Oakland University

Final Draft

Prepared for:
Oakland University
Rochester Michigan 48063

Prepared by:
Johnson Johnson & Roy, Inc.
303 North Main Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan  48104

14 November 1988

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Note: Illustrations in original not included here.

I.  STUDY PURPOSE

II.  PLAN APPROACH

III.  INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
..........INTRODUCTION
..........REGIONAL AND VICINITY OVERVIEW 
................BACKGROUND
................REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS
................VICINITY PROFILES 
................OPEN SPACE
................LAND USE
................CIRCULATION
..........UNIVERSITY AND  SUBCAMPUS OVERVIEW
................UNIVERSITY
................MAIN CAMPUS
................EAST CAMPUS
................SOUTHWEST CAMPUS
................SOUTHEAST CAMPUS
................HOUSING AREA

IV.  GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
.......... ROLE AND MISSION
................ PROGRAM GOAL I
................ RELATIONSHIPS GOAL 11
................ CAMPUS GOAL III
................ SITE SYSTEMS AND CHARACTER GOAL IV

V.   DESIGN CONCEPT

VI.  FRAMEWORK PLAN AND GUIDELINES
........... INTRODUCTION
........... UNIVERSITY 
.................OPEN SPACE 
.....................UNIVERSITY IMAGE AREA
..................... PRESERVATION AREA
................ FACILITIES
................ VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING
................ PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
........... MAIN CAMPUS
................. OPEN SPACE
....................... FACILITY SETTINGS
....................... THE MALL
....................... THE COMMONS
...................... CAPTURED SPACE
................ FACILITIES
................ VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING 
................ PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION 
........... EAST CAMPUS
..................OPEN SPACE
..................FACILITIES
................ VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING 
................ PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION 
........... SOUTHWEST CAMPUS
..................LAND USE
........... SOUTHEAST CAMPUS
..................LAND USE
............HOUSING AREA
..................LAND USE

VII.  DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
............SHORT TERM PROJECTS
............MID-TERM PROJECTS
............LONG TERM PROJECTS

I.  STUDY PURPOSE

The Oakland University Master Plan of 1971 provided a broad framework for development opportunities at Oakland University that identified expansion capacities and zones to be preserved, recognizing the qualities and value of the campus' natural features. It was successful in organizing subcampus units and suggesting linkage potential between zones. At that time, most of the University development was concentrated within Main Campus and East Campus. The support systems of roads, walks, facilities, and open space were identified and located. In addition, the plan stressed the importance of the University's rural setting and identified the fabric of open space to be preserved.

The overall vision of the 1971 plan is appropriate today, but adjustments need to occur to respond to the rapidly changing environment around the University. The impact of a changing student population, dramatic office and residential growth within the region, and technological changes has caused the University to evaluate its role within this dynamic setting. It is within this context of change that the Oakland University Master Plan Update of 1988 has been prepared.

II. PLAN APPROACH

The 1988 Master Plan Update for Oakland University is built on three elements in providing direction for the future growth of the institution.  The first is the 1971 Master Plan that was prepared to accommodate a readily expanding university community and serves as the base from which this update was formulated.  The second element is the changing conditions, both in the region and the University vicinity, that are affecting Oakland.  The third element is the interactive process developed to receive input and feedback from various administrators, faculty and staff at the University regarding issues and opportunities facing Oakland.

The study process began with the assumption that certain aspects of the 1971 plan remain valid and that other changes in the community will significantly affect the planning for Oakland University. Preservation of the beautiful 1600-acre parcel of land that comprises Oakland University continues to be of paramount importance. Blending its rural character with the intensive academic development of the main campus and the increasing office/research/ housing growth around the University are also critical considerations. Responding to the future needs of the area may require some departure from previous plans as the University grows in academics, research, and community service while continuing to provide an oasis of natural open space in an increasingly developed suburban environment.

A campus master planning procedure was developed to examine Oakland's historic evolution, current conditions, and future expectations. This was facilitated through a two-step process consisting of (1) baseline conditions and (2) the Master Plan Update (see Figure 1). The purpose of this step was to obtain an understanding of how the campus developed and what the existing issues are facing Oakland University. Baseline overview inventories included: property holdings, natural features, a facilities inventory, a traffic access and circulation review, parking capacities, pedestrian systems, campus character and condition, and infrastructure (utility systems) capabilities. In addition, conversations and interviews were conducted with administrators, faculty staff, student, and community leaders to gain insight pertaining to perceived needs of the institution; relationships within the institution and between the institution and its neighbors; political conditions; perceptions of the University's overall image; and areas requiring attention to improve the existing conditions.

Out of the first step, a working set of goals and objectives was generated to guide the second step, updating,the master plan. Step 2 consisted of focusing on inventory/analysis, master plan, and implementation phases that translated the working goals into a development concept and framework for growth. With the flexible, but strong, framework and guidelines in place, the University can effectively monitor and adapt facilities/improvements/expansion as the need occurs.

In addition to the planning process offering a logical progression to formulate the plan in an orderly manner, it provided for a number of interaction points between several levels of the University's administration and user groups to guide the consultants, build consensus, and generate support among those entities that must live with the plan upon its completion. The combined consulting team of Johnson Johnson & Roy/Inc (Planning/Design) and DeLeuw, Cather & Company (Traffic Planning/Engineering) worked with the University, its Campus Planning and Review Committee (CP&RC), and Project Steering Committee (PSC) in carrying out the process.

The CP&RC was comprised of key administrators, faculty, and staff representatives, while the PSC consisted of the President, the Provost, and select advisors (see Appendix for membership). Within each step, detailed work plans were developed; and the overall project was conducted over a total of sixteen months. Interaction milestones occurred in the form of hands-on workshops, written materials for discussion, and presentations by the consulting team to the committees. The draft plan was circulated for review and finalized as this document.

The Plan Approach was developed to initiate an ongoing dialogue between the University community and consultant during the planning process, as outlined. Consequently, the resulting plan represents a valid and appropriate working document aimed at guiding growth at the Oakland University campus. It provides background, analysis, and a structure for making implementation decisions. It has purposefully been generated as a structure of planning and design principles to retain a degree of inherent flexibility in responding to the ever-changing, ever-increasing demands on the institution. In order to be a document of-ongoing value to Oakland University, the plan requires sensitivity in the application of its basic tenets to the development of individual projects. The plan provides a context and rationale for campus growth; its implementation will be the responsibility of a number of leaders committed to following its guidance.

III.  INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

The study process for the Oakland University Master Plan Update was developed to assess both the regional and vicinity impacts and the on-site considerations providing input to the plan. The broader context of Greater Detroit and the changing  service area of the University  will affect its direction in providing higher educational services.   Similarly, the specifics of  capacities, function, and character are addressed as base information in the process of formulating planning recommendations for future growth.  This section presents the observations and summary analysis of investigations conducted during the planning process for the region and  vicinity and University and subcampus land units.

REGIONAL AND VICINITY OVERVIEW

Background

Although Oakland University is relatively young compared to many senior institutions of higher learning, it has existed through a dramatic and dynamic period in this nation's history. From its inception in the late 1950s to its role in 1988, Oakland has grown from a small liberal arts college to a modern, complex university constantly evaluating and responding to the needs of its service population. During Oakland's first thirty years, American society has experienced technological and social changes unparalleled in any previous comparable time frame. The next thirty years will carry Oakland well into the 21st Century and, undoubtedly, will be accelerated in the magnitude and significance of scientific, technological, and sociological advancements. It is critical that the vision exists today of what the university community must be to meet the needs of future generations.

The difficulty in predicting the future is no less complicated now than for previous planners addressing issues relating to the growth and diversity of education. In the specific case of Oakland University, three historical roles, combined with the changing Greater Detroit region, have contributed to the baseline condition of the institution today. It was first conceived in 1957 as Michigan State University - Oakland and envisioned to provide academic training of the highest standard to students of outstanding ability. Local demands on Oakland during its formative years through the 1960s moved Oakland quickly into its second role with a broadened base and expanded offerings to more comprehensively satisfy the needs of its predominantly Greater Detroit user population. Cultural programs serving the region also were introduced and flourished. In 1963 Oakland received university status, and in 1970 it was granted autonomy and its own Board of Trustees. In 1971 Oakland entered its third phase with a Long Range Physical Development Plan that was prepared contemplating a main campus capacity of 20,000 full-time equivalent (fte) students and sufficient land to develop another campus of 15,000 students as needed. This plan also spoke of a Detroit region containing 4.5 million persons and the potential to double by 1990.

Today, Oakland serves a student population of 9,000 fte and 12,000 headcount. The growth in the region has shifted toward Oakland, but in absolute numbers Greater Detroit is not substantially larger than it was in 1971. Current projections indicate regional growth of 550,000 persons by the year 2005 to about 5 million persons with nearly 60 percent of that increase occurring in Oakland and Macomb counties. However, the University has embarked on a five-year enrollment adjustment program to assure that operating expenses and quality education requirements are met.

What then does this mixture of projections and existing conditions mean for Oakland University as it closes out the 20th Century? Several aspects will become important elements in the next phase of Oakland's evolution and its ongoing mission. Academics continue to be a high priority and the temporary downsizing of the University on fiscal grounds must be weighed against a growing suburban population increasingly interested in the scope and range of program offerings available at Oakland. Research has taken on additional significance at Oakland with the recent location of the Chrysler Motors   Technology Center and Oakland Technology Park adjacent to the University in Auburn Hills. Oakland's existing research programs are substantial with this new dimension broadening the potential to enhance the University's position ii national and international circles. Growth in the last twenty years in Oakland and Macomb counties has created additional demand for the many and varied cultural/community service offerings of the University. This trend is likely to increase with growth around the University, the Technology Park, and the shift in economic conditions to an expanded service orientation. All of these factors contribute to a positive outlook for Oakland projecting ten, fifteen, or more years into the future.

