Mission and Place: Designing a New Pedestrian Experience at Ball State University by Weston Rogers

MISSION AND PLACE:

DESIGNING A NEW PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE AT BALL STATE UNIVERSITY Weston Rogers LA 404 - spring 2016 Comprehensive Design Project Studio

MISSION AND PLACE:

DESIGNING A NEW PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE AT BALL STATE UNIVERSITY Weston Rogers LA 404 - spring 2016 Comprehensive Design Project Studio

Department of Landscape Architecture College of Architecture and Planning Ball State University Muncie, Indiana

PROJECT ABSTRACT This comprehensive landscape architecture undergraduate thesis examined the design of a pedestrian and bicycle corridor system through the heart of the Ball State University Campus in Muncie, Indiana. This corridor system in return fostered the development of a dynamic public space corridor that connected underutilized spaces within the campus environment that provided social gathering spaces, increased connectivity, and provided a new sense of place and identity within the campus environment. Imagining a series of fragmented and disconnected campus locations as a continuous spine of dynamic public spaces required the examination of place making strategies for campus landscapes, considerations for pedestrian and bicyclist’s safety, and campus design methods and principles. In return, a continuous protected pedestrian experience was created while simultaneously maintaining and improving all vehicular service needs that exist throughout the site. This creative merging of circulation systems provided a spatial sequence of engaging social gathering spaces, grand plazas, landmarks, and performance venues that provide flexible programing opportunities throughout all seasons. Not only does this proposal provide others with an example of the endless possibilities for transforming forgotten campus landscapes into social active, safe, and functionally efficient spaces, but also provides the Ball State University campus with a unique asset that fosters a connected campus community.

TABLE OF CONTENTS /// 0 /// INTRODUCTION /// 8 ///

THE RESEARCH

/// 22 ///

THE PROBLEM

/// 28 ///

THE PROJECT

/// 36 ///

THE SETTING

/// 58 ///

CASE STUDIES

/// 64 ///

DESIGN CONCEPTS

/// 74 ///

DESIGN

/// 112 ///

CONCLUSION

/// 116 ///

APPENDICES

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

1 7

REVIEW OF LITERATURE INTRODUCTION:

campus design methods and principles that

in the place. The idea and the place of the

deal with the larger campus environment in

institution have a mutual and enduring impact

concentrates on the landscape architecture

terms of pedestrian and bicycle circulation,

on one another.” (Dumont 28). This deeper

components of campus landscape design.

building arrangement and orientation, facility

understanding of campus environments; the

Serving as the physical foundation for every

service access, and cohesive landscape design.

places they create and the spaces within them,

institution of higher education, the physical

Lastly, this literature review will examine

remain hallmark to reflecting the mission,

campus environment poses unique challenges

considerations for pedestrian and bicyclist

values and objectives of the university. This

when considering optimal site functionality,

safety to ensure that site user experience is

linkage between the mission of the university

user sociability, and pedestrian safety in

not compromised by hazardous conditions

and the institution’s physical campus

relation to the many components and uses of

that hinder connection and fluidity within

environment in which it resides suggest the

a modern day college or university campus.

the campus environment. Together, these

creation of an environment that plays a key

While a vast amount of literature has been

conditions to be investigated within this

role in expressing the mission of the university.

created to aid in the development of campus

literature review will develop a foundation to

In 2015 Ball State mission “aspires to be the

landscapes, this literature review will examine

generate design methods and principles that

model of the most student-centered and

three specific areas of campus design and

result in a socially active, safe, and protected

community-engaged of the 21st century

the relationship to the proposed pedestrian

pedestrian and bicyclist corridor while

public research universities, transforming

greenway on the Ball State University Campus.

maintain vehicular service and emergency

entrepreneurial learners into impactful leaders

access through the heart of the Ball State

– committed to improving the quality of life

University Campus.

for all.” (Ball State University). This mission

The research presented herein

This literature review will first examine

place making strategies for campus landscapes

suggests that learning beyond the classroom is

by investigating the components of design

that formulate distinctive, memorable,

PLACE MAKING STRATEGIES FOR CAMPUS

crucial in order to fully develop academically,

sociable, and multi-programmable spaces

LANDSCAPES:

emotionally, and physically as students and

within the larger campus environment that

future professionals. The importance of place

can be used by students and the community.

but as soon as a place is created to house

making will foster the mission of Ball State

Second, this literature review will investigate

the institution, the idea becomes grounded

University beyond the classroom and within

“Most institutions start as an idea,

the physical campus environment in order

of the campus environment. As Dober in

and a sense of identity with the institution

to “bring together diverse people and their

“Environmental Design” outlines how our

and with one another that persists long after

ideas in an environment that creates potential

attitude towards the spatial environment

a person’s immediate physical relationship

for intellectual and social exchange.” (Hetz

result in the design of space, Daniel Kenny,

with the institution has ended.” (47). This

55).

Richard Dumont, and Ginger Kenny describe

unique proposition D. Kenny, R. Dumont,

section aim to demonstrate how emotions

how campus design and spaces “do not

and G. Kenny have between the emotional

and behaviors, programing, density, and

merely create a functional space, mood, or

attachment to place making designs within the

formulations catalyze the support for creation

atmosphere; they facilitate certain behaviors”

campus a university resides in demonstrates

of place within the campus environment and

in “Mission and Place” (54). These desired

the power of how the physical environment

foster opportunities for interaction.

behaviors, catalyzed through understanding

plays a major role in influencing our feelings,

the contextual environment and the resulting

behavior interaction, engagement, and sense

to campus design literature, states that

place making design, can help facilitate the

of community (G. Kenny, D. Kenny, R. Dumont

the development and realization of place

mission of the university within the campus

54). Moreover, this proposition demonstrates

making within the campus environment

landscape (D. Kenny, R. Dumont, G. Kenny 28).

the importance of place making strategies

does not require a specific set of perceptions

Moreover, attitude towards the environment

that reflect the mission and objectives of

or formulations, but rather beginning with

and the place created in return, results in

the university. Richard Dober agrees with

attitude in regards “to arranging physical

desired user behavior reflecting the mission

G. Kenny, D. Kenny, and R. Dumont as he

elements in the environment to achieve a

of Ball State University as the most student-

describes this as the “landscape effect” in

satisfying and rewarding human habition.”

centered and community-engaged 21st

which our emotional reactions to the form,

according to his work “Environmental Design”

century public research universities.

size, quality, and character inspire our identity,

(175). Our attitude towards place making

attachment, and behavior in relation towards

begins with understanding the physical

to achieve a sense of place results in desired

a campus environment which represents the

environment and thus representing it through

user behaviors which allow emotions to

mission and objectives within the university in

tangible designs that reflect the mission and

be facilitated by the user experience and

which it resides (Campus Landscape: Forms,

objectives of Ball State University. I believe

attachment to the place. As D. Kenny, R.

Functions, and Features 67).

these attitudes towards understanding the

Dumont, and G. Kenny state in the book

environment inspire place making design

“Mission and Place”: “we are striving for a

environment to facilitate desired behaviors

that responds to social and cultural context

warm feeling in the heart about one’s fellow

and reflect the mission of the university

Place making strategies outlined in this

Richard Dober, one major contributor

The design of physical environment

Place making within the campus

calls for the implementation of strategic

gathering and/or programing opportunities

restrictions for campus programing or uses in

programing along the pedestrian corridor and

by the addition of buildings, pathways, and

the article “Big Plans on Campus”. Moreover,

designed spaces within this visual sequence

landscape features is also acceptable for

the need for control in regards to programing

through campus. Programing, originally

increasing place making opportunities.

is appreciated by the campus management.

defined by Arthur Shurtleff in 1930, is intended

However allowing for flexibility provides an

to “provide inviting natural informal gather,

sense of place within the campus environment

opportunity to catalyze unrealized uses and

intimately related to the instructional areas –

requires a need for flexibility, yet control

potential programing elements to change

so that the academic aura prevails amongst

seamlessly woven together within the

the way we view campus landscapes and

the students the live long day.” (Campus

campus fabric of a pedestrian corridor. Fox

create unique places that reflect the mission

Landscape: Forms, Functions and Features 57).

example at the University of Cincinnati, a

and values of the university like G. Kenny, D.

The act of gathering in this sense represents

recent public space project called “Main

Kenny, and R. Dumont outline. Programing

the core idea of place making on a university

Street” allowed for a complete transformation

for flexibility fosters an environment where

campus. Since programing results in the

of programing, providing excitement and

“students can learn wherever they have

gathering of individuals for various purposes,

energy throughout the day and evening on

opportunities for intersection; and the more

place making must allow for the function

campus. As John Bach in UC Magazines

chances for running into friends, teachers,

of space and activity of space to intersect.

article “Meet Me on Main Street” describes

fellow students, or colleagues, the better” (G.

Dober also goes on to say how the existing

the idea that “the whole metamorphosis is

Kenny, D. Kenny, R. Dumont 28). Programing

elements of the campus environment such as

really a transformation that makes the pulse

this pedestrian greenway for flexibility and

pathways and buildings can inspire design in

of the university much more electrified and

control simultaneously will result in increased

a way that “the environment is not imposed

active instead of passive. Now if you go out

sociability, user activity, site functionality,

by the designer on the basis of archaic

there, it is incredible. There are corridors

and multi-seasonal use within the campus

notions of scale and perspective but surfaces

of opportunity and spaces of destination.”

landscape.

from a regard for how people live in their

However, according to the Project for Public

environment, affect it, and are conditioned

Spaces, a leading organization devoted to

also influenced by the development and

by it.” (Environmental Design 180). While this

creating public spaces that build a sense of

understanding of density within the campus

statement remains of great value in methods

community and places, states that many

environment and how it plays are crucial

of place making design, it can be inferred that

universities have concerns about non-

strategy in place making within the campus

using judgment to modify or provide new

traditional uses and have in place many

environment. Much of programing is the

Programing a site to accomplish a

These programing efforts are

act of gathering together on the basis of

for spontaneous interaction and exchange of

practicing the design strategy combining

some form of activity that is catalyzed by

ideas, which are fundamental to collegiality

triangulation and density through “clustering

the process of interaction according to

and to interdisciplinary communication.”

activities together to create a busy, dynamic

G. Kenny, D. Kenny,and R. Dumont (110).

(111). I believe this is a key concept to a

place for many different types of people

Moreover, interaction is aided through

thriving campus community and creating a

at different times of day.” according to the

density, which is a sense of “compactness

sense of place within the pedestrian corridor.

