1. CAMPUS
Historical
International
Danish
Finn Junge Jensen, rektor CBS, of
Copenhagen Business School, theme meeting
at the Danish University and Property Agency
Campus areas are places full of life. Foreign students and researchers are drawn there by a vibrant environment. If we want to attract the best foreign capacities, we have to start by focusing on the campus area
Three perspectives
The following articles consider campus planning from three different perspectives. Together they describe what campus areas are and how they have developed.
The historical perspective takes a look at how universities have been built over the last 800 years, based on two traditions. According to one of them, the university is enclosed within itself, whilst in the other tradition, it opens up to the surrounding world and urban life. Although opposites, the traditions also complement each other in a way that is useful for today’s needs for both dynamics and in-depth studies.
The international perspective describes basic historical and cultu-ral differences between American and European campus typology and suggests a way of developing a European campus model.
The Danish perspective tells the story of Danish university planning’s development in recent years. Initially, this was mainly an ad hoc activity, but today we witness more strategic planning with consequences for the surrounding city.
The university and the city – two traditions
By Claes Caldenby, Professor of Architecture at Chalmers, Gothenburg. He has written about universities and university environments. He is the author of the book ‘Universitetet och Staden’ (The University and the City) from 1994.Two different views of science are reflected in the university’s buildings and its physical relation to the city. Science can be considered as driven either by inner forces or by interaction with the surrounding world. This article offers a historical view of the make-up of universities and the movement between the immersion of the university and the city as a dynamic ’outside world’
The university and the city – two traditions
For a long time, intellectual history has worked with two perspectives of the forces behind changes in science. One perspective considers science to be developed by inner driving forces, as contradictions emerge in a solution-finding thought system. This is called the internalist perspective. The other perspective claims that ‘reality’ raises issues and creates the preconditions for the development of science. This is called the externalist perspective. The two perspectives can also be used to describe the physical organisation of universities and their relation to the city. One is more closed and the other is more integrated in the city. The dispute between the two perspectives has at times been quite heated. At the same time, it is widely accepted that the two perspectives complement each other.
In the physical organisation of universities, the internalist perspective is evident in a closed, undisturbed environment of specialised truth-seeking and intellectual discussions at a high level. The externalist perspective deals with the university as strongly involved in the development of society, both in terms of issues addressed and in terms of how knowledge is applied. Therefore, in this perspective the university is also dependent on being an open meeting place for different currents of thought – well integrated in the city.
In the postscript to the book ‘The University and the City’, 1988, editor Thomas Bender writes about the differences and similarities between universities and the city. The city, he believes, is an “open heterogeneity”. The heterogeneity refers to the multiplicity and the inner contradictions inherent in any complex institution. The university is a “semi-cloistered heterogeneity”. The semi-cloisteredness represents a delicate balance between the university’s inner world (the cloister-like closedness) and participation in the exterior context. The interface between the university and its surroundings becomes an important spatial aspect.
Two traditions
Two traditions run through 800 years of university building history: The internalist tradition encompasses the college, the American campus and what might be termed the external university. The externalist tradition includes universitas, the institutional university and the city campus. These traditions are very much alive, both because of buildings that are still in use and because of points of view that are passed on in new buildings. I will alternately describe the internalist and the externalist tradition through a series of examples.
The college
The college was established as a foundation by means of donated funds during the Middle Ages. It had statutes that governed the life of teachers and students. Collegio di Spagna in Bologna dating back to 1367 is often considered the first specialised university building in Europe. It is clearly modelled on the monastery. A closed wall surrounds a square two-storey building around an inner courtyard. Here, teachers and students sleep, eat and study in a world of its own. At one end of the courtyard there is a church, exactly as the church by the cloister.
he tradition lives on in English colleges. At Oxford, college areas are spread all over the city with houses and classrooms around large quadrangles, often with a church at one side. Cambridge is more divided into a row with the college on one side and the city on the other – the contrast known as ‘town and gown’.
Universitas
Universitas means ‘guild’, in this case the guild of university teachers. Early universities were not physically anchored institutions, they could actually move from one city to another with their small collection of books. They did not have any purpose-built rooms, but rented space in ordinary houses in the town. Albeit preferably in one particular part of the city, just as other guilds belonged to their particular streets. The university’s street might be called ‘School Street’, ‘Book Street’ or something similar. In central Copenhagen, it was called ‘Studiestræde’ – Study Alley.
For large gatherings and formal occasions, the local church was used. One important aspect of universitas was that students, just as the teachers, formed their own ‘guilds’, or fraternities, and that they were clearly independent of and partly separate from the college.
The campus university
The campus university is originally an American tradition. The earliest reference to the concept is found in a letter from 1774 about the Princeton university area. The tradition of American universities was brought over by the first English colonialists and had its origin in the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge. In America, there were no towns in the Middle Ages. Furthermore, the universities were often established at ‘the frontier’, as their primary task was to educate priests. It was considered particularly important to carry out missionary work amongst the Indians. There was no basis for encircled courtyards here. The square became a ‘yard’ or a ‘ground’. Following independence, the campus concept spread and ended up denoting not just the lawn in front of the main building, but the entire university area. Part of the college tradition lived on in the idea that the university should take responsibility for the student’s entire life, even including accommodation and spare time, e.g. sports. The university stood ‘in loco parentis’ i.e. in the parents’ place.
The institutional university
The institutional university on the European continent belonged more to the universitas traditition. As the university grew and had more purpose-built buildings – first anatomy theatres and astronomy observatories and then, from the 19th century on, an increasing number of specialised scientific institutions – it was no longer possible to keep the university area in one place. It became necessary to use plots of land that could be acquired around the city, which resulted in a more or less spread-out localisation, well-integrated in the city. In the course of the 19th century, new main buildings for academic ceremonies were constructed in many places. They also became a means of asserting the place of traditional humanities subjects at the university. And the seminar room became humanities’ answer to the laboratory of science.
The external university
The external university became the solution to the educational explosion of the 1960s. These university areas are often called campuses, but contrary to the American tradition, they do not usually include student accommodation nor sports facilities. One similarity is the separation from the city. The exponential growth of the university – a doubling of the number of students in 10 years – made extension possibilities and space for expansion a main requirement. On that background, the universities almost without exception were placed on the outskirts of a city or actually outside the city, surrounded by a lot of open space. The university gained a clear, cohesive identity. Integration into the city deteriorated. They were called ‘education factories’ because of the narrow-minded focus on teaching and speedy throughput.
The city university
The city university became the 1990s’ answer to the criticism against the external university. Once again, integration into the city was emphasised: the city as an approach to the university and the university as an approach to the city. In France, an extensive programme, ‘Université 2000’ was carried out, which aimed at moving the faculties into the city or turning the external universities into more urban environments. In Sweden, all newly established universities from the expansion boom of the 1970s were located either on the edge of or outside the city. During a new expansion wave in the 1990s, all new establishments were placed in available buildings. Often, old industrial facilities or military barracks were taken over. Today, external universities and city universities exist side by side, as buildings, as thought models, as today’s version of the two Middle Age models: the closed college and the well-integrated universitas.
Avenue of knowledge
By 1975, Gothenburg’s large university was spread across more than 70 different addresses in the city. A joint move had never taken place, as had happened in Stockholm. The disadvantages were evident: no economies of scale in terms of anything from cleaning and caretaker to café and library; slow dissemination of information; less spontaneous meetings between teachers from different academic disciplines. But there were some advantages, too: To local politicians, the university no longer appeared to be a world in itself. The ‘free and easy’ atmosphere at the small institutions furthered contact between teachers and students, and made management take on more responsibility.
Through the 1980s and 1990s, Gothenburg’s university was gathered in faculties, in clusters, which were given the size of entire city quarters, but which remained spread across the inner city. At the same time, the view of this changed, and the advantages of the city university were considered quite obvious. Over the course of a couple of years during the 1990s, a report was prepared in collaboration between the university, the municipality and the business community, based on the university.
The purpose was to “create a better and more vigorous city”. In customary planning style, the report presented a simplified image of the university in the city. The scattered localisation was summed up as a ‘university ring’. Three ‘avenues’ were added to this image: an ‘avenue of culture and entertainment’ along the city’s main street, Kungsportsavenyn, an ‘avenue of events’ with sports facilities, arena, exhibition hall and amusement park, and a less established ‘avenue of knowledge’ across the river for a new part of the technical university. The problem with this ‘avenue of knowledge’ is, however, that it requires a boat. This kind of planning is much too abstract to capture what I believe to be essential in order to create a living avenue of knowledge at the interface between the buildings and the city. Another picture exists that captures this interface better.
Urban spaces as meeting places
The ethnogeographer Torsten Hägerstrand has described his day as a student in the institutional university city of Lund during the 1930s. Hägerstrand developed ‘time geography’ as a science, and for this he uses trajectories through time and space. He describes his journey through the city from his home to a restaurant to various teaching facilities and the student house: The Academic Association. It illustrates that the way in which to use the city is a continuous movement in and out of buildings. The point is also, that his journey is overlapped by many other people’s journeys, creating opportunities for unexpected encounters. The city is a ‘creative space’, and it consists of real avenues of knowledge. Hägerstrand’s description of a trajectory belonging to a professor of medicine in the 1970s renders a somewhat different image.
He drives his car from his home outside the city and spends all day in the same specialised environment at the hospital. No unexpected encounters occur. The architect Christopher Alexander’s book, ‘The Oregon Experiment’ from 1975, which deals with the development of a university in Oregon, is characterised by similar thoughts. One of the patterns that he describes is the ‘open university’, which dissolves the boundary between city and university, and allows them to grow into each other. Other patterns include ‘university streets’, where the university is extended in small units along the street, ‘local administration’ in small, scattered units, ‘department hearth’ as rallying points in any institution, directly joined to passages and with all rooms that are important to the institution close-by, and last but not least, ‘real learning in cafés’, which are privately run cafés, restaurants, bookshops and cinemas close to each other, which serve as meeting places for students, teachers and local citizens.
The encounter between city and university
The interface between the university and its surroundings is an important spatial aspect that outlines the framework for creative work. The physical planning must balance between the university’s inner world and participation in society. This article shows that the internalist and externalist perspectives are not incompatible, but that they rather complement each other. Creation of knowledge is a creative work. And the descriptions of Lund and Oregon are based on the idea that creative work is best carried out in continuous commuting between private and public life. Between introverted thought work and extroverted testing of ideas.
Research: Cathrine Schmidt
The future of the European campus
By Martin Wilhelm, architect and partner at mwas, Frankfurt, and Judith Elbe, architect at Technische Universität Darmstadt, have written the book ‘Der Campus – Zur Zukunft deutscher Hochschulräume im internationalen Vergleich’, which compares the European and the American campusThe US campus is admired and many European universities try to copy it. However, it is worth noticing some fundamental cultural and historical differences between the two typologies that have an influence on how the same idea works under opposite conditions on the two continents. This article summarises points from a German research project, which compares a large number of European campus areas with a large number of American ones in order to define what a European campus is and how it is planned.
Princeton and Harvard. To most people who are concerned with the development of the European university, such spectacular institutions appear to represent the very ideal of higher education. Only there is it possible to raise the future elite. Would it not be the most desirable goal to find these shining places, this close academic community, this lively 24-hour-campus in Europe as well?
However, there is a basic misunderstanding about the very idea of ‘campus’ behind the envious views across the Atlantic. The Harvard model does not work in Europe, and the European campus is already alive and yet to be discovered!
Campus: institution, community, space
Educational institutions are intertwined with and dependent upon the society in which they function and for which they have been made.
All universities are comprised of three interdependent parts:
- The institution as education and research departments, employer and representatives;
- The academic community, i.e. students, professors and staff;
- The space of the university, as the habitat of the university members and its built manifestation.
The successful development of the university requires all three parts: institution, academic community and space.
Each university consists of one or more locations housing teaching, research, institutional, administrative and infrastructural facilities. But the university space¹ is much bigger than those locations. It encompasses non-institutional facilities and spaces as well. What belongs to the ‘campus’ is subject to the perception of the community and to the surrounding observers – the city.
The difference begins here: Harvard is a town within a city. Various locations and spaces of the university overlap. That determines the special character of this campus type. Everything there seems to work perfectly, seductively inviting one to use it as a general blueprint for university development.
In Europe, university spaces and locations do not overlap. Thus, the European campus is another kind of campus, one that requires a rather differentiated search into the culture and identity of the surrounding city/society and in the collective consciousness – in combination with research into the respective university’s history, its institutional organisation and its academic community.
US: campus before city
The founding of the American university was an essential part of the colonisation of a wild country. The first universities were the frontier of civilisation. Through the founding of universities, the religious Pilgrim Fathers attempted to model a better world and an antipode to the Europe of morally rotten cities. Institutions like Harvard, Princeton and Berkeley were there before the surrounding cities. Education always meant civilisation and formation of a better man and society.
ven today, a fear of the city – of the uncontrollable – remains strong, exemplified through the suburbs and gated communities. American urbanisation means suburbs in combination with nodes of densification. The most notable kind of node is the campus. Distinguished from the environs, protected, well maintained and without the need to intermingle with the perilous surroundings. On campus, brilliant urban and landscape design and architecture can be found. This is where the future and the ideal of the American city are realised. Museums, theatres, libraries and collections were founded and remain on campus; research naturally finds its place here. And down the road, universities are home to major sports teams. Fear and monastic idealism have merged to create the American campus, the heart of American urbanisation.
Europe: university in the city
The idea of ‘university’ is a European concept. The development of institutions with a universal approach to knowledge was the expression of a progress-orientated urban community with the need for intense exchange – thus the concept of unity of research and teaching.
European universities show impressive historical importance. Common to their development is that they were founded within existing urban societies and as a part of the surrounding city. They represented the ruling order and contributed to the reputation of the sovereign.
University and city grew with mutual influence. Even today, they are tightly connected through student neighbourhoods and shared institutions. The city offers museums, theatres and public libraries, sports clubs and infrastructure, and the academic community uses them and becomes active in them. The European city and university are unified. While in the US, you study at Harvard (in the city of Cambridge), in Europe you study at the University of Frankfurt.
Institution and identity: mass university versus academic village
The institutional structure of the European university reflects its main purpose: State-run, it is optimised for efficient mass education. With one professor as the core, ‘chairs’ offer specialised teaching and research. Departments are weak bodies, self-governed by the chairs, with the dean as the rotating (approximately every two years) ‘first amongst equals’. The central bureaucracy is strong, administering all funds. In this system, students have to be independent and ‘grown up’. They shop around for the education that best fits their personal study goals. They consider the university as a workplace. Entering the university is the beginning of their professional life.
The typical built structure of the European university is comprised of large inner city complexes combined with post-war satellite areas, designed to accommodate the student masses of the scientific revolution.
Universities have to compete through excellence in their fields but are always in danger of being accused of wasting tax money if spending becomes visible from the outside.
American universities, on the contrary, form academic villages. “But the founders were resolute in the collegiate belief that higher education is fully effective only when students eat, sleep, study, worship and play together in a tight community” (Turner, 1984, p. 23). Thomas Jefferson’s design for the University of Virginia in Charlottesville shows the ‘Professors’ Houses’ surrounding the central campus: Here, professors and students live and work together forming an academic family and village. These ‘villages’ are governed by a strong dean and managed by a central administration.
The built structure of this village is important for carrying its image and ideas. A tradition of buildings by famous designers offers landmarks to the outside world and points of identification for the members of the academic community. The buildings express the spirit and the achievements of the institution.
The housing facilities are one of the most important components of the American campus. Most of the venerable buildings surrounding Harvard yard are undergraduate dorms – a fact that is very surprising to European visitors. Far away from their homes the – in many cases only 17 years old – undergraduates find a surrogate family in the American college system. Living together and socialising while taking responsibility and learning thus form the undergrad curriculum.
he on-campus housing forms the special character and the 24 hour-liveliness of the American campus – a quality that the European campus will never be able to achieve on university locations.
The European campus – innovation starts with trace tracking
Harvard may be brilliant and attractive. However, even though it is more difficult to spot, the European ‘campus’ exists, is alive and is worth further development! It is a space intertwined with the surrounding city, neighbourhoods and their culture and infrastructure. In university cities like Tübingen or Florence, the entire city takes on a ‘light’ university lifestyle and in Munich and Barcelona, the university shapes residential neighbourhoods, a bar scene and cultural activities, and creates an active street life.
Unfortunately, public opinion did not recognise this ‘secret’ until it was endangered. The University of Frankfurt planned to create the ‘Harvard of Europe’ by moving from its embedded location to three remote campus areas. When one visits these newly built places on a Saturday it is notable: closed gates, empty, guarded. This is not a campus but an empty hull, lacking the proper history and background. Now that the students have moved away from the old locations, action groups have formed to ‘save’ the university character of the neighbourhoods.
Harvard as a place does not work in Europe. It rather endangers the variety, the cultural qualities and the special charm of the European university campus.
To further develop this European campus we recommend three main points of action:
- Description of the local particularities of the university and its surrounding city, promotion of its (often times hidden) qualities, thus creating an image.
- Analysis of all the various locations belonging to the university, as well as non-university locations that clearly contribute to the university experience, optimising their infrastructure and improvement of their appearance/functionality.
- The ‘zip’ strategy: intertwining city and university with public spaces, transportation, bicycle paths, continuous signs and landmarks as well as through shared institutions, culture and activities.
Above all, it is important to agree on the general rule: The space of a university is its campus. This space by far exceeds the sum of the locations of the university and is only functional as a whole. Where, as is the case with most European universities, university and city are complexly intertwined it becomes challenging to describe the campus. The European university is not an island in the city; its space overlaps large city neighbourhoods. Campus development thus becomes a matter of collaboration between university and city developers and planners. This collaboration between university and city planners is urgent and essential and mutually beneficial for the development of both the European university and the European city!