Regional Demographics

Oakland University is situated in the northern part of the seven-county Greater Detroit Metropolitan Area. This area contains almost 50 percent of Michigan's 1980 population at 4.6 million people. Within the metro area, Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb form a tri-county area containing 86 percent of the region's population at 4 million with 58, 25, and 17 percent, respectively. Notably, although the overall region lost population between 1970 and 1980, Oakland and Macomb counties both grew at rates of 11 percent. These counties are the primary service area for Oakland University, providing approximately 80 percent of the student body.

Population projections indicate the Greater Detroit region will grow by 12 percent (554,000 persons) between 1980 and 2005, with 47 percent (261,000) and 11 percent (62,000) of that attributable to Oakland and Macomb counties. This clearly indicates a trend toward growth outward from the central city, with Detroit projected to decline by 8 percent (100,000) during the same forecast period. Demand for educational services by this substantial suburban population-  will place increasing demands on Oakland University.

Three other universities in the state's system plus several private institutions, community colleges, and technical training schools provide a number of quality higher education offerings for residents of the region. Among the state universities, both Wayne State and The University of Michigan stand out as comprehensive, complex research universities commanding substantial resource allocations in the state's priorities for higher education. Oakland continues to compare favorably in the state system in various academic programs, and its ability to secure substantial research grants ranks it fourth of the fifteen state institutions.

In cultural offerings, Oakland's "Meadow Brook" programs and facilities are some of the finest in the region/state. The professional theatre draws persons from throughout Greater Detroit. The Music Festival serves as the summer home to the Detroit Symphony Orchestra and various performing artists in a pavilion/open air venue. Meadow Brook Hall is the historic estate manor of Mr. and Mrs. Alfred G. Wilson and serves as a landmark and setting for numerous receptions. conferences, and special events.

Vicinity Profiles

In the immediate vicinity of the university, two very different communities are emerging. Rochester Hills to the east has experienced phenomenal growth in recent decades with a population in 1960 of 16,000, 25,000 in 1970, and 41,000 in 1980. Forecasts predict a 2005 population of 68,700. The community is well known in the region as an attractive affluent residential area with nearly 90 percent of its developed land dedicated for this use.

Auburn Hills, although much smaller in population at 15,000, is a community focused on office, technology, and industrial development.  It is becoming a regionally and nationally known center for applied technology with the establishment   of the Oakland Tech Park, which is  anticipated to provide 40,000 jobs by 1995.  The proximity of the Interstate 75 expressway through Auburn Hills has provided a significant impetus for commercial development along its length.  A long list of light industrial firms locating in Auburn Hills assure this city an important role in the  economic future of Oakland County.

Oakland University is sited between these two communities and offers significant- cant benefits to both. Rochester Hills looks to the university as an educational, cultural, and recreational resource complementary to the resident population's needs. Auburn Hills looks to the university as an important partner in providing education, research, and training support for continued economic development of technology, industry, and service activities as a regional employment center. Consequently, the university must carefully balance its position within a dynamic growth environment much different from its historically rural surroundings. Identity, image, and function will be essential issues to address for planning the university's future role. Open Space The Clinton River/Galloway Creek valley is considered an important environmental resource in Oakland County. It physically connects the Oakland Tech Park and Oakland University. Natural woodlands, meadows, wetlands, and the riverbed help to create a rural-like ambience on campus. Internal to the university, the creek valley is used for picnicking, hiking, jogging, and cross country skiing. The creek provides an opportunity to utilize this critical drainage system to establish a natural framework for recreational green, space system linking the university to Tech Park and surrounding communities. A strategy which establishes an environmental management plan will help to ensure preservation of this resource. Land Use Land to the east and north has developed as single-family residences along with service-oriented commercial development. Land to the west and south has been designated as Oakland Technology Park consisting of 1,200 acres of research and development technology park. This is an important departure from thinking of 15-20 years earlier when these areas were envisioned for primarily residential neighborhoods. This land use change creates an important regional employment destination with a series of traffic, adjacency relationships, function, and image issues that must be carefully assessed as both the Tech Park and university plan,for growth.

Some of the existing companies established in the Tech Park include Comerica, Inc.; World Computer; GMF Robotics; Electronic Data Systems (EDS); Secure Data; GKN Industries; ITT; and the largest being Chrysler Motors Technology Center. New facilities will include automotive technology centers, computers, robotics, applied engineering, and advanced manufacturing techniques. Oakland University adjoins the park, created the concept of the park, and has served as a catalyst for its development.

The Oakland Technology Park describes itself as an upscaled and relaxed campus-like environment. By providing bi-level boulevards; preserving trees, ponds, and streams; controlled parking, low profile, landscaped parking lots; strict zoning; low- and mid-rise buildings; and establishing guidelines to ensure both diversity and excellence of architectural design; the park will be one of the most beautiful of its kind in the country.

Oakland University describes itself as having rural amenities with cosmopolitan style. A combination of the modern classrooms, laboratories, sport facilities, conference buildings, residential halls, health center, and per- forming arts facilities; the original tudor-style mansion of Alfred and Matilda Wilson; the golf course; and hundreds of acres of undeveloped fields, forests, wetlands, and creeks reinforce the unique setting and character of Oakland University.

Oakland Technology Park and Oakland University consider their programmatic relationship to be mutually beneficial. The university realizes that there is a need to remain distinct from the park. The image that they project to the public should be different from that of the Tech Park.

Circulation

Regional access routes to Oakland University are via 1-75 (north-south) and M- 59 (east-west). Once within the vicinity, University (highway access), Adams Road, or Walton/Squirrel Avenue are the major corridors traveled. Vicinity traffic is expected to double during the next twenty years due to new development. Capacity problems, congestion, and inadequate pavement are problems today and will only increase due to development pressures. Extensive roadway improvements have been proposed, including creating boulevards and adding interchanges.

These changes will increase the ability for Oakland University to better serve the faculty, students, alumni, and cultural patrons by providing efficient access. There is a concern regarding the existing rural suburban imagery along these new and improved corridors, as well as how these changes will affect the interface points with the Tech Park and the communities and the quality of the entries into the campus.

The Adams and Squirrel Road corridors, in particular, are of increasing concern to the University and neighboring properties. Both corridors are expected to receive improved interchanges at their intersection points with the M-59 expressway. This access will dramatically change traffic flow on these arterials to the University and points beyond.

Adams Road is a rural, two-lane, north-south paved roadway bordering Oakland University's eastern edge. It passes through areas of rolling terrain and has a number of sight-distance conflicts for motorists turning on and off its length north to Walton Boulevard. Traffic backups, delays, and hazards will only increase over time on this artery until improvements are implemented. Long-term, these improvements would include left turn, acceleration and deceleration lanes, elimination of inadequate sight lines, additional traffic controls, and capacity improvements to accommodate increasing traffic flow. Many of the facility modifications will have a significant effect on the character of this corridor along the University edge and adjacent housing development. Sensitive design of roadway improvements and edge treatments is required to mitigate impacts on established development.

Squirrel Road is a rural, two-lane, north-south gravel roadway bordering Oakland University's western edge. It is a link that will become increasingly important as the University, Chrysler Motors Technology Center, and the Oakland and Tech Park develop along its borders. Current proposals suggest a four lane boulevard cross section for the long-term improvement of this corridor. Alignment and right-of-way acquisition from the University to accomplish this proposal will require relocation of the existing main entry to the institution and a mature landscaped edge that will take time to develop. Although this improvement is necessary to the access and to adjacent land development (including the University), careful consideration must be given to the impact on the forest and open space character of the University edge as this project moves forward. As other development reduces the natural appearance in the immediate vicinity around the University, Oakland takes on an increasing importance in preserving woodlands, wetlands, and open space qualities as a steward of land for the people of the region and.state. 9 4

UNIVERSITY AND SUBCAMPUS OVERVIEW

Today, Oakland University is a comprehensive, state-assisted institution of approximately 12,500 students that offers a diverse set of academic programs from baccalaureate to doctoral levels. Anchored by a strong liberal arts program, the University is organized into the College of Arts and Sciences, Schools of Business Administration, Engineering and Computer Science, Health Sciences, Human and Educational Services and Nursing, the Center for Continuing Education, and the Office of Graduate Study.

The University's faculty, which now numbers more than 400, has a distinguished record of research and scholarship. External funding support for research and developmental projects now total more than $6 million. Selective in its admissions standards, Oakland University seeks both traditional and nontraditional students. Eighty percent of its students are commuters from the tri-county area. Complementing its academic programs, Oakland University provides major public services with emphasis on the professional performing arts. Meadow Brook Theatre is located in Wilson Hall. Meadow Brook Music Festival is the summer home of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. Meadow Brook Hall, former home of the University's benefactors, now serves as a conference and cultural center; Meadow Brook Art Gallery houses the University's permanent collection of African art and presents a variety of special exhibits annually.

Oakland University consists of 1,450 acres of property bounded by Walton Boulevard to the north, Butler Road to the south, Adams Road to the east, and Squirrel Road to the west. In addition, an adjoining 150-acre parcel of University property contains single-family faculty housing. Jointly the University land holdings total 1,600 acres.

Consistent with the 1971 Master Plan, Oakland University can be described in terms of four basic systems including open space, facilities, vehicular circulation and parking, and pedestrian circulation. These systems can be anal analyzed as they are applied to the overall University  land holdings  as well as subcampus areas which include Main Campus, East Campus, Southwest Campus, Southeast Campus, and Housing Area.

University

At a university level , the quality of continuity of the whole is necessary to clearly express the University identity. Continuity between the distinct subcampus areas is necessary to strengthen the relationship between the separate areas. In addition, continuity of the image area surrounding the University is necessary to portray a sense of "whole" to the community. The current conditions which exist on campus at a university level fall short of optimum.