Project for Public Spaces article “Big Plans

and vibrancy [which] are functions of many

Buildings within close proximity on campuses

on Campus”. Through a critical application

things, including the visual context and the

create environments that are memorable,

of programing for flexibility and control as

landscape, architecture, and topography”

inviting, actively programed, and ripe for

previously mentioned, along with increased

(G. Kenny, D. Kenny, R. Dumont 105). Place

social interaction according to the Project

density, place making efforts can become fully

making relies on this aspect in order to foster

for Public Spaces article “10 Principles for

realized along this campus pedestrian corridor.

interaction and programing efforts within the

Public Squares”. Much like on the Ball State

space. The situating of pathways, buildings,

University campus this project will “look for

presented in the literature previously

and landscape features, existing or proposed,

opportunities to infill within the existing built

analyzed are grounded through research and

can increase the density in order to amplify

campus framework to enhance proximity,

observation, there must be credit given to

the creation of space along the pedestrian

intensity of use, sense of place, and vitality” in

the formulations that also provide a place

corridor.

an effort to create new sense of place within

making strategy. Considerations, such as

this pedestrian corridor (G. Kenny, D. Kenny,

Dober’s propositions on designing through

strategies previously listed, the proposal of

R. Dumont 118). In addition to these methods

understanding our attitude towards the

new buildings will increase proximity and will

Gains, who wrote “The Campus as a Work

physical environment and thus inspiring site

formulate new spaces within the landscape

of Art” states that we should look past our

behaviors, should be taken into account when

that creates a thriving pedestrian corridor

attachment with slick facades and not forget

analyzing place making strategies. However,

through heavily trafficked fully utilized space

that the “walls are not an end, but merely the

the ideas of using formulations to aid the

of interaction and programing. As G. Kenny,

means of creating space.” (7). Agreeing with

development of space remain effective in

D. Kenny, R. Dumont outline in their section

G. Kenny, D. Kenny, R. Dumont, and Gains,

providing the essential components to the

regarding density, “This proximity improves

the Project for Public Spaces article “Big Plans

creation of space. Michael Herx stresses in

the chances that people will cross paths with

on Campus” goes on to outline how creating

his book “Campus Landscape: Planning and

other people, thus increasing the likelihood

places is not just creating new facilities, its

Design” focuses more on that the formulation

In addition to the place making

While place making strategies

of site furnishings such as seating, tables and

Landscape: Planning and Design”. To reflect

with the synthesis of place making strategies

chairs, campus art, bicycle parking, shade

the mission, values and objectives of Ball State

previously mentioned through an examination

devises, signage, and other various amenities

University this pedestrian corridor system will

of building arrangement and orientation,

are the core of creating memorable spaces

accomplish the need for a revitalized campus

learning and knowledge centers, movement

and campus character. While aesthetics

landscape experience. Encompassing the

and circulation, and landscape characteristics

will be analyzed further into this review,

emotions of site users, programing elements,

within the campus environment.

these formulations of basic necessities must

increased density, and formulations of active

When considering building arrangement

harmonize the desired or existing campus

social space, this pedestrian corridor will

and orientation on a university campus, it

character. I believe while Herx proposition

create a memorable experience that reveals

remains hallmark that designers understand

on the importance of formulation to create

the true vibrancy of the Ball State University as

that the spaces created within the campus

space are valid, G. Kenny, D. Kenny, R.

an institution and the environment in which it

environment are reactive to the surrounding

Dumont, Dober, and Gains must stances

resides.

physical environment according to Thomas Gains who wrote “The Campus as a Work of

previously mentioned must also be taken into account when holistically understanding the

CAMPUS DESIGN METHODS AND

Art” (2). This is due to the resulting placement

development of spaces within the campus

PRINCIPLES:

of buildings and various other structures

environment.

In order to facilitate the development of place

that in return shape the spaces within the

Ultimately, I believe at the core of these places

making strategies previously mentioned, the

campus environment which were previously

making strategies for campus landscapes is the existing campus environment, specifically

mentioned in this review (Gains 12). This

idea for interaction between students, faculty,

along the proposed pedestrian corridor must

pedestrian corridor demands the examination

and the community in order to inspire a sense

provide the elements to create memorable

of campus facilities, such as proposed building

of place and create a memorable destination

and distinctive spaces within the large

entrances and additions to create “well-

environment that resides within the campus

campus environmental context. Moreover,

proportioned areas bounded with grace and

landscape. In return these strategies will

this section will discuss the methods and

consistent style.” (Gains 2). David Neuman,

“define the campus character and improve the

principles of campus design in relation to the

who wrote “College and University Facilities”,

livability and comfort of outdoor spaces by

larger environmental campus context, beyond

agrees with Gains in that due to the addition

providing places to gather, study and socialize,

specific place making strategies within the

of improved building arrangement and

thus improving collegiate communication and

pedestrian corridor. Examining these methods

entrance formations, improved connectivity

interaction” as Hetz mentions in “Campus

and principles of campus design will assist

and circulation results within the campus

environment that responds to existing and

relationship of adaptability to the future

21st century activities in regards to social

proposed adjacent uses and activities (317).

needs and desires of users within the campus

engagement, research, learning, studying,

Through building arrangement, I believe

environment. This adaptability ultimately adds

and collaboration according to Neuman (105).

this strengthened sense of connectedness

value to a facility by extending the longevity

Moving into the future we must understand

amplifies user awareness and visibility into the

and life of a particular design for future

that “the nature of the library as a building

environment that has resulted from designed

decades of technological and social evolution

type is now richer, encompassing more

conditions both physical and natural within the

of site users (Neuman 316).

functions and a wider range of services.”

campus as outlined by Gains and Neuman.

Continuing the conversation regarding

(Neuman 105). The Project for Public Spaces

Along with this concept of building

buildings and their role in shaping the campus

agrees in that the idea that “there are plenty

arrangement and orientation, a key design

environment, knowledge and learning centers

of unsung libraries that embody a very

element when considering the proposal for

will be examined of libraries to understand

different and more compelling vision of what

building additions or modifications is the

their role within the campus fabric. Bracken

it means to be a public place.” (Cynthia Nikitin,

concept for the desired function of flexibility

Library, which remains one of the leading

Josh Jackson ). A new vision to capitalize

in regards to building program according to

learning and knowledge centers on campus,

on unrealized potential for the formation of

Fireston in the article “Adaptive Re-use and

is a social learning and technological campus

active indoor and outdoor space in junction

Space Allocation” within the book “Campus

building that is to be examined and re-

with Bracken Library has resulted because of

Planning: Redesign, Redevelopment, Re-thing” imagined along this proposed pedestrian

this proposed pedestrian corridor. As a result,

which agrees with Neuman on this concept

corridor in regards to its orientation and

the inviting relationship with an underutilized

of flexibility (316). Along with arrangement

arrangement with the pedestrian corridor.

façade of Bracken Library and the surrounding

that fosters interaction, gathering, and access

Libraries on college campuses are the result

physical and natural outdoor environment

to the landscape “every proposed campus

of Thomas Jefferson’s vision to “see the

will be facilitated by this proposed pedestrian

plan or building should consider flexibility for

library as the main feature of a campus; it

corridor while maintain service and emergency

future change as the most important criteria

was also Jefferson who introduced research

access.

of design.” According to Fireston’s article

as a function of the university.” (Gains 14).

“Adaptive Re-use and Space Allocation” (74).

Since these historic visions were adopted at

and learning centers, the physical features

These concepts for flexibility can also be

college campuses across the nation, dramatic

of the campus environment can degrade or

mirrored within the spaces of the landscape

advances have been made in public opinion

promote learning within the campus landscape

which in return create a strengthened

regards to how a library can facilitate diverse

according to Carney Strange and James

In addition to building arrangement

Banning who wrote “Educating by Design:

arrangement of proposed campus building

contain clear, open, and distinctive landmarks,

Creating Campus Learning Environments That

additions and the flexibility of use will allow

features, and formulations that cause safe

Work” (31). The formulation of functional

for the development of cohesive spaces for

exploration and user location awareness.

aspects of campus, such as this proposed

interaction within this visually sequential

On the contrary, mystery within the campus

pedestrian greenway and the addition of

pedestrian corridor.

circulation network allows for an invitation

building entrances and floor space, improve

These proposed additions and modifications

to site users to engage in discovery, and

circulation, density, connectedness, and

to the layout of campus buildings and their

adventure into understanding what lies

allow for the creation of active social space

respective uses call for the methods and

beyond what they perceive to see within

as previously outlined in this literature

principles of circulation and movement

the landscape (Strange & Banning 28).

review. Design decisions centered on these

within the campus environment to be also

These concepts agree on the premise that

principles create “non-verbal messages that

examined. Campus movement systems

encouraging movement through a sequential

users of the campus environment then read.”

are described by Richard Dober in Campus

spatial system will enhance the pedestrian

according to Strange and Banning (28). The

Landscape: Forms, Function, and Features as

experience through the campus environment

Project for Public Spaces article “Libraries

“orchestrating visual sequences along campus

and spaces.

That Matter” article agrees with Strange and

paths is akin to the art of cinema. Foreground

Banning in that this created perception fosters

and background, close-ups and panoramas,

be designed in was that promote intersections

the development of public opinion away

space opening and closing – many of these

of pedestrian networks in order to catalyze

from believing libraries as inward-focused,

perceptible and delightful impressions of

informal meetings, events, and conversations

and instead thinking towards libraries as a

campus landscape while in motion or at rest

to take place within the natural and built

welcoming “front porch” of activity and social

can be predetermined.” (117). This proposition

campus environment as outlined by Richard

engagement (Libraries That Matter – Project

regarding campus circulation and pedestrian

Dober in “Campus Design” (216). As previously

for Public Spaces). This design approach

movement will remain as the driving force

mentioned, building arrangement, the

allows the campus community to understand

behind this proposed pedestrian greenway.

promotion of flexible use, and the creation

that “we gain knowledge not just from the

Agreeing with this concept, Strange and

of inviting entrances to learning centers and

page, but also from our interactions with

Banning describe the desire for legibility

academic buildings rely on these fundamental

other people (Houston Library Plaza: Building

and mystery within the campus circulation

design formulations of circulation networks

Knowledge, Building Community – Project

network in order to formulate the cinema-

to remain effective in creating distinctive and

for Public Spaces). Together, the appropriate

like visual experience. Legible environments

inviting campus environment that contains

Circulation and movement must also

spaces within and along the pedestrian

vistas along the way, the appreciation of

crucial that proposed building arrangement

corridor. This is due to the fact that “the

spatial sequence in moving from area to area,

and orientation catalyze the development of

quality of the campus design overall is

special night lighting to indicate the safest way

spaces within the campus environment that

directly related to the location, control,

to traverse campus – these are the by-products

complement existing natural and physical

and appearance of the circulation systems”

of attentive campus landscape design.”

