivered
at this stage. However, any designs should maintain the potential to alter vehicular access
in the future.

172

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.40
Lawn near Still shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Graphic 8.41
Lawn near Still shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Still Hall
Lawn near Still
Lawn
near Still
IN

ST

RE

ET

AR

NO

LD

AV

EN

UE

MA

173

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B5 – GEMMELL CENTER 2
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
The renovation of the Gemmell Center will not significantly change how the facility is used.

WIL

Lot 16

SON

AVE

NUE

Gemmell Center

Graphic 8.42
Gemmell Center location and
context upon completion of the
FMP

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Gemmell Center will undergo a general renovation that seeks to refresh interior fit
furnishings and MEP systems, with some areas and systems receiving more investment
than others. This renovation will specifically seek to:
▪ Contemporize lounge, commons and meeting areas with more flexible and
durable furnishings, and new carpeting
▪ Update lighting fixtures across the facility
▪ Update multimedia technology in meeting spaces
▪ Refresh finishes and lighting in the ballroom
▪ Replace systems as required
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
The servicing of Gemmell Center, as well as its food service delivery/loading functions, are
not expected to be impacted by this renovation.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative provides for a wider scale renovation of the Gemmell Center than A10 which
focuses on cosmetic quick-win projects to address the immediate need for enhancements
to the building. The scope of the two renovation initiatives to the Gemmell Center (A10
and B5) should be planned concurrently to ensure the most efficient allocation of funds.

Graphic 8.43
Gemmell Center entrance

174

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

W

B6 – HILLTOP PAVILION AND FIREPIT

O

O

Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
The pavilion and firepit will be located at the highest point of the hilltop to take advantage
of views to the west and downtown, particularly to the courthouse tower, and across the site
of Keeling once the building is demolished (B13).
The pavilion is intended to provide a focal point for outdoor recreation. It will be a
bespokely designed, simple structure which is open to the elements and without electricity
or plumbing.
Servicing Considerations:
As a basic and open structure the pavilion will have minimal servicing requirements.
However, a clear line of sight should be maintained from Hilltop Road to allow easy
inspection by campus safety patrols. A gas supply to the firepit is not anticipated, but the
pavilion will have electricity outlets and covered storage for firewood.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The pavilion and fire pit can be installed at any time. However, the Hilltop Oval and
Grove initiative (C15) will significantly reconfigure the surrounding landscape and how
the pavilion is accessed.

Recreation
Slope

Campus
View Suites

D

ST

RE

ET

Valley
View Suites

Pavilion &
Firepit (B6)

Graphic 8.44
Location of pavilion and firepit
shown within the final phase of
the FMP

Graphic 8.45
The pavilion will be of a bespoke
design and located at the hilltop
close to the water tower

Pavilion &
Firepit (B6)

175

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B7 – HEALTH SCIENCES BUILDING
Recommended for New Construction
Proposed Programming:
The Health Sciences Building is to provide new and improved facilities for the Allied Health
department to be located in Ralston Hall in FMP Phase A, alongside new labs and office
space to facilitate an expansion of the University’s Health Sciences program. The building
will also include a clinic, which will serve the wider public.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Class Lab

0

14,113

Office

0

2,535

General Use

0

1,764

Study

0

3,480

Healthcare (Clinic)

0

3,563

Support (Basement)

0

3,487

Total NASF

0

28,942

GSF

0

45,000

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The building is to be located at the corner of 8th Avenue and Wood Street at the edge
of campus. One of Clarion’s main public arteries, 8th Avenue has a mix of commercial,
institutional and residential development. The prominence of the site means that the new
building will play an important role in shaping the built identity of the University within the
town. It will also be one of the first University buildings visible when entering the campus
from Wood Street, so a high quality design is essential to help form a good first impression
of the University. A four story building is proposed with the potential to have a strong built
presence on 8th Avenue without being over-scaled for the road. The building also includes
a two-story glass entry lobby that faces (and should be scaled to match) Hart Chapel.
Landscape Considerations:
Given the campus edge and gateway location of the site, the landscape should be in
keeping with the treatment along the remainder of 8th Avenue and along Greenville
Avenue. This will keep a green strip along 8th Avenue which, whilst relatively narrow, will
be of sufficient width for the planting of street trees. The existing historic stone piers at the
entranceway to the campus on Wood Street are to be retained.
Servicing Considerations:
There is potential for service access to the rear of the building along Merle Road. This
would be the preferred servicing access point, however, the existing utilities building and
ATM would need to be removed.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The site is currently a parking lot and no enabling development is required before
construction can begin. Ralston Hall cannot be demolished until the new Health Sciences
building is operational.

176

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.46
Health Sciences location

M

ER

LE

RO

AD

Health Sciences Building

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

8T

H

AV

EN

UE

W

Grove near
Library

Graphic 8.47
Health Sciences massing

Health Sciences Building

177

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.48
Health Sciences FMP space
allocation following new
construction (levels 1 & 2)

CONFERENCE

CLASS LAB

CLINIC

OFFICE

MEZZANINE
LOUNGE

STUDENT
COMMONS

STUDENT
COMMONS
LOUNGE

Classroom
Class Lab
Office

TOILET

TOILET

TOILET
MECH

TOILET
MECH
UP

Study

CLASS LAB

CLASS LAB

General Use

LOBBY

Healthcare
Support
Non-Assignable

CONFERENCE

Circulation

LEVEL 1

178

CONFERENCE

LEVEL 2

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.49
Health Sciences FMP space
allocation following new
construction (levels 3 & 0)

CONFERENCE

CLASS LAB
MECHANICAL
OFFICE

STUDENT
COMMONS

TOILET

Classroom

TOILET

Class Lab

MECH

Office
Study

CLASS LAB

General Use
Healthcare
Support
Non-Assignable

CONFERENCE

Circulation

N

LEVELS 3 & 4

LEVEL 0

179

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Proposed Programming (Additional):
The program for the Health Sciences Building will be
determined during the planning and design services stage
of the initiative (2017-2018). However, in preparing the
FMP, the adjacent break-down of spaces was prepared
as an indication of the range of uses which could be
accommodated within a 45,000 GSF building.

CLASS LABS
FICM Type of Facility

Capacity

NASF Quantity

Total

Health Assessment Labs
210 Basic Health Assessment
Lab
210 Advanced Health
Assessment Lab
215 Health Assessment Lab
Clean/Dirty Storage
215 Health Assessment Lab
Storage
Class Lab Sub-total
Health Assessment

12

840

2

1,680

12

1,020

2

2,040

n/a

30

2

60

n/a

120

1

120
3,900

Simulation Lab
210 Simulation Lab

12

840

3

2,520

210 Unisex Simulation Regular
Toilet
210 Unisex Simulation ADA
Toilet
215 Simulation Lab
Monitoring Room
215 Simulation Lab Clean/
Dirty Storage
215 Simulation Lab Storage