On campus, the 210 acres of wetland represent a valuable natural resource which forms the rural setting for the University. The wetland alone represents the unifying fabric between subcampus areas. While the subcampus areas take advantage of views towards the wetlands the woodlot also forms a barrier between the subcampus areas. Improved pedestrian circulation through the wetlands will improve its role as a unifying feature.

The image area surrounding the University is formed by a visible edge adjacent to Walton, Butler, Adams and Squirrel roads. The role of this area is to establish a public identity for the University which is consistent, continuous, and clear. The conditions which exist now are inconsistent, confusing, and vary to extremes in relationship to the adjacent roads. The image along Squirrel Road consists of parking lots, a series of entrances to Main Campus, formal planting, and the natural wetland/wooded area to the south. Along Walton Boulevard, the image consists of parking lots, on-site roads, outbuildings, a commercial looking Meadow Brook Pavilion marquee, and a series of entries not well marked. Adams Road has open fields, an orchard, a wood entry sign, a golf course, and a child care facility. Butler's image is represented by a gravel road along a wooded natural setting.

The limited roadway linkage between the Main Campus and East Campus is viewed as a shortcoming in the existing circulation system. In addition to staff, visitors, and students, there is cross-campus traffic by a variety of maintenance vehicles requiring efficient connections between East Campus and the Main Campus grounds.

Throughout the University, existing roadway signing and lighting is poor. There are a variety of sign types consisting of vertical wood poles, metal signs, and carved wood signs, all of which are difficult to see and read traveling at 25 mph. Also, there are a variety of roadway lights consisting of poorly lit, ornate, historic lights on wood poles to the traditional cobra head roadway lights. Location, spacing, and type of lighting need to be improved to ensure safety as well as aesthetic quality of the University.

Pedestrian circulation between the subcampus units is unstructured or nonexistent between the Main Campus and outlying campus zones. It is highly desirable to improve pedestrian circulation linkage between the Main Campus and East Campus, in particular. Walkways to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians would improve communication as well as interconnect the subcampus units.

Main Campus

The Main Campus is approximately 430 acres located in the northwest corner of Oakland University. It is bounded by Walton Boulevard to the north, Squirrel Road to the west, and the Galloway Creek valley to the south and east. It is the focus of academic and administrative facilities. North and South Foundation Hall were built first in 1959 and O'Dowd and married student housing the last in 1981. The buildings are characteristically institutional with red brick, accents of concrete, and in the height range of three to five stories. Each building is sited in a generous lawn area, surrounded by immature trees. In the distance, beyond the buildings, the dominant rural landscape is viewed. This spacious campus, when viewed from its boundaries, appears attractive. Once within, the buildings and landscape look as if they haven't aged well. The uninspiring institutional architecture, building interiors, sidewalks, and roads are in need of repair, deferred during difficult financial times. Trees planted fifteen years ago have-grown at an exceptionally slow rate.

Opportunities for expansion of facilities exist on Main Campus, particularly in the southern and northeast limits. Limits of academic growth should be established to ensure that all development occurs within a ten-minute walking distance from the Student Center. The nature of growth should address a need to maintain the spacious rural character and preserve the Galloway Creek open space network.

The Main Campus entry at the library is attractive; however, the landform of the traffic circle and the planting of crab apples in front of the library block views of the library from the main entrance. An opportunity exists to enhance this first image of the University by opening views and extending the space to express the significance of this symbolic space.

The open space to the east of the library represents the place on campus where the beauty of the "rural" landscape joins the activity of Main Campus. This s space should be preserved.

The landscape setting around the lake represents captured space, an enclosed open space or outdoor room for pedestrian and recreational activity. This area is spacially too large.  Also, the parking lot adjacent to the lake is an inappropriate use and should be removed. The enclosure of the space could be reinforced by the addition of a new building in place of the parking lot.

The Main Campus entry at University Drive and the west edge adjacent to Squirrel Road will be seriously impacted by the proposed widening of Squirrel Road. The potential loss of land, which acts as a screen to the parking lot, mature trees, entry walls, and parking spaces will affect the University's public image. Careful study and evaluation of this situation needs to occur.

The existing loop road and internal roads are functioning reasonably well, without severe congestion except during special events. The traffic circle at the main entrance and the loop road are both operating below capacity. However, there are several problems with the existing vehicular system. Significant conflicts occur on the segment of Meadow Brook Drive adjacent to the main parking lot, across from Oakland Center, North and South Foundation Hall, and Meadow Brook Theatre. This link of the road network is heavily utilized, with the capacity constrained by numerous pedestrians crossing to and from the parking lot. The 15 mph speed limit in this area is unenforceable, and there are numerous conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. The vehicular traffic includes both cars turning in and out of the parking lot and those passing through, which may or may not reduce speed. While there are crosswalks in this area, pedestrians cross at any location convenient to their car, which increases the hazard. In addition, existing entrances to the parking lot are too narrow for two-way turning movements, which impedes traffic flow.

Another problem involves roadway geometries, with some locations on Meadow Brook Drive, Pioneer Drive, and Ravine Drive having sharp curves and limited sight distances. The T-intersection of Ravine Drive and Meadow Brook Drive at the married students housing operates with some congestion problems from  numerous left-turns. A tight turning radius for right turns from eastbound Meadow Brook Drive and limited sight distance from Ravine Drive also add to the problem.

One of the major concerns affecting activity patterns on the campus involves parking. The present parking supply on the main campus is about 5,234 spaces, with most of the activity concentrated in the large surface lot (1,800 spaces) across from North and South Foundation halls. The present parking system is oriented towards serving the northwest portion of the Main Campus, with a second concentration south of the library. In addition to overall supply, the distribution of parking is a problem. There is a shortage of 200 to 400 parking spaces near the main student center, the dorms, and sports center, while the more distant lots are often underutilized. However, during the peak period (11 a.m. to 12 noon of the Monday-Wednesday class cycle), most major lots are operating at or near capacity. The proposed widening of Squirrel Road, which will displace spaces along the new right-of-way, will further reduce the number of spaces where the demand is high.

Existing surface parking on campus is unattractive and imposing. Large parking lots are located within the front yard of the campus. Most contain no internal or edge buffering in the form of landscape treatment to reduce their visual impact., This is compounded by the functional pedestrian safety problem of roadways separating parking lots from building destinations. An opportunity exists to improve the character and function of the parking areas to result in a better first-impression of the Oakland University campus.

Primary circulation pattern occurs in an east/west movement between the surface parking lots and the facilities along collector walkways. A north/south walkway forms a major pedestrian spine to connect the residential area of Main Campus with the library. While the walks on the Main Campus are rationally located, they are in deteriorating condition.

East Campus

East Campus is approximately 380 acres and is located in the northeast corner of the site, bounded by Walton to the north, Adams to the east, and Galloway Creek to the south and west. Central to this zone is Alfred and Matilda Wilson's tudor mansion called Meadow Brook Hall. Other facilities included are the Baldwin Pavilion, Sunset Terrace, Health Enhancement Center, Shotwell-Gustafson Pavilion, and Katke-Cousins 18-Hole Golf Course.

The focus of these self-supporting facilities is to provide cultural services to the region, community, and the University. Meadow Brook Conference Center provides year-round activity ranging from tours of the mansion to small conferences of about 10-150 people as well as large exhibits in the Shotwell- Gustafson Pavilion The Health Enhancement Center provides programs for establishing a healthful life style through reprogramming of existing life style. Meadow Brook Festival, held at the Baldwin Pavilion, offers more than 60 concerts a year, which attract in excess of 250,000 persons per year. It is the home of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra. In 1988, the festival celebrated its 25-year anniversary and the aging facility needs refurbishing.

Collectively, these facilities sit within a rural setting. There is pressure to increase the use of these services. A proposed building to house larger conferences, increase the capacity of the festival , increase enrollment and the addition of more programs in the health enhancement field, and the addition of 18 more holes to an already over-used golf course represents such pressures. There is concern of how these changes will affect this "rural ambience. " Increased facilities implies more people e, more parking, and overloading the internal and external transportation system.

On East Campus, there is a safety and orientation problem associated with the Y-intersections, particularly at the first intersection where drivers turn off Meadow Brook Road onto Sunset Lane. This two-way, wide Y configuration is confusing to motorists, especially at night. Visitors or others who use this road infrequently are prone to slowing down or stopping completely in the roadway to figure out which turn they should take.

Southwest Campus.

The Southwest Campus is approximately 76 acres, bounded by Squirrel Road to the west, Butler to the south, and Galloway Creek Valley to the north and east. This zone is removed from main campus by a distance of a twenty-minute  walk. The epitome of a rural landscape is represented by this zone with its rolling hills and large canopy trees. Opportunities for future development in the Southwest should be "stand alone" academic facilities or research/technology activities which orient to the adjacent Technology Park. Facilities developed in the future should maintain the unique character of this landscape setting.

Southeast Campus

The Southeast Campus is approximately 22 acres, bounded by Adams Road to the east, Butler Road to the south, and the Galloway Creek Valley to the north and west. The Child Care Center is the single University facility located within this zone. The remote location of this facility from Main Campus is a concern regarding fire access and the ability of the faculty to use it efficiently. The location of this land unit causes it to have a potential association with future development south of Butler Road or east of Adams.

Housing Area

The Housing Area is approximately 150 acres located east of Adams Road. Fifty-seven single-family homes and a major wetland/open space occurs centrally within this land unit. Future development opportunities occur east of the developed area. "Special" facility development should be considered to take advantage of the scenic location, natural features, and a desire to be compatible with the surrounding residential uses.

IV. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Formulation of an initial set of Goals and Objectives was the end product of the Step 1 component of the Master Plan Update. These goals and objectives were prepared in response to the University's currently adopted role and mission statement and the issues identified during the baseline conditions analysis prepared during Phase 1. As the project moved into Step 2, the goal statements and specific objectives for the University's Master Plan were refined to provide a blueprint of physical planning guidance statements for the future of Oakland University. Plan recommendations in later chapters respond to the evolutionary goal setting process.