elements of campus. This method of design

(Campus Design 207). In return, Strange and

(117). I believe this component of effective

will assist with the strategic reconfiguration

Banning state that users will begin to decode

landscape design is a crucial factor in creating

of campus learning and knowledge centers

the nonverbal messages embedded in the

a successful pedestrian corridor that responds

in relation to spatial development along

buildings, pathways, signs, and symbols; all

to the sense of sight and movement within

the pedestrian corridor through campus.

of which aid in the development of place-

the campus environment. Dober continues

This movement and circulation requires the

making strategies outlined in section one

to describe the landscape of a campus as a

development of a clear visual spatial user

of this literature review (31). Moreover,

form of art stating that “Plant materials can

experience that formulates a distinctive

circulation systems should instill interest,

be used in a painterly fashion, adding color

character throughout this narrative

curiosity, and exploration through movement

and texture to architectural compositions,

environment of a campus landscape.

and continuous interpretation of space

or as aesthetic objects in their own right.”

resulting in a physical and emotional reaction

In his book “Campus Design” (169). This

SITE SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY AND

to the distinctive larger environment being

statement brings attention to the importance

SAFETY:

experienced (Campus Landscape, 112).

of a planting design and plan that plays into

the composition of a campus environmental

previously examined regarding the appropriate

principals previously examined must be

aesthetic. Moreover, a sense of identity and

location, program, arrangement, and

supported by the one common plane in

pride can be woven throughout the campus

design for this proposed pedestrian and

which the campus environment resides; the

fabric within the environment and spaces of

bicycle corridor presents a conflict between

landscape. With the creation of this pedestrian

the proposed campus pedestrian corridor.

clashing systems of pedestrian movement

corridor comes the need for an understanding

and vehicular access for campus services,

of landscape in mean described by Richard

corridor will in effect change the landscape of

operations, and emergencies. These clashes

Dober in “Campus Landscape: Forms,

Ball State University based off these methods

in functional systems are the result of several

Functions, and Features” as “the immediate

and principles previously outlined in this

decades of incremental growth that have

view of surrounds, the glimpses of views and

section of the literature review. It remains

caused many spatial and circulation issues

These campus design methods and

The development of this pedestrian

The complex nature of the literature

within the campus environment. The resulting

while maintaining service and emergency

This creative merging of systems can provide

segmented growth over time has created a

access requirements seamlessly designed into

a solution in regards to clashing site functions

fragmented pedestrian experience through

the pedestrian environment. This strategy is

and circulation systems through carefully

what were once “back of house” locations.

outlined in the University of Cincinnati Master

planned and considered campus landscapes.

However, today these “back of house” service

Plan 2000 completed by Hargreaves Associates

Movement orchestrated through design

and access locations are now situated in the

states that “The service access areas within

methods mentioned above however, must

heart of campus circulation, activity and

the campus interior will not appear to be

still obey the necessary codes regarding

service access for several campus facilities.

roads; they will look like pedestrian ways, but

emergency access to campus facilities. As

The literature presented here will examine

will accommodate service vehicles with the

the University of Cincinnati Master Plan 2000

how to systematically arrange and protect the

proper paving support, truck turning radii, and

outlines, proper paving support, truck turning

pedestrian experience, while simultaneously

access width and length.” (49). This creative

radii, and access width and length must

maintaining vehicular service access for

merging of systematic needs for buildings

be considered and carefully implemented

campus facilities.

and campus facilities is agreed upon by the

when protecting the pedestrian experience,

authors of the Iowa State University campus

while also formulating a successful service

site transition and design for a protected

master plan completed by Johnson and Roy,

access system for vehicular traffic (49).

pedestrian experience within the systematic

Inc. by presenting the idea that “Service

Together these considerations for code

operations of vehicular service locations is

is maintained to all buildings by allowing

requirements outlined in the appendix, and

“Main Street” at the University of Cincinnati,

service vehicles in certain instances to use

the proposed creative merging of protected

located just north of downtown Cincinnati,

major pedestrian walkways to gain access to

and maintained circulation systems will foster

Ohio. As John Bach states in the article “Meet

buildings on the interior of the campus.” (40).

the development of a functional and efficient

Me on Main Street” from UC Magazine, “Today

Moreover, placing priority designing for the

pedestrian corridor. Moreover, the functional

it is foot traffic instead of cars traversing the

protected pedestrian experience both visually

service needs of campus facilities can be

area. The road is gone; walkways, gardens and

and functionally, while seamlessly engineering

maintained while not compromising the

new buildings have supplanted what was once

access the necessary access for service and

pedestrian experience.

Campus Drive.” However, the roadway has

emergency requirements for campus facilities

technically not been removed, but rather re-

will formulate a desired design that works for

programed and designed to first and foremost

all campus users and their related day to day

function as a protected pedestrian experience

operations.

One example for examining the

speed lead to a blossoming of shared and

CONSIDERATIONS FOR PEDESTRIAN AND

automobile drivers to disobey traffic rules and

BICYCLIST SAFETY:

regulations (Dober 139), the need for enhanced livable spaces within the campus environment.

safety features such as speed and roadway

While driving at the speeds of pedestrians is

pedestrian corridor project will be the

reduction within this pedestrian corridor

not applicable for all traffic conditions, there

pedestrian user, a careful examination in

remain hallmark in creating a functional, safe,

remain many situations within this pedestrian

regards to the considerations for pedestrian

and efficient user experience.

corridor where service/access roads intersect

safety and accessibility will be taken into

or come in some form of contact with high

account. The pedestrian, traveling by foot

pedestrian safety considerations Anastasia

volumes of pedestrian activity. This suggests

or bicycle, will intersect several roadways,

Loukaitou-Siders, Aditya Medury, & Camille

that a safe and desirable speed should be

access drives, and parking locations within

Fink who authored “Crashes on an Near

proposed to insure pedestrian and bicycle

the proposed project site location calling

College Campuses: A Comparative Analysis of

safety remains a priority.

for a focused review of literature regarding

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety” believe that

design consideration to improve safety and

there are two rather ambiguous categories

State university parking lots, service/access

accessibility. As Haines, Kochevar, & Surti

of considerations associated with pedestrian

drives, and parking structures stands at 20

who analyzed campus traffic problems state

and bicycling crashes. These include: traffic

mile per hour according to the Ball State

that pedestrians and bicyclists should be the

characteristics; such as speed, mode share

University Parking Services website. This

highest priority when campus design decisions

and traffic volume, and built environment

speed along with high volumes of pedestrian

are in the making. While many researchers

characteristics; road design, land uses,

interaction poses great risk to pedestrians

believe the separation of pedestrians,

pedestrian circulation, and medians (200).

and bicyclist within this proposed pedestrian

bicyclists, motorists, and transit services

Beginning with traffic characteristic of speed

corridor. In similar campus design situations,

on campus reduce interactions and conflict

Eric Dumbaugh, who authored “Designing

Dumbaugh states that “speeds under 10 miles

potential (Dobbs, 2009; Guyton, 1983), Dobbs,

for the Safety of Pedestrians, Cyclists, and

per hour not only ensure that drivers have

who researched pedestrian and bicycle

Motorists in Urban Environments” believes

time to brake in response to a potential traffic

safety within the college campus landscape

that designers must “force vehicles to travel

conflict, they also appear to make drivers more

outlines that spatial constraints, however,

at the speed of the pedestrian by creating

accommodating to other roadway users.”

often prevent such modal separation within

environments designed to enhance safety”

(84). In addition to this proposed roadway

the campus landscape environment. With the

(83). Moreover, these spaces of high

speed within area of high pedestrian volume

desire for college bicyclists, pedestrians, and

pedestrian interaction and low average traffic

Garder, who completed a study of driver

Because the primary focus for this

To begin an examination into

The current speed limit within all Ball

behavior in Main, found that traffic speeds of

environment characteristics such too. One

the importance of roadway width reduction

10 mph or less automobile drivers yielded to

such consideration of the built environment

in relation to pedestrian safety. In addition

pedestrians interacting with roadway surfaces

that will remain a focus for enhancing safety

to these findings by Dai, Campblee, Zeger,

one hundred percent of the time (Garder,

within this pedestrian corridor will be the

Huang, & Cynecki, found that “while about

2001). This proposed traffic speed of 10 miles

examination of campus roadway design.

forty percent of crashes occur at intersections,

per hour for all roadways and service/access

Dajun Dai, who authored the study on “The

the majority happened at other locations

drives that come in contact with this proposed

Impact of Built Environment on Pedestrian

such as mid-block crosswalks, sidewalks,

pedestrian corridor can dramatically improve

Crashes and the identification of Crash

and parking lots” in their article “Crashes on

pedestrian safety. Adding to the benefit of

Cluster on an Urban University Campus”

and Near College Campuses: A Comparative

lowering traffic speed where automobile

stresses the importance of street width and

Analysis of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety.”

traffic comes in contact with the pedestrian

the relationship between pedestrian safety.

These findings build off of what Dai has

corridor, Anderson, who analyzed pedestrian

Dai state that the majority of intersection

presented by highlighting the importance of all

interaction with automobile traffic stated that

crashes between pedestrians and automobiles

forms of automobile and pedestrian conflicts

“Should one [an accident] occur, it would also

happened where street widths were greater

beyond the typical intersection. This is an

be extremely unlikely to lead to serious injury

than seventy feet in width. This remains an

important safety consideration due to the fact

or death.” (Anderson et al., 1997). Ultimately,

important factor in reconsidering the width

that this proposed pedestrian corridor will

these traffic conflicts according to Dumbaugh

of roadways located within the scope of

come in contact with many surface parking

“are an inherent part of urban environments.”

this project due to the current conditions of

lots and lengthy access drives.

(84). Moreover, the necessity to address

roadways within the campus environment

While Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, Aditya

traffic consequences requires automobile

reaching widths of more than sixty feet and

Medury, Camille Fink state that there is not

traffic to travel at appropriate speeds to

access drives spanning over one hundred and

a one design solution fixes all formulated

insure pedestrian safety within this proposed

ten feet in total width.

response to all the behavioral and

pedestrian corridor.