NOTES
¹ This definition of ‘campus’ as ‘space’ is based on the relational understanding of space described by Prof. Martina Löw. She understands space as the relational order of social goods and people in a certain place. This perception of space connects the structuring, static and ordering function of space with its genesis and permanent change (Löw 2001).
One typical difference between the American and the European campus is that the American has grown step by step in large and medium-sized urban-like building structures, whilst in Europe, we have more often built large teaching complexes in one go. Here, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and Princeton University shown on the same scale.Danish university planning – then and now
By Klaus Kofod-Hansen, Chief Planner at the Danish University and Property Agency, who has worked with campus planning for Danish universities for the last 10 years.University planning started in the mid-19th century with the development of modern science. Up until the last decade, planning was characterised by the vision of one compact university located on the city’s edge. From then on, a new development has emerged, in which city and university are developed together
The extension of the Danish university sector via planning follows the expansion of the cities and first saw the light of day around the mid-19th century. Prior to that, university extension was more of an ad hoc activity, based on current needs and the few available plots of land in medieval towns. To a great extent, the university sector’s expansion follows the development of modern science. Old buildings were not adequate for housing the new functions.
University planning in Denmark started with the University of Copenhagen. In contrast to other European city universities, it was decided to move parts of the University of Copenhagen out to released areas by Rosenborg Bastion. The Botanical Garden was established here, as were the Observatory and a number of other university buildings close to the Municipal Hospital.
Then followed the relocation of the Veterinary College from Christianshavn in 1856 to the open country at Frederiksberg. The school which is today known as The Faculty of Life Sciences was established in the manor-like building designed by the Danish architect Bindesbøll. At the same time, the College of Advanced Technology (now Denmark’s Technical University) was established on open embankment areas by Sølvtorvet square.
The establishment of Aarhus University at the beginning of the 1920s would become a significant manifestation of how universities were moved out into the provinces. The government wanted to improve educational possibilities in the provinces by means of a university in Jutland. In contrast to the universities in Copenhagen, the new university was to offer a world with accommodation, teaching and social life all in one place. In other words, a classical campus plan following the Anglo-Saxon model:
“One very important means to giving character to the university is (...) that the new university to as great extent as possible becomes a college university, i.e. that the university not only offers students teaching, but also has at its disposition student hostels where the students can live.”
“The university complex should, as a whole, be better than that of the University of Copenhagen, though beautiful and with an open landscape. The students’ physical and personal well-being should be catered for, not only by means of the student hostels, but also by means of facilities for feeding the students, sports fields etc.”¹
The universities’ development on the edge of the city continues up through the 1940s. The College of Advanced Technology, now located at the centre of the city due to the expansion of the city, tries to expand at this stage. However, a new building complex in the city centre immediately proves too small. Consequently, the Ministry of Education plans for the university to be moved outside Copenhagen. This happens in the course of the 1960s, when they move to an open area in the town of Lyngby, with good parking facilities, as it is expected that the students will primarily drive to the university by car!
The 1960s saw a significant growth, both in the number of students and in the demand for academic labour. The government decided to build a third university in Denmark. Odense University, today known as the University of Southern Denmark, was designated as a supplement to Copenhagen and Aarhus.
And suddenly, development took off. Even before Odense University had been established, the Danish Parliament decided that it would not be sufficient to absorb the expected rapid growth in student intake. As a result, it was decided as a part of national planning to strengthen business development regionally by establishing two, maybe three further universities across the country.
The new universities were placed outside city centres, as this was the only place a sufficiently large compact area could be acquired. Aalborg was designated as the location for one of the universities. Roskilde was named as the other, as this would best relieve the pressure on the University of Copenhagen.
The universities were planned without residence halls, as the idea that students should spend both their study time and their spare time in the same place was losing support. It was now considered important that students participated actively in society, and that they should be integrated in ordinary housing rather than in residence halls on campus. The Danish Act on Residence Hall Construction was repealed, and instead, priority was given to youth residences for all youngsters in process of training.
Growing desire for city integration
Out of the three new university areas that were planned from the 1970s, Odense University was the first to be built. 4 km from the city centre, without residences or any other functions close to the university. From then on, a growing desire for city integration became evident. Roskilde University was designed to be surrounded by residences and businesses, but with a clear division between the individual functions. Later on, Aalborg University was designed as a city-integrated university in a new suburb. The university was built in enclaves with the largest possible interface to other functions. However, today it is evident that the original intentions about creating an urban context in these three cases only succeeded to a limited extent.
At the same time, space for the inner city faculties at the University of Copenhagen became so cramped that the Faculty of Humanities was temporarily moved to the island of Amager – known today as KUA. Many people think incorrectly that the buildings were constructed for temporary use. They were, however, constructed as normal buildings, but with a general purpose so that they could later be used for other purposes, should the university at a later stage be gathered outside Copenhagen, as plans had it.
Growing universities
The number of students continued to grow. As a consequence, in the mid-1990s, the Danish Parliament drew up a new plan of action for the universities, called ‘Growing Universities’. It marked the beginning of large extensions in the university area and implied the allocation of DKK 500 million annually for new construction over a 10-year period.
In that connection, KUA was extended and modernised, and its location was made permanent. The plans for the future Øre-stad district had all of a sudden turned the university complex into a part of an entirely new quarter of the city, with direct metro access. The new district would house a significant amount of buildings, including the DR-byen (the national broadcasting corporation’s headquarters) and the IT University as neighbours and good opportunities for synergy. The decision to retain the University of Copenhagen, Amager (KUA), meant that the plans to move the university out of the city were finally abandoned. The idea of gathering the university in one place was abandoned, too. This idea was, however, followed through in other places as the opportunity arose.
Copenhagen Business School had been very spread out, but it was joined together in a section of the Frederiksberg district between two new metro stations. Similarly, the artistic educational programmes in Copenhagen were gathered on the island of Holmen in a former military area centrally located in the city. The development of the area also included construction of residential areas and the Copenhagen Opera House.
Aarhus University was kept together, particularly because the government managed to acquire large building complexes in the vicinity, and because the Aarhus University Foundation Construction Company purchased areas and buildings for innovation and IT in the Katrinebjerg neighbourhood close to the University Park. Plans about moving Aalborg University out of the city were finally abandoned.
Rent arrangement
Up until the year 2000, all university buildings were placed at the universities’ disposition by the government on the basis of needs analyses. In 2000, most of the universities were brought under the SEA scheme (the Governmental Property Administration), according to which the Danish University and Property Agency serves as property owner and property letter in relation to the universities. The universities receive governmental grants for payment of their rent, but they are free to manage the properties. The SEA scheme provides an incentive to utilise and rationalise the use of the area and the opportunities for construction according to need. Savings on area rationalisation can be put to use in research and education.
Mergers
Recent years have also seen a significant organisational concentration of the universities in order to accommodate internationalisation and increasing international competition. In 2005, the government initiated a development process within the universities and the governmental sector research institutions. This has led to a series of mergers, reducing the number of universities in Denmark from 12 to 8, whilst the number of sector research institutions has been reduced from 13 to 3. In the coming years, the organisational concentration will be followed by a physical concentration, whereby university facilities will be gathered in fewer locations.
New challenges
One significant challenge in university planning over the coming years will be to ensure expansion options for the universities – particularly in urban settings.
The global challenge within research and education has led the government to allocate more funds for publicly financed research. This will result in the construction of more buildings in years to come, not least laboratory facilities. The laboratories that were built 30-40 years ago are ready for modernisation. The laboratories account for some 800,000 m2, or approx. 40 % of the total university areas. Out of these, only about 200,000 m2, are new or newly renovated (built/renovated within the last 10 years).
Given the increase in research funds and the mergers, several of the universities face new and extensive challenges to create space for future growth. Especially because other university related functions must be added to the university areas, so that they will appear as attractive academic city quarters.
New plans
From the 1990s and onwards there has been great pressure to move the universities towards the city centre, as experience shows that it is difficult to create life on the edge of the city. But space in the city is cramped, and both Aarhus University and the University of Copenhagen have limited expansion options within their own area boundaries. Consequently, the universities, the government and the municipalities are now making plans for future development. The planning involves the municipalities to a higher degree than previously, because their goodwill is necessary when the universities acquire plots of land and make plans outside their own areas in the urban environment.
One of the results is a new campus plan for the University of Copenhagen, which concentrates four campus areas in city quarters: South Campus, City Campus, North Campus and Frederiksberg Campus. The division into campuses is based on academic subjects, i.e. each campus accommodates educational programmes at all levels as well as research within a general subject field. The University of Southern Denmark has chosen the same model for its campuses, which are located in the towns of Odense, Sønderborg, Kolding and Esbjerg.
Similarly, Aarhus University has just prepared its visionary plan for the next 20 years, placing a further 300,000 m2 in the urban area around the existing University Park in Aarhus. The intention is to gather all bachelor programmes here, whilst the graduate programmes, PhD programmes and research will be located in the University Park and at 15 research units spread in urban communities around Denmark.
The government and the universities are currently attempting to create attractive campus environments throughout the country. They should both contain the environment and facilities of the city and at the same time offer the qualities inherent in an academic campus. This means a high concentration of academic facilities, innovation facilities, residences for visiting lecturers and exchange students in urban environments – and this will require a lot of space.
The first challenge will be to create a medical and scientific city quarter in the northern part of Nørrebro in Copenhagen, an already completely built-up area.
NOTES
¹ C. F. Møller, The Buildings of Aarhus University), 1978
Strategy
This section poses the question of how to create a world-class campus. It is illustrated by means of examples from a series of studies of Danish and international campus areas carried out by the Danish University and Property Agency under the auspices of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
The section provides numerous examples of universities that use the physical framework strategically in order to become even more attractive and functional. They physically open up to the surrounding world and gain a physical presence and identity in the cityscape, whilst at the same time involving the municipality and local environment in sustainable planning. Additionally, the examples demonstrate how functionalities beyond the mere academic ones – such as innovation environment and accommodation for international students and researchers – strengthen the university.
The section as a whole outlines the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation´s view of the physical qualities and functionalities that a world-class campus should contain.
How do we create a world-class campus?
Which qualities and functionalities does such a campus have? And how is it designed and organised physically? The Danish University and Property Agency under the Ministry of Science has carried out a series of studies of Danish and international campus areas in order to shed light on these questions. The result is a series of inspiring examples of universities that use the physical framework strategically in order to become even more attractive and functional. They combine to provide six snapshot images of what a world-class campus should contain, and how it is planned and run
From mono-functional university area to academic city quarter
Modern-day universities have a physical presence and identity in the urban landscape. The studies show that many European universities, which are typically planned as mono-functional zones with a focus on academic activities, are now opening up their areas to the surrounding world.
The typical European campus is built outside the city centre without integrated functions for other purposes than the university’s teaching and research. It often consists of large cohesive building complexes, which have been built in one go or just a few stages. The buildings are functionally designed solely for teaching and research in the daytime. For this reason, residences shops, sports facilities and child care centres are not normally included in the structure.
This type of university can be seen in many places around Denmark, e.g. Roskilde University or the University of Southern Denmark. Earlier complexes such as Aarhus and the North Campus in Copenhagen follow the same model, although today they are located centrally in an urban area. However, at the time when Aarhus University and North Campus were established, they too were located outside the city centres. They were also constructed as large uniform mono-functional building masses.
Currently, there are many Danish and international examples of attempts at physically opening up these enclaves of university buildings in order to create a multi-functional and academic quarter. This is illustrated by the five campus cases described in this book. The purpose in each of the cases is to inspire students to spend more time on campus and at the same time open up campus so that it also physically invites the surrounding community to take part in knowledge, experiences and learning.
This tendency should be seen in the light of the fact that many universities until recent years were obliged to supply two services, i.e. education and research, to society in turn for the funds placed at their disposal by the government. A more recent requirement to many universities, including those in Denmark, is that now they also have to ensure knowledge dissemination. The obligation to communicate knowledge is evident in the planning. It is essential that the universities open up physically to the surrounding world in order to communicate and also to justify their existence.
To several universities, the ambition is to become a bustling city quarter, open 24 hours a day, and with activities late in the evenings. However, reality shows that in practice there is no basis for achieving this in the short term.
As an example, ETH Zürich now works strategically to extend the period with activities at the university by focusing on the weekend. There is no teaching during the weekend, and consequently everything is normally closed; however, during the weekends, the locals have the time and inclination to visit the campus. So, ETH now arranges academic activities, including tours of the laboratories, a children’s chess club and ScienceTalk with well-known researchers. And all this goes on during the weekend. Everything takes place in a purpose-designed exhibition building located centrally and visibly on the campus.
Naturally, the many visitors have resulted in a need for cafés that are open during the weekends, and thus it has started a positive spiral: The cafés and the visitors make it more appealing to the students to visit the university during the weekend, and ETH has seen an increasing number of students who go and work on campus during the weekend.
The studies solely show examples of universities that would like to be considered places that can be entered and visited. Even American elite universities strive for this openness. It is generally considered a means to spreading knowledge and creating greater understanding and visibility, indirectly justifying the existence of the university.
Some establish physical exhibition buildings in the centre in order to reach an audience that would otherwise never visit the university. The reputable architecture and art school Pratts in Brooklyn, NY, for instance, presents its students’ work in its own exhibition building, which is located centrally in Manhattan, where many people have the opportunity to stop by.
The University of Manchester has set up information hoardings along major roads, announcing today’s public lectures and other events on campus. They indicate time and place and encourage participation. These are initiatives that make it easy for outsiders to spontaneously visit the university. New York University is another example of this. It is located as an integrated part of urban life on Manhattan and has lectures in what resembles shop premises. Anybody can follow a lecture and even enter and participate, and in that way, the university’s work becomes more relevant in a very direct sense.
As mentioned in the opening articles, American campus areas, which have a tradition of closing themselves against the surroundings in practice, are now in several places working on physically opening gates and creating opportunities for insight and enlightenment. This is currently happening at Columbia University, which in its ‘Manhattan Village Project’ rents out shop premises on the ground floor to businesses that are related to the university. This means, that a public medical practice for brain examinations may move into the very house in which the university’s brain researchers are teaching and researching etc.
In Denmark, the University of Copenhagen’s North Campus is currently planning an international competition about a holistic plan, which will open up the areas and create greater interplay with the surrounding city. The university’s Faculties of Science and Health Sciences would like to develop the city quarter under the theme ‘Health and Knowledge’ in collaboration with the Rigshospitalet hospital, the Municipality and the Parken national stadium. Today, the area appears fragmented and in parts not very accessible because of very busy roads. The University of Copenhagen wishes to use the knowledge and activity generated in and around the campus to develop the neighbourhood physically and mentally.
The universities’ activities can also be communicated via art. The University of Copenhagen’s Frederiksberg Campus and the Holmen Campus for the artistic educational programmes in Copenhagen have just finished the preparation of art plans that integrate art on campus. The art plans describe a joint idea for the role of art within the campus area and aims at communicating and making professional competencies visible. The work of art also gives the public a reason for visiting campus.
The universities are met by demands for greater openness and relevance to the surrounding world. Naturally, this places new demands on building functions and on campus itself, and it makes it necessary to view university planning on an even larger scale than before.
One tangible challenge when turning mono-functional campus areas multi-functional is that nowadays, universities often do not have the authority to house functions that go beyond actual university functions. This is a tradition that is also seen in other parts of Europe. It is necessary to work on making it possible to integrate kindergartens, residential areas or shops on campus. At any rate, contemporary physical campus planning must be worked out in interplay with the surrounding city as well as its functions and users. A larger and more complex scale than before.
Physical planning used as a strategic tool
Modern universities have a written strategy and policy for the physical study environment and campus. And they act accordingly. The study shows that students and staff experience the study environment at the universities that have clearly phrased a strategy and policy for the physical campus environment as more attractive than those universities that do not have a strategy. Most often, the strategy is an expression of the management’s support and recognition of physical planning as a part of a management toolbox.
Lancaster University is situated outside large city areas and therefore it has to make a special effort to attract students. A couple of years ago, the university decided to invest in a programme for significant upgrading of the building mass. The university has risen considerably in British university rankings for its good study environment, and today, its marketing focuses on an appealing social environment supported by a good physical framework for both study and accommodation on campus.
Several universities have acknowledged that it takes extra manpower to convert physical strategies into action. In many cases, the strategy cannot simply be implemented as an extra task in the everyday building service. Competences completely different to those normally available in the service department may be required. At ETH Zürich, for instance, a group has been established to ensure and manage the implementation of a large master plan. The group includes both a researcher with a background in physics and a communication consultant.
CBS in Denmark has written a strategy for the physical conditions, and at the same time, CBS uses design as a strategic tool for campus upgrading. According to CBS, they spend a tad more on design and planning because they recognise its significance.1 This focus is clearly noticeable when you visit the Frederiksberg Campus, which appears inviting and modern, in keeping with the signal CBS wishes to send.
Inspiration may be found in e.g. the way in which the Ørestad Nord Gruppen2 uses physical planning in the strategic development of an area in Copenhagen. This is an interest group whose secretariat arranges large and small activities around the city area, which also includes the University of Copenhagen. Ørestad Nord Gruppen targets local residents as well as private and public companies in the new city district. The group counts on both architecture and communication capacities and experiments with e.g. how to utilise temporary city spaces or how to set up sports and spare time activities.
To several universities in the study, the challenge seems to be that physical planning – as in many other types of organisation – is not generally considered and accepted as a development tool, although focus on this is increasing. This also means that funds are not always allocated for the implementation of the strategies. It takes resources and manpower to create and realise a holistic plan.
This is evident both on a large scale, as in the ETH example, and on a small scale. At some Danish universities, managers or employees with a background in architecture serve as alert, aesthetic eyes. They move around campus and take responsibility for ensuring that e.g. interior design, lighting and signposting work as intended. Their presence also ensures that the ideas behind great strategies are communicated professionally to the users.