3

120

1

120

3

180

1

180

1

200

1

200

n/a

30

2

60

n/a

150

2

300

Class Lab Sub-total
Simulation

3,380

Advanced Care
210 Advanced Care Lab

12

600

3

1,800

210 Patient Monitoring Station

12

420

3

1,260

210 Debriefing Room

12

240

3

720

215 Advanced Care Clean/
Dirty Storage
215 Advanced Care Lab
Specialty Storage
Class Lab Sub-total
Advanced Care
215 Nursing Lab Laundry

n/a

30

2

60

n/a

150

2

300
4,140

n/a

100

1

Class Lab Sub-total
Nursing Labs

100
11,520

Basic Sciences Labs

180

210 Anatomy/Physiology Lab

24

1,680

1

1,680

215 Anatomy/Physiology Lab
Storage
215 Anatomy/Physiology Lab
Preparation
210 Lower Level Biology Lab

n/a

100

1

100

2

320

1

320

24

1,680

1

1,680

215 Biology Lab Storage

n/a

100

1

100

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

215 Biology Lab Preparation

2

320

1

320

210 Lower Level Chemistry
Lab
215 Chemistry Lab Storage

24

1,680

0

0

n/a

100

0

0

2

320

0

0

215 Chemistry Lab
Preparation
Class Lab Sub-total Basic
Sciences

4,200

Total Class Labs

15,720

OPEN LABS
Use Type of Facility

Capacity

NASF Quantity

Total

220 Open Computer Lab

30

1,200

1

1,200

225 Open Computer Lab
Storage
220 Open Simulation Lab

n/a

120

1

120

8

560

1

Total Open Labs

560

300 Faculty landing space

Capacity
varies

NASF Quantity
45

6

410 Nursing Learning Center

1

NASF Quantity
35

20

n/a

140

1

720 IT Staging and Repair

n/a

300

1

300

730 Building Receiving/
Holding
750 Housekeeping Storage

n/a

200

1

200

n/a

120

1

120

750 Trash/Recycling

n/a

100

1

100

760 Hazardous Material
Storage

n/a

75

1

75

Total Support

935

Health Clinic
Use Type of Facility

Capacity

NASF Quantity

Total

855 Imaging Development

n/a

80

1

80

n/a

125

2

250

n/a

215

1

215

10

300

1

300

410 Small Group Tutorial

4

120

2

240

410 Large Group Tutorial

8

240

1

240

410 Testing/Review Room

1

80

2

160

860 Medical Lab

1,200
PBVE
1

120

1

120

30

1

30

2

100

1

100

440 Service Desk

1

70

1

70

455 Receiving/Equipment
Room

1

120

1

120

Total Study

140

HEALTHCARE

410 Technology Center

440 Copy Room

Total

710 CHP Computer Server

855 Nursing Clinic Clean/
Dirty Storage
855 Nursing Clinic Equipment
Storage
855 Medical Reference Room

420 Resource Materials
(Closed)
440 Catalog Kiosks

NASF Quantity

700

270

STUDY
Capacity

Capacity

Total

Total
270

Use Type of Facility

Use Type of Facility

830 Nursing Clinic Reception/
Patient Records
830 Nursing Clinic Waiting
Area
850 Nursing Clinic
Examination Room
850 Nursing Clinic Patient
Education Room
855 Nursing Clinic Changing/
Locker Room
855 Medical Imaging

1,880

OFFICES
Use Type of Facility

SUPPORT

885 Nursing Clinic Lab
Storage
Total Health Clinic

2

220

1

220

20

300

1

300

3

120

7

840

6

150

1

150

1

80

1

80

2

120

1

120

2

100

1

100

1

140

1

140

n/a

180

1

180
2,675

Building Total NASF

27,235

GSF @ 1.65

44,938

2,080

GENERAL
Use Type of Facility

Capacity

NASF Quantity

Total

650 Lounge

20

400

8

3,200

655 Lactation Room

2

100

1

100

n/a

125

3

655 Lounge Vending/Storage
Total Lounge

375
3,675

181

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B8 – STEVENS HALL 2, CLASSROOMS
Recommended for Renovation
Stevens Hall

Proposed Programming:
The renovation will expand two classrooms on level 1 and four classrooms on level 2
to create spaces more appropriately sized for active learning. This will result in a slight
reduction in the number of classrooms as well as the loss of some office space.
Existing offices at the entrance of the building will be converted to meeting rooms and a
lounge will be created on level 2. The lounge will be adjacent to the elevator and benefit
from views over the grove near the Library (C12). These reconfigurations will increase
opportunities for collaboration within the building.
Graphic 8.50
Stevens Hall location

2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

5,140

3,668

Class Lab

2,168

5,219

Office

5,132

2,445

General Use

0

1,108

1,705

1,705

Total NASF

14,145

14,145

GSF

21,050

21,050

Support

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
This initiative will not impact the massing of the building, requiring only the removal of
internal partition walls and the contemporizing of classrooms.
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
Servicing arrangements will remain as existing.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The earlier Stevens Hall 1 Accessibility initiative will have introduced ADA enhancements
to the building. The classroom alterations proposed within this initiative (B8) should be
considered when the earlier accessibility enhancements are made. In particular, any
internal doorway improvements should include access to the expanded active learning
classrooms.

182

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Contemporized teaching spaces, enlarged
to increase active learning opportunities

Graphic 8.51
Stevens Hall - level 2

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

Office partitions removed and room converted to a
lounge overlooking the grove near the Library

FMP - LEVEL 2

Contemporized and
enlarged classroom

Graphic 8.52
Stevens Hall - level 1

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

Classroom
Class Lab
Office
General Use
New meeting rooms for general
student and faculty use

FMP - LEVEL 1

N

Non-Assignable
Circulation

183

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B9 – HART CHAPEL
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
Hart Chapel is to provide a single large classroom on the first floor with all other uses
relocated out of the building. This will be a versatile and unique space, benefitting from the
ecclesiastical heritage of the building and remaining capable of holding University and/
or public events.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

2,202

2,438

Office

1,283

0

General Use

2,547

2,395

Total NASF
GSF

6,032

4,833

12,890

10,670

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Externally, the building is to remain as existing in recognition of its heritage value. This is
with the exception of providing an ADA compliant access ramp to the main entrance, which
will be installed between Hart Chapel and the new Health Sciences building. The front steps
to the main entrance and western secondary entrance will be brought towards Wood Street
to provide a wide landing at the top for wheelchair access. The reconfiguration will require
the removal of one of the main entrance steps flanking walls, and a similarly detailed wall
(large rusticated stone blocks and coping) should mark the edge of the accessible terrace
linking to the ramp, with the main steps extended west along this wall to provide south
facing seating. The new stairs should be of the same stone as the existing. Any handrail
running along the top of this wall must be designed to have minimal visual impact.
Internally, the fixed seating will be removed, as will the mezzanines to provide an open hall
benefitting from the existing large windows. The removal of the mezzanines will negate the
need to provide elevator access to a second floor and allow the removal of the upward
stairs at the corners of the building. A downward stairway will be punched through at the
southwestern corner of the building to provide more direct access to renovated bathrooms
at the basement level. The existing service elevator in the southeastern corner will also be
upgraded to provide access to the basement toilets.
Landscape Considerations:
The key landscape consideration will be the installation of an ADA compliant ramp and the
reconfiguration of the front steps to provide access to the main entrance. Significant care
will need to be taken to minimize the visual impact of this addition and to ensure that its
design respects the historic character of the building.
Servicing Considerations:
Servicing of the building will not be altered by this initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling development is required and the Hart Chapel initiative could be delivered at
any stage of the FMP.
184