A dramatic reduction in roadway width while

environmental components that result in

still allowing the fictional aspects of campus to

pedestrian conflicts on campus the Federal

speeds taken into account in order to

operate can increase pedestrian safety. Dain

Highway Administration believes that “to be

increase pedestrian and bicycle conflict

also mentions that zero pedestrian crashes

safe for all users, such paths [multi-modal

with automobile traffic, there must also be

were reported in a study that monitored street

corridors] should provide adequate width and

given appropriate consideration to the built

widths of eighteen feet or less, suggesting

appropriate pavements for everyone, have

With considerations for lowered

separate lanes for bicyclists and pedestrians,

CONCLUSION:

the research presented above, will create a

and signs that clearly state the rules of

To conclude this literature review, it critical

pedestrian and bicyclist corridor through the

travel.” (Federal Highway Administration,

to remember the value and relevancy each

heart of campus that in order to solve several

2014). These types of considerations will

section within this document contributes

safety and site functionality issues, create

greatly benefit the increased pedestrian

to establishing a successful pedestrian

sense of place within the campus environment,

safety and contribute to the design of

corridor design intervention into the existing

increase sociability, and promote a college-

this pedestrian corridor system though

contextual landscape of Ball State University.

community environment that fosters the

collectively understanding the transportation

This currently fragmented visual and physical

overall mission of Ball State University within

needs of all site users. While eliminating all

spatial sequence extending over one third

the campus landscape.

safety concerns is an unobtainable goal, the

of a mile through the heart of the Ball State

suggestions and considerations from the

University campus encompasses a forgotten

research presented in this section will aid in

landscape that contains the potential to

the development of design considerations

develop a cultural and socially vibrant series

regarding the physical built campus

of places within campus environment context.

environment. All forms of design; roadway

Together, the examination of place making

infrastructure, pedestrian infrastructure and

strategies within campus landscapes, the

streetscape will work together to formulate

investigation into campus design methods

this pedestrian corridor into becoming a

and principles, and understanding the

leading destination on campus that allows for

considerations for pedestrian and bicyclist

a safe and efficient pedestrian experience.

safety will contribute to the successful realization into the potential within these underutilized and unsafe linear open spaces within the campus environment. In addition, a protected pedestrian experience will be developed while seamlessly maintaining all service access and functional needs for campus facilities throughout the pedestrian corridor. Development of a creative solution through 19

THE PROBLEM

2 21

2.0 THE PROBLEM 2.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT This study proposed to design a pedestrian and bicycle corridor through the heart of the Ball State University campus in Muncie, Indiana that focused on creating a sense of place, increasing pedestrian and bicyclist safety, and reconfiguring the existing campus environment to increase sociability. This study also examined the need for a protected pedestrian experience, while simultaneously maintaining all service and functional needs of campus facilities. The design of campus landscapes, pedestrian networks, and university facilities in terms of design and function are investigated in order to effectively incorporate the existing campus context and character with the proposed pedestrian corridor design solution. In addition to a landscape intervention that increases connectivity and sense of place, options for incorporating a college-community hub for learning and recreation have also been investigated.

2.2 SUB - PROBLEMS •

How is a “sense of place” created within an underutilized linear segment of a college

campus environment that contains heavy pedestrian circulation and presence of many

academic buildings?

•

How can a pedestrian and bicycle corridor improve circulation and connectivity within

a physically and visually fragmented spine of underutilized open space within the

campus environment.

•

How are functional service needs such as garbage pickup, service drives, and loading

docks addressed in complex pedestrian and vehicular situations on campus while

maintaining a protected pedestrian experience?

•

How can campus facilities such as libraries and academic buildings be modified to

improve the visual aesthetic and functionality in order to increase sociability and place

making? •

How can a pedestrian corridor improve safety, sociability, and programing

opportunities throughout a series of fragmented spaces over one third of a mile long?

•

What design features and amenities are needed for a pedestrian corridor that honors

campus history and culture through design narratives and motifs?

2.3 DEFINITION OF TERMS Greenway Refers to the undeveloped recreational land within a community (genera) that contains a systematic network of multi-modal transportation options to increase mobility in a safe and effective manner (the differentia) Corridor Refers to an extended pathway within the landscape (genera) that contains a sequential spatial experience through various segments of the landscape containing amenities, points of interest, and services to site users (the differentia) Sociability Refers to the quality of being conversable (genera) that is fostered and promoted through physical and psychological design elements within the landscape (the differentia) Programing Refers to the planned and coordinated activities or uses (genera) that are provided within the landscape to facilitate site activity and function throughout various seasons and times of day.

2.4 DELIMITATIONS •

This project does not include sources of funding

•

This project does not include a completed set of construction details and specifications

•

This project does not include a detailed master plan for the entire Ball State campus

•

This project does not include a maintenance plan

•

This project does not include a detailed examination and analysis of all below surface

conditions such as utilities and soils

2.5 ASSUMPTIONS •

Parking structures can be eliminated, relocated, or modified

•

Surface parking lots can be modified, adjusted, or eliminated

•

Undeveloped land as defined by the project limit line is available for developed use

•

All proposed development will follow local, state, and federal code enforcement

•

Ball State University will contain ownership of the site and oversee maintenance

•

Land will be available for public use year round with the exception of special events

•

Service and operational access will be maintained for all campus buildings

THE PROJECT

3 27

3.0 THE PROJECT 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE Due to several decades of growth at Ball State University, what was once the back of house spaces and access drives for campus buildings has since become engulfed within the larger campus environment of heavy thoroughfare pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Oversized roadways and inconsistent pedestrian circulation plague this underutilized linear segment of campus that has resulted from decades of incremental growth. Moreover, this clash of circulation networks creates unsafe pedestrian and bicyclist conditions along with poor sociability and programing opportunities within this fragmented spine of underutilized open space within the campus environment. Research shows creating safe and inviting conditions that bring together diverse people and their ideas in an environment creates potential for intellectual and social exchange remains a critical component to every college experience (Herz 55). Moreover, this incremental visual and physical spatial sequence extending over one third of a mile through the heart of the Ball State University campus encompasses a forgotten landscape that fails to capture the cultural and social vibrancy of the campus environment context. Containing some of the largest academic buildings, residence halls, and thoroughfare pathways on campus, this north / south spatial sequence through campus withholds prime real estate that remains largely underutilized. Lacking a cohesive and complementary ambiance with the surrounding campus, this disjointed and fragmented space contains potential to become an exciting addition to the cultural landscape of Ball State University. This project aims to promote active and engaging outdoor spaces within the campus environment while maintaining functional systems and service access to all campus buildings. Development of a creative solution for a pedestrian and bicyclist corridor through the heart of campus will solve issues in terms of pedestrian safety, site functionality, and create sense of place within the campus environment. Moreover, this proposed design solution will enhance sociability and promote a collegecommunity environment that fosters the overall mission of Ball State University within the campus landscape. 28

3.2 PROJECT GOALS Goal 1: Sense of Place Create a sense of place and identity within the Ball State University campus environment for students, community members, faculty, and staff to enjoy throughout all seasons.

Objective: Bring people and ideas together through the design of specific spaces along

the pedestrian corridor that encourage interaction and social gathering within the campus

environment

Objective: Provide strategic intersections of activity and circulation within the pedestrian

corridor that promote social interaction

Objective: Provide multiple activities and uses that serve the university and community

throughout all seasons

Objective: Offer new and distinctive site amenities such as seating elements, performance

space, lighting design, and wayfinding signage

Goal 2: Circulation Establish a new pedestrian and bicyclists circulation network and landscape design that relates in contextual methods to existing, proposed, or modified buildings and parking areas within the campus environment.

Objective: Provide a dynamic thoroughfare pedestrian and bicycle pathway that serves as

a bonding agent between existing and proposed campus building

Objective: Remove or modify existing campus buildings and parking locations that exists

within the project boundaries

Objective: Provide a distinctive planting design that orchestrates movement and

emphasizes strong visual elements within the campus environment

Goal 3: Safety Promote and foster pedestrian and bicyclists safety in relation to vehicular circulation conflicts while maintaining essential building access and service functionality.

Objective: Funnel pedestrian and bicycle traffic in ways that promote intersecting

roadways at strategic locations that provide optimal visibility and low speed levels

Objective: Eliminate or alter vehicular circulation patters and paved surface areas where

vehicular circulation is permitted within the pedestrian corridor

Goal 4: System Functionality Enhance and maintain service operations of campus buildings while protecting the pedestrian experience

Objective: Provide strategic vehicular access throughout the site without compromising

the flow and visual progression of the pedestrian circulation network

Objective: Mitigate systematic conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians throughout the

corridor sequence

Objective: Provide inconspicuous and visually pleasing design elements that enhance the

visual and functional aspects throughout the pedestrian and bicycle corridor

3.3 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCERNS Sense of Ownership Because this site is located within the heart of Ball State University, the sense of who owns this new pedestrian corridor will inherently contribute to its success. It is important to encourage visitors to treat this corridor as their personal back yard on campus. It is also important to promote a sense pride within the campus community as this special place becomes a legacy landscape. Visibility, Access, and Safety Since this project is being completed on a campus environment and will undoubtedly be used throughout all times a day and seasons, visibility access, and safety should remain a top priority to ensure a positive reputation is maintained throughout the corridor. Adequate lighting, sight lines, security, and regulations must be in place at all times. Service / Emergency Access Essential to the daily operations and the unplanned event of an emergency on campus, the site is capable and prepared to achieve the maximum safety and service capabilities. Seamlessly disguising and maintaining this access throughout the site will provide this essential component to the project without compromising the experience of the pedestrian. Topography A large portion of the site holds little in terms of topographic change. However, areas of diverse topographic change have been promoted as spaces that embrace this challenge and provide a solution that creates usable spaces that respond to the existing topography.

3.4 PROJECT CLIENTS Ball State University Board of Trustees The primary client and owner of this project is the Ball State University Board of Trustees. Since they determine the funding and approve all major decisions on campus the board of trustees are treated as the final check point in any development throughout this expansive project. Students, Faculty, Staff Also serving as the primary clients and site users; students, faculty, and staff are directly involved in nearly every component of this project since it is located in their back yard. These cohorts of individuals have direct contact with the site on a continual basis several times a day throughout the entire year. Community Residents of Muncie Since the site is situated in the larger framework of the local Muncie parkway and greenway system, the community residents of Muncie are encouraged to participate and engage with this new pedestrian corridor throughout the campus environment. Campus Visitors On a reoccurring basis visitors are continually coming and going from campus. They will inherently be experiencing this site and engaging with all the amenities and public spaces it provides throughout campus.

THE SETTING

4 35

4.0 THE SETTING 4.1 SITE SUMMARY The project site for this proposed corridor is a linear segment of campus totaling approximately six teen acres that connects the Student Recreation and Wellness Center to the Honors College House and the propose new south quad at Ball State University. Along the pedestrian corridor are several large academic buildings, residence halls, performance venues, and knowledge centers that create a unique opportunity for integration with this pedestrian corridor. Currently these fragmented and underutilized spaces remaining within the heart of the campus environment have the potential to become an opportunity for enhanced pedestrian flow, social interaction, safety, vehicular circulation. The major design challenges for this site are providing a protected pedestrian experience, while maintaining optimal site service access and functionality for campus facilities. Together, these challenges and opportunities allow for a unique design proposal to be created that seamlessly integrates campus facilities and the landscape together creating a new environment within the heart of campus that is functional, active, and inviting for all members of the college-community to enjoy throughout the year.