Inclusion of municipality and local environment in the planning process
The modern university is in close dialogue with its surroundings. It needs the support and goodwill of the local community to complete its plans. Studies show that the planning process is changing. Formerly, it was common to prepare master plans that indicated possible construction fields, heights and building volume for the coming maybe 20 or 30 years. This made it possible to incorporate the master plan into the municipality’s district plan once and for all.
Today, however, master plans are often replaced by holistic or visionary plans with less specific frameworks such as guidelines, and with a shorter lifespan, e.g. 10-15 years. This combination of a gradual change in the planning method and a shorter time limit means that more and more often, universities may need to request changes to e.g. the municipalities’ district plans in order to complete their building works. This requires a continual and constructive dialogue between the universities and the authorities. Naturally, this does not just apply to a local level, as university planning to a higher degree should also be considered at a regional and a national level in order to ensure a holistic cohesion. Traffic planning is a good example of this. The establishment of a new metro ring is thought of in connection with campus planning, so that it will not only serve residential areas but also large university areas.
The campus cases in this book represent different planning pro-cesses and ways of involving interested parties. MIT, for instance, applies a model they call ‘Real-Time Planning’, which is an ad hoc planning process, in which the outlook is a maximum of five years. The focus is more on reductions and individual buildings than on large perspectives, such as a general improvement of outdoor spaces. The weakness of this method is that it fails to create unity and cohesive experiences between the individual buildings. This is evident at MIT, where the gap between the houses – from a Danish point of view – is poorly utilised, and only a few places invite you to spend any time there. MIT is known for using world famous architects through the years to design building works full of identity, but the buildings appear as individual lighthouses rather than as a harmonious whole. The real-time planning method’s focus on the individual building does, however, fit in well with the American funding form, which is based on sponsorships. If a sponsor spontaneously offers to finance a specific building, e.g. a swimming pool or a new laboratory, the method makes it easy to quickly integrate new building projects.
Another example is ETH in Zürich, which chose to involve inte-rested parties a mere three months after they had the first idea for a comprehensive transformation of their campus. They prepared a draft to visualise the idea of a dense campus area and used this to enter into dialogue with people and organisations who might have a political or financial interest in the project. The dialogue created the foundation for a master plan competition, which provided guidelines for construction within specific building fields in the future. This process had the advantage that the university, without making large investments, could quickly enter into a dialogue and ensure financial and political backing to realise their vision.
A third model is used by the University of Copenhagen’s Frederiksberg Campus. Through a one-year vision process, they have established the basis for realising a step-by-step extension of the campus. The process has examined three sides of campus at three different levels. A sort of matrix process, in which the focus was to create an overview of and a hierarchy between the various interested parties’ information about and visions for the place. The intention was to establish approved guidelines for further development. The advantage of the process is that it makes it possible to include a lot of knowledge and involve a lot of partners at different levels, all at once.
So far, many campus areas in Denmark have had holistic plans elaborated, which in great detail indicated construction fields and heights for buildings that might not be built within the next 10 years. As can be seen, the content of a ‘strategic holistic plan’ is currently undergoing change. The examples show how universities to a higher degree require frameworks and rules according to which future buildings can be designed. Regardless of the choice of process model, they all require a close dialogue with the municipality and local partners.
The universities also see themselves in a new light in relation to the surroundings. It is no longer sufficient to phrase what they can do for students, researchers and business community. The universities now also articulate to a higher degree how they can contribute to the city or the area. Universities should be an important component in a knowledge city.
This is a new self-understanding, and it requires collaboration with local authorities and players. The University of Copenhagen, for instance, is currently working on developing the North Campus between the districts of Nørrebro and Østerbro in Copenhagen. The intention is to physically open up campus so that it interacts with the surrounding city quarters. To the University of Copenhagen, this means that in collaboration with the Municipality of Copenhagen, building owners and a number of large institutions and businesses in the area, they are currently establishing the basis for a joint vision plan for the district.
It is a challenge to ensure the goodwill and attention of local politicians and civil servants. Many municipalities are preoccupied with how the residential areas develop, and they are not necessarily interested in the needs of knowledge-heavy businesses and educational programmes. Alsion, the knowledge and cultural centre of the University of Southern Denmark in South Jutland encompasses a university, a research park, a foundation-funded concert hall for the local symphony orchestra and a ticket office for Danish Rail in one large building. This is a good example of a type of planning that could not take place without close collaboration with authorities and other partners. The university develops best physically if the municipality and local environment perceive a strategic advantage in the presence of the university.
Opportunity to act on changing needs for e.g. incubator environments
The modern university needs opportunities for quick reaction to changing circumstances. In brief, there needs to be space for enrolment of more students, new research units, start-up projects etc. Studies from other countries show that facilities such as science centres, student centres, parks or incubator environments for young researchers contribute positively to a holistic campus area. They create opportunities for e.g. coupling study jobs and practical assignments closer to the teaching, thereby easing the transition from study life to work life. It is essential to be able to create space for such environments on campus in the future.
At MIT, private research companies have settled in the university’s periphery in areas owned by MIT. The university deliberately invests in areas around the campus area. Partly in order to invest with a view to profit, partly to secure the area for future expansions. It also gives the university the opportunity to build buildings for spin-offs, incubator environments and private companies with which they want to collaborate.
Lancaster University is a public university financed partly by the British government and partly by the university’s own income. The university owns buildings and the land on which it stands and rents out some of the buildings to private businessmen. Lancaster has 6,000 resident students on campus and needs many grocery stores because of its isolated location. One of the tasks of the university’s property manager is to control retail trade on campus, so that retail, residential and teaching areas supplement each other in terms of needs and contents. Among other things he sets up commercially run cafés, which are converted into non-profit student-run places at night, or he offers a cheap rent to a Red Cross charity shop, because it ensures that students donate their furniture and other items instead of dumping them as rubbish, which the university then has to clear away by the end of term. To Lancaster University, the flexibility is not found in their being property owners. They consider this to be of minor significance. Instead, the possibility of renting out to others and thereby creating a profit is of primary significance.
Danish universities are subject to a rent scheme, which implies that governmental institutions within e.g. the research and teaching field pay rent for the buildings they use, most of which are let by the Danish University and Property Agency. This gives the universities flexibility, as they can terminate a lease at short notice, if they do not need it or require it for expansion.
Aarhus University additionally collaborates with a property company under the auspices of the Aarhus University Research Foundation. The company constructs buildings and then lets them out, primarily to the university. The property company has been an active player in the extension of computer scientific learning and research environments at the Katrinebjerg area, which were bought and developed by the company. The property company lets out areas to both businesses and Aarhus University. Consequently, several subjects within the institute of computer science today coexist side by side with private consultancies from the IT sector.
When it comes to being able to act quickly to changing area and functional needs on campus, the challenge is an increased risk and financial uncertainty. For instance, it may be difficult for universities to be bound to an area which they are not sure that they will be able to let out, e.g. to small newly started businesses. The physical presence creates synergy and is decisive when a university expands. It may mean increased focus on the existence of e.g. cheap and flexible areas with low operating costs.
Strategic use of accommodation for foreign visitors
The modern university not only offers attractive learning and research environments, but also attractive accommodation options for its foreign visitors. The studies indicate that several universities, also Danish ones, consider the number of foreign visitors on campus as directly proportional to the number of attractive residences for foreign researchers and students. The residences are a significant key in a strategic effort to establish an international study and research environment. Residences also ensure life on campus and are therefore included as an urban development factor for the campus.
Foreign universities work with residences on campus to a much higher degree than Danish universities. American and Anglo-Saxon universities in particular consider housing options along with the educational programme, but universities from the European mainland are also interested in integrating housing on or around campus.
There are historical and cultural reasons why Danish/European students and researchers primarily live outside campus, as Wilhelm and Elbe describe in their article. A typical Danish campus – in contrast to an American – is built as a place of work, and it is situated as a supplement to the city, just as business areas are. This explains why housing, shopping facilities and varied cultural spare time offers for young people are not a natural feature around campus as it is seen in the USA. In Denmark, we also have a cultural desire to make young people independent, including by giving them a life where they are physically away from studies and teaching. Similarly, it is traditional that researchers and teachers do not spend their spare time at the university, but instead participate in social life and make use of the cultural offers outside the university. In spite of these fundamental differences it is, however, worth noticing a couple of housing initiatives abroad, as the ideas can be transferred to e.g. accommodation for foreign students or visiting researchers in Denmark.
Many American universities such as MIT, where 40 % of the undergraduate students are foreigners, deliberately attempt to make student life merge with private life. This is done, for instance, by integrating learning and group rooms at the residence halls, which are also used for teaching. This is a structure known in Denmark from the folk high schools, where learning and spare time also merge. MIT considers housing a good way of ensuring quick integration, which is particularly important to a researcher or student who is only visiting for a short time.
MIT also deliberately locates attractive researcher family accommodation in buildings where students live, in order to further contact in that way. This is supported by activities such as offers about communal eating. In practice, this means that the researcher and his/her family feel at home among the students, and that discussions continue after class in a more private setting. MIT has experienced better and quicker integration between visiting researchers and students as a result of the researcher being accommodated at residence halls on campus.
ETH Zürich is planning to construct a number of four-room housing options on campus, because they would like to have an attractive offer for students and foreign researchers with a family. They are financed by sponsors and will be rented out via a property company. The accommodation is deliberately designed as four-room units so that they can be used either for flat sharing with three to four students or as spacious researcher family units. This will also make them attractive to ordinary families, so that in times of recession the units might be let out to interested parties in the area.
In Denmark, a number of new, attractive foundation-funded student hostels have been built in Copenhagen, including the Bikuben and the Tietgen on the University of Copenhagen’s South Campus in the Ørestaden district. The offer here is attractive independent accommodation for young people, with the chance of interacting with peers. The interest in these housing units seems to be growing among students, and this probably means that this type of network accommodation, where you benefit from the resources of each other, is generally gaining popularity among Danish youth. However, these student hostels are built by donors without the involvement of the university or anybody else.
One of the challenges when offering accommodation to foreign visitors is to clarify who owns and runs the residences. In Denmark, the municipalities are generally under obligation to provide housing, but not particularly responsible for resolving this kind of housing issue. The universities can rent from private people, but experience – particularly from the capital – shows that typically, Danish universities cannot afford to rent appropriate accommodation close to campus, as the basic price here is typically too high. Another aspect is the relatively large amount of practical work that goes into finding accommodation on the private market – especially for visiting researchers who only visit for, say, a couple of months.
Strategy for sustainable campus planning and operation
The modern university has a strategy for its sustainable effort and it acts accordingly. The examples in this book show that sustainability far from being mere political correctness to the universities is an opportunity to save money in the long term. Danish universities must take the lead and ensure a sustainable strategy.
A good example of a successful organisation that has worked with this theme from an early stage is the ‘Harvard Green Initiative’, which was founded in 2000. The office has some 20 professional full-time employees who for a couple of years influence all building projects, for instance by making sure the environmentally correct American certification LEED is obtained and that the university’s users are trained.
Training may consist in creating a ‘peer-to-peer workshop’ for kitchen staff or students, in which they talk to each other and compete about who can save the most. Students from different academic subjects are recruited to be green ambassadors and get paid to turn up every two weeks to be taught concrete measures, which they can implement and pass on to their fellow students at the residence halls, e.g. saving water or turning off the light. Harvard has 10,000 resident students on campus, so the savings are significant.
This means that the people employed in the initiative work as a cross between practical caretakers who have water savers installed in the showers in the residence halls, and strategists who communicate the greater picture both downwards to the users and upwards to the management. All employees are self-financed in the sense that the university pays them as sustainability consultants who ensure environmental certification in reconstruction and new construction cases. It turns out that the additional expenditure for consultants and building costs are recovered through operational savings.
The Danish University and Property Agency is currently building its first CO2 neutral building at the University of Copenhagen’s North Campus. The Green Lighthouse will consume 22 kWh / m2, corresponding to 80 % less than prescribed by the Building Code. As a general rule, the Agency’s new strategy for the energy area establishes as a minimum to build in low energy class 1, which is 50 % below the Building Code.
In the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation’s essay competition about the physical framework for student environments at the country’s universities, students indicate that they find it a struggle ‘to be allowed’ to engage in sustainable work on campus. Both employees at Danish universities and the people behind the Harvard Green Initiative have also experienced how difficult it is to involve the students. Typically, they have very little understanding of the university’s organisation, and therefore it is difficult for them to act within it.
A considerable challenge remains in thinking sustainability into every step of the university’s operation and work. That being said, examples show that it is difficult to organise and systematise sustainable efforts at the universities. It is a laborious work with a lot of stages, and there are only very few models to follow. In an article in this book, the founder of Harvard Green Initiative, Leith Sharp, encourages universities to use sustainability as an opportunity to undergo a systemic transformation. She believes that they should move from being teaching and researching organisations to being learning organisations, too, which can professionally handle the transformation processes implied by sustainability.
World class?
How do we then create a world-class campus? Urbanity, sustainability, residences and the inclusive planning process each contributes and each expresses the same: It is all about using the physical framework and planning strategically and professionally to handle some of the challenges facing the universities.
This article is based on information from studies that can all be downloaded from the website of the Danish University and Property agency at www.ubst.dk /projekt Campus
NOTES
¹ Rector Finn Junge, theme meeting at the Danish University and Property Agency, June 2007
Campus cases
In this section, five campus cases combine to provide an idea of how international and Danish universities work with physical campus planning. These particular campus areas were chosen because they handle current challenges, which several other universities are also facing in their physical campus planning. ETH Zürich’s focus is urban integration, Harvard’s is sustainability, University of Copenhagen focuses on inclusion and art, Lancaster aims at the good student life, and MIT’s focus is on a planning process that furthers iconic architecture.
The five cases represent different campus typologies: An open campus, such as Lancaster University, which is surrounded by fields. A campus on the edge of the city, which strives to be integrated into the city, such as ETH. And finally, a campus that is integrated into the city, exemplified by Harvard University, University of Copenhagen and MIT. Common to all five cases is the fact that they deal with urbanity and the desire to open up and physically make the university visible in society. Their diffe-rent approaches result in their opening up in completely different ways. Some universities strive to integrate themselves into the city. In the case of others, the city is too far away, and therefore they create urbanity on the actual campus.
Each case consists of a campus analysis. This illustrates how the university is organised, how buildings and urban spaces as well as social and professional life work together, and finally, it describes the future strategies for the campus. The analysis is supplemented by amplifying interviews with people who are involved in the planning.
The cases may contribute as inspiration when universities, authorities and consultants create the campus areas of the future.
ETH Zürich
Urban integration
The ETH Hönggerberg (Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich) campus was built after the Second World War on the outskirts of Zürich, 15 minutes’ drive by car from the city centre. The university wishes to turn the mono-functional Hönggerberg into a lively knowledge neighbourhood in Zürich. This development takes place within the framework of the Science City development project, which since 2003 has organised academic activities, communication and construction projects to open up the university to the surrounding world
| Hönggerberg, Zürich, Schweiz / | |
|---|---|
| Established | 1855; campus commenced in 1964 |
| Status | Federal university |
| Campus population | ETH Hönggerberg Campus: 5,500 people. In total 18,000 at ETH: 6,300 Bachelor’s degree students, 4,700 Master’s degree students, 3,000 PhD students and 4,000 technical and academic staff |
| Distance from the city | 7 km from the centre of Zürich (1.1 million inhabitants) |
| Subject areas | Engineering, Architecture, Humanities, Business, Science |
| Annual study fee | Approx. DKK 2,800 |
| Number of beds on campus | None |
Ownership and organisation
ETH is one of two federal technical universities in Switzerland as opposed to regional institutes of learning in the cantons. The federal Swiss government therefore owns the ETH buildings, and as a consequence, the university can only lease areas and rooms to parties with no academic interests such as private businesses, cafés and shops in the Hönggerberg campus area. ETH does not have the option of purchasing areas or buildings that can later be built on or leased. ETH is developing its university in close collaboration with the city of Zürich (construction permits and general political support), the canton of Zürich (public transport and educational framework) and the federal government (finances and overall strategy).
Urban spaces and buildings
ETH Hönggerberg was originally planned as a complex with large detached buildings of an almost industrial character intended exclusively for teaching and research. The university lies isolated in peaceful surroundings amongst fields and green woods.
As part of the Science City project, an urban space competition was held in 2005. The winner was a flexible urban strategy proposing high-density construction to ensure urban qualities. The idea that private and public zones should overlap and create interaction constitutes another main component. In the past, ETH had kept the subject areas separate, e.g. engineers in one building and architects in another. The current strategy is to mix the subject areas in the different buildings to promote better understanding between the subjects.
One of the most recent building projects has added a closed urban space to the campus in the form of a square. This square is now the central point of arrival and information and its urban character and local feel has made it very popular. The square is fitted out with large orange light-weight furniture that fills the spaces between the buildings. The furniture is a gesture that invites informal sojourns, playfulness and user influence.
Social and academic life
It is ETH’s intention that Hönggerberg Campus should be more than just a place of work and study, and therefore tours and lectures are planned that target user groups living in surrounding city areas. ETH communicates about research and current academic topics to user groups that normally do not have the opportunity to participate in such events during the day. Because of the growing number of visitors over the weekend, the university’s canteens are now open on weekends. This has sparked a positive spiral, as it has now also become more attractive for students to spend time at the university over the weekend.
Science City is also a learning project and the university includes the campus development in its curriculum and research projects. A research project at ETH about campus development, for instance, communicates knowledge about planning and sustainable campus development to other universities around the world.
A large international conference on sustainable campus development is held in April each year, which emphasises the central aspect of Science City: The intention is to make ETH Hönggerberg a sustainable urban area – and at the same time efforts are being made to use Science City as a starting point for the creation of an international sustainable network. Disseminating and initiating knowledge becomes an active component of the university profile.
