MU Campus Master Plan Update Executive Summary -Columbia MU Campus Master Plan Update/Executive Summary

University of Missouri - Columbia Campus Master Plan Update/ Executive Summary July 2006

University of Missouri-Columbia

MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary Table of Contents

I. Introduction...... 1 II. MU Campus Master Plan Process...... 3 III. MU Campus Master Plan Framework...... 5 IV. Campus Development Capacity & Initiatives...... 7 V. Major Renovation Needs...... 9 VI. MU Campus Infrastructure...... 11 VII. Potential for Future Development & Expansion...... 13

MU Campus Planning Maps A. Regional Context ...... 15 B. Campus/Community Interface ...... 16 C. Existing & Proposed Open Space System...... 17 D. Existing Planning Study Areas...... 18 E. Existing & Future Traffic Circulation & Parking ...... 19 F. Potential Building Capacity ...... 20 1. Central Campus ...... 21 2. Southeast Gateway...... 22 3. East Campus ...... 23 G. Major Renovation Needs...... 24 H. Proposed Utility Upgrades & Extensions...... 25 I. Proposed Sewer Upgrades & Extensions...... 26 J. Proposed Land Use...... 27

University of Missouri-Columbia “The campus began as a unified ensemble of buildings that, through special architectural concern with the natural environment, evolved over time into districts distinguished by unique architectural styles and color palettes.”

The first campus plan from 1872 shows the original five buildings surrounding expansive open space. This pattern of open spaces framed by buildings organized at a human scale continues today. Used by permission, State Historical Society of Missouri, Columbia. MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary Introduction

he University of Missouri – Columbia (MU) Current Enrollment Figures was established in 1839 on a 44-acre tract of land a stone’s throw from the main street of During the 2005-2006 school-year, a record T 27,985 students enrolled at MU, an increase of Columbia, a small frontier town with a population of about 700 in the central part of the state, midway 4 percent over 2004’s total (27,003). Of the recent between St. Louis and Kansas City. total, 77 percent (21,644) were Missouri residents; 10 percent (2,899) were minority students and A leading Doctoral/Research University- 5 percent (1,374) were international students. Extensive public university today, MU consists Four percent (1,069) of the students are seeking of more than 18,000 acres, of which over 1,360 professional degrees, while 20 percent (5,051) are comprise the main, contiguous campus. Columbia’s seeking graduate degrees. population now exceeds 85,000, making it the fourth-largest metropolitan area in the state. A Legacy of Sound Planning and Design The Facilities Campus architecture reflects MU’s growth and development into an internationally visible research MU’s main campus contains more than 300 university. The campus began as a unified ensemble buildings with approximately 14.6 million gross of buildings that, through special architectural square feet of space for academic, research, concern with the natural environment, evolved administration, medical, athletics, residential over time into districts distinguished by unique housing, student services and structured parking. architectural styles and color palettes. Activities relating to the university’s land grant The Original Campus "'s fiery mission of ‘teaching, research, public service and economic development’ take place in about 170 In 1875, five structures comprised the campus: Educational and General space (E&G) buildings the Neoclassic Academic Hall (the main classroom destruction in 1892 resulted in on the contiguous campus. Subsidiary educational building); the Scientific Building; a president’s functions, e.g. student and medical services, residence; a small observatory; and a “Normal the creation of an entirely new athletics and parking, are located in 149 non-E&G School” for women’s vocational training. space buildings on the contiguous campus. The 1893 campus … Known as the Red Academic and Professional Programs Academic Hall’s fiery destruction in 1892 resulted in the creation of an entirely new campus. Within Twenty academic colleges and schools, including a year, six red-brick Victorian structures had been Campus, the area in 1974 was a Graduate School and the professional schools erected at the edges of a grassy rectangle, later of Journalism, Law, Medicine and Veterinary named . In the quadrangle’s Medicine, occupy the MU campus. center, the old Academic Hall’s six Ionic columns listed on the National Register MU offers 267 degree programs — including more were left standing as a memorial to the university’s than 30 on-line options — and is one of only six beginnings. A new academic hall (later renamed of Historic Places." universities nationwide with schools of Agriculture, ) anchored the quadrangle’s south end and Engineering, Medicine and Veterinary Medicine on serves today as the campus’ main administrative the same campus. Institutional Research figures building. Known as the Red Campus, the area in show MU’s teaching and research faculty number 1974 was listed on the National Register of Historic 3,612, and is supported by a staff of over 7,000. Places.