4.2 SITE HISTORY Ball State University located in Muncie, Indiana was founded in the year 1918 as a one building college set in the rural countryside. Nearly one hundred years later, after decades of incremental growth and expansion, Ball State University has grown to a size of more than seven hundred acres, with over one hundred campus buildings, and more than twenty thousand students that attend the university annually according to the Ball State University fact book. This project site is important because of its location within the heart of the campus environment where much of the recent incremental growth has taken place throughout the past several decades. As the landscape of Ball State University adjusts to these post development conditions, an issues of campus design becomes apparent and will be addressed through the proposed design of this pedestrian and bicyclists corridor. 36

Bet

hel

Recreation

Ave .

ELY

McKinley Ave.

Neely Ave.

Riverside Ave.

McKinley AVE.

CAP

Business

Noyer

Library

University Ave.

Parking

Pruis Figure 4.1.a

Ball State University Campus Scale 1” = 1,200’

0’

600’

Emens

Woodworth

1200’

Campus Project Site

RIVERSIDE AVE.

Honors Figure 4.1.b

Project Scope Area N Scale 1” = 400’

0’

200’

400’

Project Site

4.3 FRAMEWORK RELATIONSHIPS The local Muncie, Indiana community has been diligently working throughout the past decade to bring high quality and efficient greenway systems to the local residents. Currently Muncie, Indiana contains the Cardinal Greenway, White River Greenway, and Martin Street greenway connecting many segments of the local community fabric together. The future is even more exciting for the local community as more parkways and greenways are planned for local streets with the hope of better connecting the community. This new pedestrian and bicycle corridor fits within the context of the existing framework of local greenways and parkways that serve all members of the community. The most important aspect of this framework plan is how the Ball State University campus is now connected to the existing community greenway system. Moreover, an enhanced sense of community and identity is created between the local community fabric and Ball State University.

McKinley Ave.

ve.

PROJECT SITE

A ling

BALL STATE UNIVERSITY

Neely Ave.

Walnut St.

Riverside Ave.

Martin St. Greenway

University Ave.

Cardinal Greenway

Jckson St.

DOWNTOWN MUNCIE

Figure 4.3.a

Framework Plan N

2000 ft Scale 1” = 1,000’

0’

500’

1000’

4.4 SITE PHOTOS

4 3 2

1 Figure 4.4.a Visual Focus Area

Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map

4.4.1 SITE PHOTOS - WOODWORTH / EMENS AUDITORIUM 1. Looking north at Riverside Ave. 2. Woodworth Drive / Parking areas 3. Woodworth Drive / Parking areas 4. Entrance to Arts and Communication Bldg. 5. Looking east towards Park Hall

1 40

Figure 4.4.1a Looking north at Riverside Ave.

Figure 4.4.1d Entrance to Arts and Communication Building

Figure 4.4.1e Looking east towards Park Hall

3 Figure 4.4.1c Woodworth Drive / Parking Areas

2 Figure 4.4.1b Woodworth Drive / Parking Areas

4.4 SITE PHOTOS

4 5 3 2 1

Figure 4.4.a Visual Focus Area

Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map

4.4.2 SITE PHOTOS - BRACKEN LIBRARY / PRUIS HALL 1. Emens Parking Garage facade 2. Space between Pruis Hall / Parking Garage 3. Looking towards Pruis Hall / Bracken Library 4. East side of Pruis Hall / Bracken Library 5. Birds eye view of Pruis Hall / Bracken Library

1 42

Figure 4.4.2a Emens Parking Garage Facade

Figure 4.4.2d Space between Pruis Hall and Parking Garage

Figure 4.4.2e Birds eye view of Pruis Hall / Bracken Library

3 Figure 4.4.2c Looking towards Pruis Hall / Bracken Library

4 Figure 4.4.2b East side of Pruis Hall / Bracken Library

4.4 SITE PHOTOS

3 2

Figure 4.4.a Visual Focus Area

Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map

4.4.3 SITE PHOTOS - NOYER / BUSINESS BUILDING 1. East side of Miller College of Business 2. Lawn between Noyer / Business Building 3. West side of Noyer Hall 4. East side of Business Building 5. Noyer pick up / drop off looking south

5 44

Figure 4.4.3a Noyer Pick up / Drop off Looking south

Figure 4.4.3d East Side of Business Building

Figure 4.4.3e West side of Noyer Hall

2 Figure 4.4.3c Lawn between Noyer / Business Building

1 Figure 4.4.3b East side of Miller College of Business

4.4 SITE PHOTOS

5 4 3 2 1

Figure 4.4.a Visual Focus Area

Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map

4.4.4 SITE PHOTOS - CAP PARKING LOT 1. Noyer pick up / drop off 2. Business Building service area 3. CAP parking lot looking west 4. CAP parking lot looking east 5. Entrance to Recreation Center

1 46

Figure 4.4.4a Noyer pick up / Drop off

Figure 4.4.4d CAP parking lot looking east

Figure 4.4.4e Business Building service area

5 Figure 4.4.4c Entrance to Recreation Center

3 Figure 4.4.4b CAP parking lot looking west

4.5 SITE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 4.5.1 The Campus Environment

RECREATION

Examining the project scope and the physical environmental conditions within helps reveal the dynamic characteristics and potential this campus landscape has in achieving the goals of creating a network of dynamic public spaces and a new definitive heart of campus. The project scope, building uses, landmarks, spatial characteristics, and viewsheds will be investigated here.

DESIGN

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

BUSINESS

LIBRARY PARKING THEATRE

AUDITORIUM, ARTS,COMM, MUSIC

MUSIC

Figure 4.5.1a

HONORS

HEALTH SCIENCE

Figure 4.5.1b

Project Scope This linear segmented landscape containing 16 acres of currently underutilized space demonstrates an expansive north/south spine through campus.

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

Building Uses Project boundaries demonstrate the division between academic building to the west and residence all buildings to the east. This suggests that an appropriate transition zone is needed to accommodate the many spaces and uses throughout the proposed east mall.

Figure 4.4.1e

BELL TOWER FROG BABY

WATERFALL

ATRIUM PLAZA

Figure 4.5.1a

SCRAMBLE LIGHT

Figure 4.5.1c

Figure 4.5.1d

Campus Landmarks Project boundaries reveal the absence of any campus landmark within the proposed area to be redeveloped suggesting the need for a newly developed anchor point and legacy landscape on campus.

Figure 4.5.1e

Character of Space Locations throughout the site expand and contract in terms of spatial sequencing offering opportunities for breaks and transitions between the programmatic elements of the east mall.

Viewsheds Along with the character of space expanding and contracting throughout the corridor, viewsheds offer the opportunity to be amplified and celebrated within the larger corridor network of spaces.

4.5 SITE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 4.5.2 Pedestrian Circulation Examining the pedestrian circulation patterns throughout the site reveals the existing conditions as well revealing the dynamic conditions that play a role in developing a solution to this important aspect of the overall project. To achieve an optimal pedestrian circulation design solution, user paths of travel, major circulation patterns, nodes of activity, and campus roadways will be examined in this section.

Figure 4.5.2a

Figure 4.5.2b

User Paths of Travel Demonstrated pedestrian movement and paths of travel taken throughout campus within the project scope show the existing desired movement revealing the chaotic and randomness of pedestrian travel.

Paths of Travel Context Origin of travel for pedestrian movement result in the need to provide access not only for north/south travelers, but also the many east / west origin connections shown here.

Figure 4.5.2c

Major Circulation Pattern Observing the randomness and confusion associated with the existing paths of travel a clear hierarchy emerges resulting in the desired north/south and east/west connections throughout the site.

Figure 4.5.2d

Figure 4.5.2e

Major Nodes Points of complicated intersection created confusing and unorganized circulation patterns on campus. However these locations can serve as active and exciting areas for social interaction resulting in a sense of place and a dynamic campus landscape.

Campus Roadways Many paths of travel come into considerable contact and interaction with existing campus roadways and parking lots. This results in an unsafe and confusing pedestrian environment suggesting a need a more clear hierarchy of circulation.

4.5 SITE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 4.5.3 Vehicular Circulation Vehicular circulation remains critical to ensuring the functional needs of a campus environment from pick up / drop off, service assess and emergency access. Roadways, service drives, pedestrian paths of travel, and conflict areas are examined to determine design decisions that place the pedestrian first, while seamlessly maintaining all service and functional needs of the campus.

Figure 4.5.3a

Figure 4.5.3b

Campus Roadways Campus roadways serve as a critical component to achieving safety, service, and functional needs of campus. However, existing conditions demonstrate how pedestrian have no priority of roadways and parking lots. This suggests the need to retrofit and re-think the campus roadway circulation patterns.

Service Access Areas Service access locations, represented in red, demonstrate the need for vehicular access points throughout the entire project scope. This results in a clashing pedestrian and vehicular systems, calling for a clear hierarchy and division to be created between the two.

Figure 4.5.3c

Service Access Transport Current service access paths of travel overrun the project scope boundary resulting in inefficient and poor design within a campus landscape. This suggest the need to maintain service access while maintaining a protected pedestrian experience.

Figure 4.5.3d

Paths of Travel / Service Access Pedestrian circulation systems continually interact with roadways and expansive parking lots throughout the site resulting in diminished sense of place and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Figure 4.5.3e

Conflict Areas Areas of conflict demonstrate the clashing of pedestrian systems with vehicles resulting in the opportunity to re-examine the priority of circulation systems. This also suggest the need to maintain the high volume of pedestrian traffic in order to increase sociability, while maintaining all the vehicular functional needs.

4.5 SITE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 4.5.4 Campus Relationships

RECREATION

Campus relationships between vehicles, pedestrians, and the correlating facilities used by each will be critical in determining design decisions to ensure optimal levels of effectiveness concerning safety, sociability, efficiency, and functionality for all users of the campus environment.

DESIGN

BUSINESS

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

LIBRARY PARKING THEATRE

AUDITORIUM, ARTS,COMM, MUSIC

MUSIC

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

HONORS

HEALTH SCIENCE

Figure 4.5.4a

Figure 4.5.4b

Building Uses The level of prominent academic buildings, residence halls, and parking facilities suggest the critical level of effectiveness that must be achieved in the areas of campus relationships between vehicles, pedestrians and the related facilities.

Active Social Zones Building entrances and gathering spaces throughout campus provide a framework for a developed pedestrian corridor. Existing conditions in some areas lack this critical component that result in portions of the project to scope to remain underutilized and seeming lifeless.

ACADEMIC

RESIDENTIAL

ANCHOR POINT

ACADEMIC

TRANSITION

RESIDENTIAL

ACADEMIC

Figure 4.5.4c

Campus Anchor Point Lacking a sense of identity and core heart throughout the corridor network suggest the need for a developed anchor point. Existing conditions result in a landscape that is void of any defining characteristics or definitive space.