Future strategy
The Science City project is to ensure that Hönggerberg becomes an ‘academic city area’ with more than just academic functions. The Science City project is a platform that the university uses to create a dialogue with authorities, inhabitants and interest groups about the development of the area, and the platform is also used to create the framework for a master plan, traffic, sustainability, financing, communication and maintenance.
Each year, new projects are added. There is a total of approx. 70 sub-projects under the umbrella. Current work involves new signage at the campus and publication of a digital monthly magazine about campus development. In addition, the first residential buildings on campus are being planned in an attempt to include more functions and daily rhythms in campus life. A thousand residential units are planned, typically four-room flats that can be used both as shared accommodation for students and as accommodation for visiting researchers. The residences are managed by the city’s housing association, and because of the way they are fitted out, they can also be let to other target groups, if relevant.
This chapter is an edited summary of the working paper ‘The campus area of the future’ by the Danish University and Property Agency and Juul|Frost Arkitekter.
INTERVIEWS
Yvonne Wäger is a fourth-semester student of Environmental Studies
How much time do you spend at Hönggerberg campus each week?
I don’t really have a specific errand. A couple of Saturdays ago, I was on a tour of the campus and discovered how beautiful it is. So, I took my own class of pupils up here one day. We brought a bat and balls and played both rounders and volleyball. Afterwards, we walked through the medical garden and looked at plants from the Alps. On the way home, we bought ice cream in the small campus kiosk. Today, I am here with my own children, as I thought the shallow paddling pools would be ideal for them on such a hot day.
Which facilities do you use in addition to the academic facilities?
When I am at Hönggerberg, I always try to go to the sports centre. Last year, I was part of a rowing team where we received free training, but unfortunately I don’t have enough time this year because of my studies. In addition, I often go to the cinema on the campus in the city, when access there is free.
Do you know students from other subjects than your own?
I share a flat with other students from ETH; we all come from different subject areas. ETH has a central housing service that helps students find a place to live. By sharing a flat with other students, I have extended my network at university both academically and socially. In addition, Environmental Studies and Geology are located together, which has given me an opportunity to get to know other students.
Eveline Meier is a primary and lower secondary school teacher and has come to campus with her children and their friends to enjoy the good weather. She lives about 10 minutes from campus.
What is your errand here on campus today?
I don’t really have a specific errand. A couple of Saturdays ago, I was on a tour of the campus and discovered how beautiful it is. So, I took my own class of pupils up here one day. We brought a bat and balls and played both rounders and volleyball. Afterwards, we walked through the medical garden and looked at plants from the Alps. On the way home, we bought ice cream in the small campus kiosk. Today, I am here with my own children, as I thought the shallow paddling pools would be ideal for them on such a hot day.
So when you came here the first time, it was because of the many Science City initiatives? Yes, I read in the paper that there were a lot of new things happening here, and I decided to go to an open house event. The guide who showed us around was very enthusiastic, and as soon as I saw the orange furniture floating in the paddling pool, I thought my children would love that. So, here we are! I think the next time we come here will be for the ‘university day for children’ where they have chess for the little ones, among other things.
Henri Hagenmiller is a cross-disciplinary PhD student at the institutes of pharmaceutical sciences and mechanical engineering. Last year, the engineering degree programme moved from the city to Hönggerberg. Henri therefore divides his time between his office in the city and his desk in a major research cell at Hönggerberg
What do you think of Hönggerberg as a campus?
It is a huge contrast for me to work in a closed office in the city one day and in a research room with plenty of other people the next. But I actually like being at Hönggerberg because I meet more people in the research room than in the city where I sit completely on my own. On the other hand, the atmosphere is a bit more personal in the city. The new building here from 2004 is cold and sterile. All rooms have partitions, which can be moved around and nothing is permanent for any length of time. The good thing about it is that my desk is right next to my laboratory, and I therefore have quick access to experiments and results. I can also quickly get help from others. If I need to concentrate at Hönggerberg, I have to go to the library to find peace and quiet. I don’t need to do that at my office in the city.
Can you compare Hönggerberg with other universities?
I have also studied at a recognised American university – and I must say that the research facilities are actually much better here. A lot of money is obviously being invested in us, which makes it a pleasure to go to work in the morning. As regards non-academic programmes, however, we are way behind American standards. In that area, we still have a lot to learn.
Do you use any other university facilities?
I often use other machines at the university in connection with my research, but that's about it. I’m not very good at participating in social events, for example. Things happen here and there but I’m a bit too much of a university geek to participate. The only thing I really use is the café opposite the bus stop. There I can enjoy a cup of coffee and read the newspaper while waiting for the bus.
From vision to reality
Interview Gerhard Schmitt, Vice President of Planning and Logistics at ETH
It took just three months from the time that the idea to radically transform the campus was conceived in 2003, until the vision was presented to the public. The Science City project aims to transform the mono-functional ETH campus into a living academic neighbourhood.
A vision is born
How did the process begin? What came before the vision?
Before the vision there was a pronounced need for a new campus. At the time, ETH had the majority of its buildings located in downtown Zürich – and an outpost at Hönggerberg in a recreational area. It was a collection of buildings used for research and teaching, there were no residential areas, no life, no campus in the proper sense of the word.
This was seen as a major shortcoming by both students and staff, and some of them would have preferred to move the entire university back to the city. This spurred the idea to radically regenerate and revitalise the outpost in such a way as to make the premises as good as – or even better – than moving the facilities to the city.
How many people were involved in this process?
Only very few people. I consulted with and was of course supported by a number of colleagues – but the actual decision was made by only a handful of people.
How long did it take?
What sort of information was used in this first draft proposal for the Science City? We already knew the functions – we knew for instance that we needed to build residential areas for students. The primary aim of the first proposal was to demonstrate the spatial effects. The draft plan played a crucial role in the further process, because we were able to use it as a basis for the discussions with our stakeholders.
What sort of information was used in this first draft proposal for the Science City?
We already knew the functions – we knew for instance that we needed to build residential areas for students. The primary aim of the first proposal was to demonstrate the spatial effects. The draft plan played a crucial role in the further process, because we were able to use it as a basis for the discussions with our stakeholders.
A sort of basis for dialogue?
Yes, exactly, a physical dialogue model! With this first spatial sketch we were able to communicate with the neighbours – the adjacent city quarters – and they were able to ask us more specific questions.
Echo rooms
How, more specifically, did this dialogue take place?
We established so-called echo rooms – ‘Echo-räume’ – to permit participation also by groups that were not necessarily directly involved in our project – partly because we did not know them yet – such as NGOs, political parties, neighbours, neighbouring institutions, and so on. We discussed the various options and risks of the project – using the first draft model – all of which helped us clarify and improve our proposal.
Do you have some good advice for other universities facing similar challenges?
An absolutely decisive factor for us was the fact that we involved our stakeholders at the earliest possible stage of the process to tell them about our vision. In this, the initial draft proposal was a help, as it proved indispensable to our dialogue. We consider it important to focus on the stakeholders, because they have powers to halt the process in a very direct way. The Swiss principle of direct democracy means that even small groups can stop a proposal by voting against it. And this is the real wonder: We were able to overcome the initial doubts and questions when the project was first presented to our neighbours, and we were able to adjust the plans and give accommodating answers to them. There was not a single ‘Einsprache’ – formal objection – when the first buildings were presented. ETH is a federal – not a private – university. This means that the new neighbourhood is also intended to benefit the local residents. We feel obliged to make this their neighbourhood as well.
Realisation
You then arranged a planning competition?
Yes, the dialogue phase provided the basis for arranging a competition in 2004, which was won by Kees Christiaanse. This gave us a Master Plan – which is not actually a Master Plan, but more like a set of Master Rules. As a result, we have the freedom to allow quite a few aspects to develop further along the way.
How do you convert the result of the competition into concrete work?
We have created a total of 60 modules, which together embrace the focal points of our vision: sports facilities, provisioning, housing, academic activities, etc. Within each module we have defined a number of sub-projects, which are realised in parallel. The sub-projects have different target groups and vary considerably in size, ranging from projects for outdoor lighting and signage to completely new buildings. And thanks to our modular structure, we are able to address many subordinate aspects at the same time.
Which are the essential factors for the success of the project in the realisation phase? How do you maintain the overall commitment and focus?
The fact that we have a – very – lean organisation is essential for the success. We have a small steering group, consisting of the project manager and the Vice Presidents responsible for infrastructure and finances. This means that there are very few people in the ‘inner circle’, and that the Board of ETH Zürich is responsible for ensuring that the project develops. Fortunately, we receive valuable support from our Strategic Advisory Board, which includes representatives from politics, science, local trade and industry.
At the same time we maintain a dialogue with peers from other countries who are dealing with similar issues. They come to see us from different parts of the globe – often from Asia – and we receive visitors from universities all over the world, from Berlin to Singapore, who are interested in the Science City Model. Together we discuss the possibilities and problems presented by this development. This takes place on professional as well as administrative levels, involving inter-university collaboration, and we learn very much from that. Following the planning aspects, I am now responsible for our international relations, and these areas go well together.
Financing
How do you address the financing issue?
We have two bodies who are responsible for obtaining financing for the Science City projects. The Board of ETH Zurich has the overall responsibility, and we collaborate with the independent ETH Foundation whose purpose is to support ETH. Members of both bodies talk to their contacts to seek the required financing. Generally, we have to settle the question of financing very quickly so that it does not bring the process to a halt. This is because it is a long and difficult process to obtain the required approvals of a building project. It must be approved by the university and the municipality – and at the level of the Swiss Parliament as well. As a result, we need to concretise the different aspects – including the matter of financing – of the buildings we want to build, at a very early stage in the process.
Is that the reason why you wanted a flexible plan?
The Master Rules played a very important role in relation to the financing. We knew right from the start that we would need external financing to accomplish our vision. This can lead to uncertainties as to what can be accomplished and when, so we needed to have a flexible plan that would allow different things to happen simultaneously. It is essential that things can occur in parallel, so that the entire pro-cess is not interrupted or put on hold, just because a single project has not fallen into place.
Are there any other aspects that help you in your fundraising efforts?
Our focus on sustainability has turned out also to be important for the ability to find external sources of financing. We have set a target stating that our CO2 emissions must be reduced by 50 % within the next decade. Since we have many existing buildings, the practical consequence is that the new buildings must all produce energy over the course of a year. This challenge has clearly helped us raise interest in contributing to the financing of our new energy-efficient buildings.
Mikala Holme Samsøe
The Road to the Neighbourhood of ‘Thought Culture’
Interview Ute Schneider, Architect, Kees Christiaanse Architects & PlannersETH Zürich aims to become a ‘Neighbourhood of Thought Culture’ with many and diverse functions. To accomplish this ambition, the university is following a master plan that lays down the primary parameters for its future development. The plan is to ensure that the gradual expansion of the university proceeds with the maximum amount of freedom while at the same time ensuring a perfectly coherent result. Together with her team, Architect Ute Schneider from KCAP, is responsible for implementing the master plan she originally took part in designing
Since 2005, the new master plan has served as the basis of a project to restructure and expand the mono-functional ETH Hönggerberg campus from the 1960s. The new Science City at Hönggerberg is to become a modern, sustainable, academic neighbourhood of ‘Thought Culture’. The objective is to transform the campus from a place of mere learning and research, to a place where you live, shop, practise sports and attend cultural events.
The plan focuses on densification and sees the Science City as a compact system of mutually interacting, interdependent spaces. A system of atriums, courtyards and passageways ensures a convergence of private, semi-public and public spaces. The plan focuses more on the individual functions than on the constructed form.
A master plan for diversity
The master plan you created for Science City consists of a set of guidelines for the creation of Our guidelines cover aspects of urban planning as well as exterior spaces. The urban planning rules define the acceptable building ratio for a given site as well as the building lines that must be observed in order to create streets and spaces to enable people to find their bearings. They define the maximum height and density of the buildings, and determine where passageways or perforations should be located.
The rules work well in practice, even though it took a while before they were fully accepted. There is a preference towards avoiding such rules, as building projects usually imply a certain financial pressure to maximise utilisation. For this reason alone, the urban planner has to fight for and explain the purpose of the rules. This applies primarily to the rules that deal with maximum building ratios or determine the appropriate street layouts and building heights to ensure the required light incident, as the purpose of such rules is not always clear.
The master plan aims to create a multitude of different functions on campus. Are there any practical barriers to creating this level of diversity? The objective of scattering residences around campus has been difficult to achieve, even though it is essential if you wish to bring some life into the area. It seems that there is a tendency to group similar functions together – even if that is not the way a city works. Also, the clients themselves tend to minimise the functional diversity.
You need to be persuasive to be allowed to implement service and shopping functions on campus. In connection with our plans for arranging a competition, for instance, the building department expressed certain reservations, asking which functions it would be sensible to have on campus in the first place, and arguing that in reality all that was needed was the kindergarten, which had already been proposed. Here, as a planner, you can exert a lot of influence in the planning phase and present proposals for functions like launderettes, shopping facilities or other facilities, which the students themselves may influence and take ownership for. Proposals that could also be reflected in the competition programmes.
The role of the planner
We won an urban development test competition in 2004 [in which four companies participated], and on that basis were asked to design a master plan, which we worked on for nine months. We then prepared the legal basis [for a new local area plan] in collaboration with ETH and the city of Zürich. As a result, the building regulations now permit the Hönggerberg area to include residential functions as well, which was not possible under the city’s previous plan for the area.Leith Sharp, founding Director of HGCI, Harvard University
We then prepared a plan for the public spaces on campus, and we have made a number of smaller studies of additional functions and prepared competition material. We also took part in evaluating competitions on e.g. signage or the lighting concepts for Science City.
Most of this work falls under the category of supervision or builder consultancy. In several projects, we have found this to be a very positive way of following a planning process. Especially when the supervision is combined with the preparation of a plan for the public space, which in effect is the plan for the rug on which everything will be placed.
Which sorts of experience did you gather from the supervision process?
When the planner acts as a supervisor, the overall objectives of the master plan can be integrated intensively in any sub-project or building task. And the often very complex structures in a master plan can be integrated naturally in the further planning. We see that as having a very positive impact on the end result.
However, if the master planner is involved only as a supervisor without at the same time being involved in preparing the planning basis, the supervision will most often be reduced to simply proposing rectifying interventions. In the case of ETH, KCAP had great influence on the planning, as we participated both in the area and function strategy development and in preparing and evaluating competitions. We also designed the plan for the public spaces.
The plans are implemented in very close collaboration with both the strategic project management of Science City and the ETH department in charge of the implementation of the building projects. Before the master plan, each building project was treated and planned as an independent object. In order to align the individual building projects with the overall planning, it was necessary to have a transition period to make it possible to adapt to the new guidelines. In this context, it was important to ensure that the objectives of the master plan were communicated clearly and unequivocally. It was necessary to have a broad backing and understanding of the new plan. Therefore, the strategic project management communicated the objectives of the master plan to a broad audience, which included university staff, students and the local population.
Organisation
You have also made campus plans for other European universities. What, in your opinion, should universities generally emphasise if they wish to embark on a major campus planning project?
In very general terms you might say that it is important to establish a good and comprehensive holistic concept that includes everyone affected by the project. It will be difficult to implement a project like that without the acceptance of all participants and users.
It is very important for the university to appoint a single person to represent and manage the project. A person who has been delegated the necessary responsibility and has been assigned staff to follow up on and co-ordinate the project. Experience also shows that it is essential for the strategic and conceptual project management to have close collaboration with the executing side, i.e. the partner in charge of the actual construction work.
Finally, it is really important for the whole project to have a master plan that lays down the most important framework conditions – while leaving enough freedom of action to ensure that diversity can develop within the coherent whole. It must offer enough flexibility to allow the concept to change dynamically to reflect any changes in the relevant conditions, such as political or commercial changes or changes in the academic structures or types of learning.
In order for the project to get out of its academic enclave and develop as a true academic neighbourhood, it is crucial to integrate the local residents and open up the campus to them during the project implementation. You could for instance have “Open day” at the individual institutes, spare time arrangements and open lectures. The ‘Treffpunkt’ (Meeting place) project, which invites local residents to attend academic arrangements during the weekends, began as a test project at ETH, as at the time the university was not even sure if the local residents would be interested. However, the programme was continuously extended, as it proved extremely popular. A positive side effect of the project was that the campus has been brought to life during weekends, and furthermore, it has resulted in the establishment of highly valuable exchanges between ETH’s local and academic populations.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Sustainability
Harvard University is the oldest and probably best known university in the USA. It was founded at the same time as the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1636 and is an integral part of the city. Since then, Harvard has expanded step by step. Today, the university is planning a major extension in Allston, which is part of the city of Boston. The new neighbourhood will be built in accordance with sustainable principles
| Harvard University, Boston, USA | |
|---|---|
| Established | 1636 |
| Status | Privately owned university |
| Campus population | Approx. 35,000 people: 6,650 Bachelor’s degree students, 11,900 Master’s degree/diploma students, 2,800 academic staff and 12,500 other employees |
| Distance from the city | 4 km from downtown Boston (4 million inhabitants in the metropolitan area) |
| Subject areas | Business, Design, Government, Arts & Sciences, Law, Medicine, Engineering, Divinity and Education |
| Annual study fee | DKK 210,000 |
| Number of beds on campus | 7.800 |
Ownership and organisation
Harvard is privately owned and mainly financed through donations and the university’s own revenue. The university consists of 14 different schools and institutes that function independently of each other, each with their own administration and finance department. Two thirds of the students receive some form of financial support e.g. loans or grants or have income from part-time jobs.
The university owns and runs several museums and art exhibitions, which are open to the public. However, the many libraries are primarily reserved for people associated with Harvard, and the public has limited access to the buildings.