University of Missouri-Columbia  The East (Agriculture) or White Campus This increase, along with the post-1985 construction With the laying in 1900 of the cornerstone of of 71 major buildings, the ongoing construction and Waters Hall, both the College of Agriculture and the design of 18 structures, and the planned – through “White Campus” began to take shape. Collegiate 2010 – construction of 16 facilities, indicate the scale Gothic buildings of white limestone, dedicated of MU’s growth needs. to agriculture programs, were erected over three Research drives development decades in pasture land east of the Red Campus. Campus development is driven increasingly by An Expanding Campus MU’s burgeoning research enterprise. Over the last Increasing enrollment from the mid-1940s decade (1993-2002) for which comparative figures through the 1970s resulted in the construction of are available, the university’s 163 percent growth academic, medical science, administrative and in federal research funding ranked second among student living facilities in residential areas adjacent public AAU institutions. to the campus and on open land to the east, south During the 2005 fiscal year, scientists and and west of the Red and White campuses. These scholars at MU achieved record levels of external new structures were built in the International- or sponsorship, with total expenditures falling just By the early 1900s, the MU campus had spread south Early Modern architectural style, faced with buff- short of $180 million. This new figure, a 10-percent and east from Francis Quadrangle as enrollment or yellow-colored brick that attempted to mediate, increase over 2004, is a welcome indication of the increased. The agriculture campus, known today as if not tie together, the older red-brick and white- continued growth of MU’s research enterprise and the White Campus, is shown in the upper left area of limestone structures. a confirmation of the university’s place among this 1910 postcard. Photo credit: University Archives. MU’s Campus Master Plan was implemented in the nation’s elite research institutions. In National 1980 to unify the campus. Properties adjacent to the Science Foundation funding alone, MU leads all core campus were acquired, allowing open areas Missouri universities, is in the top 15 universities and pedestrian corridors to be created, beginning nationwide and is ranked 14th in the nation in the integration, unification and beautification research funding in life sciences. of campus districts and the development of the MU continues to aggressively seek external university’s historic “sense of place.” funding to supplement state appropriations and Planning for the Future student fees. The university continues to attract not only competitive money for research programs, Between 1985 and 2001, MU’s annual enrollment but is also securing funding to renovate existing – accompanied by unprecedented construction on buildings and construct new facilities, such as campus, which continues today – averaged around the recently completed National Swine Resource 23,000 students, reflecting a nationwide trend in & Research Center and the proposed Regional which the growth of facilities has been driven Biocontainment Laboratory on the East Campus. less by enrollment and more by the expansion of research, support functions and services institutions are providing. A surge in enrollment beginning in 2002 reached a record 27,985 students the 2005-2006 school year.

 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary MU Campus Master Plan Process