ACADEMIC

RESIDENTIAL

PARKING

ACADEMIC

RESIDENTIAL

ACADEMIC

ACADEMIC PARKING

TRANSITION

ACADEMIC

RESIDENTIAL

Building Relationships The division between academic building to the west and residence all buildings to the east. This suggests that an appropriate transition zone is needed to accommodate the many spaces and uses throughout the pedestrian corridor system.

RESIDENTIAL

ACADEMIC

Figure 4.5.4d

TRANSITION

ACADEMIC

Figure 4.5.4e

Transition Landscape The differing land uses suggest the need for pedestrian corridor system to serve as a transition landscape.

CASE STUDIES

5 57

5.0 CASE STUDIES 5.1 Main Street - University of Cincinnati The “Main Street” pedestrian corridor project is located at the University of Cincinnati in Cincinnati, Ohio and was completed by Hargreaves Associates. This project completely transformed a disconnected and forgotten landscape that connected together many of the largest facilities on campus. “Today it is foot traffic instead of cars traversing the area. The road

is gone; walkways, gardens and new buildings have supplanted what was once Campus Drive.” (UC Magazine, “Meet Me on Main Street”). This expansive and heavily programed landscape still however serves as a critical component for service access and emergency services seamless incorporated into the design. The success of this project is apparent in its intensity of use each

and every day by the students, faculty, and the local community of the University of Cincinnati. The project can best be described as “traverses a series of campus open spaces and districts but maintains its identity by the intensity of programs and activities, the broad circulation network, and a distinct material palette” according to Hargreaves Associates.

hargreaves.com/projects/Academic/UCinnMP Figure 5.1b University of Cincinnati

hargreaves.com/projects/Academic/UCinnMP Figure 5.1a University of Cincinnati

hargreaves.com/projects/Academic/UCinnMP Figure 5.1c University of Cincinnati

5.2 Main Campus Mall - University of Vancouver - PFS Studio The “Main Campus Mall” pedestrian corridor project is located at the University of Vancouver in Cincinnati, Ohio and was completed by PFS Studio. This project drastically re-designed the critical linear campus mall throughout the university into a series of dynamic public spaces that use to serve as a roadway. Placing priority on pedestrian circulation instead of vehicular traffic,

this project developed a cohesive campus plan that provided a protected pedestrian experience. An in depth approach to design was taken as PFS Studio examined current “campus policies and principles, land uses, and an examination of the function of this pedestrian artery within current and future campus planning considerations” (PFS Studio). These comprehensive approaches lead to

the development of a connected and harmonious landscape within the campus environment that provided a series of dynamic public spaces. In addition PFS Studio also adapted the program for this landscape to respond to the bridging between academic and residential communities that come into contact with this landscape spine stretching throughout the entire university.

https://pfsstudio.com/ Figure 5.2b University of Vancouver

https://pfsstudio.com/ Figure 5.2a University of Vancouver

https://pfsstudio.com/ Figure 5.2c University of Vancouver

5.3 Shoemaker Green - University of Pennsylvania - Andropogon Associates The “Shoemaker Green” public commons project is located at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and was completed by Andropogon Associates. This project transformed a location of the campus environment that served as the front lawn for many prominent campus buildings, yet was designed to be tennis courts. Moreover, this underutilized space was

re-imagined to provide “new green space is both a destination and a pedestrian route from Locust and Smith Walks in the core of campus to the historic buildings surrounding the space and further eastward to the new Penn Park” (University of Pennsylvania). This new public commons provided a welcoming open space of lawns, tree lined walkways, and seating areas.

In addition, sustainable site initiative principles were incorporated into much of the design. With a relatively loose program the site serves as a multi-usable location for formal or informal events that provides the university with much needed flexibility. Together this site not only increased sociability, but also improved the quality of the environment overall (University of Pennsylvania).

www.andropogon.com/work/academic/university-of-pennsylvania

Figure 5.3b University of Pennsylvania

www.andropogon.com/work/academic/university-of-pennsylvania

Figure 5.3a University of Pennsylvania

Figure 5.3c University of Pennsylvania

Figure 5.3d Ball State University Campus

DESIGN CONCEPTS

6 63

6.0 DESIGN CONCEPTS 6.1 SITE PROGRAM Provide efficient, functional, and safe circulation network - - - - -

Separated bicycle and pedestrian main pathway Limited access roadways for building service access and parking Efficient and accessible primary, secondary and tertiary pathways Enhanced loading and service areas Showcased site amenities such as lighting and way finding signage

Create dynamic public space network - - - - - -

Both large and small spatial development Active and passive recreation opportunities Outdoor event space Multi-purpose grand plaza Event space for campus activities Year-round opportunities and activities

Provide sense of place and identity - - - - -

Campus landmarks anchoring space Enhanced building exterior relationships Lush planting design to choreograph spatial movement Amplified viewsheds showcasing campus landmarks Strategic intersections of activity and social interaction

6.2 CORE HEART FOR EACH DESIGN CONCEPT Throughout each design concept, the thread of a new definitive heart on campus will remain similar in each proposed design solution. This anchor point for the entire corridor will serve as the core heart and catalyze the synergy of all the elements listed below in figure 6.2a. Together these elements (existing in blue, proposed in pink shown in figure 6.2a and 6.2b) will anchor the core and central hub of the corridor system as shown in figure 6.2c. This will be in an effort to activate and develop a grand public space that contains energy and excitement.

RECREATION

MILLER COLLEGE OF BUSINESS

RESIDENCE HALL

DESIGN

ENTRANCE

ACADEMIC COMMONS

GRAND PLAZA

DINNING FACILITIES

BUSINESS

CENTER FOR

ENTREPRENEURSHIP

LIBRARY

ACADEMIC COMMONS CREATIVE STUDIO SPACE

CREATIVE STUDIO SPACE

ENTRANCE ENTRANCE

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

PRUIS HALL THEATRE

MUSIC

Figure 6.2a Grand Plaza Concept

PARKING

THEATRE

AUDITORIUM, ARTS,COMM, MUSIC

LIBRARY

RESIDENCE HALL + DINNING

ENTRANCE

CENTER FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP

HONORS

HEALTH SCIENCE

Figure 6.2b

PROPOSED ADDITIONS IN PINK

Figure 6.2c

NEW CORE AND ANCHOR POINT

6.3 DESIGN CONCEPT #1 Design concept one captures the essence of a tradition campus mall that include two parallel lines that stretch from one end of the corridor system to the other as seen in figure 6.3a. This bold and elegant form provides a central spine that knits together many components of the campus environment as seen in figure 6.3b. In addition vegetation also takes a formal approach by providing grad tree lined walkways in figure 6.3c as well as defined spatial development throughout the entire corridor system as seen in figure 6.3d. Although this design concept does achieve the goals of this project, it fall short of achieving the most engaging and dynamic public space corridor compared to the upcoming design concepts in the coming pages of this document.

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH EMENS

Figure 6.3 a

OVERALL CIRCULATION

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH

Figure 6.3 c

CIRCULATION

WOODWORTH

EMENS

Figure 6.3 b

PRUIS HALL

CONCEPT VEGETATION

EMENS

Figure 6.3 d

SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT

6.4 DESIGN CONCEPT #2 Design concept two captures a staggered approach to circulation as seen in figure 6.4a, that allows for a sense of control and flexibility throughout the corridor system. This design concept generates a sequential movement and progression throughout a series of spaces that emphasize desired pedestrian experience throughout time as shown in figure 6.4d. These sequential transitions that respond to the campus context and pedestrian movement allow for a cohesive and visually dynamic corridor system as seen in figure 6.4c. Because of these conditions, design concept two is chosen as the primary consideration for development of the master plan for this corridor system shown in section seven of this document.

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH EMENS

Figure 6.4 a

OVERALL CIRCULATION

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH

Figure 6.4c

CIRCULATION

WOODWORTH

EMENS

Figure 6.4b

PRUIS HALL

CONCEPT VEGETATION

EMENS

Figure 6.4 d

SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT

6.5 DESIGN CONCEPT #3 Design concept three captures the organic and diverse circulation system as seen in figure 6.5a that continually changes viewsheds and developed an adventurous sense of progression and movement throughout the campus environment. The benefit to this design proposal concept is the unique spatial qualities that are sequentially developed throughout the site as seen in figure 6.5d. With the help of vegetation, transition zones, viewsheds, and spatial development is crafted to create a unique user experience as seen in figure 6.5c. However, while this particular design achieves the goals and mission of this project, it falls short of putting the pedestrian first in terms of efficient and safe paths of travel. While this form creates a unique user experience, it does not offer the same level of functionality compared to the other concepts.

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH EMENS

Figure 6.5a

OVERALL CIRCULATION

ARCHITECTURE

WHITINGER BUILDING

WHITINGER BUILDING NOYER

NOYER

BRACKEN LIBRARY

PRUIS PARKING

PRUIS HALL

WOODWORTH

Figure 6.5c

CIRCULATION

WOODWORTH

EMENS

Figure 6.5b

PRUIS HALL

CONCEPT VEGETATION

EMENS

Figure 6.5d

SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT

FINAL DESIGN

7 73

7.0 FINAL DESIGN

Recreation Center

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning

Main Corridor Pathway

7.1 MASTER PLAN

Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off

Seating Meadow

University Green Extension

7.1.1 Main Themes / Big Ideas

Nee

ly A

ve.

Business Service Area

Miller College of Business

Noyer Plaza

Event Lawn

Noyer Residence Hall

Noyer Service Area

Stage

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

This master plan seen in figure 7.1a and the enlarged plan in figure 7.1b to the right captures the essence of this proposed dynamic public space corridor. Improved pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation systems, a newly created definitive heart of campus that anchors the entire corridor system, along with sequential public spaces are all knitted together throughout this north / south campus spine. In addition, this master plan developed a newly established sense of place and identity within the campus environment, developed a safe and protected user experience, ensured seamless system functionality and operation, and emphasizes a definitive mixed use core; all of which will be examined in the upcoming pages of this document.

ve Dri

Grad Plaza Space

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Bracken Library

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Limited Access Drive

Parking Structure McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall B Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Woodworth Service Area

Stage

Emens Auditorium

Woodworth Residence Hall

Woodworth Plaza A

Main Corridor Pathway

Legacy Lawn

New Entrance

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Emens Pick up / Drop off

Riverside Ave. Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Honors House Future Academic Building

Proposed Future Extension

Ball State University: Preliminary Master Plan Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Old Quad Connection

Main Corridor Pathway

McKinley Ave.