Urban spaces and buildings
Harvard consists of three campus areas: Allston, Longwood and Cambridge, the oldest, all located in the immediate vicinity of each other. Cambridge Campus is the best known. It dates back to 1636 and is the centre of the area. Harvard’s Cambridge Campus primarily consists of small and medium-sized buildings, which have been built in stages and form an integral part of the surrounding city area. The university’s different functions are located in between residences and shops.
Harvard’s oldest and best known part is the commercial centre around ‘Harvard Square’. The square is in the centre of the area and has a subway station and many restaurants, cafés and shops. This is where the neighbourhood’s fashion shops as well as ‘Harvard Bookstore’ and ‘Harvard Shopping Mall’ are found.
The university’s oldest buildings from 1720 are located in the famous ‘Harvard Yard’, an inward-looking green park space just around the corner from the pulsating Harvard Square.
Harvard’s Cambridge Campus primarily consists of buildings in a classical style with historic components and references. The university has retained this expression in connection with reconstruction and extensions, and new buildings also blend in with the existing structure of many small, detached buildings. The buildings create inward-looking green parks surrounded by residences, institutes or libraries. The characteristic Yard thus creates small worlds on campus, each with its own character and user groups. Some gardens look private and are used by students who live in the area. Others are of a more public nature and attract large numbers of tourists. The building and yard structure makes Cambridge Campus appear as a small town that invites exploration.
The university offers a number of sports and leisure activities across the three campus areas. Many of these are of a professional standard. Allston, for instance, is home to the large Harvard Sports Stadium with room for 30,000 spectators.
Academic and social life
Harvard offers a multitude of on-site facilities and also has a rich commercial life in and around the university campus. Students and employees can easily spend several weeks on campus without needing to visit surrounding areas. The students live on campus during the first year but some subsequently choose to move to neighbouring areas. In total, approx. 60 % of all students live on campus. There are 13 different ‘Houses’ that function as colleges, each with their own traditions, library, dining hall and common room.
Harvard has a strong tradition of involving students in voluntary student groups. The university has several hundred groups covering areas within the media, politics, sports, music, theatre, dance and charity as well as academic subjects in general. Many of these groups are more than 100 years old. ‘The Harvard Crimson’ from 1873 is one of USA’s oldest daily university newspapers; The Harvard University Choir is the oldest university choir in the country and the ‘Phillips Brooks House Association’ is a student organisation that works closely with the local Boston environment.
The social and academic activities on campus primarily target the students and the faculty but in some cases also reach out to the local society. For instance, the university operates several museums with rare collections. These collections are typically open to all interested parties in addition to being used in teaching contexts.
Future strategies
The campus at Allston, which is within walking distance from the original Cambridge Campus, is in the process of a major expansion. Building complexes are being constructed on a large scale and with a more modern expression than in the oldest part of Harvard. The area is on the south side of the river.
Today, Allston is a run-down industrial area with long and short-term parking for lorries. Its central location and low degree of utilisation provides a unique opportunity for the university to expand. Two important activities – the Harvard Business School and the large sports stadium – are already located in the area.
The plan covers the next 50 years and outlines flexible guidelines for projects in the area. Over the next 20 years, the campus will be extended by 370,000-450,000 m2, and the plan is for the campus to be extended by a similar area over the following 30 years.
The plan focuses on four themes: Interdisciplinary teaching and research, which aims to ensure that many disciplines, including science, finance and art, can work together in a multidisciplinary manner. This will be visible in the way university buildings are structured. Place Making is the second theme, and it looks at creating identity and anchoring in the run-down area. Here, the university’s functions are mixed with public and cultural functions to create a lively and distinctive environment. At the same time, a road with heavy traffic, which has so far prevented access to the river, will be covered to create a recreational area for the neighbourhood. Sustainability is the third theme, placed on the agenda by a group called ‘Harvard Green Campus Initiative’. Allston has to be planned, constructed and run in a sustainable manner. The extension of Allston is an example of Harvard making it a strategic goal to become the leading university within sustainability, and Harvard has been working towards this goal since the turn of the millennium. Economic development is the last theme. The project is meant to create development and economic growth in the neighbourhood, and the aim is to generate an average of 500 new jobs and 15 new companies per year in the area over the next 50 years.
Research: Julia Anshelm og Mikala Holme Samsøe
INTERVIEWS
Zach Arnold is the student coordinator of Harvard’s Green Campus Initiative's peer-to-peer programme. He informs Harvard students about energy and the environment and tries to persuade them to act in a more sustainable manner
What is Harvard’s peer-to-peer programme?The aim of the programme is to get students to lower their energy and water consumption and recycle more, and to promote increased environmental awareness among the students. We talk about how the individual’s behaviour affects the campus and thereby the global environment. It’s all about the individual’s environmental footprint. The university sponsors prizes for our environmental competitions and pays a salary to a number of student representatives, a permanent employee from the university and the three of us student coordinators.
What does your and the student representatives’ day-to-day work involve? We plan a student activity programme for the entire year. We are available to answer questions from the students and advise on how to improve the environment at Harvard. The university is not the most transparent organisation, you see. A simple thing such as installing energy-saving light bulbs in the dining hall involved three different offices. One of my tasks is to improve the contact between students and the employees who administer and handle the running of the university.
Our student representatives help students who have individual green projects they would like to implement. They work with the different residential Houses and student groups to organise green competitions or launch campaigns where students can commit to acting sustainably in their daily lives.
Anabela Pappas is a kitchen assistant at Harvard University. She has participated in Harvard’s courses on sustainability and works to make the kitchen more sustainable
What is your motivation for participating in Harvard’s Green Initiative, first as a student representative and later as a student coordinator?I have always been involved in environmental issues. I also continue working at the political level where we have made Harvard commit to reducing its contribution to greenhouse gases. Previously, I worked on a system that could measure the energy consumption of the individual House here and now.
I find it exciting to help increase awareness of the consequences of our consumption; to communicate the relationship between what appears to be abstract global environmental issues and the behaviour of the individual. It creates a chain reaction, as our students will end up in very different jobs that will impact on the world around them.
What have you learnt from your courses about a greener Harvard?A lot of people just couldn’t see the problem. We work with the students and I saw how much of the grilled food was left uneaten because the students changed their mind or had to hurry off for lessons. So much food was wasted and the grills used a lot of energy. We started a campaign with signs saying, ‘Take only the food you can eat’. In that way, we can create awareness of how to save energy.
Why did you start telling others about how to save energy and reduce waste? A lot of people just couldn’t see the problem. We work with the students and I saw how much of the grilled food was left uneaten because the students changed their mind or had to hurry off for lessons. So much food was wasted and the grills used a lot of energy. We started a campaign with signs saying, ‘Take only the food you can eat’. In that way, we can create awareness of how to save energy.
Previously, our cookers were switched on 10 hours a day. Now we switch them off between meals. It makes a huge difference! We can also save water when cleaning. Instead of using a lot of water when rinsing the food containers, we fill a sink and rinse them in turn before washing them.
‘Bring your own cup’ is another way of saving paper cups. I actually jumped into one of the waste containers and took pictures of all the used paper and plastic cups. That really helped open the eyes of students and faculty employees.
How could the green campaign be improved?I have suggested that ideas about how to save energy should be introduced in Harvard’s bridge-building courses. During these courses, people learn to speak English as their second language. Harvard is good at supporting diversity and we have many people working here who don’t speak English. Pictures speak more than a thousand words and they can be used to spread information across campus and the workplaces.
Green organisational changes
Each year, Harvard University employs 30-40 students to promote sustainable behaviour among their fellow students. Their efforts have led to a 15 % reduction in the university’s energy consumption. The students are systematically taught how to use games and competitions to draw attention to water consumption or standby electricity consumption at the residential Houses. The training takes place within the framework of the ‘Harvard Green Campus Initiative’ (HGCI), which is an academic and administrative initiative that aims at making Harvard University a global model for sustainable campus management
InterviewLeith Sharp, founding Director of HGCI, Harvard University
Strategists and handymen
HGCI combines a strategic project with work of a more practical nature. They report directly to the university’s top management and create organisational changes in response to the challenges to sustainability. At the same time, they act as a kind of handymen ‘in the field’ who make sure e.g. that all showerheads in the Houses are replaced with water-saving models. As a result, the group is in daily contact with both the top and the bottom of the organisation. Within this framework, HGCI’s employees exert their influence in two ways: they make people change their behaviour, and at the same time they act as consultants in all construction projects at Harvard.
From 1 to 24 employees
HGCI was set up in 2000 with one temporary project employee, and today, 8 years later, 24 full-time employees and 40 part-time employees are promoting the project. The manager of HGCI, Leith Sharp, explains that the project began as a one-man project that had to convince the university of its relevance. “The fact that I was responsible for the initiative means that I did everything myself until I was able to obtain funding for staff. Consequently, it has been very much a hands-on job with participation in construction projects, a role as adviser on green construction methods and meetings with students to encourage them to adopt green behaviour. I have made people realise the economic and environmental savings that can be obtained by investing in our group and over time, we have grown to 24 employees. This has allowed me to focus on more strategic activities such as implementing green construction guidelines all over campus and ensuring long-term funding.”
All buildings must be certified
HGCI’s staff participate in the university’s construction projects and make sure that the buildings can attain LEED certification, which is the American rating system for green buildings. The LEED label is associated with considerable prestige in the USA, and you can achieve silver, gold or platinum certification. At Harvard, all buildings must, as a minimum, be LEED silver certified, and Harvard is the American university with the largest number of certified buildings. Harvard has a growing number of ongoing construction projects, currently 50 major buildings of which the majority will achieve LEED gold certification.
Peer-to-peer training of kitchen staff and students
HGCI’s other field of activity is to create behavioural changes. This is achieved not only by means of appointing students as green ambassadors but also by training e.g. technical staff and kitchen staff who typically have influence on a considerable amount of the energy and resource consumption on campus.
Rather than teaching students and employees, HGCI uses the peer-to-peer principle, in which they primarily let the participants talk to each other, exchanging experiences in order to find solutions. HGCI has had success using this method, as it creates positive competition between participants. The competition is constructive because all participants share a common goal and everyone wins. For instance, the participants compete with each other as to which House can achieve the largest reduction in water consumption during the coming period. The winner acquires social status.
The argument for using the peer-to-peer method is based on psychology and the often unconscious strive for social recognition. The manager, Leith Sharp, who has studied psychology and human development, says: “The desire to maintain status in the peer groups to which we belong, is a powerful human need. It can be used strategically to break down barriers to effective adult learning. People are busy, and it is normally difficult to get them to focus on learning. However, if you make learning essential for their social status, people have a tendency to give it higher priority. The beauty of the peer-to-peer model is that it is a process between equals, which involves mutual learning while the participants at the same time are rewarded socially for their commitment. When we began using these models, we discovered that they presented many other advantages. For instance, it all became more fun and it created good relationships between people.”
HGCI supports the process and mainly serves to create a forum where these issues are discussed and subsequently followed up. The students are paid USD 11-17 per hour to participate once every fortnight. They subsequently have to use games and activities to highlight a chosen aspect of sustainability at the House during the coming period.
Students understand campus better
The students who participate in the training typically find it a very positive experience. Some call it their best. The students see it as part of their learning and time at the university. They can personally identify problems in their local environment at campus or in the House – and with the assistance of HGCI, it is easier for them to implement solutions, which can also be of a structural or organisational nature. As a general rule, the themes are also used in the students’ academic work, and in this context, HGCI assists with data and information.
Barriers to sustainability in teaching
When students and faculty become involved in the local sustainability debate, it contributes to a greater understanding of the university as an organisation. According to HGCI, the students and the academic staff generally have very little knowledge of how the buildings are managed. The management of the buildings is intuitively considered dirty work that should be easy to perform. Students and staff from the faculties help break down these barriers by using cases from the building management at Harvard in their teaching.
This creates another problem, however, in that the administrative staff are seldom able to provide structured information for the students’ learning projects. It is simply too difficult to get access to data about the management of buildings and transportation at Harvard, which is probably equally true of many other universities. HGCI finds that this happens because the administrative staff do not have the necessary time to structure the information so that it can be used. “The faculty often does not have the time to find out how a campus operates. Students cannot get access to information and are also dependent on having to submit their projects on time. The university’s employees already have a huge workload and do not have the time to drop everything to help students or the faculty. Our universities therefore need to bridge the gap between staff, faculty and students so that together they can use the campus creatively as a learning tool. The result is not directly measureable, and therefore, only a few universities have introduced such initiatives despite the fact that this form of practice-orientated teaching is essential for a degree related to sustainability,” Leith Sharp points out.
The aim is – also – to save money
Harvard markets itself on its commitment to sustainability, which is realised through HGCI, and many perceive the university as one of the leaders in this field. However, this kind of involvement does not always have to involve additional costs. The way HGCI is structured ensures that most of the costs are covered.
All HGCI staff are employed by Harvard and actually function as consultants paid by the individual Harvard Schools, which are independent financial entities. They purchase HGCI’s assistance to ensure that sustainability is implemented in construction projects and in everyday life. The cost involved is easily offset by the savings obtained in the running of the school. In the same way, the company that runs the canteens pays for the training of the kitchen staff, as they experience a considerable reduction in the kitchen’s resource consumption and waste following each session.
Leith Sharp explains: “It presents many advantages to Harvard: financial savings, positive press, pride in the local community, improved development opportunities for staff and improved relationships with the public authorities for the area. Of course, it also gives us a pleasant feeling of acting pro-actively in relation to these enormous issues. Conversely, it would also present a risk if Harvard were not a leader in this field. The university would be attacked by frustrated students and alumni or be given bad press. I think the advantages go hand in hand with the fear of the risks of not acting and that both have contributed to people’s involvement.”
Loans for green initiatives
HGCI has established a Loan Fund from which the individual schools at Harvard can borrow money for sustainable projects in connection with renovations or new buildings. There are different types of loans e.g. corresponding to the additional cost of introducing components that can result in financial savings of at least 9 % per year. Leith Sharp explains that the possibility of borrowing money in a non-bureaucratic manner has been decisive for the schools’ ability to and interest in making sustainable improvements to their buildings. “The Loan Fund was created to eliminate an excuse – e.g. a lack of finance – for not incorporating green initiatives, with a repayment period of five to perhaps ten years.”
Global programme for campus management
HGCI’s goal is to change Harvard University so that it becomes not just a teaching and research institution but also a learning institution. A fundamental change in the institution’s organisation is required to enable it to handle today’s huge challenges, e.g. the sustainability issue. In concrete terms, this means that HGCI is implementing ‘University-wide Sustainability Principles’.
“The idea is that each semester, a growing number of teachers and students should have an opportunity to use their campus as a learning tool for a myriad of topics: from sustainable building design, green accounts and energy systems to management and decision processes. For the time being, this is more of a vision than a reality at Harvard. We have certainly seen excellent examples in recent years: engineering students studying the energy consumption in buildings, or courses in public administration where students examine Harvard’s CO2 emissions. However, this is not yet a routine phenomenon. In order to realise this vision on the scale proposed in the Principles, Harvard must find a way of financing the additional employees required to support this work. As mentioned previously, in order to create the right opportunities for developing a sustainable campus, students, faculty and staff must be given the right support,” Leith Sharp concludes.
Mikala Holme Samsøe
CAMPUS CASE: HARVARD
| Harvard Green Campus Initiative (HGCI) | |
|---|---|
| The mission of the Harvard Green Campus Initiative (HGCI) is to make Harvard University a living laboratory and learning organisation for the pursuit of campus sustainability. The business model is fundamentally entrepreneurial in its approach as it continuously develops and sells new services to schools and departments that want to both save money and reduce their environmental impact. HGCI is a service organisation consisting of 24 professional staff and 40 part-time students who have been trained and managed to work on building upgrades, building construction and design and behavioral change |
University of Copenhagen
Inclusion and art
Frederiksberg Campus is a green and almost rural sanctuary in the Frederiksberg neighbourhood, 2 km from the centre of Copenhagen. This is the location of the Faculty of Life Sciences (LIFE), which deals with people, plants and animal life. The surrounding world knows LIFE for its popular garden, which is used for recreational purposes by people living nearby. With a new vision plan, LIFE now wishes to make the academic activities and aspects of the campus area more visible
| Det biovidenskabelige fakultet, LIFE, Frederiksberg Campus, København | ||
|---|---|---|
| Established | 1858 when the faculty’s garden was established. | |
| Status | Public university | |
| Campus population | 5,300 people: 3,500 enrolled students (of whom 10 % are foreign students) and 1,800 full-time employees. | |
| Distance from the city | 2 km from the centre of Copenhagen (1 million inhabitants) | |
| Subject areas | Food, natural resources and veterinary medicine | |
| Annual study fee | DKK 0 | |
Ownership and organisation
The University of Copenhagen is a public university. The university leases most of its buildings from the Danish University and Property Agency, which owns the buildings and the campus areas.
In 2007, the University of Copenhagen merged with a number of other universities, including the Royal Danish Veterinary and Agricultural University, now called the Faculty of Life Sciences (LIFE). The University of Copenhagen has ambitious plans for combining its activities in the four new campus areas: North Campus, City Campus, South Campus and Frederiksberg Campus. In addition to Frederiksberg Campus, the Faculty of Life Sciences also has campus areas in the towns of Taastrup and Hørsholm. This is where activities that require a lot of space are located, e.g. test fields and houses with large farm animals.
Urban spaces and buildings
Frederiksberg Campus consists of three areas located end to end, separated by roads with heavy traffic. The areas differ considerably. The best known area is the original area consisting of a garden now listed as a protected area with distinctive buildings by architect Gottlieb Bindesbøll. An old greenhouse in this area has acquired a new role as a café – nominated the best café in Copenhagen in 2008. The menu includes the university’s own beer. .