ampus planning and development are • Identifying, evaluating and illustrating accomplished through the MU Campus university, neighborhood, and community land CMaster Plan (MUCMP), an ongoing, use, ownership, restrictions, and circulation dynamic, participatory process begun in 1980 patterns and administered by Campus Facilities. The • Articulating an overall campus-plan concept goal of the MUCMP is the support of MU’s guiding future development “… the MU Campus Master institutional priorities and strategies through the construction, maintenance and renovation Campus master planning is based firmly on of facilities, infrastructure and landscaping architectural and construction principles, but Plan (MUCMP) [is] an ongoing, to ensure “the creation of a unified, efficient remains flexible in planning issues, goals and environment that is both inviting to students and program objectives, which are constantly changing enhances the university’s [land grant] mission of and can be only vaguely foreseen and defined. dynamic, participatory teaching, research, public service and economic Participatory Planning development.” process begun in 1980 and Facilities, Infrastructure and Landscape The basic tenet of the MUCMP process is stakeholder involvement, which is deemed critical Planning in meeting MU’s campus-planning needs. Facilities, administered by Campus The primary MUCMP concerns are: 1) siting infrastructure and landscape planning and and arranging future academic and non-academic development cannot be accomplished effectively Facilities.” facilities throughout the campus, 2) determining by distant individuals or organizations, or even overall design parameters, including infrastructure by local committees. Planning and development of and landscaping, within which new projects fit, MU’s campus is thus a function of the needs and and 3) the planned maintenance, renovation, and wants of students, faculty, staff, and the general preservation of existing facilities. public, all representative of the geographical, educational, social and political surround of which Campus master planning is principle-based and the university is part. Expanded involvement a function of the following planning objectives: and accountability provide multidimensional • Identifying and confirming the continued use, expression of planning needs that might otherwise modification, demolition, and/or construction go unexpressed, and allows for productive, of buildings rewarding campus planning. • Identifying the purpose, size, function, and MUCMP’s unique planning process thus fosters location of new facilities a maximum of planning-and-design freedom in responding to changing academic and research • Identifying and evaluating campus landscape needs. Campus stakeholders involved in the components planning-process exercise a mandate of interactively • Identifying and evaluating campus vehicular planning needed facilities, infrastructure and and pedestrian circulation, and parking landscaping. The MUCMP process supports networks institution goals and objectives while preserving MU’s historic architectural fabric and all-important • Illustrating changes proposed for remedying sense of place. A reflective process, the MUCMP is deficiencies and serving new development

University of Missouri-Columbia  marked by continuous and successful participatory the framework of open space, circulation and productivity and accomplishment. infrastructure in which growth will occur, with a focus on the density and capacity of the Central The MU Campus Master Plan Publication and East campuses and the Southeast Gateway as Planning strategies, expectations, possibilities the core areas of institutional growth and change and development accomplished through the (See Figure F, page 20). MUCMP process are presented annually in the Due to decreasing availability of campus “MU Campus Master Plan (Year),” a tabloid building sites, academic and research facility publication and campus map illustrating existing growth patterns — including pedestrian and MU buildings, projects recently completed, vehicular circulation and infrastructure needs projects in design or construction, projects in the — are being meticulously analyzed to identify the planning stage, and possible future facilities. The capacity for future development. Development publication also contains narrative on topical must stay in line with roadway capacity and utility campus-development issues and is prepared in infrastructure, and must be organized to support conjunction with an annual public forum where academic functions and the campus’ quality of life. ongoing campus planning is presented for review Future development must be compatible with the and validation by the campus community and existing campus and community environment. public at large. Annual public forums allow members of the MU Original ideas of the 1893 design of the MU Campus community and the public at large to review This Campus Master Plan Update/Executive campus — clear spatial organization, human and validate the updated annual MU Campus Master Summary, a periodic planning-update of and scale of the campus environment, and integration Plan. addendum to the MUCMP publication, provides of architecture and landscape — have been campus stakeholders a long-range view of the maintained over the years and should continue to resources and capacities critical to day-to-day guide future campus planning. planning and decision-making on the future growth and development of the campus. The objective of this report is to establish an updated foundation for campus-planning from which future campus development may proceed. The report looks at where MU is today, where campus development — facilities, infrastructure and landscaping — are headed and how the MUCMP process supports developing institutional strategies and priorities. Graphics illustrating these concepts and referenced in the following chapters can be found in the “Campus Planning Maps” section. Campus planning priorities Currently in the midst of major planning, The Bond Life Sciences Center provides state-of-the-art the result of enrollment growth and increased laboratory and teaching facilities for six MU schools and research funding, the MUCMP today addresses colleges collaborating on research to improve food, health and the environment.