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

Parking Structure

Future Academic Building

N Figure 7.1a Ball State Master Plan Scale 1” = 400’

Proposed Future Extension

0’

200’

Future Academic Building

400’

7.2 SYSTEM DIAGRAMS

Recreation Center

7.2.1 Pedestrian Circulation

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off

Design Process: Existing pedestrian circulation conditions cause a lack of hierarchy within pedestrian circulation systems throughout the site as seen in figure 7.2.1a. This uncontrolled and random pattern is transformed into a circulation network that provides a sense of control and flexibility in site circulation as seen in figure 7.2.1b. This staggered circulation approach to design allows for a clear hierarchy of circulation to be developed throughout the site. Pathways are situated to foster in the development of sequential spatial progression and are oriented to provide views as the site user is transported throughout the corridor system.

Main Corridor Pathway

University Green Extension

Neel

y Av

Business Service Area

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Driv

Grad Plaza Space

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Bracken Library

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Grad Plaza Space

Parking Structure McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall B Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Woodworth Service Area

Emens Auditorium Woodworth Plaza

Woodworth Residence Hall

Main Corridor Pathway

Legacy Lawn

New Entrance

Emens Pick up / Drop off

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Riverside Ave.

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

McKinley Ave.

Figure 7.2.1a

Figure 7.2.1b

0’

Pathways

250’

500’

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Pedestrian Circulation After

Ball State University: Scale Preliminary Master Plan 1” = 500’ Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Main Corridor Pathway

Pedestrian Circulation Before Scale 1” = 500’

Honors House

Old Quad Connection

0’

250’ Parking Structure

Pathways

500’ Proposed Future Extension

N Future Academic Building Future Academic Building

7.2 SYSTEM DIAGRAMS

Recreation Center

7.2.2 Vehicular Circulation

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off

Design Process: Existing vehicular circulation systems contribute to a landscape that is disconnected and fragmented by parking lots and roadways outlined in blue in figure 7.2.2a. These poorly designed and expansive spaces for vehicular circulation and parking contribute to decreased pedestrian safety and connectivity within the landscape. The design process regarding vehicular circulation shown in figure 7.2.2b developed a series of pick up / drop off turn around spaces with welcome plazas, as well as a re-designed parking structure. This consolidation of vehicular circulation allows for a cohesive and connected landscape to sequential flow throughout the site while still maintaining all vehicular access to parking structures, academic buildings and residence halls.

Main Corridor Pathway

University Green Extension

Neel

y Av

Business Service Area

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Driv

Grad Plaza Space

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Bracken Library

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Grad Plaza Space

Parking Structure McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall B Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Woodworth Service Area

Emens Auditorium Woodworth Plaza

Woodworth Residence Hall

Main Corridor Pathway

Legacy Lawn

New Entrance

Emens Pick up / Drop off

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Riverside Ave.

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

McKinley Ave.

Figure 7.2.2a

Figure 7.2.2b

0’

250’

Vehicular Surfaces

500’

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Vehicular Circulation After

Ball State University: Scale 1” = 500’ Preliminary Master Plan Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Main Corridor Pathway

Vehicular Circulation Before Scale 1” = 500’

Honors House

Old Quad Connection

0’

250’

Vehicular Surfaces Parking Structure

500’ Proposed Future Extension

Future Academic Building Future Academic Building

7.2 SYSTEM DIAGRAMS

Recreation Center

7.2.3 Land Uses

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

PARKING

NORTH GATEWAY

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning

PICK UP DROP OFF

Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off

N O TI SI E AN ON TR Z

Design Process: Existing land uses throughout the site shown in figure 7.2.3a contribute to a disconnected and underutilized landscape that failed to capture the vibrancy and potential existing throughout the campus landscape. Parking, underutilized lawn space, and service areas plague this linear segment of campus. The proposed design solution developed a series of dynamic spaces that balance intensity of activity through gateways, transition zones, and dynamic spaces outlined in figure 7.2.3b. This development of land use is interned to provide a transitional and sequential experience that provides a wide range of programing opportunities for site users.

LAWN CONNECTION University Green Extension

PARKING

Neel

y Av

Business Service Area

UNUSED LAWN

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

EVENT LAWN

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Driv

BACK OF HOUSE SERVICE AREAS

Grad Plaza Space

BRACKEN SQUARE PLAZA

New Entrance to Library

Bracken Library

Main Water Feature

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Grad Plaza Space

Pruis Hall B Pruis Service Area

TRANSITION ZONE

McKinley Ave.

DEGRADED PAVING/ VEGETATION

Limited Access Drive

Library Plaza

Parking Structure Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Limited Access Drive

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Main Corridor Pathway

EMENS PLAZA

PICK UP DROP OFF SOUTH GATEWAY Emens Pick up / Drop off

Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

McKinley Ave.

LAWN SPACE

Figure 7.2.3a

Figure 7.2.3b

Honors LAWN House CONNECTION

Land Uses After 500’

Ball State University: Scale Preliminary Master Plan 1” = 500’ Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Main Corridor Pathway

Land Uses Before 250’

Woodworth Residence Hall

LEGACY LAWN Legacy Lawn

Riverside Ave.

0’

Woodworth Service Area

Woodworth Plaza

LAWN SPACE

Scale 1” = 500’

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Emens Auditorium

DRIVE/ PARKING

New Entrance

Main Corridor Pathway

Old Quad Connection

0’

250’ Parking Structure

500’ Proposed Future Extension

N Future Academic Building Future Academic Building

7.2 SYSTEM DIAGRAMS 7.2.4 Vegetation Design Process: Existing vegetation on site added little value to spatial development and harmony throughout the campus landscape as shown in figure 7.2.4a. Random and spontaneous plantings fail to respond to the campus circulation patterns and physical environmental conditions. The proposed design solution provides a sense of visual connectedness and adds to the spatial development throughout the site by orienting views and defining specific public spaces along the corridor system as shown in figure 7.2.4b. Vegetation plays a critical role in formulating spatial qualities and developing a visually connected corridor system that remains flexible and multiprogrammable.

Figure 7.2.4a

Figure 7.2.4b

Vegetation Before Scale 1” = 500’

0’

250’

Vegetation After 500’

Scale 1” = 500’

0’

250’

500’

7.3 ZOOM IN PLAN VIEWS

Pruis Hall

New Creative Studio Space Service Area

7.3.1a Legacy Lawn Amphitheater

Limited Access Drive

The Legacy Lawn Amphitheater serves as the primary outdoor performance venue on the Ball State University Campus. Situated between the Arts and Communication Building and the Woodworth Residence Hall, this dynamic public space provides opportunities for informal and formal special events and performances, spaces for gathering, seating options, and a clear separation of pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems seen in figure 7.3b.

Arts & Communication

Separated Bike Lanes

Woodworth Pick up / Drop Off

Performance Stage

Woodworth Residence Hall

Woodworth Plaza

Main Thoroughfare Pathway

Amphitheater

Recreation Center

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off Main Corridor Pathway

University Green Extension

Nee

ly Ave

Business Service Area

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Emens Auditorium Pick up / Drop Off

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

ve Dri

Grad Plaza Space

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Bracken Library

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Grad Plaza Space

Parking Structure McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall B Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Woodworth Service Area

Emens Auditorium Woodworth Plaza

Gateway

Woodworth Residence Hall

Main Corridor Pathway

Legacy Lawn

New Entrance

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Emens Pick up / Drop off

Protected Pedestrian Crossing

RIVERSIDE AVE.

Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Riverside Ave.

Ball State University: Preliminary Master Plan

Honors House Future Academic Building

Protected Pedestrian Crossing

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Protected Pedestrian Crossing

Main Corridor Pathway

McKinley Ave.

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

Old Quad Connection

Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Parking Structure

Proposed Future Extension

Future Academic Building Future Academic Building

Figure 7.3a Zoom in Area

Figure 7.3b

Legacy Lawn Amphitheater

Scale 1” = 100’

0’

50’

100’

7.3 ZOOM IN PLAN VIEWS 7.3.2a Legacy Lawn Grading Arts and Communication

Stage

+748 +750 +750 +752 +752

Woodworth approx. 5% slope

approx. 5% slope

The Legacy Lawn Amphitheater is designed to maintain gently sloping conditions while also providing comfortable seating options for formal and informal gathering. To accomplish this design goal, gentle slopes of 5% as shown in figure 7.3d are created to maintain accessibility standards while comfortable seating arrangements are designed to provide 2’ high ledges throughout the amphitheater.

+754 +754 +756 +756 +758 +758 +760

Figure 7.3d

Legacy Lawn Grading Plan

The Legacy Lawn Grading Plan shown above in figure 7.3d demonstrates accuracy associated with this gently sloping performance venue. Comfortable seating and gathering arrangements are created while providing all site users with exceptional viewing.

Scale 1” = 75’

0’

37.5’

75’

7.3.2b Water Conservation Plan In an effort to mitigate storm water run-off, a water collection system is established throughout the amphitheater to collect and store storm water in a nearby cistern as shown in figure 7.3f to be used as irrigation for the nearby lawn and vegetation.

Cistern Collection

Lawn Seating Wall

Seating Wall

4" Organic Growing Soil 8" New Top Soil Filter Fabric

2'-6"

Existing Grade 2'-6"

Water Collection

3'-0" min.

4" Perforated Pipe to Storage Cistern Fine Gravel

6'-0"

Figure 7.3e

Figure 7.3f

Water Collection Construction Detail

Water Collection Construction Plan

This water collection system show above in figure 7.3e demonstrates the sub-surface conditions that collect water near each seating ledge. This water is then transported to the nearby cistern shown in figure 7.3f to the left.

Scale 1” = 80’

0’

40’

80’

Drainage System Flow The orange striping shown above in figure7.3f represents the water collection system throughout the amphitheater site. This collection system transports water to a nearby cistern to be used for irrigation on site.

7.3 ZOOM IN PLAN VIEWS

Service Area

7.3.3a Bracken Square Plaza Bracken Square Plaza is designed to serve as the new definitive heart and anchor point for the entire corridor system. This expansive main plaza space is activated by the addition of a new entrance to the east side of Bracken Library, a new entrance the southeast side of the Miller College of Business and new creative studio spaces as shown in figure 3.7h. In addition to flexible and multiprogrammable spaces, Bracken Square Plaza is fitted with a new campus landmark water fountain to anchor the space a provide a captivating element to the campus landscape. In addition a flexible performance stage is also incorporated for formal and informal events throughout the seasons.

Legacy Lawn Noyer Plaza

Noyer Residence Hall

Main Thoroughfare Pathway

Miller College of Business

Performance Stage

Bracken Square Plaza

Library Plaza Recreation Center

Neely Ave.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning

Water Feature

Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off Main Corridor Pathway

University Green Extension

Nee

ly Ave

Business Service Area

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Bracken Library

Limited Access Drive

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

ve Dri

Grad Plaza Space

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Bracken Library

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

New Creative Studio Space

Grad Plaza Space

Service Area

Parking Structure

B Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Woodworth Service Area

Emens Auditorium Woodworth Plaza

Woodworth Residence Hall

Main Corridor Pathway

Legacy Lawn

New Entrance

Emens Auditorium Main Plaza

Emens Pick up / Drop off

Protected Pedestrian Crossings

Riverside Ave.

