18 May 2016 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN UPATE

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "18 May 2016 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN UPATE"

Brianna Atkinson
5 years ago
Views:

1 18 May 2016 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN UPATE Council of the Deans ( Over view)

2 AGENDA Engagement & What We Heard Focus Elements: 1. Development Framework Plan 2. Campus Mobility 3. Campus Guidelines 4. Wayfinding & Signage 5. Sustainability 6. Preservation & Adaptive Reuse Questions/Discussion

3 ENGAGEMENT & WHAT WE HEARD

4 engage: Campus Engagement EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COUNCIL OF THE DEANS COUNCIL ON THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT ADVISORY MEETINGS I INTRODUCTION TO CMP UPDATE SURVEY OF 2004 GOALS SWOT EXERCISE INITIAL CAMPUS OBSERVATIONS OPEN FORUM INTRODUCTION PLACE SURVEYS OPEN SUGGESTIONS DISCUSSION TABLE FOCUS GROUP I INTRODUCTION TO CMP UPDATE, SURVEY OF 2004 GOALS, SWOT EXERCISE AND INITIAL CAMPUS OBSERVATIONS LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES/ HENSEL PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES SUSTAIN- ABILITY PLAN PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE RESEARCH PARK MOBILITY SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING HEALTH SCIENCES CAMPUS RESIDENCE LIFE AND DINING INFRA- STRUCTURE VOICE OF THE CAMPUS STUDENT OPEN FORUM FOCUS GROUP II REVIEW OF WHAT WE HEARD, CAMPUS FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT, PRELIMINARY APPROACH & SCENARIOS LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES HENSEL PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES SUSTAIN- ABILITY PLAN PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE RESEARCH PARK MOBILITY SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING RESIDENCE LIFE AND DINING INFRA- STRUCTURE VOICE OF THE CAMPUS FACULTY & STAFF OPEN FORUM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COUNCIL OF THE DEANS COUNCIL ON THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT JOINT FOCUS GROUP MEETING MPO TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ADVISORY MEETINGS II ENGAGMENT OVERVIEW WHAT WE HEARD CAMPUS FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY APPROACH & SCENARIOS

5 engage: Campus Engagement: Student Open Forum 1. Students most frequently commented on landscaping and open space. 2. Comments on campus architecture with a simultaneous desire to preserve the A & M-ness of campus and update the buildings to support contemporary needs. 3. Mobility comments focused on two major issues: Safety among various forms of transportation Repair of existing streets and sidewalks 4. West campus was articulated as being over there and disconnected from east campus.

6 engage: Campus Engagement: Faculty & Staff Open Forum 1. Numerous comments about vehicular circulation and access to parking locations. 2. Similar comments on the character differences between east and west campus and indicated a desire west campus felt more like east campus. 3. A desire to highlight and emphasize the visibility of the academic accomplishments of campus. 4. Out-of-date signage within Buildings 5. Identifiable primary building entrances

7 engage: What We Heard - Common Themes Pedestrian Conflict Areas Bizzell Street Engineering District (Ross Mall, Ireland St., etc.) University Drive Crossings White Creek Erosion Issues West Campus Remoteness Connection from White Creek Housing to East Campus Connection from West Campus to East Campus West Campus feels remote due to lower population and density Memorial Student Center Works well on multiple levels Design Standards, Signage, Branding, Green/Open Space, etc. Traffic Congestion Points Reed Arena/Parking Lots (100) Bizzell Street (Parking Lots 54) Green Space JK Williams Admin Building East Lawn (formal) All Quads (Cushing, Academic, Architecture) West Campus Green Space is underutilized Spence Park has great potential Simpson Drill Field multifunctional open space Build-to-Line Identify (and Enforce?) Is it still applicable? Campus Policies and Process Campus Policies and Process should align with the CMP Update in order to implement the plan accordingly Campus Branding Multiple opportunities to enhance TAMU branding Arrival points, institutional identity and campus traditions need to be leveraged. Off-Campus Development Will lead to new access points and the need for improved systems to support TAMU users of these developments

will help to forecast and guide our planning efforts moving forward. 2.

Plan Focus Elements for a holistic understanding of the interrelationships.

8 engage: Continuing Engagement 1. The input gathered from the advisory groups, focus groups and open forums will help to forecast and guide our planning efforts moving forward. 2. The composition of Focus Groups will evolve to mirror the Campus Master Plan Focus Elements for a holistic understanding of the interrelationships. 3. Engagement will continue to occur frequently to support and inform the planning process. 1.

9 FOCUS ELEMENTS

10 elements: Six Focus Elements LANDSCAPE HENSEL PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES SUSTAIN- ABILITY PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE RESEARCH PARK MOBILITY SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING HEALTH SCIENCES CAMPUS RESIDENCE LIFE AND DINING INFRA- STRUCTURE VOICE OF THE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK PLAN CIRCULATION AND PARKING PLAN SUSTAINABILITY PLAN PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE PLAN SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING PLAN LANDSCAPE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES

11 elements: Six Focus Elements Campus Development Plan A review and analysis of existing planning efforts undertaken by the University since the adoption of the Campus Master Plan in 2004 will be completed. This will include the adopted and proposed District Plans, Vision 2020, current Academic Plans, current Strategic Plan(s), and other planning efforts. Mobility The planning effort will evaluate current campus access and circulation along with projected scenarios based on potential growth. Emphasis will be placed on the pedestrian experience along with campus gateways, edge conditions, alternate mobility opportunities, future garage locations and connections to the community. Sustainability Develop a set of sustainability guidelines that will inform the planning effort and the Development Framework Plan. Identify both planning and building best practices relevant to sustainability strategies. Incorporate standards into a set of Sustainability Guidelines. Preservation & Adaptive Reuse Review the current list of heritage campus buildings to identify necessary additions or deletions, coordinated with facilities indicated for potential demolition in the 2004 Campus Master Plan and adopted District Plans. The current Heritage Building Guidelines will be reviewed and recommendations made for revisions. Wayfinding & Signage Develop a signage and wayfinding master plan. This effort will focus on developing a breakdown of where wayfinding is needed and the development of new signage standards for the university. The wayfinding system includes directional, identification, and orientation signs to facilitate campus navigation and identity. Campus Guidelines Review and recommend additions, deletions or modifications to the current 2004 Campus Master Plan guidelines for architectural and landscape components.