 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary MU Campus Master Plan Framework

he MU campus-plan framework identifies relationship. A community-within-a-community, existing physical developmental patterns MU manages its educational mandate while sharing Tand networks defining the campus and infrastructure and identifying and addressing its surroundings, where future campus growth common municipal and civic concerns and issues will occur: the regional context in which the with city officials (See Figure B, page 16). campus exists, campus land-use districts, vehicle Environmental Responsibility and pedestrian circulation systems, campus infrastructure networks, interface with the MU is concerned with planning and managing community, and the campus’ open-space structure environmentally responsible campus development. that ties it all together. Particular concerns are land-use efficiency; energy conservation; waste management; materials MU’s master-planning builds on this framework recycling; and reducing reliance on vehicles for by projecting where and how future development commuting and traversing the campus. The impact should take place. The framework indicates on the community and campus “quality of life” is how open space, circulation and infrastructure carefully considered in the design of all projects. networks need to be reshaped to accommodate development. Importantly, the campus master plan A Long-standing Symbiotic Relationship identifies those aspects of the existing framework MU has long recognized a “symbiotic” that must be preserved and modified to enable relationship with business and residences on sound growth for future generations. The vision its perimeters, the strength and protection of Since its initial development in 1839, the MU campus embodied in MU’s Campus Master Plan is to which must be maintained. Planned interface has abided by consistent principles of campus sustain a cohesive campus environment fostering and integration strategies will lead to a greater design. The original ideas for the campus — clear the university’s mission of teaching, research, utilization of campus and area resources that spatial organization, human scale of the campus service, and economic development. benefit all. environment and integration of architecture and landscape — have held fast for over a century and a Regional Context Cultural Programs and Activities half and will continue to hold in the campus master MU has an extensive physical presence in the MU’s commitment to cultural programs and plan. Photo reprinted with permission of University community. As the region’s largest employer, activities, a central quality of its civic presence in Archives, C: 0/3/8. the university significantly impacts the region’s Columbia, is currently exemplified by a planned economy. regional performing arts complex to be located on the north periphery of campus, both contiguous Off-campus university property within the city and integral to the central campus and community. limits includes the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center The proposed development will have state-of-the- campus (northwest); Columbia Regional Hospital art capability to attract a wide array of cultural and (northeast); the Lemone Industrial Park facilities academically related events to the region. and the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources’ South Farm, both to the southeast of Athletics is an essential auxiliary to academic campus — all approximately a 10-minute drive activities and an important link to the community, from the central campus (See Figure A, page 15). region and, indeed, the entire state and nation. State-of-the-art sports facilities, ideally located Campus/Community Interface in an open area south of the central campus, MU is part and parcel of the City of Columbia, accommodate enormous campus-community and with which it continues to enjoy a positive public interest in university sports programs.

