Learning Resources

Abstract: If a facilities master plan cannot keep up with rapid change, it becomes just another big book on the shelf. The University of Michigan-Ann Arbor’s (UM) College of Engineering did away with a static master plan in favor of a one that is data-driven and reflects the latest trends in engineering education. In this session, you will learn how UM created this responsive master plan that acts more as an interactive set of tools than a static document.

Abstract: Harvard University’s Smith Campus Center has repurposed an entire city block, providing innovative new spaces for collaboration and a welcoming “front door” to the university. The campus center has been transformative for Harvard, revitalizing a prominent site at the campus's crossroads and providing the wider community of 44,000 people with new central gathering and events spaces. Come learn how we successfully navigated stakeholder outreach and generated a design solution within the existing building.

Abstract: In 1966, Frederick W. Mayer joined the staff of the University Planner’s Office at the University of Michigan. In 1968 he was named “university planner”—a position he held until his retirement in 2003. In this position he was responsible for the preparation and updating of master plans for all of the university’s campuses.

The material included in this work is presented as a case study of one university’s successful program of campus planning and implementation over a period of 40 years. It is hoped that it will prove instructive and useful to other institutions and individuals engaged in the process of campus planning.

Abstract: Over their 150-year history, land-grant universities have played a tremendous and vital role in the development of the United States and the education of its people. Most of these institutions were established as the result of the Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862. How has this mission, drafted in a much different time, held up over the years? As we move toward the third decade of the twenty-first century, many universities are evolving to better embrace changing student demographics; build industry partnerships; and reframe campus legacies to ensure that the land-grant mission still supports the needs of our times.

Abstract: This article explores a major opportunity that universities have to capitalize on their existing property portfolio to both earn additional revenue and enhance the quality of the student and staff experience: the creation of university-linked retirement communities. We examine this opportunity in the context of demographic and educational trends in the United States and United Kingdom and identify the factors that act as catalysts for universities to create these communities. We then describe a conceptual framework for university-linked retirement communities that categorizes communities in terms of the level of university involvement in the community and the level of care provided to the residents. We next place university-linked retirement communities in a broader context of social housing trends in Europe and suggest that it may also be possible to create more socially inclusive university-linked learning-centered communities that provide additional opportunities for universities to capitalize on their resources and expertise while contributing to the surrounding community.

Abstract: Campus chapels once bespoke a school’s curriculum, defined the student body, contributed to ambiance, and served as a recruitment tool for parents looking to religion to influence their children’s character. As schools strayed from their religious roots, encountered pressing program needs, and faced funding concerns, many of these rarely used buildings fell into disrepair. In the last few years, efforts to preserve an institution’s heritage, maximize space, and address spirituality have led schools to consider restoring and reusing campus chapels. This article focuses on keeping the chapel’s original design intent while capitalizing on its strengths to upgrade the building and supplement its usage.

Abstract: Universities and colleges across the country are faced with growth in the campus population and the loss of surface parking lots for new buildings. The response of many institutions is to build new garages with the assumption that parking demand ratios will remain the same. Such an approach, however, can be extremely expensive—upwards of $2,000 per net new space annually. In many cases, a mix of parking and demand reduction programs—such as shuttles, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and financial incentives not to drive—can accommodate growth at a lower cost per trip. A balanced approach will also tend to support other goals, from improving town-gown relations to maintaining debt capacity. Demand management strategies have been employed by institutions for many years. However, it is less common for a cost-benefit analysis to be undertaken comparing them with new parking construction. Using examples from universities in California and Colorado, this article demonstrates a methodology to inform basic decisions on the amount of parking required to cater to campus growth, which can be incorporated into campus master planning.

Abstract: This article explains the various steps taken by Cornell University to create a Freshmen Campus on their North Campus. It first explores the reasoning about the decision to create a Freshmen Campus and then explains the process whereby the plan was developed. It compares the developed new physical plan to other campuses as well. Within the article are planning guidelines for designing new freshmen residence halls and dining facilities.