12 CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN

character: frame: Comparing 2004 to 2016 - Framework 2004

13 character: frame: Comparing 2004 to Framework 2004 Civic Structure (Framework + Green Space Network) 2016 Framework

14 character: frame: Comparing 2004 to 2016 Open Space Network 2004 Civic Structure (Framework + Green Space Network) 2016 Open Space Network

15 character: frame: Comparing 2004 to 2016 Character Zones 2004 Floor Area Ratio 2016 Character Zones

frame: Campus Character Zones: Examples ZONE: CAMPUS CORE 139 acres 54 buildings Avg. footprint: 16,061 s.f. Floor-area ratio:.71 Avg. building height: 4 stories Avg.

16 frame: Campus Character Zones: Examples ZONE: CAMPUS CORE 139 acres 54 buildings Avg. footprint: 16,061 s.f. Floor-area ratio:.71 Avg. building height: 4 stories Avg. year of construction: 1948 Parking count: 2088 Landscape Character: Formal ZONE: RESEARCH PARK 193 acres 13 buildings Avg. footprint: 25,397 s.f. Floor-area ratio:.08 Avg. building height: 2 stories Avg. year of construction: 1997 Parking count: 1816 Landscape character: Suburban

17 CAMPUS MOBILITY

18 mobility: Campus Mobility 1. Create a pedestrian-focused campus environment. 2. Enhance safety among the various forms of mobility: Pedestrians Bikes & Boards Transit Personal Vehicles Others 3. Improve congestion and conflict areas.

19 Harvey Mitchell Parkway FM 2818 Texas Ave. mobility: Proposed Pedestrian Zone 2004 Master Plan University Dr. George Bush Dr.

20 Harvey Mitchell Parkway FM 2818 Texas Ave. mobility: Existing Pedestrian Zone University Dr. George Bush Dr.

21 Harvey Mitchell Parkway FM 2818 Texas Ave. mobility: Pedestrian Zone: 2016 Master Plan - Test Scenario University Dr. George Bush Dr.

22 CAMPUS GUIDELINES

23 guide: Guidelines Approach CAMPUS GUIDELINES SITE AND LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING GUIDELINES ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING GUIDELINES PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE GUIDELINES

24 Policies & Supplementary Procedures CMP Update Strategic guide: Architecture and Planning Guidelines Approach ASPIRATIONAL/STRATEGIC FORM BASED/MASSING PRESCRIPTIVE PERFORMANCE BASED

25 guide: Site and Landscape Guidelines Approach PROGRAMMING / FUNCTION DESIGN / AMENITIES Formal Civic Space Courtyard, Quadrangle Park, Pocket Park Natural, Creek Recreation/Athletics Streetscape Connective Green Space Open lawns/fields Texas Landscape Paving /Hardscape Seating Plantings Shade Lighting Signage Access

26 WAYFINDING AND SIGNAGE

27 find: Wayfinding and Signage 1. Define the audience and support the experience on campus. 2. Reinforce the institutional identity and brand. 3. Clarify the use and message of wayfinding.

28 Smaller More Larger Less find: Wayfinding and Signage Hierarchy & Goals SCALE CONTENT

29 find: Example Bush Drive to Century Tree George Bush Dr.

30 SUSTAINABILITY

31 sustain: Sustainability 1. Incorporate holistic and broad Sustainability Themes that encourage flexible and comprehensive outcomes. 2. Two Classifications: Operational (Campus Systems) Non-Operational (Campus Behaviors and Policies) 3. Engrain principles, priorities and recommendations throughout planning solutions.

32 sustain: Sustainability Approach Operational Matters Non-Operational Matters Energy Use/ Conservation Campus Mobility Waste Management Social Sustainability Education, Outreach and Engagement Ecology and Landscape Built Environment/ Site Design Dining Services Administrative Support Pedagogy, Research and Innovation INCLUDED SUPPORTED REINFORCED

33 PRESERVATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE

preserve: Preservation and Adaptive Reuse 1. Identify potential historic resources. Buildings Interior Spaces Open Spaces Pathways View Corridors University Dr. 2.

34 preserve: Preservation and Adaptive Reuse 1. Identify potential historic resources. Buildings Interior Spaces Open Spaces Pathways View Corridors University Dr. 2. Catalog resources relative to level of significance and priority. 3. Document resources to highlight cultural and educational aspects. 4. Establish guidelines that care for these resources. Eligible Buildings TAMU Heritage Buildings On the Fence Buildings Buildings George Bush Dr.

35 QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION

36 18 May 2016 Thank you!

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN UPATE

19 MAY 2016 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN UPATE Metropolitan Planning Organization AGENDA Introductions Planning Scope Observation & Analysis: Mobility Systems Campus Development Plan Mobility Planning Scenarios