ROLE AND MISSION*[*First two paragraphs from the Graduate Catalog 1985-87.]

The following role and mission statement for the University was adopted by the Oakland University Board of Trustees on 21 July 1982. It emphasizes four essential ingredients for the direction of the University: excellent and relevant instruction, high-quality basic and applied research and scholarship, responsive and effective public and community service, and a comprehensive schedule of student development activities.

As a state-supported institution of higher education, Oakland University has a threefold mission. It offers instructional programs of high quality that lead to degrees at the baccalaureate, master's, and doctoral levels as well as programs in continuing education; it advances knowledge through research and scholarship; and it renders significant public service. In all of its activities, the University strives to exemplify educational leadership.

The first cut at goal setting revolved around three categories identified to begin thinking about Oakland University and its associated planning issues. These categories included program identification, relationships, and site systems and character.

Program

This category represents a review of existing facilities and input of required and desired facilities that will enhance or improve the institution's operation. Evaluating this category necessitates an examination of academic capacities, research facilities, cultural and community service programs, and campus operations. It also necessitates an analysis of University landholdings and capabilities to accommodate growth.

Relationships

This category represents an analysis at several levels of University operations to measure the effectiveness of physical facility and space relationships. At the regional level, the proximity of the institution and any extension facilities, satellites, or off-off-campus-opus programs to its primary service area were reviewed. A brief examination of relationships to competitive higher education campuses was also conducted. At the vicinity level, relationships between the University and its adjacent neighboring land uses was examined. At the local level, on-campus relationships, function, and  efficiency were examined to gain a better understanding of University operational policies and future opportunities to build or adjust facility relationships.

Site Systems and Character

This analysis examines the fabric of the campus within which facilities are located and that which represents the on-site image to students, visitors, and staff in day-to-day life on campus. E I  addressed in site systems include open space, vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation and plazas, lighting, signs, special features, and outdoor furniture. These elements, taken together with the physical structures, combine to produce an expression of character that is indicative of the University as a whole. In some cases, growth over time, varying functions, or response to the natural landscape features determine several distinct characters for subcampus units. This was also examined to explore opportunities for expression of continuity and unity in Oakland's framework for development.

In discussing issues relating to these three categories with the working committees (Campus Planning and Review, Project Steering) that understood the philosophy and operation of the University at every level, a set of goal statements and associated objectives were prepared to be addressed in the second step Master Plan Update. The goals reflect some broad concerns of the University that translate into the physical elements of the campuses. Specific task-oriented objectives were listed under each goal statement to focus on problems in the current operation of the campus and opportunities to improve inadequate facilities. This set of goals and objectives follow:

Program Goal 1: Achieve academic, research, and service facility programs that respond to the university's role and mission.

Objectives: Understand program requirements of currently planned and envisioned facilities.

• Library Expansion
• Science and Technology Building
• Oakland Center Addition(s)
• Baldwin Pavilion Expansion

Examine physical facility needs by units and services provided for -future program requirements.

• Auditorium/Lecture Space
• Child Care
• Classroom Office Building
• Computing Facility
• Conference Facility/Alumni Center
• Continuing Education Center
• Engineering and Science
• Health Enhancement
• Incubator Facility and Think Tank/Research
• Performing Arts
• Parking Decks/Lots
• Research Institutes
• Sports and Recreation Building
• Animal Care Facility
• University Maintenance Facility

Determine development capacity of university. property by land units.

• Main Campus
• East Campus
• Southwest Campus
• Southeast Campus
• Housing Property
• Open Space

Relationships  Goal II- Vicinity: Maintain distinct university identity while establishing community relationships.

Objectives:  Inventory and analyze surrounding land uses to define images.

Identify interface opportunities related to the university.

• 1-75 to Main West Entry
• M-59/Squirrel/Entry
• M-59/Adams/Entry
• Walton Boulevard/Entries
• Oakland Technology Park
• Open Space System
• Pedestrian/Bicycle Linkages

Campus Goal III: Identify opportunities to establish a unified camps image while respecting the unique character of the individual zones.

Assure unity within campus zones.

Objectives: Inventory and analyze distinct/similar campus zones.

Identify interface opportunities between campus zones. (i.e., West Campus-East Campus)

• Open Space
• Vehicular Circulation
• Pedestrian Circulation
• Architecture Site
• Amenities
  - Signs
  - Lighting
  - Furniture

Identify unifying opportunities within campus zones.
             - Buildings
             - Parking
             - Open Space
             - Amenities

Develop framework plan of relationships.

Site Systems and Character Goal IV:  Enhance and develop site systems which are functional, clear, and ensure safety of user.

Strive for consistency in expression of a traditional academic campus character while respecting natural systems and unique site facilities.

Objectives

Vehicular Circulation:

• Identify access requirements (students, service, visitors)
• Design campus entries to orient visitors.
• Provide appropriate vehicular network to satisfy campus needs.
• Minimize conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian circulation
• Provide appropriate parking distribution for campus needs.

Pedestrian Circulation:

• Identify existing pedestrian circulation systems.
• Design a clear, safe, and adequate pedestrian circulation system.

Open Space:

• Inventory campus areas suitable for open space designation/preservation.
• Develop an open space system that preserves natural features.
• Establish hierarchy of open space/activity settings. 
          1.  Interior Open Space
                  --Campus center
                  --Captured space
                  --Courtyards
          2.   Exterior Open Space
                  --Campus edges
                  --Campus entries
                  -- Preservation/open space

Architecture:

• Inventory and analyze existing architectural expression.
• Explore and identify design guidelines to direct for future facility development, i.e., massing, materials, and detailing.

Utilities:

• Consolidate future facility development to minimize extent of infrastructure
• Interrelate utility corridors with vehicular circulation system to maximize efficiency.

During the second step of the Campus Master Plan Update process, the working objectives developed under Step 1 were pursued as tasks to be completed toward a plan that was focused on achieving the stated goals which would, in turn, contribute to the realization of the University's role and mission components. A summary analysis of these goal categories was produced and utilized to formulate a design concept which would lead to more detailed recommendations in the framework plan.

In the distillation of the summary analysis, a transition was made to three broad goal statements that would encompass both the vision of the future for Oakland and the practical translation of project specific recommendations for future expansion. The three broad goals statements are:

Accommodate Growth - This goal combines the planned structures, envisioned facilities and unforeseen opportunities in looking at the campus potential to expand without compromising relationships and character.

Maintain the Rural Context - The rural setting of Oakland has played an important role in establishing zones, relationships, and character of the existing campus. The natural features and many components of the built environment continue to support a rural theme in shaping future improvements.

Unify the Campus - All development units at Oakland University need to share elements of continuity and design unity relating to on-campus systems. This unity may be expressed at two levels: subcampus systems and University-wide character.

Each of these goal statements captures a dimension of the elements that must be sensitively and carefully addressed in the University planning process. The design concept and framework plan that follow approach broad goals by specifically evaluating the University and its campus units according to the four systems that comprise each, including:

• Open space
• Buildings/facilities
• Vehicular circulation
• Pedestrian environment

This uniform format allows for ease in presenting analysis and recommendations that adhere to one or more of the broad goal statements. Therefore, taken as a set, the recommendations in the framework plan become the action-oriented tasks that contribute to the achievement of the stated goals. Each time a new project is proposed, its evaluation against the planning principles, recommendations, and design guidelines of the framework will assist the University in determining appropriateness of the proposed improvement. These goals and objectives are always meant to positively contribute to the implementation of the University's role and mission and relate primarily to those statements.

V. DESIGN CONCEPT

The design concept for the Oakland University Master Plan Update looks at the past, present and future,as a source of inspiration. Oakland University originated within the rural setting of Oakland County, a rural agricultural setting rich in natural beauty. The adjacent woods and rolling topography contributed to making the campus a unique setting for higher learning. Through time, much of the University growth occurred on Main Campus and East Campus, fortunately preserving the outlying areas in their natural state.

Today, Oakland University can still be considered "land-rich" with 720 acres of undeveloped land under its ownership. Surrounding the University, however, is an environment of dynamic change. Increased residential, office, and high-technology developments are changing the character of the "rural" landscape. Today, even more than in the past, the natural setting of Oakland University represents an invaluable resource for the University as well as the surrounding community. During this study effort, the consultants and University Campus Planning and Review Committee identified the following goals for the University's future. Essentially, it represents the "vision" for the future:

1. Maintain a "rural" setting.

2. Accommodate "growth".

3. "Unify" the University. The following design concept will translate that vision into a literal plan for the future through the following steps:

1. The rural landscape and natural open space represents the essence of the past and should be preserved for the future. This preservation zone will act as a recreational amenity, visual feature, and open space fabric to link the campus quadrants together.

2. Growth will be accommodated through the identification of appropriate settings for new University facilities to locate within. The landscape settings or "yards" are small relative to facility size within areas such as Main Campus (hence, higher density to promote interaction between facilities). The landscape settings grow larger as development is located closer to "rural" preservation zones or in areas such as East Campus (hence, decreasing density).

3. Finally, the design concept recommends "unifying" the University property as a whole to reinforce that Oakland University is more than Main Campus alone. To achieve overall unity, the design concept recommends the development of an appropriate "edge" to encompass the perimeter of all University land holdings. In addition, vehicular circulation , pedestrian circulation, entry treatments, lighting, and signage will be used to unify the University.

