Masters of the university
Trustees will decide today if master planners have the right vision for University Park's future

By DARYL LANG
Collegian Staff Writer

Fast forward to University Park in 2024.

Having become a pedestrian walkway, Pollock Road is dotted with students. Free busses shuttle commuters from parking lots at the east and west ends of campus. A cluster of agricultural classrooms sits on what used to be Parking Lot 80.

A generation from now, parts of the campus might look dramatically different as a result of the University Park Campus Master Plan, a set of guidelines for development over the next 20 or 30 years.

The plan has been progressing for the past two years as planners have drawn input from the university and community.

Now, it's judgment day. A consultant is scheduled to present the final plan for approval at the Penn State Board of Trustees meeting today.

If the trustees vote to approve the plan, it will become the framework for expanding and managing green space, pedestrian traffic, cars and buses, architecture, utilities, and land use at University Park.

The Master Plan is "opportunities based," said university architect Charles Brueggebors, meaning it is only a set of guidelines for projects that might come up.

"It's not an implementation plan," Brueggebors said. "If we do decide to do (a project), this is how it's done . . . We might come up with better ideas as we go on."

Brueggebors directed the Master Plan project. As a result, his desk is covered with neat stacks of manila folders containing documents and diagrams related to every detail of the plan.

The Master Plan is the product of dozens of interviews, focus groups and community information sessions. Working with an advisory committee representing administrators, faculty, staff, students and other members of the community, consultants from Johnson, Johnson & Roy Inc. of Ann Arbor, Mich., drafted plans and made recommendations.

As a result, the final presentation balances some touchy issues.

It calls for more open space and pedestrian walkways at the expense of roads and parking lots. It tries to bring the campus up to date and still focus on traditional landmarks like Old Main and the Nittany Lion Shrine. It does not recommend more growth, but shows ideal ways to fit additional buildings where necessary.

To make the campus friendlier to pedestrians, the plan suggests closing some campus roads to traffic.

Vehicle traffic will be blocked or restricted on sections of Pollock Road, Shortlidge Road and Curtin Road.

Students who walk on Pollock Road on their way to classes already have seen a glimpse of the proposed traffic changes. The closing of Pollock Road to private traffic during certain hours has been successful in making the road safer for pedestrians and bikers, Brueggebors said.

The plan removes several parking lots, but makes up for the lost spaces with three new parking decks in central locations and more parking near The Bryce Jordan Center.

One of Penn State's goals for transportation is to eventually offer free bus services, perhaps paid for by parking fees, Brueggebors said.

Among Centre region leaders, parking and traffic are "at the top of everyone's list" of Master Plan issues, said Robert Bini, director of the Centre Regional Planning Agency and a member of the advisory committee.

Although the suggested traffic changes have raised some eyebrows, Bini said the open discussions about the Master Plan have been positive for the university and the community.

In addition to the general plans for the entire campus, the Master Plan zooms in on three subcampuses for particular detail.

One subcampus is the agricultural campus, which may be built on the area that is now Parking Lot 80. A concept drawing shows a parking deck, a field and several classroom buildings, which may become the new home to the University Creamery.

In the drawing for the science subcampus, a dense area near the center of campus, the parking lot behind Osmond Laboratory is converted into an open square. The plan suggests Pollock Road near the HUB become a mall landscaped with plazas and sitting areas.

The third subcampus design, the engineering subcampus, shows the Hammond Building split in half and recommends the removal of the boxy Engineering Units.

One issue given little attention in the plan is housing, reflecting the trend of having the majority of students live off campus.

Although a new graduate housing area is planned for the west side of campus near the golf course, the plan does not feature any new residence areas for undergraduate students.

The consultant's original plans recommended more housing, but the university administration did not support it, Brueggebors said.

However, it is likely some residence areas will be updated and reworked, Brueggebors added.

Away from the center of campus, the Master Plan allows for growth to the east and west, but designates a section of land north of Park Avenue for the arboretum, a planned natural area that would showcase different kinds of vegetation.

Landscape architecture students have been following both the arboretum and the campus Master Plan with particular interest.

Some landscape architecture classes have used the design problems as examples for class assignments, said Jason Kentner (senior-landscape architecture), president of the Landscape Architecture Student Society.

One of the lessons is master planning deals with concepts rather than specifics, Kentner said.

"People who don't understand that will often nit-pick," Kentner said. "It's not set in stone."

Many campuses, including all in the Penn State system, follow master plans. University Park has had some form of a master plan for more than 90 years.

"The first (University Park) Master Plan was done in 1907, but nobody paid any attention to it," Brueggebors said.

The last major update to the Master Plan was in 1987, during a time of rapid growth for the campus.

As the campus continued to expand, the Facilities Planning Advisory Board decided in 1994 to create a fresh approach to the design.

That decision, followed by years of research and ideas, eventually led to the Master Plan the trustees are seeing today.

"(The plan) has allowed for a lot of shaping," Bini said. "I think people, if they're being realistic, should be able to see that their comments and input have had an impact."

• Green Space
• Arboretum
• Hammond Building