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.53
Hart Chapel location

Hart Chapel

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

Gemmell
Grove

8T

H

AV

EN

UE

W

Graphic 8.54
Hart Chapel viewed from Wood
Street

185

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.55
Hart Chapel - Level 0

Offices
removed and
level 0 used for
general storage

EXISTING - LEVEL 0

New stairs between
level 0 and 1

Toilets

Renovated
elevator

Classroom
Office
General Use
Non-Assignable
Circulation

186

N

FMP - LEVEL 0

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Raised permanent or
removable stage

Stairs to
mezzanine
removed

Graphic 8.56
Hart Chapel - Level 1

Curved stage removed
to create a more
flexible classroom

ACTIVE-LEARNING CLASSROOM
(seats for 80 students)

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

Upwards
stair removed
and replaced
with stair to
basement

Steps remodelled and brought forward to
provide ramped access to the main front door

Classroom
Office
General Use
N

FMP - LEVEL 1

Non-Assignable
Circulation

187

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B10 – DAVIS HALL
Recommended for Minor Renovation
Proposed Programming:
The existing classrooms and labs will be renovated and resized to create spaces more
appropriate for active learning. This will result in a slight reduction in the number of
teaching spaces.
Davis Hall

Graphic 8.57
Davis Hall location

The classroom on Level 2, which overlooks the lawn near Grunenwald, will be converted
to a lounge.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

3,279

1,940

885

1,764

8,986

8,986

Classroom
Class Lab
Office
General Use

195

655

Support

3,830

3,830

Study

1,294

1,294

Total NASF

18,469

18,469

GSF

32,300

32,300

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
This initiative will not impact the massing of the building, requiring only the removal of
internal partition walls and the contemporizing of classrooms.
Landscape Considerations:
n/a
Servicing Considerations:
The servicing arrangements of the building will not alter as a result of this initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling development is required for this initiative.

188

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Classroom partition removed to
create larged teaching space with
associated break-out room

Graphic 8.58
Davis Hall - level 2

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

Class lab converted to student/faculty lounge
overlooking the lawn near Grunenwald

FMP - LEVEL 2

Classrooms contemporized and enlarged to
provide more opportunity for active learning

Graphic 8.59
Davis Hall - level 1

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

Classroom
Class Lab
Office
Study
Non-Assignable
N

FMP - LEVEL 1

Circulation

189

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

B11 – RALSTON DEMOLITION
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Ralston Hall has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and is in poor condition;
while the building is due to be partially renovated to house health sciences functions (A11),
it should be demolished once the new Health Sciences building (B7) is completed.
The demolition of the building will allow for the building of the new Hilltop Residence A
(initiative C1) and the creation of the Hilltop Oval and Grove open space (C15).

B12 – STROHMAN
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The Strohman Building has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and is in poor
condition; it should be demolished. Storage efficiencies should be found elsewhere on
campus so that it does not need to be replaced by a new structure.

B13 – KEELING
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Keeling is the current location of the student health center, which will be relocated to the new
Health Sciences Building (B7). Keeling has significant mechanical, electrical and plumbing
deficiencies and should be demolished once vacated to avoid ongoing maintenance costs.
Before demolition, the temporary space requirements during the renovations of MarwickBoyd (C4) and Becker Hall (C6) should be assessed, with Keeling providing potential swing
office and classroom space if required.
Following the demolition of Keeling, the site will be landscaped as a treed lawn. This will
retain the longer-term potential for a new building on the site beyond the 2033 timespan
of the FMP.

190

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.60
Location of Phase B demolitions
shown upon the completion of the
FMP

KEELING

RALSTON HALL
STROHMAN

191

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES
8.3 PHASE C INITIATIVES (2023-2033)
C1 – HILLTOP RESIDENCE (A)
Recommended for New Construction
Proposed Programming:
The new Hilltop Residence (A) will provide modern, up-to-date housing based on a review
of best practices and market desirability at the time of its construction, with design work
anticipated to begin in 2021 and completion of the building in 2025.
Hilltop Residence (A) will replace Ballentine Hall, which even in 2013 is not very competitive
in the student housing market. This initiative is not intended to add significant bed capacity.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Residential

0

28,800

General Use

0

3,200

Total NASF

0

32,000

GSF

0

40,000

The program of the building is based on a 40,000 GSF building (four levels given the FMP
building footprint), with an 80% gross-to-net floor area ratio. The program has then been
split 90% residential to 10% general use to allow for lounges and other common areas.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
A more detailed feasibility study should be undertaken nearer the time of construction to
determine current best practices in University residential design. However, it is anticipated
that the new residence will have four stories and be a single building. The massing will
need to respond to the site’s hilltop location and views over the Clarion Valley should be
maximized. This building’s footprint seeks to create a ring that surrounds Hilltop Oval.
Landscape Considerations:
The siting of Hilltop Residence (A) enables the Hilltop Oval & Grove landscape initiative
(C15) with the building playing a key role in enclosing the reconfigured open space. Silar
Road, which connects Chandler Drive to Wilson Avenue, will need to be reconstructed.
Servicing Considerations:
Service access will be possible from the front and/or the rear of the building. However, car
parking should be accessed from Silar Road on the southern side of the building so that it
is shielded from view from the Hilltop Oval & Grove (C15).
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The demolition of Ralston Hall (B11) is required for the construction of Hilltop Residence
(A). Once the new residence is completed, Ballentine Hall can be demolished (C7).

192

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.61
Hilltop Residence (A) shown
within the final phase of the
FMP

Hilltop Residence (A)

Graphic 8.62
Hilltop Residence (A) shown
within the final phase of the
FMP

Hilltop Oval and Grove

Hilltop Residence (A)
SILAR (SERVIC

E)

R

D
OA

Lower Grove

193

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C2 – PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING
Recommended for New Construction
Public Safety

Graphic 8.63
Public Safety location

Proposed Programming:
The new University Police Department [UPD] building will address remaining deficiencies in
the existing Admissions building and bring Clarion’s UPD facilities in-line with contemporary
campus safety, security and law enforcement practices.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Office

0

2,000

Support

0

1,500

Total NASF

0

3,500

GSF

0

4,650

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
This new facility is to be a simple, utilitarian structure on the eastern edge of campus near
the Rhea’s Lumber site.
Landscape Considerations:
While the landscape design surrounding the new UPD is to be relatively simple and focused
on vehicular access and improved delineation between pedestrian and vehicular space,
plantings will include trees to restore the tree canopy and should be a mixture of deciduous
and evergreen species.
Servicing Considerations:
Attendant parking and drive design needs to permit easy emergency vehicle access.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative will be implemented in conjunction with the reconstruction of Lot P. Though
no enabling initiatives are required, the University views student-focused buildings and
open spaces to be a higher priority for capital investment.
Graphic 8.64
New Public Safety building
massing

Public Safety

194

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C3 – LAWN NEAR GRUNENWALD (UNIVERSITY WALK, PHASE 4)
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
Lawn near Grunenwald comprises the area between the Seminary Plaza (A14) and Lower
Grove (B1) stages of University Walk. The existing lawn is to be maintained with the
established University Walk landscape treatment—datum gingko trees, wide distinct paths
and regular spaced lighting columnar poles and signage—applied to the pathways at its
edge.
In addition, an outdoor performance stage will be introduced as a focal point for the lawn
and to provide an additional performance arts opportunity on the campus.
Servicing Considerations:
University Walk needs to provide emergency and service vehicle access to the core of the
campus.