A number of historical and preservation-worthy buildings from 1770 and 1858 are located in the northernmost area, which was included as the years went by. In 1968-70, the distinctive multi-storey building was built because of the growth in the faculty’s degree programmes. Today, it is considered the main complex. The eight-storey functionalistic laboratory and teaching building was designed by the architects Steen Eiler Rasmussen and Mogens Koch. The building creates an internal walkway and is a lively area full of activities. New lecture theatres and laboratory and foyer buildings were erected by architectural firms like Erik Møllers Tegne-stue in 1995 and Dissing+Weitling in 1996.
Accessibility: The garden is open to the general public and provides room for activities and relaxation in the sun.
Social and academic life
There is an active student environment at the Faculty of Life Sciences. The studies and experiments in the degree programmes typically revolve around the greenhouses and gardens around the campus area. Many students enjoy the campus area and also spend some of their spare time here.
Some students even have an opportunity to live nearby.
The campus covers a large area and as a researcher, you typically spend most of your time at your own faculty. However, students from different subject areas like to meet in the popular Gimle canteen located in a square just outside the original campus area. Gimle thus functions as a social centre where all students drop in from time to time.
The campus has meeting places both indoors and outdoors. The central corridor with tables and chairs creates an opportunity for both academic and social interaction. The campus’ outdoor plant collections are gathered in parks where employees, students and outsiders can go for walks or lie in the sun. Tours are offered by the university, giving information about plant life.
Future strategy
LIFE faces major construction work in the form of new teaching and research facilities as well as guest residences. The faculty has therefore just prepared a development plan. Students and researchers from LIFE, together with external experts, were involved in the preparation of this development plan. The plan combines visions for sustainability, traffic, social life and plant life on campus.
A special art plan shows the possibilities for including art in the future Frederiksberg Campus. At the Faculty of Life Sciences campus in Taastrup, the artist Camilla Berner has prepared an art plan that turns the entire area into one major work of art.
The relationship between the university and the city is an important part of the University of Copenhagen’s campus planning. Today, Frederiksberg Campus is already an attraction in the local area, in part due to its garden. In future, the faculty wishes to offer even more green spaces and experiences such as concerts or open lectures for the city’s inhabitants and people at the university. The vision plan includes a ‘rambla’ that connects the different parts of the campus and forms part of an existing green bike path in the municipality.
Select walls around campus will be demolished to open up and create views. At the same time, the vision plan includes new locations such as the House of Gastronomy. The purpose of these new initiatives is to strengthen the university’s communication of knowledge about e.g. the journey of our food from earth to table. Today, the university already sells plants from the greenhouses to private individuals – and in that way attracts more visitors to the campus area.
Research: Cathrine SchmidtINTERVIEWS
Per Holten-Andersen is Dean of the Faculty of Life Sciences
Can you describe what the initiation and implementation of a vision requires of management?As chairman of the steering group, I followed the process closely. We needed an operational plan and not just beautiful architectural drawings. We therefore made it quite clear what we prioritised – e.g. that practical aspects like parking had to be solved in the vision plan.
Has the involvement of Frederiksberg Municipality facilitated the work?The involvement has allowed us to influence the municipality’s thoughts about the area and vice versa. We wanted to ensure that the vision plans were incorporated into the municipality’s local plans and the traffic plans for Frederiksberg. The municipality’s planning manager was a member of the steering group. The decision about what should happen to the two roads crossing the campus area from east to west will be made in the next couple of years. We know that from our joint meetings.
Do you have any good advice for others in a similar situation?I don’t have any cure-all solutions but I think it’s important that the university’s management takes control of the campus environment. Universities are not just about research and teaching. The environment is an important component in attracting students, and it affects the extent to which the employees enjoy going to work. In total, I probably spend about 10 % of my time at work on outdoor areas and buildings. I see it as an integral part of the university management’s task to follow up on and develop the environment through extensive plans for the future in addition to minor maintenance work.
The universities should stand out with visible campus areas that lift the rest of the neighbourhood and the spirit of the university. We already have a good framework and we are trying to make it even better. As an example, we have gone to great lengths to make the outdoor areas more usable. Today, our wireless network, for instance, also covers the entire park, which is always open. Contrary to what was the case two years ago, we have no signs saying: ‘Don’t walk on the grass’. We receive a lot of very positive feedback to these measures in our teaching environment assessments.
INTERVIEWS
Trine Sofie Nielsen studies Natural Resources at LIFE and is the Chairman of the Students' Council. Trine Sofie Nielsen participated in both the Advisory Board and the Steering Group for the LIFE development plan
What do you think of the vision plan process and what was your focus as a student?The workshop [dialogue days, ed.] worked very well. Our focus as students was, of course, to improve the study environment and get better facilities, such as a larger student house.
Do you think the students have had an influence on the vision plans?Yes, the social aspects of the campus area were important. The ‘rambla’ connects the students better, and whereas some facilities currently exist at one end of the campus area only, we have made sure that there is a canteen or cafés in all three parts of the campus in the vision plan. In that way, students also have something to contribute. While employees at LIFE obviously have specific interests relating to their place of work, we as students are perhaps able to see things in a broader perspective. We don’t have any specific places where we belong. We come and go throughout the campus area.
Have other students shown any interest in the vision plans?At the beginning, it was difficult to capture the students’ interest. Many of the people I talked to only became aware that the students had an opportunity to be involved in the process after the workshop had taken place. The information had not reached everybody. If we should do it all over again, we could perhaps hold the workshop over two days to attract more attention to the project and get more people involved.
In hindsight, is there anything else you would wish had happened?It would have been logical to include students from the landscape architecture line. I have heard several students say that they regretted not being involved in the process.
INTERVIEWS
Marina Bergen Jensen is a researcher at Forest & Landscape.
How were you involved in the work with the vision plan?I presented ideas for different ways of working with water on campus at one of the meetings of the Advisory Board. The idea is to take some of the load off the Frederiksberg Municipality sewage system by retaining the rain water on the campus area. The sewage systems will come under pressure in the years to come, as climate changes will result in more and heavier rain.
The water could be used to create an inte-resting campus with special beds for plants that prefer a moist soil. It would be an excellent task for students in our landscape architecture degree programme. The water could also be used for our greenhouses, toilet flushing or other purposes that don’t require drinking water quality.
What do you think of the vision plan process?It was not until the first meeting that I really understood the context of the campus plan. As I experienced it, my role was to provide inspiration for the working group. Now I would like to know what is happening with the vision plan.
What do you think of the result?I didn’t hear any further about the result until the rector presented it at our staff meeting. The ‘rambla’ sounds great. It’s a good idea that all the different parts of campus are to be connected. I don’t know if anything is going to happen with the water plans.
What are you looking forward to most in the future development as outlined?The Greenhouse, our student-run café, will be located centrally on the ‘rambla’. That’s a great idea! I’m looking forward to seeing that.
LIFE: planning the campus of the future
The new development plan for Frederiksberg Campus aims to ensure that the general principles have been well thought through so that future initiatives will become part of a whole. Subsequently, the plan should help raise funds for the implementation of the initiatives. Experience shows that it is necessary to involve all levels of the university and at the same time keep in mind that the finished product should be easy to implement
InterviewMarianne Vejen Hansen, Campus Manager and Anette Persson, Project Manager.
Intenst arbejde med udviklingsplanen
“You have to get actively involved in the work with the consultants. The work with the development plan requires thorough knowledge of the area and the buildings. It has been an advantage that the project has been anchored centrally in the organisation. The Dean of the Faculty of Life Sciences, Per Holten-Andersen was involved in the project from the very beginning,” says Marianne Vejen Hansen, and she continues: “The collaboration in our small working group was excellent and very flexible. It was an advantage to have so many participants in the dialogue meetings. We wanted as much input as possible and at the same time we wanted to create a network as well as ownership of future decisions.”
The working group had only four members: the consultants from the Kjær & Richter architectural firm and Schønherr Landskab, the building manager and the project manager. Input to the working group came from an Advisory Board, among others. The working group was established at the beginning of the process. Internal and external sparring partners from the Advisory Board were invited to participate in dialogue meetings throughout the working process. The thoughts and visions that emerged at the meetings with the Advisory Board were subsequently processed and presented to the steering group, which was responsible for prioritising the proposals.
A process in which many parties are involved requires a clear framework, according to Anette Persson: “The dialogue meetings were primarily used to communicate information and in hindsight could have involved more active participation. The dialogue meetings require clear statements about what you expect from the members of the Advisory Board representing the different academic environments. Some of the members of the Advisory Board probably felt that they contributed with their academic knowledge and interest merely by participating in the meetings. They were not inclined to act as ambassadors by spreading the debate to colleagues at the institutes. That was, however, what we had in mind when we asked the institutes to appoint representatives from each academic area.”
Overview, legitimacy and commitment
“We wanted to create ownership of the process amongst our students and employees,” says Anette Persson. “That is why we wanted to get them involved. We wanted to create commitment to – and ownership of – the process and the area as well as the subsequent result. We wanted employees and students to consider what could be improved about the surroundings. We wanted to demonstrate that LIFE has some very special qualities.”
The development plan is also a checklist. It highlights the things you have to consider before carrying out the actual physical mea-sures. The answers to those issues vary from area to area and may also vary in the future. The basis for decision-making therefore has to be transparent. “By explaining why certain measures have been adapted rather than just mentioning what has been decided, we give the process legitimacy and motivate users and collaboration partners to commit to the process,” says Marianne Vejen Hansen. By way of example Frederiksberg Municipality was involved at an early stage of the vision process.
“We had meetings with the municipality where we talked about our plans and they told us about their traffic plans, etc. We were interested in changing the traffic conditions around campus, especially as regards the two roads that cut through the campus area. Our future collaboration is off to a good start, because they know what we want and why and because they have been able to influence the plan,” says Anette Persson.
Academic skills at the university can contribute to the campus planning
“Naturally, all the academic skills present at LIFE place us in a privileged position. I nevertheless think that other university faculties could also benefit from involving their academic skills in a similar way,” says Marianne Vejen Hansen. Thanks to the academic skills in landscape architecture, urban spaces and vegetation, researchers at LIFE could contribute specific proposals to the vision plan. One researcher at the Centre for Forest & Landscape, for instance, worked with a seepage system that can prevent flooding in connection with heavy downpours.
Students and employees can also contribute with their knowledge of the area. At one of the dialogue meetings, they were given the task of noting the different qualities, potentials and problems of the campus area on individual maps. These maps were later combined into one. This made it clear to the working group what they needed to focus on. It was a pleasant surprise to the working group that the students and employees identified such a wealth of opportunities for the campus and were open to change.
Plan well ahead when involving students through the teaching
Free beer on tap and hot dogs attract students. That was what the working group handed out to attract the students at LIFE to the open dialogue meetings. Flyers and emails, on the other hand, were not the way to draw attention to the dialogue meetings in this project. To ensure considerable student participation, the meetings should not take place too close to the exams either, but preferably be scheduled immediately before the Friday bar, Marianne Vejen Hansen and Anette Persson agree. To involve the students further through their teaching requires even more planning. “We wanted to involve a group of students in a project about campus access for the disabled, but the teaching plan for the year was already in place. On top of that, it is a bit of a challenge to get the students involved in the work to develop the campus area. Their lessons are quite spread out and with their strong academic focus, the students often end up wearing ‘blinkers’,” says Marianne Vejen Hansen. It is easier to involve the student organisations, which can formulate and represent clear interests. Student groups in support of sustainability, for instance, had an opportunity to present their ideas at one of the Advisory Board meetings. The same representative from the Student’s Council was a member of both the Advisory Board and the steering group, which ensured a good knowledge flow.
The development plan is rolled out
The development plan should not be allowed to gather dust on a shelf, so a lot of work remains to be done. The development plan does not contain specific measures or guidelines. These now have to be defined in the middle of our busy daily lives. The working group is therefore in the process of preparing an action plan, which will contain both the overall long-term visions and the minor quick successes such as establishing a jogging track on the campus area. The difference between the development plan and the action plan can be described by means of the theme ‘Outdoor lighting’. The action plan must specify guidelines for what correct outdoor lighting is at a number of places based on the considerations outlined in the development plan. These considerations relate to orientation, safety, atmosphere and staging. As part of more specific guidelines, the working group would like a common set of rules for new physical initiatives. The aim is not to create uniformity but to ensure a kind of diversity where several different players can take initiatives and the projects can be implemented on an ongoing basis. The group will take stock of the work done every six months and establish guidelines for future activities.
The communication work has yet to be completed, too. It is important to make earlier initiatives visible so that both internal and external users of the campus area can see the results of their efforts. “Once the signs are up for the new jogging track, or the deck chairs are put out around the campus area, it must be clear that this is just a small part of the overall development plan,” Anette Persson concludes.
Cathrine SchmidtCampus planning – much more than just a physical framework
By Camilla Hedegaard Møller, Architect MAA, Schønherr Landskab, and John Mortensen, Architect MAA, Kjaer & RichterCampus planning has major financial and political consequences. It requires major decisions and a broad perspective. What is the role of the planner in this context? Schønherr Landskab and Kjaer & Richter worked closely with LIFE for one year to prepare the new development plan
For a year, we worked closely with staff at the faculty. It was an open process, and we had to define on an ongoing basis how it was to unfold. Many entities in the developer’s organisation had to ask themselves and each other: what kind of life should be accommodated at campus, how do we want to be perceived by the surrounding world and what kind of development are we aiming at?
Peace and quiet or a discussion club?
The users were to play a key role in defining the content of the plan, and as consultants we were to play a key role in giving the plan a physical expression. In that way, the users’ knowledge of the area influenced the project while we achieved peace and quiet to create a plan as a synthesis. This turned out to be a sensible and understandable distinction, which also highlighted the difference between architects and users.
The working group consisted of architects from the faculty and the consultants. This was productive and absolutely necessary. The architects at the faculty had an insight into the campus environment that was vital to both the product and the process. Their knowledge of the organisation ensured that the plan was understood, approved and given credibility internally. This close collaboration was a positive experience and prevented mistakes and unrealistic proposals.
We presented the project on an ongoing basis at the Advisory Board meetings and received constructive criticism. For example, one participant came up with the idea of the so-called ‘rambla’ – a network of paths and activities within the campus area. It is difficult to determine whether or not the members of the panel actually brought something back from the meetings and shared it with the rest of the faculty. What we have learned is that the purpose of an Advisory Board should be determined early in the process. The composition of the panel and the members’ understanding of their roles are decisive.
The programme as the central element
We emphasised the preparation of a programme for the plan. The aim of the programme was to pinpoint the shared intentions and goals for the plan. The developer’s proposal was far-reaching and ambitious. The area is large and there are many inte-rested parties. The programme helped us identify values, problems and potentials and created a focus and a hierarchy.
The programme was an excellent tool to get both users and decision makers involved. The focus was on the substance of the plan and we avoided idle talk about odd pet projects. It was an advantage for both the academic content of the plan and the benefits of user involvement that we were able to develop the programme and the proposal for the plan in one continuous process. By becoming a basis for the plan, large parts of the programme were incorporated directly into the final development plan. The development of the programme made all parties more aware of the content of the plan and promoted a common understanding of the background for the plan’s physical expression.
Gaps in the time schedule
Why did the project end up taking 10 1/2 months when it was meant to take about six? We have a confession to make: The steering group’s approval of the programme and the final work to communicate the plan in connection with the faculty’s 150 years’ anniversary turned out to take a lot longer than anybody in the working group had expected.
A programme is a commitment with huge consequences, and the approval process should not be underestimated. The approval of the programme made everybody aware of the seriousness of the project, and this resulted in a one month gap and additional meetings with e.g. Frederiksberg Municipality. We have discovered that the approval of a programme has to be planned. All decision makers must commit to a timetable in advance and they must all fully understand what a programme is. In addition, the work to clarify the final shape of the project is huge in its own right. The shape depends on the receiver and the way in which the project is handed over.
How can you work with the entire campus as an ‘environment’?
In order to come to grips with the complexity of the task, we prepared a matrix. In three scales, we focused on 1) the relationship between the campus area and the city, 2) the area as a whole, and 3) the individual spaces and buildings. At the same time, we worked with three tracks representing the three dimensions of the campus environment. The mental track was about aspects like branding and identity. The social track involved e.g. life and communities on campus. The physical track involved the area’s materiality.
The connection between the tracks and the scales created a system that made widely differing aspects visible, from the lack of individual parking spaces to the reputation of the campus area in the rest of the city. Everybody quickly understood the model, with their own comments and points of view fitting into a context. The model turned out to be very useful until the programme had been developed; after that it became more a way of thinking.
Should the users draw or speak?
It makes a difference whether users contribute by means of e.g. words, drawings or photos. The media encourage one thing and complicate others. Our experience is that words and talk easily become too non-committal and do not challenge users to choose or see new contexts. When the users had to draw on maps, they automatically placed their ‘own corners’ in a context. When we asked the users to contribute three photos of ‘the best’, it gave us an opportunity to capture moods and situations. Other aspects are of course best described in words.
It should be emphasised that the involvement of users should not blur the lines between the players. The users know best what their dreams are, what qualities and problems they have experienced in a place, and the architects know best how to place everything in a context and give it a physical expression.
Another important question is: Which communication strategy has the desired effect in the organisation? This must be discussed at an early stage. The project was published on the faculty’s own website where students and employees could add comments. The fact that relatively few comments were posted could be due to the poor exposure of the project on the faculty’s website. Everybody was invited to the dialogue day – a joint workshop with the participation of users and working group. The event and the website were advertised by means of flyers and posters all over the campus area. The many flyers and posters created awareness but the faculty’s design template seemed to have a neutralising effect. It would have been better to give the project its own graphical profile and in that way attract more attention.
Colleagues in New York
The study trip to campus environments in New York and Connecticut was planned to take place in the early stages. On account of the large amount of coordination work, however, the tour took place later on during the programme approval period. This turned out to be good timing.