University of Missouri-Columbia  Land-Use Districts implemented by Thomas Jefferson at the University of Virginia. This open-quadrangle theme is carried Land use on the MU campus fits the classic throughout the campus, helping to create MU’s pattern of America’s land-grant universities: A sense of identity and place. compact, well-defined academic core and academic- support facilities occupying an area centered on the Since the early 1980s, MU has taken bold steps "The basic land-use pattern university’s main administrative center and library, in developing open spaces and creating green and flanked by student residential and recreational space. The Carnahan Quadrangle, Kuhlman is sound and should not be areas connecting academic life with social learning Court, Speakers Circle and Lowry Mall are experiences (See Figure J, page 27). dramatic examples of effective planning and timely appropriation. MU’s medical area is also related closely to the altered in any substantial way academic core, an important linkage reinforcing the Collegial Edges campus’ growing research mission. Major public A strong sense of place and campus unity is to accommodate future growth thoroughfares allow direct access to University achieved by the manner in which buildings have Hospital and related medical facilities serving the been placed at the edge of the MU campus. These community and region. and development." “collegial edges” allow the articulation of open Beyond both the academic core and medical space, establish an identifiable campus edge, and area, land use accommodates intercollegiate sports draw the viewer into the campus. facilities, agricultural areas, large surface parking An extensive, natural open-space system exists areas, the Research Park and a golf course, all along the perimeter of Hinkson Creek. Natural requiring extensive areas of land. The basic land- and agricultural land, recreational fields and a golf use pattern is sound and should not be altered in course make up the system whose natural, open- any substantial way to accommodate future growth space character is basic to MU’s land-grant legacy. and development. The open-space planning goal of the south and Open Space System east edges of campus is to strengthen connections between these outlying, natural areas and formal, MU’s open space system comprises a network open-space areas at the heart of campus. of formal landscaped spaces and places that, vis-à- vis the , unify the campus. Open spaces permit visual axes to be integrated into the design and placement of buildings, fostering a sense of community and unifying the campus by providing sight lines to Jesse Hall Dome, Memorial Collegial edges, such as the corner of College and Union Tower, and other present — and future University avenues, establish an identifiable edge — campus icons (See Figure C, page 17). and draw viewers into the campus. An arched entry MU’s “Sense of Place” connecting Stephens Hall, left, to Lefevre Hall leads to the White Campus. The university’s commitment to open space stems from traditional campus designs modeled after small communities. The design of Francis Quadrangle, for instance, is similar to the plan first

 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary Campus Development Capacity

opography, past land use, open-space building sites where extensive hospital surface character,, infrastructure and the proximal parking and the University Terrace apartments Tclustering of like-functions have resulted in now exist. widely varying developmental densities within Projected capacity for development in this area MU’s 1,360-plus acres of contiguous campus. ranges from 1.6 to 1.8 million gross square Planning Study Areas feet, which does not include future expansion " Topography, past land or redevelopment within the Health Sciences Given that density, character, and capacity complex west of Hitt Street, the subject of its disparities exist on campus, MUMCP planners own extensive planning process. use, open-space character, have subdivided the campus into the following planning-study areas for more detailed analyses 3. The East Campus is an area of significant of capacity (See Figure D, page 18): potential growth through “infill” among infrastructure and the proximal existing buildings to the north (e.g. Bingham 1. The Central Campus is distinguished by the Residential Complex, School of Veterinary clustering of like-functions campus’ traditional “academic core” functions; Medicine) and construction of major new the Health Sciences complex; and most of developments to the south. The balance of the the undergraduate residential areas. Future site is taken up with surface parking lots and have resulted in widely varying development here depends on interstitial infill smaller ancillary buildings. sites and redevelopment of certain existing building sites. The estimated future building capacity of the developmental densities East Campus is between 1.6 and 1.8 million Future building capacity in the academic core gross square feet, based on the plan framework campus (after deducting the area of buildings and density assumptions. within MU’s 1,360-plus acres of that might be replaced) is estimated to be in the range of 1.2 to 1.4 million gross square 4. The South Campus study area contains a feet, which may vary somewhat as individual variety of intercollegiate sports facilities in contiguous campus. " sites are analyzed in greater detail. Criteria MU’s Sports Park (e.g. the , for identifying future sites are both aesthetic Memorial Stadium, Simmons Field), the MU and functional. Future building sites must Research Reactor and support facilities, the avoid intruding on or disrupting open spaces A.L. Gustin Golf Course, wooded land and and vistas in the core area that are critical to open fields. Future development will likely the character of the campus. Sites must also occur in concentrated clusters associated with accommodate the fabric and the established existing facilities. building scale of core structures, which Potential Building Capacity generally average three or four stories in height. The MU campus currently accommodates approximately 14.6 million gross square feet of 2. The Southeast Gateway’s principal planning classroom, research and teaching laboratories, concern is the realignment of Hospital Drive, administrative, residential, sports, medical, which will enable development adjacent to the support, and structured-parking space. Ambulatory Care Building, thereby linking the area with Central Campus. Development Approximately 11 million gsf of this footage has capacity here exists in the creation of new been constructed since 1960 (4 million gsf was built