Seminary
Grove
Egbert
Garden

Recreation
Sloper

Lawn near
Grunenwald
Outdoor
stage

Lower
Grove

Graphic 8.65
Lawn near Grunenwald shown
within the final phase of the
FMP

Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative does not require any enabling development but forms part of the phased
implementation of improvements to University Walk. It is desirable to combine this initiative
with Lower Grove (B1) if possible.

Graphic 8.66
Lawn near Grunenwald shown
within the final phase of the
FMP

195

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C4 – MARWICK-BOYD HALL
Recommended for Renovation
Proposed Programming:
The overall purpose of the building is to remain similar to existing with the main and
blockbox theaters retained and renovated. However, the offices and teaching spaces are
to be reconfigured and a more generous lobby created at the southern entrance.

Graphic 8.67
Marwick-Boyd location

2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

3,257

746

Class Lab

17,764

10,559

7,695

8,894

0

1,790

21,172

23,284

1,504

1,749

Total NASF

51,392

47,022

GSF

87,520

87,520

Office
Special Use
General Use
Support

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
This is an interior renovation with the exterior envelope largely unaffected. However, a high
level of critical maintenance investment is proposed for existing building systems to be
comprehensively replaced and updated. The existing theaters will be renovated with new
furnishings, modern lighting, and theatrical systems installed. The second floor offices and
classrooms are to be comprehensively redesigned along a single corridor with larger, more
flexible rooms. The southern entrance lobby to the black box theater is to be significantly
enlarged, increasing the potential for the building to support events and opening up views
of the interior from Greenville Avenue.
Landscape Considerations:
The initiative only includes landscaping provision for any construction impacts during the
renovation. However, the later initiative Grove near Marwick (C21) will see the replacement
of Lot 12 (adjacent to Marwick-Boyd Hall) with a landscaped open space.
Servicing Considerations:
Servicing arrangements are not proposed to be altered by this initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling projects are required for this initiative. However, it is anticipated that the
building will be closed for at least 18 months and alternative classrooms, offices and
performance space will need to be found on campus. The renovation of Hart Chapel (B9)
will provide space suitable for the performing arts, as well as a flexible classroom, and the
FMP is phased so that the renovation of Marwick-Boyd does not start until after Hart has
been completed. If sufficient swing office or teaching space is not available to facilitate
the renovation of Marwick-Boyd, the demolition of Keeling (B13) could be delayed or the
renovation of Harvey Hall (C10) brought forward.

196

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES
Teaching spaces
converted to offices

New digital
media room

Reconfigured offices

Graphic 8.68
Marwick-Boyd - level 2

New flexible
classroom with
removable divide
EXISTING - LEVEL 2

FMP - LEVEL 2
Meeting room

Graphic 8.69
Marwick-Boyd - level 1

Reconfigured offices

RENOVATED
AUDITORIUM

Renovated class labs

Back stage lounge

EXISTING - LEVEL 1

Classroom

RENOVATED
BLACK-BOX
THEATER

Class Lab
Office
Special Use

Support rooms for the
expanded lobby

General Use
N

FMP - LEVEL 1

Expanded lobby, increases the
events potential of the building

Support
Non-Assignable
Circulation
197

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C5 – ADMISSIONS
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The Admissions House has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and is in poor
condition; it is not appropriate for the University to continue to hold on to obsolete domestic
building stock and it will be demolished. The demolition of these domestic structures reduces
the University’s operating/maintenance outlays and allows for the eventual construction of
the Hilltop Connector path (C17) and the associated reforestation.
This initiative is enabled by the construction of the new Public Safety building (C2).
Graphic 8.70
Admissions House following
demolition

198

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C6 – BECKER HALL
Recommended for Major Renovation and Expansion
Proposed Programming:
The program of Becker Hall is anticipated to remain broadly similar following initiative C6,
which will see a major overhaul of the building’s interior including the reconfiguration of
teaching spaces, study areas and offices.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

11,286

9,899

Class Lab

14,615

10,684

Office

6,934

6,740

Study

3,530

3,569

0

670

General Use

228

2,801

Support

554

0

Total NASF

37,147

34,193

GSF

53,120

54,320

Special Use

Becker Hall

Graphic 8.71
Location of Becker Hall

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Both levels of the building are to undergo a major renovation. On level 1, the three wings
on the outer side of the circulation route will all be reconfigured to provide contemporized
office, study and general use space. The group of teaching spaces and offices at the
southwestern corner on the inner side of the circulation route will be combined to form a
single large classroom with four associated break-out rooms. This room will be able to be
divided along its center and will be a well-proportioned space for active learning.
On level 2, the diagonal partition walls will be removed to provide rooms proportioned for
active learning. The corridors on the east and west sides of the building will be widened
and include seating to encourage impromptu collaboration. The western wing of the
building outside of the circulation route will be opened out to provide a large learning
commons area adjacent to the classrooms. This will be a light-filled space benefitting from
the exterior cladding refit described below.
Externally, the envelope of the building will be transformed on the north and west elevations
through the removal of the existing, non-loadbearing, brickwork and the installation of a
glass curtain wall. This will dramatically improve visibility into the building from Greenville
Avenue and along the main pedestrian spine within the campus. Large doors will be
included within the northern curtain wall, enhancing the entranceway from the level 2
patio.
A new entranceway to the building will be created at the southeastern corner of the
building. This will expand slightly out from the building and will be a gateway structure for
the University when accessing the campus from Greenville Avenue.

199

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Landscape Considerations:
The external terrace at the northern side of the building should be updated as part of
the renovation, especially given the conversion of the cladding at this location to a glass
curtain wall. Consideration should also be given to the South Access & Lot R (C20) and
Grove near Marwick (C21) landscape initiatives which envision a significant redesign of
the building’s surroundings.
Servicing Considerations:
The renovation will not alter the building’s existing servicing arrangements.

Graphic 8.72
Becker Hall - level 1

Digital media lab

New study
EXISTING - LEVEL 1

New glazed curtain wall to
replace non-loadbearing
brick facade (extents
indicated by blue line)

Sound
recording
studios

Classroom
Class Lab
Office
Study
Special Use
General Use

New entrance
lobby and stairs

Support

200

Reconfigured offices

N

Non-Assignable
Circulation

Classroom layout simplified
into one large room capable
of subdivision and associated
break-out rooms

FMP - LEVEL 1

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling projects are required for this project, although it is anticipated that the
building will be out of service for 18 months and swing office and teaching space will need
to be found on the campus. This requirement could delay the demolition of Keeling (B13)
or bring forward the renovation of Harvey Hall (C10) if sufficient space cannot be found
in other buildings.