VI. FRAMEWORK PLAN AND GUIDELINES

Introduction

The framework plan is comprised of four basic systems including open space, facilities, vehicular circulation and parking, and pedestrian circulation. These systems can be applied to overall University land holdings and subcampus areas which include Main Campus, East Campus, Southwest Campus, Southeast Campus, and Housing Area. The primary focus of designing systems is to formulate a high level of quality, a great deal of flexibility, and continuity within and between subcampus units. The framework approach is utilized to achieve these aspects. It is a planning and design tool that suggests basic patterns and relationships without formalizing detailed designs. Its success lies in the principles guiding the framework and the multiple opportunities for it to respond to changing conditions facing the institution. The framework also guides the envelopes in which development can occur without inhibiting the individual creativity at the project specific level of design.

Guidelines are developed that work with the framework plan to help translate those critical elements that contribute to the overall campus image into more specific solutions. Examples include sign systems, lighting, landscape treatments ranging from very formal plantings to preservation of natural beauty areas and generalize recommendations for architecture. The design guidelines provide a set of reference information that will assure consistency in implementation across future projects impacting the campus environment.

This section discusses each of the systems to explain where, why, and how future development should occur in order to strengthen the existing campus structure and to implement the framework plan. The following outlines and defines how the systems will be discussed in the context of the University and subcampus land units.

Definition - Describes the components of the system and/or where the system is located.

Principles - Presents the rationale and fundamental cause upon which recommendations are based.

Recommendations - The desirable action taken in order to achieve the principles. Guidelines Standards and rules which guide and direct implementation.

Guidelines - Standards and rules which guide and direct implementation.

UNIVERSITY

OPEN SPACE

Open space at the University level is inclusive of the "University Image Area" and the "Preservation Area."

University Image Area

Definition

The University Image Area is the undeveloped land between the external roads and Meadow Brook Drive. The setbacks adjacent to Adams Road, Butler Road, and Squirrel Boulevard also form the continuous University Image Area.

Principles

1. The University Image Area should establish a unified image to unite all the properties under the University's ownership.

2. The Image Area should depict a "rural" landscape character and form a continuous green foreground for the University. The desirable image is buildings viewed at a distance, within a green setting.

Recommendations

1. New buildings or relocation of existing facilities should not be located within the University Image Area.

2. To maintain the character of the University Image Area, the introduction of landform and vegetation is necessary to screen the existing parking lots and roads.

3. A 100-foot landscape setback should be established along Squirrel Boulevard, Butler Road, and Adams Road.

Guidelines

1. The quality of landform and vegetation necessary to screen the existing parking lots and roads should be bold and simple.

a. The landform should be graceful and integrate well with the existing topography. Height of the berm should be established to screen a larger percentage of parking.

b. The use of canopy and evergreen trees planted informally to make a bold landscape statement similar to the woodlots in the preservation area.

Preservation Area

Definition

The Preservation Area is defined as the combined area of wetlands, steep slopes (10% or greater) and significant woodlots to be preserved. Wetlands can be defined by the presence of certain species of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants that are adapted to areas with permanent or seasonal saturated soils. Wetlands in the State of Michigan are protected from development by the Wetland Protection Act (P.A. 203, 1979).

Principles

1. Wetlands function as natural areas of water storage, transport, and filtration. In addition, they provide some of the most diverse and valuable habitats for wildlife and fish. These functions are expressed in the ability of wetlands to trap and slowly release stormwater; filter out water-borne sediments and pollutants; and provide breeding, nesting, and feeding areas for a vast array of mammals, birds, amphibians, insects, and fish. The ability of the wetlands to provide their diverse, natural functions should be maintained in future campus expansion.

2. The Preservation Area embodies the natural character and qualities of the University's past. Future' preservation of this area is necessary to maintain the quality of the setting that exists today.

3. The Preservation Area represents a valuable recreational resource for the University, adjacent community, and outlying region.

Recommendations

1. The Preservation Area should take on an increased role for passive recreation: hiking/interpretative trails, picnic areas, etc.

2. Further study of the wetland system on the Oakland University Campus is recommended. This would include the identification of endangered species and the location of areas which present special environmental study opportune opportunities . In addition, there should be an understanding of the movement of surface and groundwater into and through the wetland areas. The goal is to be able to incorporate the wetlands into the stormwater, maintenance, recreation,. education, and aesthetic systems of the campus in a way that is compatible to the wetlands, the University, and the community that the University serves.

FACILITIES

Definition

The only facility considered University-wide is the University Maintenance Facility. It is centrally located on a 12-acre development zone just south of Meadow Brook Drive and east of East Oakland Drive.

Principles

1.  Central1y locate the University Maintenance facility to efficiently y and effectively serve the entire University.

2. Accommodate vehicles and material storage on a low visibility site, ensuring visual preservation of the "rural" character.

Recommendations

1. Organize all maintenance activities such as Campus Facilities and Operations, maintenance equipment, maintenance storage, campus storage, and bulk material stockpiles in one zone.

2. Provide access to the service road for effective distribution of maintenance equipment.

3. Site the proposed facilities to minimize views from Meadow Brook Drive and in such a way as to not to disturb the mature vegetation.

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING

Definition

The vehicular system is the entries and the internal roads required to service the University. This system includes University Drive entrance, Adams Road entrance, East Oakland Drive entrance, Meadow Brook Drive, and the Service Road.

Principles

1. The entries, Meadow Brook Drive, and the Service Road should unite the campuses by providing clear, safe, efficient access and circulation.

2. The entry image should reflect the dignity and permanence symbolized by the University.

Recommendations

1. The primary entries at University Drive, East Oakland Drive, and Adams Road should reflect similar images. This image should be articulated through the use of similar forms and materials such as signage, entry walls, and plant material.

2. The East Oakland Drive entrance planned boulevard should be completed to and terminated at Meadow Brook Drive.

3. Meadow Brook Drive

a. Treatment of Meadow Brook Drive should be consistent through the use of lighting and signage.

1) Directional/orientational signage should be clear, uniform, and placed at key decision points. Further study is required to establish a signage system.

(2) Roadway lighting should be uniform, efficient, and effective. Further study is required to establish a lighting system.

b. The segment of Meadow Brook Drive on Main Campus adjacent to the parking lots has been identified as a conflict area between pedestrians and vehicles. The introduction of walls paralleling the parking lots would channelize pedestrian flow to a limited number of crossing locations. The walls would improve safety and minimize pedestrian and vehicular conflict. To improve the flow of traffic in this area sufficient width must be allowed for a center left-turn lane into the parking lots.

c. The Ravine Drive/Meadow Brook Drive intersection should accommodate a pull-off space for school buses or van loading/unloading children at the married student housing.

d. To improve safety, realign the sharp curve just east of the Festival Drive entrance.

e. It is recommended that the Y-type intersection just within the Adams Road entrance be reconfigured to a T-style design for improved clarity and safety. With a T-intersection, the driver would be faced with a clearer choice in direction.

f. It is anticipated that the Southwest Campus will be oriented towards development. Future extension of Meadow Brook Drive to the south to serve and internally connect the expected development.

g. The existing unpaved Service Road between the center portion of the Main Campus and East Campus should be improved to accommodate University maintenance vehicles.

Guidelines

1. University Entries

a. Stone walls should be used to maintain continuity with the historic farmstead of East Campus,and reflect the stone foundations of the Main Campus I library.

b. The form of the walls should embrace the landscape, emerging from the land to introduce and define the entrance. The length, width, and height of the wall should represent dimensions appropriate in establishing a stately and bold presence.

c. Signage should signify, primarily, Oakland University and, secondarily, the subcampus unit directly associated with the location of the wall.

d. Landscaping should be bold and simple. The use of large canopy trees and crab apples with flowers as an accent is preferred.

2.  Campus roadways should be two-lane facilities, with 12-foot lanes, curb, gutter, sidewalks, and a 25-mph posted speed limit.

3 . Traffic signs should meet standards set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, MUTCD (e.g., stop signs and speed limit signs). The installation of chevrons (arrow signs) is recommended at curves in the campus roadways. All signs should be reflectorized.

4. Wall/Edge Treatment Along Meadow Brook Drive and Parking Lots

a . The walls should be 3 feet to 3 feet 6 inches high to screen the parking lot as well as channelize pedestrian circulation. Brick should be used to maintain continuity with existing building.

b. The use of canopy trees, planted formally; shrubs; and a continuous green foreground.

c.  Further study is required to coordinate parking lot entrances, parking lot layout and pedestrian crossings to minimize conflicts.

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

Definition

A system of walks to interconnect campuses, preservation area, and adjacent communities.

Principles

1.   The system of walks will promote interaction, increase access and communication, and unify the University.

Recommendations

1 . Provide a secondary walkway along Meadow Brook Drive which extends from Main Campus to East Campus entrance. This walk will allow access to the community of Rochester Hills and faculty housing.

2 . Provide a secondary walkway along Walton interconnecting the walk along Meadow Brook Drive and the Walton/Adams Road intersection. This walk will allow students to access the commercial/retail center.

3. Implement a series of pathways internally connecting East Campus and Main Campus.

4 . Provide additional trails connecting the campuses with the preservation are a. 27

5.  Provide walks at Main Campus entry to interface between the proposed walks along Squirrel Boulevard and the University Pedestrian system. This walk will allow access to Oakland Technology Park and the community of Auburn Hills.

Guidelines

1. Standard walkway widths to be applied are:
    -Secondary walk - 8 feet wide, concrete surface
    -Pathways - 6 feet wide, concrete surface
    - Trails - 6 feet wide, wood chips or gravel surface.

2.  All walkways will be handicap accessible.

MAIN CAMPUS

Open Space
Open Space on Main Campus is inclusive of Facility Settings, the Mall, Captured Space, and the Commons.

Facility Settings

Definition

The immediate landscape setting or yard around buildings.

Principles

1. Facility settings should vary in size as a reflection of the context within which they are placed: small settings or a higher density within the heart of campus, large settings or a lower density in the more 'rural' areas.

Recommendations

1.  Within the interior of Main Campus, settings should be small relative to facility size (higher density.) Facilities cluster close to one another and benefit from interaction with one another.