University of Missouri-Columbia 7 between 1990 and 2001) through infill of interstitial Establishing a Framework sites in the Central Campus area and expansion to land outside the central campus. Construction of Three key campus areas are being studied for many large-scale buildings associated with health establishing a framework with which to make sciences, sports and recreation, residential life and sound future siting decisions: 1) Central Campus’ traditional “academic core,” where undergraduate "Enrollment … funding sources, structured parking, tripled the space-growth that occurred prior to 1960. instruction is concentrated (See Figure F-1, page 21) 2) the “Southeast Gateway” area (See Figure and institutional mission and Unprecedented space-growth continues at MU, F-2, page 22) and the 3) East Campus (See Figure driven today by the robust expansion of funded F-3, page 23). Building capacity in these areas is research facilities and enhancement of campus estimated to be between 4.4 and 5 million gross resources, make the projection community life with residential, cultural, sports square feet, an area approximately one-third more and other support facilities. This growth is also than MU’s existing building space. sustained by higher standards of accommodation of future growth and terms by driven by today’s pedagogy and technology. The centrality and contiguity of the areas to Enrollment (a 2002 surge in student enrollment each other and the rest of the campus are critical factors in the future growth of academic, research, which it should occur clearly in 2005 reached a record high of 27,930), funding sources, and institutional mission and resources, residential and common facilities, including make the projection of future growth and terms by efficiency of operations, resources and vitality of prudent. " which it should occur clearly prudent (See Figure academic and community life. F, page 20). The above three areas remain works in progress, the fundamental goal being that of establishing a disciplined-but-flexible, unified, efficient framework for siting future buildings.

Campus development in the academic core varies from one-story buildings like the Gaines/Oldham Black Culture Center, foreground, to the five-story Bond Life Sciences Center, background.

8 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary Major Renovation Needs

U has many educational and general (E&G) Fixing the Problem buildings that, from an exterior point of view, appear to be functional. From A funding mechanism for this backlog must be M identified. Several options are available, including a teaching-and-research, interior point of view, however, they are functionally obsolete, meeting increased legislative appropriations and increased gifts. An approach similar to Executive Order 28, neither the space needs nor the technological "MU has many E&G buildings requirements of today’s students and faculty. which would return obsolete buildings to their full educational function and value in a reasonable As of FY2006, there are 38 such outdated E&G amount of time, has been discussed. Setting aside that … appear to be functional buildings on campus, which contain 1.79 million an annual 2 percent ($22.3 million) of the present gross square feet of obsolete space, nearly one-third $1.14 billion replacement value of MU facilities of the campus total of 6.4 million gsf of E&G space would allow campus building obsolescence to be … however, they are (See Figure G, page 24). Most of this antiquated eliminated in approximately 20 years. space is located in the academic-and-administrative center, or “heart,” of MU’s Central Campus functionally obsolete, meeting Planning Area, that part of campus bounded by Elm Street/University Avenue (north) and Rollins neither the space needs nor the Street (south) and by Sixth Street (west) and College Avenue (east). The ‘Interior Renovation-Rehabilitation’ technological requirements of Problem today’s students and faculty." The biggest share of outmoded E&G space was constructed during the 1950s and 1960s, although much consists of earlier construction. Most has never been significantly upgraded, which has resulted in substandard space for teaching and research functions, and the creation of an estimated $389 million backlog of needed “interior renovation and rehabilitation.” Many outdated facilities, such as these in Swallow Hall, do not meet the technological and space needs of today's Existing Renovation Backlog faculty and students. The state legislature and UM in 1994 established Executive Order 28, which sets aside as funding 1.5 percent of the replacement value of campus buildings to clear up the backlog of deferred maintenance and repair projects. This funding, however, is not available for “renovation and rehabilitation” projects. Other funding sources, such as legislative appropriations, federal grants, and gifts, thus need to be identified.