New glazed curtain wall to replace
non-loadbearing brick facade
(extents indicated by blue line)

Graphic 8.73
Becker Hall - level 2

Student lounge,
open to the
corridor

EXISTING - LEVEL 2

UP

Classroom
Renovated
restrooms
Mezzanine overlooking
new entrance atrium

Consolidated
office wing

Large classrooms and
associated glass-walled
break-out rooms

Class Lab
Office
Study
Special Use
General Use
Support

N

FMP - LEVEL 2

Non-Assignable
Circulation

201

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C7 – BALLENTINE HALL
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Ballentine Hall will be surplus to Clarion University’s requirements once Hilltop Residence
A (C1) is completed. The demolition of Ballentine Hall will enable the Hilltop Oval & Grove
landscape initiative (C15).

Graphic 8.74
Ballentine Hall following
demolition

C8 – CHANDLER DRIVE AND LOT E
Recommended for Reconstructed Access and Parking
Landscape Considerations:
The existing section of Page Street which connects Wood Street to the rear of Harvey Hall
will be reconfigured to provide a more attractive, sweeping route and rationalized car
parking layout. This initiative is integral to the creation of Recreation Slope (C9).
The road surface should be minimal, with footpaths and green spaces to either side. Trees
will be planted at regular intervals along the reconfigured drive, on the eastern (Recreation
Slope) side these should be Sugar Maple to add seasonal color in the fall.
The connection through the campus along Page Street will have been severed by the
time of this initiative by the extension of Tippin Hall (A4), and the Lower Grove (B1) and
Lawn near Grunenwald (C3) landscape projects. The remaining section of road, realigned
during this initiative (C8), will be renamed Chandler Drive.
Servicing Considerations:
Chandler Drive provides the only vehicular access to Moore, Egbert and Harvey Halls and
these buildings’ service requirements will need to be carefully considered.
Chandler Drive will connect to Silar Road and, upon the completion of the Hilltop Oval &
Grove landscape initiative (C15), it will also connect to Hilltop Road providing a service
route between Wood Street and Wilson Avenue.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The initiative will form the western edge of Recreation Slope (C9) and the two projects
should be delivered concurrently, if possible. Construction should seek to minimize the
impact on vehicular access to Moore, Egbert and Harvey Halls with the road alignment
undertaken during the summer months.

202

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.75
Chandler Drive and Lot E
shown within the final phase of
the FMP

Graphic 8.76
Chandler Drive and Lot E
shown within the final phase of
the FMP
Seminary
Plaza

W

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

CHAND

LE

R

D

RI

VE

Recreation Slope

203

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C9 – RECREATION SLOPE
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
Recreation Slope will be an oval-shaped lawn with Sugar Maple trees regularly placed at
its edge. The reconfiguration will enhance the status of Recreation Slope and establish it as
one of the campus’s signature open spaces.
There is a steep gradient across the lawn which contributes positively towards its character.
However, targeted earth forming to provide more gently sloping areas suitable for informal
recreation could form part of the project.
Servicing Considerations:
Chandler Drive (C8) will run to the west and south of the open space connecting to Hilltop
Road.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The initiative is enabled by the demolition of Ballentine Hall (C7) and should be delivered
concurrently with Chandler Drive and Lot E (C8) if possible. Any regrading of soil must
consider existing, on-site geothermal wells.

204

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.77
Recreation Slope shown within
the final phase of the FMP

Graphic 8.78
Recreation Slope shown within
the final phase of the FMP
Seminary
Plaza

RI

VE

W

CHAND

LE

R

D

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

Recreation Slope

205

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C10 – HARVEY HALL
Recommended for Partial Renovation
Proposed Programming:
The only change to the building will be at the basement, where a currently unassigned
space will be divided into two classrooms.
Harvey Hall

2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Classroom

3,210

5,160

Class Lab

1,479

3,300

Office

4,387

4,387

149

149

9,225

12,996

21,820

21,820

General Use
Graphic 8.79
Harvey Hall location

Total NASF
GSF

Massing and Architectural Considerations:
To increase the flexibility of the classrooms, they should have removable central divides
forming sufficient acoustic barriers for uninterrupted classes on either side.
Landscape and Servicing Considerations:
n/a
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
While this initiative brings a currently unassigned space into use, it does not address an
immediate space need. This contributes towards its timing within the FMP as the final
renovation project. However, no enabling development is required and the new classrooms
could be created at any time with minimal disruption to the campus. This is important, as
the initiative could be brought forward if insufficient swing teaching space is available
during any of the more major renovations to the University’s academic buildings, namely;
Still Hall (B3), Gemmell Center 2 (B5), Marwicvk-Boyd (C4) and Becker Hall (C6).
Graphic 8.80
Harvey Hall - level 0

EXISTING - LEVEL 0

Classroom
Class Lab
Support
Circulation

206

N

Non-Assignable

FMP - LEVEL 0

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C11 – FACILITIES BUILDING
Recommended for New Construction

New Facilities Building

Proposed Programming:
This includes a new office and service building for Facilities Management, along with the
conversion of an existing building to vehicle storage.
The FMP envisages a 20,000 NASF facility, 10,000 SF in a main building and an additional
10,000 SF of vehicle storage.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
The site is somewhat removed from the collegiate areas of the campus and the new
building will be a simple, cost effective design. The existing collection of small buildings
at the edge of the campus and accessible from Veterans Drive is to consolidated as the
principal facilities and maintenance area for the University.

Graphic 8.81
Facilities compound and new
building

Landscape Considerations:
The parking lot will be reconfigured with the amount of asphalt reduced. This will allow
for the introduction of a green strip along Veterans Drive, as well as simplified vehicle
movement.
Servicing Considerations:
Access to the site will remain as existing.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
The construction of the new facilities building is not dependent on any other initiatives.
However, the size of facility constructed should take regard of the planned demolition of
the McEntire buildings (C18 & C19), and site design should coordinate with the Public
Safety building (C2).

207

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C12 – GROVE NEAR LIBRARY
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
This initiative would reconfigure servicing access to Carlson Library to increase the size of
the open space between the library and 8th Avenue. New pathways would be laid through
the open space to create a diagonal walking route into the campus from the intersection
of 8th Avenue and Wood Street and more direct access from Church Street.
Tree planting and opportunities for public art should be assessed as part of this initiative.
Servicing Considerations:
Discreet and screened zccess to Carlson Library will need to be retained.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This landscape initiative could be brought forward at any time. However, projects along
University Walk should take priority.

Graphic 8.82
Grove near Library shown within
the final phase of the FMP

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

8T

H

AV

EN

UE

W

Grove near
Library

Seminary
Plaza

GR
EE
NV
ILL
V
E A
EN
UE

208

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C13 – GIVAN HALL

Campus
View Suites

Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
Givan Hall is not competitive in the student housing market and will be demolished within
the lifespan of the FMP.
No replacement for Givan Hall is provided before its demolition within the FMP. However,
the FMP includes the potential for an additional Hilltop Residence B (C23) phased for
procurement in 2033. This is a deliberate move to provide flexibility during the later phases
of the master plan and, if needed, the Hilltop Residence (B) could be constructed earlier to
provide replacement accommodation for Givan Hall.

GIVAN
HALL

Hilltop
Residence A
(C1)

Hilltop
Residence B
(C23)

Graphic 8.83
Footprint of Givan Hall shown
in relation to the FMP

C14 – LOT 11
Recommended for Parking Modifications
Landscape Considerations:
The landscape strip at the edge of the parking lot will be widened and more generously
planted, including tall canopy street trees, to partially screen the lot, add to the greenery
of Greenville Avenue, and provide a safer crossing to events at Tippin and Marwick-Boyd.
Servicing Considerations:
Existing servicing arrangements will be unaffected.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative could happen at any time and could be brought forward as part of any
community beautification or greening projects for Greenville Avenue.