A large delegation with representatives from a number of the parties involved participated in the trip. Especially the meetings with the universities’ own planners provided a lot of inspiration. During the trip, everyone became aware that the plan had to be a dynamic tool. Actual decisions were also made during the trip. The idea about a specific main entrance to the campus, for instance, was eliminated. The study trip acted as a catalyst to modify expectations and assess what was realistic. In our experience, the optimum timing of a study trip is halfway through the programme preparation, as this makes it possible to test whether a number of provisional aspects about the programme are likely to work out.
The unforeseen?
There were a number of surprises during the project. The possibility of simultaneously commencing work with an art plan for Frederiksberg Campus led to a general consolidation of the development plan but also to further coordination and detailing of the relationship between the two plans. Frederiksberg Municipality was also given an unexpected role when it turned out that a sub-area was subject to the Danish Act on Nature Preservation to an extent that was difficult to clarify within the given time frame.
So what was the result of this process? The main substance in the plan is a number of guidelines and principles – to maintain the values in the area, unfold its potential and resolve main issues. Layouts and visualisations show how physical space could but not how it should be ensured within the given framework. The development plan is a planning tool. It will therefore remain relevant for many years if the action plan is anchored broadly beyond the physical framework.
New possibilities for art in campus planning
The physical environments of universities should not only be safe and healthy but also aesthetic, according to the Danish Act on Teaching Environments. The universities can therefore obtain assistance from the Danish University and Property Agency for both art decorations and an overall art plan for the physical surroundings, indoors as well as outdoors. The Faculty of Life Sciences (LIFE) avails itself of this opportunity
InterviewCamilla Berner, artist
At LIFE in Taastrup, the land-art artist Camilla Berner has prepared an art plan in which the landscape is the work of art. She explains how a number of paths in the landscape not only create an opportunity to enjoy the beautiful surroundings on campus, but also make daily life on campus visible by telling a story about the academic knowledge behind what is seen and sensed.
‘White Route’ is the title of a work about ‘shortcuts’. According to the plan, a number of white slabs will lead to the different research activities on campus: climate station, tree collection and water balance station. In addition to the white slabs, the test fields are cut to create paths. The paths include those already created by students and employees, as well as others that would make it possible to walk through the blooming rape and lupin fields laid out as test fields. The intention is therefore to make white wellington boots available in all sizes so that visitors can walk through the landscape regardless of the weather.
“You normally structure and embellish a landscape in a particular design. However, after a while, human use will have made a mess of it. People have created their own paths. Those paths will be my starting point – the use of the place and the importance of the things that exist on campus,” says Camilla Berner, and she continues: “When driving to LIFE’s Højbakkegård farm in Taastrup, you pass the fields and the beautiful apple orchard called ‘Pometet’. However, on the actual site, the history is not immediately apparent. The first time I was there, it was autumn. There were no leaves on the trees and apart from a red Virginia creeper, all I saw was the grey aerated concrete buildings. There were no signs of the interesting life that takes place there. As a visitor, you missed signage that could guide you around to what actually happens on the campus.”
Visible art, visible campus
To integrate art into campus development requires a close dialogue between developer, consultants and users. An art committee with two art consultants and two government officials support the work to prepare an art plan. Normally, the educational institution is asked to set up an art committee with which the art consultants can discuss how to establish guidelines for expression, location, maintenance and compliance with specific requirements and wishes. During this process, the academic skills of the researchers and the current use of the area can generate new ideas for ways of making the art visible on the campus.
At LIFE in Taastrup, the artist Camilla Berner has involved researchers and employees from the area. She has gained insight into the use of the area by asking employees and students to enter their shortcuts on a map of the area. All in all, Camilla Berner spent 3-4 months on the preparatory work of learning about the place and investigating possible routes. “I went down there and said hello!,” says Camilla Berner with a laugh. “Then I have asked: How do you get here? They may answer: By bus, and then tell me what route they walk to get here. They might actually prefer to take another route because they would save five minutes but they don’t like walking across the lawn. Then I take them up on it and draw a path in exactly that spot.”
In that way, the work was created around the wishes of the daily users. Camilla Berner elaborates: “The veterinarians and the students like to go for a walk and clear their heads after major operations that may take several hours. That is what Susanne Nautrup Olsen, the head of the new large veterinary hospital, told me. The owners of large animals also like to take a walk and think about whether to pay for a major operation or have the animal put down. Also in other contexts, researchers and students like to walk around and ponder ideas.”
Art folder for communication and fundraising
The aim of the art plan is to ensure that the art supports the campus area, the university’s identity and history and its academic profile. It is, in fact, possible to combine aesthetics and academic skills, and it is important to include art as early as possible in the planning stage.
LIFE hopes that the art plan will also generate funds for the campus area and has prepared a folder about the artwork to apply for sponsorship money to establish the paths. At a later stage, LIFE plans to make a folder for visitors that tells the stories of the landscape. The folder should be available along the main routes. There you will be able to read about the plant ‘wall cress’, which can detect landmines. (The green plant becomes red if it grows on top of a landmine). You can also read about the ‘Pometet’, the old apple orchard, which serves as a Nordic gene bank for apples. The folder was prepared by Camilla Berner and Hanne Lipczak Jakobsen, Technical Manager at LIFE’s campus area in Taastrup. The two have worked closely together, which has been of great benefit to the project.
“There are many activities in the landscape that nobody knows of, except those who work with it. I went for a walk with Hanne, for example, and we stopped near the hillocks with corn. Architecturally, they seemed to frame the landscape. As an aesthete, I exclaimed how fantastic it looked, but Hanne replied: “Yes, it is a great success!” “Success – how?” I then discovered that the researchers at LIFE have been experimenting with corn that gives a greater yield if cultivated on small mounds rather than on flat ground. They could do a lot more to communicate that.” The universities do not commit themselves to using the art plans, but in addition to helping with communication and fundraising, the art plans are also a useful frame of reference when the universities assess their aesthetic teaching environment once every three years.
Campus art creates new challenges
The art in the campus development creates both new opportunities and new challenges, especially when the work of art is a landscape with many functions. How do you handle the more fluid form of the work of art? Should the defined shortcuts, slabs and maps of the area be changed when new activities are added? Or should the work of art be a frozen picture of current activities? It has also been important to coordinate the artistic decoration with production and research at LIFE as well as with the objectives for health, sustainability and accessibility that apply to campus areas open to the public.
As far as the art plan for Taastrup Campus is concerned, this means that it must be possible to rearrange the harvested paths to prevent them from getting in the way of the test fields, which are planted on an ongoing basis. In addition, other important planning considerations such as access for the disabled must be included in the plan for the surrounding area. Should the white walkways and the down-trodden paths be made accessible to wheelchair users? So far, Camilla Berner’s answer to this question has been “no”. She argues: “Obviously, we must make allowance for the disabled, but I am not a landscape architect in the traditional sense, and what I have created is not landscape design but a work of art. That sometimes means more emphasis on aesthetics than on function. There is a certain finesse about the white line created by a row of white slabs. It creates the impression of a walking trail. A double row of slabs would resemble a wide pavement. However, collaboration with a new landscape architect could make it possible to open up a combined route in which my paths can be connected to new asphalt and gravel paths that allow access for the disabled.”
Once a new landscape architect has been found, the Faculty of Life Sciences will start applying for funds to implement the art plan, which includes everything from the purchase of wellington boots to the establishment of paths. The art plan prepared by Camilla Berner thus has the specific goal of incorporating art into the campus.
The art funding is based on a government circular, which states that 1.5 % of labour costs in connection with new construction work or restructuring must be spent on decoration¹. This scheme has been in operation since 2004, and during that period, approx. DKK 5 million have been allocated per year. On the website of the Danish University and Property Agency, you will soon be able to see the approximately 40 decorations financed by the agency since the start of the scheme. The art plans for the campus areas will also be available on the website.
Cathrine SchmidtNOTES
¹ The art funding is calculated on the basis of normal construction costs. As a result, additional costs e.g. in connection with the establishment of laboratories, would not result in additional funding for decoration.
Lancaster University
The good student life
Lancaster University from 1964 is located in the countryside, approx. 5 km outside the city of Lancaster. The university has 6,000 beds on campus and a total of 15,000 students and employees. Because of its location in the countryside and the many boarding students, the university has to provide for the many needs associated with the students’ everyday life
| Det biovidenskabelige fakultet, LIFE, Frederiksberg Campus, København | ||
|---|---|---|
| Established | 1964, the year it was built | |
| Status | Public university | |
| Campus population | Campus population: 15,000 people: 8,500 Bachelor's degree students, 3,000 Master's degree students, 800 PhD students, 1,200 academic staff and 1,500 technical and administrative staff | |
| Distance from the city | 5 km from the centre of Lancaster (46,000 inhabitants) | |
| Subject areas | 3 faculties: Management, Art/Social Science and Science/Technology | |
| Annual study fee | Approx. DKK 35,000 (Standard for British universities) | |
| Number of beds on campus | Approx. 6,000 | |
Ownership and organisation
Lancaster University is a public university, financed in part by the British Government and in part by the university’s own revenue. The university owns its buildings and land. As a result, it can lease premises to different commercial enterprises and benefit from the profits. The university takes part in several public/private partnerships, including the recent ‘graduate housing’ partnership. The planned new science park is to be financed jointly with Lancaster city, which is extremely interested in maintaining a good relationship with the university, as the university is the main employer in the city and the region.
Urban spaces and buildings
Lancaster University is an isolated campus located 5 km from the city of Lancaster. The campus area has a wide range of facilities – academic as well as social – which makes it a lively area that can be compared with a small town.
The campus is designed as one long street – commonly called ‘The Spine’ – which connects all classrooms, shops and social functions. The student residences often have a bar or a café on the ground floor facing the street, whereas classrooms and accommodation can be found on the first and second floors. The result is a lively street scene with shop fronts or learning facades on the ground floor. The central ‘spine’ is partially covered so you can walk from building to building without getting wet. At the same time, the covering creates shelter and nice places for informal meetings.
The building structure is compact and non-hierarchical, and pedestrians are kept apart from other traffic. This dense structure means that all distances can easily be covered on foot. Nothing is more than a 10-minute walk away. This concentration of campus life in a small area creates a feeling of closeness.
‘Alexander Square’ is the central square on campus from which the streets lead to the rest of the campus and other smaller squares. The square is a kind of ‘Town hall square’ with an underground terminal for the bus to Lancaster city as well as key functions such as a library, the university administration, a bookshop and a baker’s. Alexander Square is flanked by buildings on all sides and is both sunny and sheltered. One side of the square is elevated with steps to sit on, which creates an intimate and relaxed atmosphere. Students gather here for meetings or for no apparent reason and people constantly cross the square on their way from one end of campus to the other.
Social and academic life
More than half of the students live at one of the nine colleges on campus. To meet the needs of the 6,000 students who live here, the university offers a wide range of urban facilities on campus and almost all are located in the main thoroughfare: cinema, second-hand shop, bookshop, newsagent, baker’s, coffee shops, eating places, church, bank, florist, theatre, dentist, doctor, pharmacy, post office, etc. Some eating places are managed by the university but most are private enterprises that lease the premises from the university. Leasing is handled by the university, which thus has an opportunity to generate income from the presence of the retailers.
The university generally uses the premises around the clock by e.g. having a café that is operated commercially during the daytime while students are allowed to run a non-profit café in the evening.
With its focus on holistic campus planning, Lancaster has gone to great lengths also to meet the non-academic requirements. Informal meeting places have high priority – also in buildings mainly used for teaching and research. The InfoLab 21, for instance, a new research centre, contains incubator environments, research facilities as well as an attractive café with a roof terrace and a view that attract visitors who do not otherwise use the building.
Future strategy
Since 2007, Lancaster University has worked according to a new 10-year master plan, which, contrary to the previous plan, tries to keep the campus within the original construction area. The new strategy therefore emphasises the central thoroughfare created in the original plan from 1966, shifting the focus away from the outer areas and back to the centre of the campus. The aim of the new plan is to upgrade the public space and reintroduce green corridors with views to the surrounding landscape. This plan involves demolition of select buildings inappropriately located. New urban squares are to be created and existing squares upgraded to add new destinations to the street, including a culture square at the northern end of campus in connection with the theatre and the concert hall. At the central Alexander Square, the intention is to establish a new exposed learning hub to make ‘independent studies and autonomous study groups’ more attractive to the students.
The chapter is an edited summary of the working paper ‘The campus area of the future’ by the Danish University and Property Agency and JuulIFrost Arkitekter.
INTERVIEWS
Joe Rigby studies Sociology at Lancaster University. He is about to complete his first year of a combination degree programme consisting of a Master’s degree and a PhD after completing his Bachelor’s degree at Oxford University
How much time do you spend on campus?I live in the city, as I tried living on campus during my BA studies. This time, I preferred to live in an environment where I wasn’t surrounded by students alone. The thought of student isolation didn’t really appeal to me, but that said, I go to campus every day to study.
What made you change university between your Bachelor’s degree and your advanced studies?When choosing a university for my advanced studies, I had to consider my finances, among other things. I went for an interview at Lancaster because I am very impressed by the professors who teach at the Department of Sociology. They wrote the books I studied during my Bachelor’s degree. During the interview, they offered me an attractive package with a combined Master’s and PhD degree, which was hard to refuse. They also made it feasible financially, so I accepted the offer. I changed because of the academic profile and not so much because of the social life.
In your opinion, what are the differences between Oxford and Lancaster Universities?The atmosphere at Lancaster is definitely quite different from Oxford. Lancaster is almost anti-elitist. I don’t see the class barriers that were very obvious at Oxford. On the contrary, I often run into my professors and teachers in the campus area. They have their feet firmly planted on the ground and like to stop and chat. At Oxford there was a lot of pressure both my own and from the surroundings: I had been given the privilege of being accepted at Oxford, so I had to give it everything I had. It became a bit of a disincentive and I am actually happier here at Lancaster where I have unlimited room to find my own feet.
Lianne Robinson is currently on leave from her Bachelor’s degree in Film Studies and has a paid job as the person responsible for ‘education and welfare’ in Lancaster University’s Student Union, LUSU
How much time do you spend on campus?I spend almost all my time here in that I live, work and socialise here. I live at one of the colleges but spend most of my time here at the student union. Most of my friends are here and we are more or less like one big family. So even though I am on study leave, most of my life, both mental and physical, still revolves around campus.
Why did you choose to work for the LUSU and what do you do there?There are many reasons why I chose to become active in LUSU. First of all, the union has given me some great times as a student and made my time on campus much easier. LUSU has a film club located in one of the university’s lecture halls. I frequented it a lot, as the cinema is much cheaper than cinemas in the city.
Through the film club, I became aware of the many other clubs and societies connected with LUSU. They cover everything: political, ethnic, academic as well as social issues. When I was in need of a break from my studies last summer, working at LUSU was a logical choice for me and I therefore ran for election as one of the six students who get paid for their work. I was elected, and I am now responsible for general welfare and education on campus. It’s an excellent combination, as I gain relevant work experience without losing my contact with the university.
What are you trying to improve at the university?At Lancaster University, the needs of the students are generally well looked after, so fortunately there are many things I don’t need to worry about. One thing that keeps us busy at the moment is the upgrading of the physical study areas. The Lancaster University area has a wealth of informal places where you can study but many of them are connected with either cafés or our many bars. We have many students who would like to sit together informally without getting crumbs, crumbled chips or spilt beer on their laptops, and it’s important that we make room for them, too. Many of them are often advanced students who don’t participate much in the social life at the university, and it’s important that their needs are met.
Patricia Russo is an exchange student from Italy. She is studying for one year at the Institute of English Literature as part of her Italian Bachelor’s degree
How much time do you spend on campus?I spend all my time here. I was a bit nervous about moving to the north of England all on my own so I was very pleased when I finally arrived. I live at a college with students of different subjects and it has been very easy to settle in. I had only been here two days when one of my fellow students from the same floor dragged me down to the bar for the first time. I enjoy studying and living at such an intense place. When I wake up in the morning, I’m a student; when I have lunch, I’m a student, and when I party at night, I’m also a student. I have entered a ‘complete’ student life!
What facilities do you use on campus?It would be easier to say what I don’t use because I live my entire life here. I do my shopping at the local supermarket; I draw my money from one of the many cash points on campus; I drink my pints at one of the many bars on campus and I do yoga at the sports centre. I really can’t think of any need that’s not being met here – except maybe for clothes shopping – but it’s also good to be forced to go into town every now and then.
Which places do you prefer on campus?I love sitting here in the square, looking at people passing by. It’s a place where you can both see and be seen. It’s a bit quiet here today, but sometimes really strange things happen. People create happenings to collect money or sell their old books, and the many societies often recruit members here. It may be due to my Italian background, but if I should complain about something, I would say that it would be nice to have a café here in the square that sold proper coffee and perhaps had a couple of tables where you could sit in the sun. And well, I don’t want to insult anybody, but the quality of the food here on campus isn’t exactly up to Italian standards.
More campus environment – higher ranking
Lancaster University recently improved its national ranking after four years of massive efforts to physically improve its campus. The university, located in the north western corner of England, devotes particular attention to creating an attractive physical and social environment. The strategy is to create space for ‘the good student life’. To Lancaster University this concept includes shops, banks, restaurants and a theatre. And perhaps also soon a residential area for over-55-year-olds who may act as mentors to the students
Interview
Mark Swindlehurst, Director of Estates, Lancaster University
RANKING
You have recently improved your position in the British ranking lists for universities. Did the physical environment contribute to the improvement – and if so, which particular aspects of the physical environment? We have found that the physical environment plays an important role when students are choosing their future university. I think that two things are essential here: the range of available facilities and the quality of the facilities. We try to create diversity and a broad range of offers on campus. By this, I mean for instance sports facilities, shops, supermarkets, banks, leisure facilities. And the quality of it all must be in order. In addition, we focus a lot on creating safe environments for our students. The campus must be a comfortable, secure place to stay, live, and study.