University of Missouri-Columbia  Il ulput enis acinit iurem vent loborem doloreet velenit ipit at, venisi. Sandigna feum vel ulputpatet

Of MU's 6.4 million gross square feet of education and general (E&G) space, about two-thirds, or 4.4 million square feet, is more than 30 years old. Two million square feet of that amount are more than 50 years old.

Top: Built in 1918, Neff Auditorium became obsolete for use by today's journalism students. Bottom: A 2001 renovation transformed the auditorium into a comfortable facility adapted to modern technology.

10 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary MU Campus Infrastructure

U’s campus infrastructure, the East Campus Upgrades/Extensions interconnected physical framework of Utilities must be extended to serve the Regional Mutility, transportation and service systems Biocontainment Laboratory and the proposed is of fundamental concern in the MU campus Comparative Medicine Center. master planning process. Pedestrian/Vehicular Circulation Electrical systems, steam systems, potable water "MU’s campus infrastructure, and chilled-water systems are critical to MU’s Traffic Safety operations (See Figure H, page 25). Sanitary sewer Major public arterials: Stadium Boulevard, the interconnected physical and storm-sewer systems also play a critical role in Providence Road and College Avenue provide campus operations (See Figure I, page 26). high-volume, regional access to the university and A network of campus streets and sidewalks Columbia’s central business district. Pedestrian framework of utility, allows movement of service and private vehicles, crossings here must be limited, in order to maintain faculty, staff, students and visitors. This network vehicular traffic. transportation and service — which supports an estimated 40,000 students, MU has taken major steps to improve pedestrian employees and visitors — is accessed daily by movement and safety on these arterials. A pedestrian some 35,000 vehicles, which create a pedestrian- bridge over Providence Road (completed in 2002) systems is of fundamental vehicle interface of major concern (See Figure E, improved safety for pedestrians in the MU Sports page 19). Park. A pedestrian bridge over College Avenue concern in the MU campus Proposed Infrastructure Upgrades and (completed in 2004) links nearby student residential Extensions facilities with the Central Campus core to the west. master planning process.” Central & South Campus Upgrades/Extensions Campus collector streets: Rollins Street, Additional steam capacity, electric, and chilled University Avenue, Maryland Avenue and Hitt water lines will be required to serve the new Brady Street provide access to and through campus, but Student Center Expansion, the National Plant and with less vehicle volume and speed. Nevertheless, Genetics Security Center, the proposed Technology numerous pedestrian crossings on these roadways Incubator Facility, the International Institute for create a relatively delicate balance between the NANO & Molecular Medicine and other projects flow of vehicular traffic and the safe movement of campus-wide. The proposed Rollins Street Sanitary pedestrians. Sewer Main upgrade will also support new construction. Pedestrian-friendly (“Closed Campus”) street corridors: A portion of Ninth Street to Conley Southeast Gateway Upgrades/Extensions Avenue and a portion of Hitt Street fronting Utilities must be extended and distribution loops Memorial Union are closed to vehicles during completed to allow the construction of a planned class hours, measurably enhancing pedestrian Health Sciences Research & Education Facility, safety. At other times, these two roadways function Surgery Tower and Parking Structure # 7 and to as campus “collector” streets. Future campus maintain utility-reliability to these facilities. The development may dictate the closure of other “core proposed Hospital Drive Sanitary Sewer Main area” streets. upgrade will also support new construction here.