GREEN

Graphic 8.84
Lot 11

VILLE
AVENU
E

Tippin Hall

209

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C15 – HILLTOP OVAL AND GROVE
Recommended for New Access, New Parking and New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
This initiative will enhance the hilltop area as a unique residential community within the
campus. The hilltop area will include reorganized vehicular connections and drop-off
circles, a strong secondary pathway network linking the area to other parts of campus and
to University Walk, extensive tree plantings (particularly evergreens), and gathering/passive
recreation areas. The landscape typology for this area is predominantly “Campus Grove”
but also includes “Pastoral Landscape” in the form of maintained lawn and woodland
areas. Specific enhancements include:
▪ Reorganized access drive and drop-off circles to the east and west of the hilltop.
▪ Oval pathway linking the residential buildings with the drop-off areas and other
campus walkways; the Hilltop Oval is intended primarily for pedestrian traffic but
can accommodate emergency access and move-in/move-out vehicular traffic; the
design of the Oval should coordinate with the oval shape of Recreation Slope (C8)
and will require significant site work to mitigate terrain at the northwest portion of
the Oval
▪ Retention of open air pavilion and fire pit located on hilltop (B6)
▪ Extensive evergreen tree planting around the perimeter of the space, defining
open lawn areas
▪ Supplemental high-canopied deciduous trees as accents to supplement the
evergreen tree planting
▪ Woodland planting on the steep hillside to the west of Valley View Suites, including
evergreen tree planting and understory planting
▪ Trees arranged to frame portals to distant views, particularly out over the footprint
of the to be demolished Keeling to the northeast
Servicing Considerations:
This project represents a major reconfiguration of vehicular access to the hilltop suites
area of the campus. Access to the existing buildings will need to be maintained and the
landscape work may potentially have to be phased over multiple summers.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative is a “terminal project” and does not enable any future initiatives. It is made
possible by the:
▪ Demolition of Ralston Hall (B11)
▪ Demolition of Givan Hall (C13)
▪ Significant regrading at the northwest side of the Oval where it meets Recreation
Slope (C9), and significant reconstruction of the access drive that connects to
Wilson Avenue
▪ Coordination with Hilltop Residence A (and potentially B)

210

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.85
Hilltop Oval and Grove

W

Recreation Slope

O

O

D

ST

Graphic 8.86
Hilltop Oval and Grove
RE

ET

Pavilion &
fire pit (B6)

Hilltop Oval
and Grove
Campus View Suites

Hilltop Residence B

Hilltop Residence A

211

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C16 – NORTH ACCESS AND LOT 6
Recommended for Reconstructed Access and New Parking
Landscape Considerations:
This initiative reorganizes the surface parking into a larger, more efficient facility at the
eastern end of the existing parking area between Wood Street and Main Street. This allows
for the removal of parking adjacent to Eagle Commons, removal of the connection to
Arnold Avenue, and the planting of a new woodland (C17). The retained surface parking
area is to include:
▪ Tree islands and stormwater capture integrated into the landscape design
▪ Pathways through the lot linking to the campus core
▪ Parking bays oriented north/south to accommodate pedestrian movement along
the drive aisles
▪ Regularly spaced and alternating tree islands to accommodate high-canopy shade
trees throughout the parking lot
▪ Broad medians to accommodate stormwater capture in the form of bio-retention
and rain gardens
The enhanced parking lots will be connected by a new access road running at the eastern
edge of the campus from Wood Street to Main Street. This will provide a more direct
vehicular access to parking Lot 6 from Main Street, reducing vehicular movements within
the core of the campus. The closure of Lot H will result in the loss of 67 parking spaces,
this will be more than offset by reconfiguring Lot 6 from 38 to 138 spaces (giving a net
increase from C16 of 33 spaces).
A major new gateway sign, matching initiative A12, is to be positioned at the junction of
Main Street and the new access road.
Servicing Considerations:
The initiative includes a new access road between Wood Street and Main Street. The
vehicular load where the new road and Main Street meet will need to be assessed by
PennDOT to determine if this should be a signalized junction, but a traffic light is anticipated.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This landscape project is enabled by the demolition Wilkinson Hall (A16), and coordinated
with the reconstruction of Arnold Avenue (A20).

212

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.87
North Access and Lot 6

Graphic 8.88
North Access and Lot 6
Lot 3
MA

IN

ST

RE

ET

New large scale
university sign

W

O

O

D

ST

Lot 6
RE

ET

New road connecting
Main and Wood Streets

213

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C17 – HILLTOP CONNECTOR
Recommended for New Landscaping

Graphic 8.89
The new connecting path will wind
its way through the woodland

Landscape Considerations:
A new woodland area to the east of Eagle Commons is proposed that would include a
pathway connecting Wood Street to the Main Street residences (A2 & A3). This would be
conceived as a primarily natural area and play a key role in the FMP’s landscape strategy
of extending the surrounding woodlands into the campus.
Servicing Considerations:
The relatively small parking area (Lot G) which services Eagle Commons is retained.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This project is enabled by the reconfiguration of parking in initiative C16.

AR

NO

LD

AV

EN

UE

Graphic 8.90
Hilltop Connector

W

214

O

O

D

ST

RE

ET

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C18 – MCENTIRE BUILDING
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
By the end of the FMP timeframe, this building will be obsolete and in need of significant
repairs. Its functions should be relocated to a new facilities and maintenance complex
(C11). The McEntire Building should be demolished to make way for a new and highly
efficient south parking field (C20, South Access and Lot R). This initiative should be
coordinated with C19 (McEntire Warehouse).

C19 – MCENTIRE WAREHOUSE
Recommended for Demolition
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
By the end of the FMP timeframe, this building will be obsolete and in need of significant
repairs. Its functions should be relocated to a new facilities and maintenance complex
(C11). The Warehouse should be demolished to make way for a new and highly efficient
south parking field (C20, South Access and Lot R). This initiative should be coordinated
with C18 (McEntire Building).

Graphic 8.91
Locations of McEntire Building
and Warehouse within
completed FMP

MCENTIRE BUILDING

MCENTIRE WAREHOUSE

215

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C20 – SOUTH ACCESS AND LOT R
Recommended for Reconstructed Access and New Parking
Landscape Considerations:
The demolition of the McEntire buildings, in addition to the earlier Thorn 1 and 2
demolitions, will allow existing Lot R to be significantly enlarged. This will become the
campus’s largest parking lot, serving Marwick-Boyd and the southern half of the campus.
The lot should be divided by planted medians to reduce the visual impact of a mass
of parking, with stormwater swales integrated into the design. Tree islands should be
staggered to provide better canopy coverage.Tree planting should add seasonal color to
the campus, with Red Oak at the edges, Red Maple on central medians and Yellow Gingko
connecting northwards to University Walk.
Servicing Considerations:
The parking lot is to be accessed from both Greenville and Wilson Avenues.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative is enabled by the demolitions of the McEntire buildings (C18 & C19) and
Thorn 1 and 2 (A18 & A19). Its design should be coordinated with Grove near Marwick
(C21).