2. Settings around the exterior of Main Campus should be larger to allow views to occur between facilities to the outlying Preservation Zone. An example of this larger setting is the area between the Academic Ex[Expansion Zone south of Dodge Hall and Varner Hall.

3. Settings within the outlying areas of Main Campus should be largest. In areas such as the Southern Academic Expansion Zone, the setting should be larger than the facility within which it is sited.

The Mall.

Definition

The Mall is the large formal open space which forms a 'front yard' to the west of the library.

Principles

1. The Mall symbolizes Oakland University as an institute of learning. It forms the first impression for visitors and students on campus.

2. The Mall should represent a 'forum' for outdoor activity. The buildings along its edges should promote activity.

Recommendations

1. To improve visibility and importance of the arrival "image", The Mall should be modified:

a. Reshape the landform within the entrance drive "rotary" to allow views to occur towards The Mall.

b. The crab apple trees funnel a narrow view of the library. With the library expansion underway, a wider view down The Mall is appropriate. Relocate the crab apples elsewhere on Campus such as the Main Campus entry.

c. A continuous line of canopy trees and pedestrian lights should be implemented to define the edges of the expanded Mall.

2. Complete the "enclosure" of The Mall by infilling an Administration/ Student Services facility.

The Commons

Definition

The large informal open space which forms the "back yard" to the east of the library.

Principles

1. An open space should exist where the beauty of the "rural" landscape joins the activity of Main Campus.

Recommendations

1. Develop the Commons as a large yard to look over and outward towards the Preservation Zone. Frame its edges with an informal mass of trees.

2. The landform of the Commons should be preserved to maintain its form as a knoll on top of which rests the library--the symbol of learning. Remove asphalt walk cutting across the Commons and replace with a concrete walk.

3. Trees should be planted informally and in such a way as to reinforce the form of the Commons and maintain the views to the preservation zone.

Captured Space

Definition

The open spaces defined by buildings surrounding the lake and the space defined by Engineering and Science buildings.

Principles

1.  An enclosed open space or outdoor room for pedestrian and recreational activity to occur within. The space should have a proper and appropriate balance between built and nonbuilt areas in order to maintain a pedestrian-scaled environment.

2. Use of open space as a technique for relating separate buildings in order to emphasize special relationships and establish a sense of building complexes.

Recommendations

1. The Captured Space surrounding the lake is spacially too large and undefined. The existing parking lot adjacent the lake is an inappropriate use and should be replaced elsewhere on Campus.

2. Reinforce the open space enclosure surrounding the lake with new facilities (refer to Main Campus Facilities Section).

3. Reinforce the spacial enclosure by installing additional landscaping adjacent to the building edges.

4. An additional captured space should be developed as a complement to the lake setting south of the Engineering and Science Buildings. In 'his location, the Captured Space should take on the form of a courtyard, defined by the new Science and Technology Building and existing facilities.

FACILITIES

Definition

The collection of academic, administrative, student services, housing and recreational facilities.

Principles

1. Enhance the existing structure of facilities: a. Organize similar uses within "zones"--academic, housing, etc. b. An ideal campus is organized as a series of concentric circle; normally at the center is the library and student services, surrounded by academic uses with housing, recreation, and other support services located around the perimeter.

2. Encourage relocation of nonconforming uses to appropriate locations.

3. Strengthen interrelationships between adjacent zones.

4. Strengthen and complete open spaces defined by buildings

5. The architectural expression of future facilities should respect the existing buildings and express the dignity, tradition, and timeless permanence of the University.

Recommendations

1. Academic/Student Services

a. Reinforce the student service/administrative "core" with infill expansion to the south. The site will complete the "enclosure" of The Mail and generate additional pedestrian activity within the heart of the campus. The expansion zone has been defined with a maximum capacity of 40,000 square feet over two stories.

2. Academic Uses

a. Interior Academic Sites:   Two sites are defined for academic expansion: first, the removal of a nonconforming use, the Meadow Brook Theater for academic expansion of 60,000 square feet; the second is an academic expansion site of 54,000 square feet north of the Student Service Center. A building located on this site will better define the setting around the lake as an "outdoor room." In addition, the building will reinforce the pedestrian connection between the Student Service Center and Student Housing.

b. Exterior Academic Sites:  Two building sites have been defined for academic expansion south of the Engineering and Science Buildings; both have a capacity of 170,000 square feet. The buildings have been placed on the edge of the bluff to establish a new image from the south as well as face outward to view the rural open space beyond. The buildings have also been positioned to allow views from the interior campus to be preserved.

c. Outlying Academic Sites:   A zone of 49 acres has been defined for future academic expansion south of East Oakland Drive. Approximately 350,000 square feet of new facilities can be located to take advantage of the rich and natural attributes of the adjacent preservation zone.

3. Housing Uses

a. Interior Housing Sites:    An interior housing zone has been defined to accommodate 120,000 square feet of future infill housing in the area currently occupied by Fitzgerald, Anibal, and Pryale Houses buildings. Additional student apartment housing in this area will reinforce the existing student dormitory uses located there. In addition, housing in this area can focus on the lake setting and take advantage of adjacent recreational uses.

b. Outlying Housing Sites:   A zone of nine acres has been defined for future Married Student Housing adjacent to the preservation area. This area can accommodate approximately 120 units. The beauty of this setting along with its isolated location makes it ideal for this type of housing.

4.   Recreational Uses

a. Recreational Additions:   A site has been defined for an addition to the Lepley Center of approximately 2,400 square feet. The expansion should occur to the southwest on level ground currently occupied by a parking lot. The expansion represents an opportunity to improve the facility's image and presence onto Main Campus; thus, reinforcing its role as an intramural facility.

b.   Recreation Expansion:   A 16-acre zone has been identified to accommodate approximately 120,000 square feet of future recreational use. The site could accommodate major recreational facilities to fill emerging campus and other recreational or health enhancement needs such as a field house and natatorium. The site is located adjacent to the ridge to strengthen its relationship to adjacent recreational uses by proximity and views. The site's substantial distance from Walton Boulevard will enable the facility's presence to be minimized. In addition, this relatively flat site can accommodate parking and ease of access from both off campus and on campus as required by this multi-purpose recreational facility.

5.   Nonconforming Uses

The following existing facilities represent a use which is inconsistent within the zone where they are located:

a. Belgian Barn:   The Barn is situated within a parking zone identified as necessary to support future academic expansion. The opportunity to move the Barn elsewhere on campus should be investigated.

b.  Meadow Brook Theater and Art Gallery:   This public-oriented facility is located within a prime academic zone. The Theater and Art Gallery should be relocated to East Campus in an integrated cultural and performing arts facility.

c.  Campus Facilities and Operations:   This facility is a maintenance facility located within a prime academic zone. This use should be relocated to a central site within the University (refer to University Facilities section).

d.   Fitzgerald, Anibal, and Pryale Houses:   The existing dormitories which have been partially converted to academic uses fall within a prime housing zone. This academic use should be relocated to an academic zone.

e. Performers Trailers:   The existing trailers which are a support activity for the Meadow Brook Theater are located within an academic expansion zone. The trailers should be relocated to an inconspicuous location on campus such as the University Maintenance facility. A long-term solution would be to utilize off-campus housing in nearby apartments to temporarily house the performers or incorporate housing with n a new cultured performing arts center.

Guidelines

1. Architecture

a. Height of future buildings should be restricted to three to five stories which is the average height of existing buildings on campus.

b. The dominant building material should be masonry with the color matching or complimentary to the existing buildings.

c. The fenestration of new buildings should be designed to add character and richness. The use of special materials and detailing will provide interest in buildings where the interior functions prohibit endows and doors at pedestrian level.

d. The internal program organization of new buildings should orient classrooms and offices to view the "rural" landscape.

e. The main entrance to each building should be clearly marked.

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING

Definition

All roads and parking required to service Main Campus.

Principles

1. Access to the Main Campus should be experienced as a sequence or a series of steps identified as see, arrive, and park.

a.  To accomplish the see portion of the sequence, the Main Campus needs to be easily identifiable from the edge. When looking at the entry and beyond, it is clear that the campus is straight ahead and that the right path has been chosen.

b. Once the user has seen the entrance, it is important to then arrive at the "heart" of the campus. The ability to see the campus, or to find a specific building and experience the activity and ambience, all contribute to the,sense of arrival.

c. The road network should unify the campus by providing' clear, safe, and efficient circulation.

d. Ease of parking focuses on quantity and distribution. Parking should be distributed based on a ten-minute walking radius between the parking lot and the destination. Quantity of parking is a function of number of persons using the facility, access patterns, auto occupancy, scheduling of class and work hours, and institution policies. Careful placement of additional parking should occur in such a way as not to detract from the "rural" character.

Recommendations

1. Meadow Brook Drive should remain at its present location to accomplish the arrival portion of the sequence. Measures should occur to alleviate the pedestrian and vehicular conflicts and increase efficiency adjacent to the parking lots.

a. Use walls to channelize the pedestrian flow to fewer and easily identifiable crossing locations.

b. Reduce the number of parking lot entrances off of Meadow Brook Drive.

c. Add an entrance/exit off of Squirrel Road to the main parking lot to minimize the need for Meadow Brook Drive traffic to enter/depart parking areas, thus improving traffic/pedestrian flows.

d. Provide sufficient width to allow for a center left-turn lane into the parking lots from Meadow Brook Drive.

2. A new extension of  Pioneer Drive should be linked to West 0akland Drive entrance. This extension accomplishes:

a. The removal of primary circulation off of Ravine Drive.

b. Allows access to two undeveloped zones off of the secondary road.

c. A direct link between two campus entries.

d. Direct access to the internal part of campus.

3. Ravine Drive should be reverted to a local road for residents in the adjacent apartments and will end in a cul-de-sac.