University of Missouri-Columbia 11 A study under way of pedestrian and vehicle existing pedestrian/vehicle conflict caused by circulation and parking constitutes a separate extensive surface parking component of campus planning. Improving 3. Locating major parking facilities that can pedestrian safety, accessing various campus be directly or indirectly accessed by major areas, and determining the impact of proposed arterials or collector streets Il ulput enis acinit iurem vent buildings on pedestrian and vehicular circulation are objectives of the study. A prominent result 4. Erecting facilities of sufficient size and in has been an extensive examination of areas of sufficient number where the likelihood of loborem doloreet velenit ipit at, major congestion and proposed traffic-calming the continual availability of parking spaces is modifications to Rollins Street between Maryland maintained venisi. Avenue and Hitt Street, the most heavily congested 5. Proactively managing campus parking so that roadway on campus. construction and operating costs of parking Vehicle Parking structures are borne by parking fees Sandigna feum vel ulputpatet The development of new campus parking A seventh parking structure is proposed in the structure sites and street changes is accomplished Southeast Gateway area near University Hospital. in accordance with principles established in a 1990 The most recent addition was that of the Virginia study: Avenue Parking Structure serving the Health 1. Locating campus parking within a reasonable Sciences and Central Campus area. A plant operator monitors the operation of the MU walking distance of significant destinations Power Plant. The plant is capable of reliably and efficiently meeting all of the campus’ current steam 2. Locating parking structures about the central and electricity needs. campus perimeter, thereby lessening the

Proposed traffic “calming” measures on Rollins Street.

12 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary Potential for Future Development & Expansion

ajor acquisitions of land in 1839 (264 acres), These early acquisitions and subsequent smaller 1870 (640 acres) and 1955 (450-plus acres) purchases did not result in or retain the contiguity Messentially defined the outer perimeters of of today’s campus. As the campus grew, extensions the 1,360-plus acre campus as it exists today. of the university from the Francis Quadrangle area initially spread east and south to encompass private residences and business properties that existed within the campus. Further purchases over time of private land were necessary to accommodate the growth of MU’s academic colleges, professional schools, departments, research and administrative facilities, thus necessarily extending and spreading university functions to the south, southwest and north. Phenomenal growth in the late 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, toward earlier-established outer-campus perimeters, resulted in campus sprawl. In 1980 the MU Campus Master Plan was implemented, the purpose of which was to functionally and aesthetically integrate, unify and beautify the campus. A concerted effort was begun on planning the aggregate of the campus, which necessitated the purchase of properties to make the campus functionally and aesthetically whole.

Formal green space, such as Carnahan Quadrangle, above, has been created over the past two decades by aquisition of private buildings and redevelopment of the land.

The aquisition and closing of Lowry Street created a pedestrian mall and campus corridor in the heart of campus.

University of Missouri-Columbia 13

MU Campus Master Plan Update/Executive Summary

Campus Planning Maps

University of Missouri-Columbia

MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure A

University of Missouri-Columbia 15 Figure B

16 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure C

University of Missouri-Columbia 17 Figure D

18 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure E

University of Missouri-Columbia 19 Figure F

20 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure F-1

University of Missouri-Columbia 21 Figure F-2

22 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure F-3

University of Missouri-Columbia 23 Figure G

24 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure H

University of Missouri-Columbia 25 Figure I

26 MU Campus Master Plan Update/ExecutiveSummary

Figure J

University of Missouri-Columbia 27 “For a successful total campus … [building projects and parking] should be developed within a strong, handsome sequence of major open spaces and of major cross-campus pedestrian ways. Mizzou’s system of quadrangles, courtyards, malls and playing fields can be linked, improved and extended to help unify the total campus.” Jack Robinson MU Campus Master Planning Consultant 1981-1997

“Connection is the hallmark of great campuses. It is the creation of spaces that induce people to gather and interact in a collegial way. It is the linkage of open spaces that works to unify the campus fabric. Academic, residential and social functions are tied together by inviting pedestrian passages that enhance campus vitality and intellectual exchange.” M. Perry Chapman MU Campus Master Planning Consultant 1999 - present Publication date: July 2006 Prepared by MU Campus Facilities with assistance from Sasaki Associates