216

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.92
South Accessand Lot R

Graphic 8.93
South Access and Lot R

Grove near
Marwick

E

WIL

AVENU

SON

AVE

VILLE

NUE

GREEN

Lot R

217

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C21 – GROVE NEAR MARWICK
Recommended for New Landscaping
Landscape Considerations:
The existing parking lot is to be decommissioned and replaced by a new lawn, groves of
trees and sweeping pathways which will provide more direct access between Greenville
Avenue and University Walk.
Servicing Considerations:
Thorn Street will be closed and demolished to become part of the grove near Marwick.
Vehicular access to Marwick-Boyd will be via Payne Street. This may require a new service
entrance to Marwick-Boyd from Marwich Grove that relies on otherwise pedestrian routes..
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
This initiative is enabled by the expansion of parking within South Access and Lot R (C20).

GREEN

Graphic 8.94
Grove near Marwick

VILLE
AVENU
E

Lot R

218

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C22 – WOOD STREET
Recommended for Reconstructed Access and Parking
Landscape Considerations:
Wood Street forms a key east-west route across the campus. This initiative provides for
additional tree planting, sidewalk enhancements and updating of street lighting and
signage. Additionally, landscaped bulb-out curbs will replace some parking spaces. These
will bring additional greenery along Wood Street and break up the visual dominance of
parked cars and/or a sea of asphalt.
Servicing Considerations:
Existing servicing arrangements will remain unaltered by this initiative.
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
No enabling projects are required for this project and it could be delivered at any time.

Graphic 8.95
Wood Street

W

O

Lot 6
O

D

ST

RE

ET

Recreation
Slope

219

8

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

C23 – NEW HILLTOP RESIDENCE (B)
Recommended for New Construction
Proposed Programming:
Hilltop Residence (B) would provide new student housing following best practices at the
time of design. It has been included in the master plan to provide flexibility in case housing
needs in phase C (2024 – 2033) require additional construction. It is programmed in the
FMP for procurement at the end of 2033, but could be brought forward if needed. This
initiative is not intended to add significant bed capacity, but rather replace Givan Hall.
2013 NASF

Per FMP NASF

Residential

0

28,800

General Use

0

3,200

Total NASF

0

32,000

GSF

0

40,000

The program of the building is based on a 40,000 GSF building (four levels given the FMP
building footprint), with an 80% gross-to-net floor area ratio. The program has then been
split 90% residential to 10% general use to allow for lounges and other common areas.
Massing and Architectural Considerations:
Hilltop Residence (B) should take an architectural lead from the earlier new residential
building (C1).
Landscape Considerations:
The siting of Hilltop Residence (B) completes the Hilltop Oval & Grove landscape initiative
(C15) with the building playing a key role in enclosing the reconfigured open space.
Servicing Considerations:
Service access will be possible from the front and/or the rear of the building. However, car
parking should be accessed from Silar (service) Road on the southern side of the building
so that it is shielded from view from the Hilltop Oval & Grove (C15).
Scope and Sequencing Considerations:
It is important that the site is safeguarded for a future building following the demolition of
Givan Hall, with the two Hilltop Residences (C1 & C23) conceived as a pair of buildings.
However, it is likely that Hilltop Residence (B) will not be required during the time frame if
the FMP.

220

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

8

MASTER PLAN - INITIATIVES

Graphic 8.96
Hilltop Residence (B) shown
within the final phase of the
FMP

Hilltop Residence (B)

Graphic 8.97
Hilltop Residence (B) shown
within the final phase of the
FMP
Lawn near
Grunenwald
Chandler Oval
and Grove

Hilltop Residence (B)

SILAR (

CE
SERVI

O
) R

AD

221

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

222

CLARION CAMPUS

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9

9

224

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

This section provides the cost and implementation path of the FMP initiatives by phase.
The FMP is divided into three standalone phases of development:
▪ 2013 to 2018
▪ 2018 to 2023
▪ 2023 to 2033

Graphic 9.01 (overleaf)
Campus on completion of the FMP
(c.2033)

Graphic 9.01 (previous page) represents the campus on completion of the FMP.

225

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9.1 PHASE A (2013 - 2018)
Year of
Procurement

Initiative
Number

Initiative name

2013

A1

Becht Hall Renovations

16.6M

A2

Main Street Housing – N.

30.5M

A3

Main Street Housing – S.

30.5M

A4

Tippin Expansion

44.9M

A5

Rec Center Expansion

4.2M

A6

Stevens Hall 1 - Accessibility

2.5M

A7

Moore Hall 1 - Accessibility

1.0M

A8

Egbert Hall - Renovations

5.8M

A9

Carlson Library, Level A

1.6M

A10

Gemmell Center 1 - Interior

1.4M

A11

Ralston Hall, BSN Renovation

1.5M

A12

Greenville Ave Campus Edge

1.3M

A13

Admissions Hall - Renovations

0.5M

A14

Seminary Plaza - Uni. Walk 1

4.3M

A15

Nair Demolition

1.7M

A16

Wilkinson Demolition

1.7M

A17

Carrier Demolition

0.5M

A18

Thorn I Demolition

0.04M

A19

Thorn II Demolition

0.04M

A20

Arnold Avenue - Uni. Walk 2

2.4M

Critical Maintenance

9.2M

2015

2016

2017

2013-2018

Total
*Escalated at 3% from 2013 to year of procurement.

226

Escalated
Project Cost*

162.2M

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9

Graphic 9.02
Areas included within Phase A,
2013 - 2018

227

9

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9.2 PHASE 2 (2018 - 2023)
Year of
Procurement

Initiative
Number

Initiative name

2018

B1

Lower Grove - Uni. Walk 3

2.7M

B2

Moore Hall 2 - Renovation

1.2M

B3

Still Hall Renovation

B4

Lawn near Still

0.6M

B5

Gemmell Center 2 - Renovation

6.6M

B6

Hilltop Pavilion and Firepit

0.1M

B7

New Health Sciences Building

B8

Stevens Hall 2, Classrooms

2.1M

B9

Hart Chapel

5.3M

2021

B10

Davis Hall, Offices

2.0M

2022

B11

Ralston Demolition

1.2M

B12

Strohman Demolition

0.1M

B13

Keeling Demolition

0.5M

2019

2020

2018-2023

Critical Maintenance
Total

*Escalated at 3% from 2013 to year of procurement.

228

Escalated
Project Cost*

16.4M

24.7M

58.6M
122.1M

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

Graphic 9.03
Areas included within Phase B,
2018 - 2023

229

9

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9.3 PHASE 3 (2023 - 2033)
Year of
Procurement

Initiative
Number

Initiative name

2023

C1

New Hilltop Residence (A)

16.0M

C2

New Public Safety Building

3.7M

C3

Lawn near Grunenwald - Uni. Walk 4

1.7M

C4

Marwick-Boyd Renovation

C5

Admissions Demolition

0.1M

2025

C6

Becker Hall Renovation

24.9M

2026

C7

Ballentine Demolition

0.6M

C8

Chandler Drive & Lot E

1.5M

C9

Recreation Slope

1.7M

C10

Harvey Hall Basement

1.9M

2027

C11

New Facilities Building

8.8M

2028

C12

Grove near Library

0.6M

2030

C13

Givan Demolition

1.6M

C14

Lot 11

0.2M

C15

Hilltop Oval and Grove

4.9M

C16

North Access & Lot 6

5.4M

C17

Hilltop Connector

1.9M

C18

McEntire Building Demolition

0.7M

C19

McEntire Warehouse Demolition

0.2M

C20

South Access & Lot R

6.2M

C21

Grove near Marwick

1.4M

C22

Wood Street

1.3M

C23

New Hilltop Residence (B)

21.8M

Critical Maintenance

37.7M

2024

2031

2032

2033
2023-2033

Total

*Escalated at 3% from 2013 to year of procurement.