4. Realign the sharp curve on Pioneer Drive at the Lepley Sports Center.

5. The treatment of Meadow Brook Drive, Pioneer Drive, and Ravine should be consistent through the use of lighting and signage.

a. Directional orientation signs should be clear, uniform, and placed at key decision points. Further study is required to establish a signage system.

b. Roadway lighting should be uniform, efficient, and effective. Further study is required to establish a lighting system.

6. Based on current enrollment, the widening of Squirrel Road and the planned Science and Technology Building, approximately 600 to 1,000 parking spaces are needed in the immediate future. Displaced and additional parking is accommodated by:

a. Adding 250 spaces by expanding the existing parking lot near Vandenburg Hall northward.

b. Adding 240 parking spaces by expanding the existing parking lot east of Ravine Drive (near recreation fields).

c. Adding 160 spaces by reconfiguring the assemblage of lots and roadway parking behind Varner Hall.

d. Adding,125 spaces by expanding to the west the parking lot south of the main entrance.

e. Adding 260 spaces by expanding the parking lot south of the proposed Science and Technology Building.

7. As enrollment increases and new facilities are developed, additional parking should be established south of Pioneer Drive. The potential for 2,200 spaces could service Main Campus in an interim stage until the south outlying zone is developed. Once developed, this parking will service the immediate zone; therefore, these 2,200 spaces will need to be relocated within the core of Main Campus.

8.  In the long-term, assuming an eventual enrollment of 15,000 FTE Students and commensurate staff increase, it is estimated that 3,000 additional parking spaces will be needed within the Main Campus core. The following describes the modifications, relocations, and new parking to accommodate this need.

a. The addition of 600 spaces in a new surface parking lot is proposed east of the present married student housing in conjunction with new proposed recreational facilities.

b. The addition of 100 spaces in a new surface parking lot to the east of O'Dowd Hall.

c. The addition of 450 spaces south of the Public Safety and Maintenance Building, assuming eventual displacement of the Belgian Barn.

d. The addition of 1,800 spaces in two new parking structures flanking the main entry.

e.  The addition of 600 spaces in a new parking structure to the Lepley Center.

9. Planting should be incorporated within all existing and propose lots.

Guidelines

1.  Campus roadways should be two-lane facilities with 12-foot lanes, gutter, sidewalks, and a 25-mph posted speed limit.

2. Parking:

a. Parking layouts should be consistent across campus. This includes  stall widths, standardized bay distances, and angle of parking.

• Lots laid out with 90 degree parking stalls will make the best use of space and ease of parking.
• Typical parking space 9 feet by 18 feet, with 60 feet from center of parking bay to center of parking bay.
• Handicap spaces should be 12 feet by 18 feet and located closest to the building entrances.
• Compact car spaces should be 8 feet by 18 feet and can comprise 25 percent of each lot.

b. The pavement in all parking lots should be given relief by 10- to 15-foot-wide landscaped islands. The use of canopy  trees in lawn is preferred.

3. See Guidelines under University Vehicular section for wall treat

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

Definition

A system of walkways which interconnect facilities, parking lots, and open space.

Principles

1. A walkway system consists of major walks, secondary walks, pathways and activity centers. This hierarchical system is based on the degree to which a walkway is traveled which responds directly to those activities which occur along it. The role of each type of walk can be defined as:

a. Major walks are those which allow primary circulation from one end of  the campus to another. Sometimes referred to as the spine, corridors feature hubs of activity that symbolize the campus identity.

b. Secondary walks are those which interconnect zones.

c. Pathways serve individual buildings.

d. Both major and secondary walks define open space and activity centers.

e. Activity centers,are hubs of activity where major walks intersect.

Recommendations

1. Extend major north/south walkway to the south of the library providing access to the proposed academic facilities.

2. Extend major north/south corridor to the south outlying zone providing access to parking and proposed academic facilities.

3. Establish a major east/west corridor just south of Dodge Hall and Hannah Hall interconnecting the parking lot and the major north/south corridor. This new walkway will complement the existing east/west corridor connecting the parking lot and the Student Center.

4. Establish secondary walks to proposed facilities.

5. Implement walks to define The Mall, Commons, the captured space at the lake and Preservation Area.

6. Further study is needed to identify standards and requirements in establishing a uniform, efficient, and effective walkway lighting system.

7. Further study is needed to identify standards and requirements in establishing a uniform, efficient, and effective walkway signage system.

8. Embellish the existing activity center at the east entrance of the Student Center by allowing it to become a small plaza area with special paving, canopy trees, and seat walls.

Guidelines

1. Standard walkway widths to be applied are:

        --Major walk - 10 feet wide, concrete surface, structurally able to accommodate service vehicles.

        -- Secondary walk - 8 feet wide, concrete surface.

        --Pathways - 6 feet wide, concrete.

2. All walkways will be handicap accessible.

EAST CAMPUS

OPEN SPACE

Definition

Open space on East Campus can be described as a collection of individual building "settings". Each landscape setting represents a spacial zone with its edge defined by topography and/or vegetation.

Principles

1. The facilities located on East Campus are individual in architectural character and function. As future expansion occurs, this individuality needs to be preserved.

2. The facilities on East Campus have generous yards or "settings" surrounding them; they are in balance. As future expansion occurs, this balance between facility and its setting needs to be maintained.

3. In addition to preserving individuality, the facilities of East Campus should appear as though they are part of the larger whole or University campus.

Recommendations

1. The character of the existing settings should be preserved--open pastures absent of trees, with masses of trees at the pasture's edge and reinforced with a continuous fence.

2. The remnants of the existing farmstead estate should be preserved--the orchard, pasture, fences and historic structure. These features offer an important insight to the University property's history.

3. Placement of environmental art on the land is similar to that of facilities; it requires an adequate setting. To preserve the quality of the existing settings, additional environmental art should be restricted.

FACILITIES

Definition

East Campus facilities represent a collection of self-sustaining, self- liquidating uses providing University and community-oriented services.

Principles

1. Maintain the existing "structure" of campus facilities:

a. Maintain the individual architectural character of the facilities.

b. Identify limits of facility growth within the existing settings.

c. Identify additional settings for new development to occur within.

Recommendations

1. Meadow Brook Hall:   Meadow Brook Hall is architecturally complete. Expansion to this historic structure is discouraged.

2. Health Maintenance/S. G. Pavilion:   A site has been defined for expansion to the north with a capacity of  87,000 square feet. The limits of the expansion have been define preserve the adjacent pasture "setting." This location allows expansion to embrace the rolling topography and to conceal the parking located southward.

3. Pavilion Expansion :  A zone of 5.8 acres has been identified to accommodate the Pavilion and its support facility expansion. Expansion can occur within this inward-oriented amphitheater area without impacting the character and quality of  the hill visible from the outside.

4. Sunset Terrace:   A 40,000-square-foot development located within a 9-acre setting identified as an inconspicuous addition to the north of Sunset.   New development as a replacement to Sunset Terrace represents another option. Replacement development at the same site could include University- and/or community-oriented services such as a conference center, Meadow Brook Theater, or multi-purpose housing to service the performers and East Campus. However, this is a historic building listed with the State of Michigan. Replacement development may not be  feasible, and guidelines regarding state historic property will be needed before  further planning is done on this site.

5. Public/Cultural - Northeast Corner:   A 10-acre site has been identified as having a facility capacity square feet. This site offers an opportunity to accommodate a high-image  community-oriented facility, visible from Adams Road. Located in the   center of the site, the facility allows for an expansive front yard with   parking to the rear. The front yard, the adjacent woodlot as a backdrop  and the orchard as an entry feature collectively express the "rural" nature of East Campus. This setting is ideal for a theater/auditorium or  performing arts center.

6. Public/Cultural - South of Main Entry:   An 8-acre site has been defined to accommodate approximately 80,000 feet of new development such as relocation of Meadow Brook Theatre or  housing to support Meadow Brook Hall and the Health Maintenance Alumni Center.  The site is situated behind the orchard and along the hillside with public exposure from Adams Road.  The required parking could be concealed within a shallow swale nearby. 

7. Golf Course:  A 204-acre area currently accommodates an 18-hole golf course and clubhouse. Expansion potential exists within the existing boundaries.

8. Future Growth Area:   A 106-acre site is located southwest of the golf course. The majority of the site is heavily wooded with mature hardwood trees. The undulating landform is surrounded by attractive settings--the golf course and the preservation area. Frontage access is available from Butler Road. To preserve this secluded and sensitive landscape, low-intensity developments are recommended such as small office developments (less than 20,000 square feet), housing, or recreation uses.

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING

Definition

All roads and parking required.to service East Campus.

Principles

1. The road network should unify the campus by providing clear, safe, and efficient circulation.

2. Separate parking should be provided for each facility because of the individual nature of the uses.

3. Placement and character of new parking should "fit" within and respect the individual settings.

4. Expansion of existing facilities and the addition of new facilities should be based on the ability to accommodate the required parking without compromising the character or quality of the setting.

Recommendations

1. The Y-type intersections should be reconfigured to a T-style design for improved safety and clarity.

2. Mansion Drive should remain a continuous road preserving the historical approach to Meadow Brook Hall.

3. The expansion of the Pavilion at the Meadow Brook Music Festival will require an additional 500 parking spaces. These spaces should occur to the east within the adjacent woodlot just south of Meadow Brook Drive. A 50-foot buffer or screen of the existing wood lot should remain to preserve the character of the setting.

4 . The public/cultural development site on the northeast corner has the potential of accommodating approximately 500 parking spaces without compromising the quality or character of the setting.

5. The public/cultural development site just south of the main entrance has the potential of accommodating approximately 300 parking spaces without compromising the quality or character of the setting.

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

Definition

A system of walkways which interconnect parking lots and facilities.

Principles

1. East Campus is primarily vehicular oriented; therefore, the role of walks is specifically to connect the parking lot to the building. If there is a need to walk between facilities, the existing roads should be used.