SECURITY
So, you take responsibility for the youngsters by considering security as part of your campus planning. How do you do that?
When you live on campus, you have all the possibilities you find in an ordinary city. But unlike the city, we have the possibility of providing a higher level of security. Some students prefer that. The British police have a special award: The Secure by Design award which is given to building complexes whose design includes considerations of security, for instance in terms of lighting or general visibility. We have been given this award for all the building projects we have implemented in the past two years. Security is important to us, so we are very pleased with our Secure by Design award.
ACCOMMODATION
You have 6-7,000 residences on campus, which means that half your students live here, making the area a lively place all 24 hours of the day. The campus is surrounded by green fields, and the nearest town is 5 kilometres away. As a visitor, you may experience the campus as an isolated, but lively youth town. You have built residences for students with children, thereby achieving a more differentiated population of residents. Have you also thought about building residences for other age groups than students?
Yes, we are currently considering whether to offer housing to over-55-year-olds on campus. This has been tested in Australia as a concept where older newcomers get sort of a parental status in relation to the students, acting as a kind of mentors. We can of course offer further education and adult training for people who decide to move in here. Naturally, they can also use the university’s sports and leisure facilities. So, it is not exactly what you would call retirement to a quiet life! We are currently applying for permission to use some of the university’s areas for residential purposes, and once we get the permission, we will decide whether to use them as residential areas for over-55-year-olds. We consider this an exciting prospect.
DUAL FUNCTIONS
You aim at utilising the available areas efficiently, seeking to establish dual functions with added social benefits. For instance you have established cafés which are privately run during the daytime and transform into student-driven non-profit facilities during the night-time. So, the room and the kitchen are the same, and only the financial set-ups differ. Do you have any other examples of areas which are used for multiple purposes like that?
Yes, at the moment we are rebuilding the academic accommodation for the scientific staff around campus. We are also introducing Breakouts or Mixing Hubs in the office areas which may be used by both students and staff. Breakouts are a supplement to the workplaces – which may be used for formal meetings with students, but also for informal conversations or other interaction with colleagues. We typically place these meeting places in the corners with the best view of the premises. In this way, they serve as a sort of link between the different functions and people in the building.
COMPLETE OVERHAUL
What are your plans for the next couple of years?We follow our 10-year master plan which was completed last year – and proceed project by project. For instance we will be performing a complete overhaul of all older buildings over the next 9 years. As a result, we will replace windows, installations, cables and pipework in all buildings to ensure sustainable operation. At the same time, the overhaul enables us to refurbish and restructure the office and study areas.
Sustainability is generally important to us, and we have received several awards for our efforts in this field. One of the initiatives we have implemented makes it possible for students to log on and monitor the energy consumption in their own house. The house with the lowest energy consumption in a term can win a £600 prize. Each house has just 12 residents, and the prospect of making an extra £50 each has proved a strong motivator in encouraging the students to improve their habits!
FINANCING
Other than the overhauls, you are also busy implementing several new building projects as well as an upgrade of many areas and street sections on campus. How do you finance all these initiatives? The university has made a strategic decision to spend a part of its annual profits on upgrading its buildings. In addition, the university can apply for both national and regional funding. Finally, we use PPP, Public Private Partnering, for all accommodation. Without PPP, we could not afford to build the new residences.
In the longer term we wish to leave the ownership and operation of the student residences that we own already to private operators. By focusing on owning and operating the teaching buildings and leaving operation of the residences to others, we can minimise the associated operational and building risks. Ownership of buildings per se is not important to us. As long as the contracts are in order, we have no problem disposing of them under a PPP model. This enables us to spend the money on other things that we also care about.
Mikala Holme SamsøeMIT
Planning process and iconic architecture
MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) is located in an industrial quarter in the city of Cambridge only a few kilometres from the centre of Boston. The campus area was founded in 1916 and has gradually been extended since then. The university uses distinctive iconographic architecture to market its multidisciplinary and innovative approach. They do not use master plans but rely on ongoing planning processes
| MIT with Boston on the opposite side of the Charles River. | ||
|---|---|---|
| Established | 1861, campus commenced in 1916 | |
| Status | Private university | |
| Campus population | 18,000 people: 4,000 Bachelor’s degree students, 2,400 Master’s degree/diploma students, 3,700 PhD students/doctors, 1,800 academic staff and 6,100 technical and administrative staff | |
| Distance from the city | 2 km from the centre of Boston (4 million inhabitants in the Boston metropolitan area) | |
| Subject areas | Engineering (45 %), Architecture (8 %), Humanities (5 %), Business (12 %) and Science (29 %) | |
| Annual study fee | Approx. DKK 185,000 | |
| Number of beds on campus | 5.000 | |
Ownership and organisation
MIT is a private university and considered amongst the best in the world. The university places considerable emphasis on theoretical, applied and interdisciplinary research as well as high-tech development work. MIT is a private company that owns all its buildings, although the university does receive public funding via grants for research projects. MIT leases premises to independent service companies while sports facilities and residence halls or ‘houses’ are financed and managed by the university.
Urban spaces and buildings
MIT is a concentrated city university with an extensive campus area in the city of Cambridge a couple of kilometres from the centre of Boston. The campus area is divided into two parts, as Massachusetts Avenue, which connects Boston and Cambridge, cuts straight through the campus. On the one side are all the academic buildings, while the other side of campus contains residences, sports grounds, cultural facilities and a small number of retailers.
The buildings in the academic area are dominated by the university’s earliest building, a structure consisting of long connected corridors. The central corridor connects completely different academic areas and is MIT’s ‘catwalk’ where you go to see and be seen.
Both parts of campus are graced with a number of buildings designed by world-famous architects. MIT has a long-standing tradition for attracting such architects, as innovative architecture is seen as part of the university’s profile. However, the iconographic and at times expressive buildings such as Frank Gehrys ‘Stata Center’ lend a fragmented character to the campus.
There is no focus on the space between the buildings, and at present the number of inviting city spaces is limited. There are exceptions, however, such as the monumental lawn by the river, which is transformed into the school’s ceremonial hall in connection with diploma ceremonies in addition to the more informal and intimate everyday use. The slogan: ‘At MIT we don’t walk – we run’ indicates that the MIT user does not walk aimlessly around campus but moves with a purpose. The experience between arrival and departure then becomes meaningful, which can be a possible explanation for the limited focus on the space between the buildings.
As a result of MIT’s unusually strong academic profile, the university has had no major need to interact with its surroundings. This may explain why the extensions of the last 90 years barely interact with the rest of the city. MIT does not make its knowledge visible in the urban surroundings and does not offer any programmes that invite outsiders to participate.
The area around MIT primarily consists of industrial buildings and office areas and appears lifeless. The city of Cambridge does not want much retail business in the area, as it gives higher priority to research companies that pay more tax. This prioritisation of research companies and the large number of incubator environments in MIT’s immediate vicinity contribute to making the Cambridge/Boston area a knowledge city, par excellence. From this point of view, MIT coexists perfectly with the rest of the city.
Social and academic life
It is a major challenge for MIT to provide a social environment in an academic climate characterised by elite students and high ambitions. MIT offers all new Bachelor’s degree students accommodation in a residence hall to help them become well integrated in the MIT environment. The residence halls/houses that characterise the western side of campus are generally designed to create a universe of rooms and nooks that facilitate both learning and social interaction. In that way, they combine a home atmosphere with academic life. The university’s emphasis on residence halls built by famous architects should thus be seen as a strengthening of the academic environment.
‘Simmons Hall’ is the most recent residence hall designed by Steven Holl and is the most expensive residence hall in the USA to date. The building further elaborates on work by the Finnish architect Alvar Aalto’s canonised MIT college ‘Baker House’. The residence house also accommodates a host family with a member of the teaching staff, and offers accommodation for guest researchers.
‘Learning by doing’ is MIT’s academic motto. The teaching is of an experimental nature and students and researchers consistently work in a multidisciplinary manner and often construct and test ideas in one of the many workshops or laboratories.
Despite their dreary appearance, the long corridors and the ‘catwalk’ at MIT form the basis of MIT’s special entrepreneurial culture. In the corridors, people from different academic areas meet and share their knowledge despite the fact that no special effort has been made to create informal meeting places. This multidisciplinary exchange is supported by the fact that several subjects are located in the same corridor as opposed to a structure where the subjects are based in separate buildings.
Trends and future strategy
MIT is the only university in this survey that does not have a master plan but focuses on ‘Real-time planning’. It is a less structured planning tool aimed at short-term action, and it has to make allowance for a complex and changing world.
Throughout the most recent decade, MIT has used ‘real-time planning’ to focus on building new unique and iconic buildings for research and accommodation and has also made various individual attempts at revitalising the outdoor spaces on campus. MIT’s next development phase ‘Evolving Campus’ aims to ensure that the university remains a leader within knowledge, innovation, research and education and at the same time becomes a neighbourhood that can provide for many diverse needs.
As the global classroom has become the norm at MIT, the university now wishes to give higher priority to the local campus and immediate neighbourhood in order to continue attracting international researchers, students and investors.
Future projects should therefore contribute to a positive development of the surrounding neighbourhoods, especially a run-down industrial area between the university and the city. The area is already partially developed, as over the years MIT has purchased large tracts of land it now wishes to develop.
The chapter is an edited summary of the working paper ‘The campus area of the future’ by the Danish University and Property Agency and Juul Frost Arkitekter.
INTERVIEWS
Kaitlyn Becker is in her second year of a mechanical engineering degree. The prescribed duration of the Bachelor’s degree is four years
How much time do you spend on campus?All my time, more or less. I live at the Simmons Hall residence hall, which is located on the western side of campus, and I study on the eastern side. Now and then, I leave campus to do some shopping – but that’s about it. Otherwise, I divide my time evenly between my room and my teaching. MIT is my world.
Why do you live at Simmons Hall?As a Bachelor’s degree student, you are guaranteed a room in one of the university’s residence halls. You choose which residence hall you prefer to stay at and then hope to be allocated your first choice. I chose Simmons Hall because it’s the newest and therefore, if I may say so, the least run down. Simmons Hall may be the most expensive of the residence halls but I really fancied living in this amazing new building. In fact, I like the building so much that I ran for election to become a guide to the building. I don’t get paid but that doesn’t matter, as I also have a student job at the residence hall reception. On the contrary, it shows that I’m committed when I write it in my CV. The job at the reception means that I get free accommodation, and at the same time I get to know a lot of the other residents at the hall. As if that wasn’t enough, I also have a summer job as part of an ‘undergraduate research programme’. That job gives me laboratory experience, which is essential for my future.
What made you choose MIT as your university?I actually didn’t consider MIT until my science teacher grabbed hold of me and encouraged me to apply. My parents and I therefore paid a visit to check the physical facilities. My first thought was: “Oh my god, I never want to study here,” because what I saw was a barren and cold campus that wasn’t particularly appealing. However, then we did a tour guided by one of the students. He was amazing and in him I met a student who was just like me: interested in mechanics and a passionate user of all technical terms; in fact he was probably a bit of a nerd, in a positive sense, that is. It was definitely the feeling that I would find ‘soul mates’ at MIT that made me apply.
Phoebe Putnam is in the process of completing a PhD dissertation in literature at Harvard University
What brings you to MIT when you study at Harvard?I live halfway between the two universities, although I'm closest to Harvard. However, Harvard shuts down many of its facilities over the summer whereas MIT remains open. Today I’m here because I like to sit in the reading room on the top floor of the student centre, which is where the ‘non-academic facilities’ are based. That makes it easy for me when I need a break: All I have to is go down a couple of floors to buy a cup of coffee, eat my lunch or go for a swim in the pool.
How would you compare MIT and Harvard?At Harvard, it is, so to speak, your teacher who has the keys to the classroom. When there is no teaching, you have to sit elsewhere and study. At MIT, the environment is much more social and informal. You can sit in any classroom that is not being used. It doesn’t even matter whether you are enrolled at MIT or not. MIT is also much more isolated from the city than Harvard and they’ve therefore had to provide ‘support functions’ like the student centre that offers everything from food and coffee to photocopying, merchandise and sports facilities under one roof. So even if the design and architecture may not be the most attractive, one area can meet most of my requirements. That’s practical when you are busy writing, like I am, but it’s also easy to get distracted. In this building, I have peace and quiet, more or less!
Do you use any other university facilities?The reason why I began using the reading room at MIT was my boyfriend who has studied chemical engineering here at the university. Before I met him, I had never been to MIT although I was born and grew up in Boston. My interest in literature means that I am far removed from the ‘nerds’ at MIT. I later found out that MIT has an excellent library that also has textbooks and academic material that I can use, so I now use the library a lot. Perhaps students of literature aren’t that different from engineering students, after all.
Planning in real time
Talent and the right people engaged in a collaborative process is what it takes when MIT considers campus planning. It is done in a real-time planning process that seeks to challenge intellectual partners and allow architectural innovation to happen. Adèle Santos is a member of the Building Committee at MIT and thus involved in giving advice to the President of the university about architectural planning
InterviewAdèle Santos, Dean of the School of Architecture and Planning, MIT
Real-time planning is a less structured planning process that allows multiple viewpoints in order to reach architectural innovation. It is an example of a rather different approach to campus planning. This approach has guided MIT for a while, and it has created a rich variety of architectural masterpieces on campus. The challenge, however, is the idiosyncrasy and ad-hocism it can cause.
Advantages and disadvantages
You don’t use master plans at MIT – but more what you call real-time planning...? Oh yes, we haven’t had a master plan forever to be honest! We had a previous planner who made master plans but these were considered too rigid. His contract was not renewed and we have not had a formal planning process since. Instead of having a master plan we are trying to look at the process of engagement that can give us more choices for the future.
What is the advantage of real-time planning in your opinion?I think it is very pragmatic. You have to have a framework, of course. So you know the general destination. But you need the flexibility in the process that you get from real-time planning.
And the disadvantage?It can be quite ad hoc. There really has to be an overall ‘framework’ to guide development. We need to have that idea of relative centrality and what can be put in the periphery. Otherwise things will end up in the wrong places. For example, we built a dormitory in a poor location just because the land was available. And, frankly, that is really the history of MIT. The way we exploited space is quite idiosyncratic.
Get the best people
What does it take from the leaders and administration of the university to do real-time planning?I think you have to go and find the best talents. What you need is the ‘best thinkers’ and you need a really collaborate process. With people from inside the university, and from both the faculty side and the planning department. In that way, we can make the best product and think it into the larger context of this university. We try to explore the potential of the context with the most talented architects, urban designers and landscape architects
It is more a matter of the right people than the right process?Yes, as long as it is collaborative. There still has to be an overall ‘framework’ to guide us.
| ”Real-Time Planning” | |
|---|---|
Real-time planning’ is a less formalised approach, which can be used in complex planning processes aimed at creating innovative construction projects such as iconic buildings. In ‘real-time planning’, neither master plans nor guidelines are used, as is seen in local development planning. Instead, the internationally most talented people are found, and their skills are matched with the possible problems expected in the assignment, and then you set off on an open journey together. Here, you must be able to read the changing surroundings rapidly in order to make quick choices that will send the project off in the right direction. The direction in this case is a number of social and urban objectives. This approach should make it possible to interpret the forces at play in connection with a construction project in a large and complex organisation such as a university. Each individual construction project is treated as an opportunity both to take a critical look back and to explore the future. The advantage of the ‘real-time planning’ process is the flexibility it provides in every phase of the project. Mechanical repetitions are avoided and new ideas are allowed. The disadvantage is that without passionate commitment, strong leadership and high architectural aspirations, the project will not succeed. Source: Mitchell (2007) |
Fremtidsplaner
MIT has built many significant buildings the last couple of years using star architects. What are the future plans right now?Yes, a lot of buildings were build during the previous administration and now we don’t really have a lot of resources to do a lot of that right now. So the easiest thing is to take a look at all the pieces of landscape that bring this campus together. Landscaped spaces and pathways that join with the indoor networks can make the built campus more coherent. Our existing landscape is mostly quite ordinary. To be honest.
If the space in between the buildings has been neglected so far does it have something to do with the ad hoc process of real-time planning?I think it is more a matter of landscape plans that did not go anywhere. MIT was more focused on the buildings. The landscape architects who are working with us now are very user-orientated. I think they are extremely user-sensitive and they are trying to pick up the important features of the past. Obviously, Killian Court, which is the green lawn between the main building and the river, is a really nice space. A lot of our open spaces are not really useful because they are not user-friendly.
Advocate of architecture
You are Dean of the School of Architecture and Planning and also a member of the Building Committee with significant decision-making power in building projects at MIT. How are you involved in practice in the planning process?I sit down with the designers before the Building Committee meetings and have a professional critique, you know professional to professional. I can identify the issues that will be of concern and help reach the best solution. In a way, I am an advocate for good design, improving everything we do at MIT.
On the other hand, I also have to be a bit of an activist. Our university is very spread out and we are in a series of interconnected buildings. It is very difficult to know what research is taking place behind the closed doors in our hallways. Right now, I am involved in an effort to create spaces where we can reveal what we are creating. One idea is to have an ‘innovation gallery’ where all five schools can display their work. This would facilitate discussion and reveal MIT to MIT.
I am sure it applies to every place, but MIT does not reveal itself to the world. There is a unique culture here, and when you drive down Massachusetts Avenue, you should know that you are passing through MIT. For example, I have been recommending that the bus stops close to our main entrance be designed by our faculty members who know how to design digitally interactive structures. These would contain screens that announce events taking place on campus and show the innovations that are taking place at MIT. People should see the innovations we make, just by passing by. I think that the public would find this very exciting!