230

Escalated
Project Cost*

32.4M

177.2M

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

Graphic 9.04
Areas included within Phase C,
2023 - 2033

231

Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
September 25, 2014 REPORT

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9.4 FMP INITIATIVES PROJECT PLAN
PHASE A

Graphic 9.05
Clarion Campus Delivery Chart
Funding & Design Procurement
Planning/Design Services
Contractor Procurement
Construction

2014
NEW BUILDING INITIATIVES
Becht Hall
A1
Main Street Housing - N.
A2
Main Street Housing - S.
A3
Tippin Expansion
A4
Rec Center Expansion
A5
Health Sciences Building
B7
Hilltop Residence (A)
C1
Campus Police
C2
Facilities Building
C11
New Hilltop Residence (B)
C23
BUILDING RENOVATION INITIATIVES
A6
Stevens Hall 1 - Accessibility
A7
Moore Hall 1 - Accessibility
A8
Egbert Hall
A9
Carlson Library, Level A
A10
Gemmell Center 1 - Interior
A11
Ralston Hall
A13
Admissions Hall
B2
Moore Hall 2
B3
Still Hall
B5
Gemmell Center 2
B8
Stevens Hall
B9
Hart Chapel
B10
Davis Hall
C4
Marwick-Boyd
C6
Becker Hall
C10
Harvey Hall
LANDSCAPE INITIATIVES
A12
Greenville Ave Campus Edge
A14
Seminary Plaza - Uni. Walk 1
A20
Arnold Avenue - Uni. Walk 2
B1
Lower Grove - Uni. Walk 3
B4
Lawn near Still
B6
Hilltop Pavilion and Firepit
C3
Lawn near Grunenwald - Uni. Walk 4
C8
Chandler Drive & Lot E
C9
Recreation Slope
C12
Grove near Library
C14
Lot 11
C15
Hilltop Oval & Grove
C16
North Access & Lot 6
C17
Hilltop Connector
C20
South Access & Lot R
C21
Grove near Marwick
C22
Wood Street
BUILDING DEMOLITION INITIATIVES
Nair Hall
A15
Wilkinson Hall
A16
Carrier Hall
A17
Thorn 1
A18
Thorn 2
A19
Ralston Hall
B11
Strohman
B12
Keeling
B13
Admissions
C5
Ballentine
C7
Givan
C13
McEntire Building
C18
McEntire Warehouse
C19

232

2015

2016

2017

2018

Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
September 25, 2014 REPORT

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

PHASE B
2019

2020

2021

PHASE C
2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

233

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

9.5 FMP CLOSE OUT
Graphic 9.06 shows the impact of the FMP initiatives on the overall quantity of FICM uses
with regard to the 2013 and 2023 space needs outlined in Section 5 of this report.
Overall, the space needs indicate an existing surplus of 71,305 SF in 2013. This includes
major surpluses of office and unclassified uses, and less dramatic surpluses of teaching
and study spaces. These surpluses are somewhat offset by deficiencies in special, general,
support, and healthcare uses. The existing planned projects at the Clarion campus (A1 to
A5) will add 266,745 NASF to the campus and, if only these initiatives were delivered by
2023, the overall 2023 surplus would stand at 223,089. However, in total the remainder
of the FMP initiatives (A6 to C23) represent a major reduction in assignable space,
cumulatively removing 178,955 NASF through demolition and renovation. The campus
will have a reduced surplus of space in 2023 of 32,497 NASF.
The surplus/deficit of the 2033 FMP space allocation to the 2023 space needs is included
in the table. While it is difficult to predict the campus space needs in 2033, the comparison
is useful as it shows the direction of facilities change throughout the entire FMP; and,
particularly in the latter stages, there is flexibility as to when initiatives could be undertaken
and projects may be delivered earlier than anticipated.
The FMP retains a surplus of teaching spaces on the campus, slightly reduced from the
2013 level. This surplus will be required at different stages of the FMP as major renovations
of academic buildings are proposed with potential closures of 18 to 24 months for Still
Hall, Marwick-Boyd and Becker Hall. Swing-teaching space will be needed during these
times. However, the surplus does indicate that the Harvey Hall (C10) basement classroom
additions may not be needed. The prototype classrooms within Carlson Library (A9) also
add over 5,000 SF of teaching space. This initiative is intended as a test-bed to inform
the classroom renovations of other initiatives and provide swing-teaching space. Once the
renovations of the campus’s academic buildings have been completed, the requirement
for teaching space within Carlson Library should be reassessed.
A constant theme of the FMP renovations is a reduction of teaching space (in addition to
contemporizing), and an increase in general use space, in the form of student lounges/
commons. This is intended to support the University’s shift to more active learning while
encouraging interaction between students and faculty. Nearly 22,000 SF of general uses
are added to the campus through the initiatives, spread across the renovations and new
construction. The deficit in special uses on the campus is largely met through the Recreation
Center expansion (A5).

234

2013-2033 Clarion Univeristy Facilities Master Plan
Clarion Campus
February 2015

9

IMPLEMENTATION & COSTING

2013 EXISTING ALLOCATION

UNCLASSIFIED

RESIDENTIAL

HEALTHCARE

SUPPORT

GENERAL USE

SPECIAL USE

STUDY

OFFICE

LABORATORIES

BUILDING
NASF

CLASSROOM /
LECTURE

FICM

1,035,666

66,608

87,965 144,309

79,756

88,378 149,710

49,878

1,004 316,984

51,074

964,361

51,208

81,102

96,125

68,691 111,364 172,593

63,887

2,407 316,984

-

71,305

15,400

6,863

48,184

11,065 -22,986 -22,883 -14,009

2023 FMP ALLOCATION

1,067,196

59,977

2023 SPACE NEEDS

1,034,699

46,481

32,497

13,496

1,071,143

58,029

86,786 138,427

36,444

11,548

2013 SPACE NEEDS
2013 NEEDS SURPLUS/DEFICIT

2023 NEEDS SURPLUS/DEFICIT
2033 FMP ALLOCATION
2033 FMP Vs 2023 SPACE
NEEDS SURPLUS/DEFICIT

96,101 144,374

85,368 127,070 167,368

47,514

79,130 126,555

70,197 122,596 180,595

70,553

16,971

15,171

7,656

17,819

11,872

4,474 -13,227 -23,039

85,407 129,530 171,159
15,210

6,934

49,902

-9,436 -20,651

-1,403

0

51,074

5,394 326,453

7,577

2,460 336,132
2,934

-

-9,679

7,577

5,394 343,459

3,050

2,934

3,050

7,327

Graphic 9.06
Comparison of existing and FMP
assignable FICM
square feet with calculated space
needs

235