Recommendations

1. Maintain all existing walks and add walks as new facilities are developed.

The Southwest Campus, Southeast Campus and Housing Area recommendations have been generalized under the category of Land use based on the inherent qualities of the land, the adjacent land uses, and the uncertainty of development. 

SOUTHWEST CAMPUS

Land Use

Definition

The Southwest Campus is a development zone of approximately 76 acres adjacent to the intersection of Squirrel and Butler Roads. To the west and south are the Oakland Technology Park.  Major access to this development zone is available from M-59 at the new Squirrel Road interchange.

Principles

1.  The development of the Southwest Campus property should take advantage of the adjacent Technology Park and the inherent beauty of the rolling wooded site.

Recommendations

1. To preserve this secluded and sensitive landscape moderate intensity development is proposed and appropriate uses to relate the adjacent Technology Park include office/research facilities (60,000 to 90,000 square feet) or a conference center sensitively placed within the woods.

2.  Access to the Southwest Campus should occur off Squirrel Road.

3.  On-campus roadway extension could be implemented to link Main Campus to the Southwest Campus should a strong use relationship exist.

SOUTHEAST CAMPUS

Land Use

Definition

The Southeast Campus represents a future growth area of 22 acres adjacent to the intersection of Adams and Butler Roads.

Principles

1. This site is relatively small, but highly visible from the adjacent roadways. The Southeast Campus is removed from the University facilities and, as such, should be developed as a "stand-alone" development.

Recommendations

1. Relocate Child Care Center facility to Housing Area.

2. The Southeast Campus is "exterior-road" dependent. Provide access to this future growth area from Adams and Butler Roads. The extension of an on- campus roadway to this areas would not be cost-effective.

3. Develop a single-use, stand-alone facility on the site such as a research institute or a technology/conference center. Another option is to develop a new golf course clubhouse at this location. This would help alleviate congestion at the current East Campus location.

4. Orient facility development towards the preservation zone with parking adjacent to the exterior access roadways.

HOUSING

Land Use

Definition

East of Faculty Housing lies a 64 acre development zone overlooking a wetland.   The area is noncontiguous with the primary University property as it is separated by Adams Road.

Principles

1.  Development of this University property should be compatible with the quality of the land, be sensitive to the adjacent residential uses and, because of its isolated location, be able to stand along.

Recommendations

1.  A range of development scenarios should be evaluated for future use of this University property. All options recognize that because of the rolling terrain and adjacent wetland setting, low-intensity development on the land is most appropriate.

a. Maintain University Ownership Option:

1. Develop additional University-related housing such as temporary staff, guest, or married student housing on the remaining 64 acres.
2. Locate Child Care Center facility on the northern portion of the 64 acres.
3.  Buy back (repurchase) the adjacently single-family homes and develop the entire property as a University-related research/office complex of small, think-tank offices.
4. Land-bank the property for a future undetermined use.

b. Sale of Property Option

1. Develop the area for additional housing
2. Develop the area as a community park to service nearby residential areas.

VII. DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

Previous chapters have provided the background, framework, and guidelines to assist Oakland University,in shaping the future of its campus and physical facilities. This chapter organizes the master plan recommendations into a development strategy that will provide time frame focus to anticipated improvements. A number of ongoing considerations including funding availability or commitments, university policy, priorities, and phasing must all be factored into the long-range planning process. It is desirable to map out the short- (within 5 years), medium- (6-10 years), and long-term (11-20+ years) sequence to guide capital budgeting and assure coordinated implementation of related projects. It is recommended that this chapter be updated in five-year increments (or more frequently if necessary) to assure the currency of implementation priorities accompanying the master plan.

SHORT-TERM PROJECTS - WITHIN FIVE YEARS

1.   Evaluation and response by Oakland to the University Drive improvement project entrance to the Main Campus. This includes design and implementation of roadway geometries, traffic control, pedestrian access, main entrance sign (and other signs) replacement, and landscape treatment.

2. Evaluation and response by Oakland to the proposed improvements to Squirrel Road and eventually Squirrel Boulevard. Treatment of the western edge of the University will require careful consideration of setbacks, landforms and landscape materials restoration, entry treatments and sign replacements, parking lot modifications, and sale of University property for road rights-of-way.

3. Site selection, design, and construction of new Science and Technology Building and associated sitework/parking area.

4. Design and implementation of a coordinated and unified University sign system.

5. Refinement, final analysis, and ongoing implementation of the campus lighting systems to include Brightway paths, sidewalks, plazas, roadways, and parking areas.

6.  Conduct a campus furniture study to provide detailed guidelines for the unification of outdoor elements that compliment sign and lighting recommendations ons.

7. Relocate purchasing trail ers to the expanded Public ic Safety and Services building.

8. Improvement, modification, and expansion of existing parking lots on the Main Campus in the following priority order:
        -- Vandenburg Hall lot expansion - add 250 spaces 
        --Recreation fields lot - add 240 spaces 
        --Varner Hall lot expansion - add 160 spaces 
        --Lot south of main entrance expansion - add 125 spaces

MID-TERM PROJECTS - SIX TO TEN YEARS

1. Continue and complete campuswide sign unification program.

2. Continue and complete upgrade of campus lighting systems. 47

9 . Reduced size of Main Campus parking lot to respond to Squirrel Road (Boulevard) expansion - loss of 300 spaces.

10. Relocate professional theatre housing accommodations to south of Belgian Barn parking area or substitute off-campus housing within one mile of Meadow Brook Theatre.

11.  Complete library expansion and adjacent grounds improvements in the Commons.

12. Reconfigure "Y" intersections to "T" intersections on East Campus.

13.  Plan and design new University Maintenance facility between Main and East campuses.

14. Identify site and design 120,000 SF Classroom-Office Building III on Main Campus. Suggested location might be east of new Science and Technology Building.

15. Design and implement screen wall, pedestrian crosswalks, and landscape materials enhancement project to improve safety and aesthetic issues along the western edge of the Main Campus building zone.

16.  Improve service road between Main and East campuses for facilities operations purposes only.

17.  Begin implementation of pedestrian network improvements per master plan recommendations by replacing asphalt walks with concrete; improving walk system around the Library, Mall, and Commons; and improving Main Campus linkages.

18. Redesign Library mall and entry rotary landscape to compliment new University main entry.

19. Design and construct addition to the Oakland Center for a new bookstore and additional meeting rooms.

20. Design and begin planting enhancement plan for overall University edge and open space treatments.

21. Develop preservation area/wetland plan to maximize value of this resource to the University. This includes identification of important water features, drainage value, vegetative and wildlife habitats, and nature interpretation assets.

MID-TERM PROJECTS - SIX TO TEN YEARS

1. Continue and complete campuswide sign unification program.

2 . Continue and complete upgrade of campus lighting systems.

3 . Continue implementation of pedestrian system and preservation area trail network.

4. Develop expanded child day care facilities in the housing expansion area east of Adams Road.

5. Continue overall University edge and open space planting plan impl ementation.

6. Construct new 120,000 SF Classroom-Office Building.

7.  Design and construct new entry signs at Adams Road and the Meadow Brook Festival entrance on Walton Boulevard identifying each as "Oakland University."

8. Modify Pioneer Drive to connect with secondary entry to Walton Boulevard (East Oakland Drive). Also, realign Pioneer Drive in the vicinity of Lepley Sports Center to improve road geometries and allow for expansion of Lepley.

9.  Begin construction of new University Maintenance Center.

10.  Design expansion of Lepley Sports Center.

11.   Develop additional married student housing units along Pioneer Drive south of the existing main recreation fields complex.

12. Expand Baldwin Pavilion and add 500 spaces of associated parking in 6- to 10 year plan.

13. Construct  library mall and main University entry rotary improvements

14.  Develop apartment-type residential units to expand on-campus housing southeast of the lake.

15. Design joint University/Community Cultural facility and associated parking on northeast corner of East Campus site.

16. Design recreational facility complex on Main Campus on Meadow Brook Drive/Ravine Drive site.

17. Evaluate Adams Road upgrade,proposals impact on campus and access to M-59 via proposed interchange.

18. Plan academic expansion opportunities for Wilson Hall and site north of Oakland Center. Evaluate need for additional Oakland Center expansion.

19. Evaluate academic expansion capacities and program opportunities east of the new Science and Technology Building site.

20. Evaluate land acquisition and additional academic and parking area expansion opportunities south of Pioneer Drive and the Main Campus.

21. Begin feasibility studies for development of  Southwest Campus as a University-related office/research development.

22. Close off Ravine Drive at Pioneer Drive to minimize through traffic in the existing married student housing.

23. Modify Meadow Brook Drive east of Baldwin Pavil ion and near Adams Road entrance to improve vehicular circulation and safety issues.

24. Begin implementation of preservation area/wetland access and interpretation plan, including designation of preservation zones, fragile wetlands, woodlands, and steep slopes which are to remain undisturbed except for intrepretative access.

LONG-TERM PROJECTS - ELEVEN TO TWENTY YEARS

1. Complete upgraded on-campus pedestrian system preservation area trail system and links to related off-campus systems.

2. Construct Lepley Sports Center expansion.

3. Construct University/Community Cultural Center on East Campus.

4. Construct recreational complex.

5. Evaluate and implement parking lots/decks in designated areas to accommodate University expansion.

6. Upgrade service road to link Main and East campuses as needed.

7. Evaluate relocation potential of Belgian Barn (and other historic structures) to the East Campus.

8. Continue academic, student services, and housing additions/expansions as the need arises on Main Campus and south of Main Campus.

9. Continue overall University edge and open space planting plan implementation.

10. Begin design and development of Southwest Office Research Campus.

11. Examine additional program opportunities for one site remaining on East Campus south of the main entry drive.

12. Continue wetland enhancement and nature interpretation system development.

13. Explore development opportunities for Southeast Campus.