Future Academic Building

Sursa Hall

Old Quad Connection

Pruis Hall

Scale: 1” = 50’ 0’

50’

100’

200’

400’

Creative Studio Space / Parking Garage

Honors House

Main Corridor Pathway

McKinley Ave.

Sursa Hall Pick up / Drop off

Ball State University: Preliminary Master Plan

Limited Access Drive

Separated Bike Lanes

McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall

Parking Structure

Proposed Future Extension

Future Academic Building Future Academic Building

Figure 7.3g Zoom in Area

Figure 7.3h

Bracken Square Plaza

Scale 1” = 100’

0’

50’

100’

7.3 ZOOM IN PLAN VIEWS 7.3.4 Water Conservation Plan In an effort to engage in sustainable landscape management practices lawn areas and plaza spaces shown in figure 7.3k collect water through an underground collection system shown in figure 7.3j below. This water collection system will help mitigate stormwater run-off and provide a water source for irrigation for the lawn spaces. Lawn Detailing

Pathway / Curbing Concrete Footing

1 2"

1/4" Gap Between Units

Cistern Collection

Expansion Joint

1' Granite Curb

4" Organic Growing Soil

Irrigation Head

2" Sand Setting Bed

8" New Top Soil Filter Fabric

4" Concrete Slab

Rain Garden

Existing Grade

6" Gravel 1'-3" 2'-0"

Water Collection Irrigation Piping Sand

Figure 7.3j

Water Collection Construction Detail

Water collection lines, shown above in figure 7.3j, are distributed throughout the lawn area represented in the orange striping in figure 7.3k to the right. This collection system is submerged beneath the surface and collects water through organic growing soil and an engineered sand deposit that attracts and directs water for collection purposes.

4" Perforated Pipe to Storage Cistern Fine Gravel

Figure 7.3k

Scale 1” = 80’

0’

40’

80’

Water Collection Construction Plan Drainage System Flow The orange striping shown above in figure 7.3k represent the underground channeling system and the storage locations for water collection. Rain gardens and cisterns will be used in an effort to collect water and re-use it for lawn irrigation and vegetation irrigation.

McKinley Ave.

CAP Service Area

7.3 ZOOM IN PLAN VIEWS

College of Architecture and Planning Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off Main Corridor Pathway

7.2.5 Service Access Function University Green Extension

Nee

ly A

ve.

Business Service Area

Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Ac ive

Maintaining essential vehicular access throughout the project site is a critical component to ensuring daily campus operations continue with optimal efficiency and safety in regards to vehicular service access, pick up / drop off access, and emergency vehicular access. While roadways and parking lots were eliminated, additional pick up / drop off areas were added in an effort to ease traffic congestion along with limited access service driveways designed to maintain a protected pedestrian experience. Figure 7.3L to the right demonstrates the paths of travel for vehicular traffic to access parking structures pick up / drop off locations, and service access for campus buildings such as Bracken Library, Woodworth Residence Hall, Pruis Hall, Noyer Residence Hall and the Miller College of Business. Limited access driveways shown in pink throughout figure 7.3k are designed to appear as if only pedestrian focused spaces yet also simultaneously serve limited access vehicular service on occasion.

Grad Plaza Space

Bracken Library

New Entrance to Library

Main Water Feature Limited Access Drive

Library Plaza

Library Service Area

Grad Plaza Space

New Creative Studio Space

Parking Structure McKinley Ave.

Park Hall Pick up / Drop off

Pruis Hall B

Service Access Diagram

Scale 1” = 160’

0’

80’

Pruis Service Area Limited Access Drive

160’

Limited Access Service Drives Vehicular Service Access Drives

Woodworth Pick up / Drop off

Figure 7.3L Service Access Diagram

Woodworth Service Area

7.4 Construction Details 1/2" X 8-1/2" Stainless Steel Dowel 1/2" Expansion Joint

7-5/8" x 2-1/4" Brick Pavers 1-1/2" Bluestone Paving 1/4" Max Spacing Mortar Joints

1/4" Max Spacing Mortar Joints

1-1/4" Mortar Setting Bed

4" Concrete Slab

4" by 4" WWM, 2" Clear

Compacted Crushed Stone Min 4" Thick

Compacted Subgrade

Plaza Seating Wall Figure 7.4a

Figure 7.4b

Plaza Paving Detail 2" Radius Curve

Main Pathway Paving Detail 2'- 0" 1'-8"

1" 32 Stainless Steel Pin

Seating Element 1" Wood Cap Concrete Cap Drip Kerf Flashing Corrugated Veneer Tie Terracotta Bedding Mortar Limestone

Wood Cap Precast wall cap w/ 1/2" chamfered edge

CMU Stem Wall Voids Grout Filled 1"

2'-11" 2'-8"

#4 Rebard at 12" O.C.

Horizontal reinforcement every 3 Courses, Typ.

Brick Unit

2'-6" 8" x 8" x 16" CMU, Voids grout filled

Perforated Drainpipe and Gravel with Filter Fabric

4" Diameter Drainage Pipe

Concrete Bench Under Veneer Vertical Reinforcing #4 Rebar Concrete Footing

Horizontal Reinforcing #4 Rebar

Figure 7.4c

88 Seating / Retaining Wall Detail

Figure 7.4d

Seating Wall Detail

Concrete Setting Bed from Paving 5" min. under seating walls

Stair Details

1/4" weld radius 1-1/2" S.S. Post Rail 1'-9"

1-1/2" S.S. Tube Rail 1'-6"

1" R72 2'-51 2"

1'-9"

Retaining Wall

3' 3' 1'-03 4" 1"

R71 2"

1" R2

1'-6"

1' 3'

2% Slope 83 4"

1/2" Exp. Joint

1'-1"

6" Stainless Steel Pin

Drip Kerf 1" Overhang

5 Rebar, 2" clear

1" Bluestone Cap 3-1/2" Concrete Cap Copper Flashing x 1.5" Limestone Veneer L-?

Lawn 1/4" Mortar Joint, Typ. 1" Mortar Setting Bed Galvanized Masonary Tie

4-1/2" round cap 2-1/2" cored hole, 8" deep Typ., Grouted

Prepared Subgrade

#5 Rebar Per Plans, 2" Clear, Typ. 1.5" Terracotta Veneer

Footings Extend min 3'-6" below grade Lawn

Figure 7.4e

Stairway Detail

Star and Rail Section and Elevation Scale 1" = 1'

Nicore Murray - Wes Rogers

3'-6" min. Agg. Wrapped in Filter Fabric 3" Pipe, Typ.

2" by 4" Shear Key Footing Size Varies, see wall schedule

Figure 7.4f

Retaining Wall Detail

7.5 BEFORE / AFTER SECTIONS 7.5.1

Existing conditions between Emens Auditorium and the Woodworth Residence Hall shown in figure 7.5.1a is currently dominated by vehicular circulation and parking that diminishes the potential of the space. Proposed conditions as seen in figure 7.5.1b includes the removal of roadway surfaces, increased vegetation, enhanced pedestrian circulation and multiprogrammable greenspace for gathering, performances, and special events.

Figure 7.5.1 a

Figure 7.5.1

Figure 7.5.1 b

Legacy Lawn Close-Up View

Lawn/Amphitheater

7.5 BEFORE / AFTER SECTIONS 7.5.2

Existing conditions between Pruis Hall and the Emens Parking garage as seen in figure 7.5.2a shows the disconnected and fragmented landscape that provides little in terms of pedestrian circulation hierarchy and circulation. Proposed conditions shown in figure 7.5.2b demonstrate the enhanced efficiency in circulation networks, along with added vegetation. In addition a retrofitted multi-leveled parking garage fronted by new creative studio spaces is also included.

Figure 7.5.2a

Service Area

Legacy Lawn Noyer Plaza

Figure 7.5.2

Noyer Residence Hall

Main Thoroughfare Pathway

Miller College of Business

Performance Stage

Bracken Square Plaza

Library Plaza

Water Feature

Bracken Library

Limited Access Drive

Separated Bike Lanes

Service Area

Figure 7.5.2b

Creative Studio Space / Parking Garage

Pruis Hall

Bracken Square Plaza Close-Up View

7.5 BEFORE / AFTER SECTIONS 7.5.3

Existing conditions located near the east side of Bracken Library shown in figure 7.5.3a show the lack of social activity and confusing, random, and unsafe vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems. Proposed conditions shown in figure 7.5.3b include the addition of a new east entrance to Bracken Library, plaza space, grad water feature, and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems through the removal of excessive vehicular access.

Figure 7.5.3a

Service Area

Figure 7.5.3

Legacy Lawn Noyer Plaza

Noyer Residence Hall

Main Thoroughfare Pathway

Miller College of Business

Performance Stage

Bracken Square Plaza

Library Plaza

Water Feature

Bracken Library

Limited Access Drive

Separated Bike Lanes

Service Area

Pruis Hall

Bracken Square Plaza Close-Up View

Creative Studio Space / Parking Garage

Figure 7.5.3b

7.5 BEFORE / AFTER SECTIONS 7.5.4

Existing conditions between the Miller College of Business building and the Noyer residence hall provides underutilized and depressed greenspace as seen in figure 7.5.4a. Proposed plaza space, enhanced circulation systems and building entrance additions seen in figure 7.5.4b activate and amplify this segment of the corridor system.

Figure 7.5.4a

Service Area

Figure 7.5.4

Legacy Lawn Noyer Plaza

Noyer Residence Hall

Main Thoroughfare Pathway

Miller College of Business

Performance Stage

Bracken Square Plaza

Library Plaza

Water Feature

Bracken Library

Limited Access Drive

Separated Bike Lanes

Service Area

Pruis Hall

Bracken Square Plaza Close-Up View

Creative Studio Space / Parking Garage

Figure 7.5.4b

7.5 BEFORE / AFTER SECTIONS 7.5.5

Existing conditions nearby the College of Architecture and Planning contain expansive parking lots and no clear pedestrian circulation as seen in figure 7.5.5a. This space is transformed into an efficient pick up / drop off location serving several academic buildings. Along with separated bike / pedestrian circulation systems plaza and gathering spaces seen in figure 7.5.5b.

Figure 7.5.5a

Figure 7.5.5 Recreation Center

Neely Ave.

CAP Service Area

College of Architecture and Planning Multi-Use Pick up / Drop off Main Corridor Pathway

University Green Extension

Nee

ly A

Business Service Area

Figure 7.5.5b Noyer Plaza

Miller College of Business

Noyer Residence Hall

Noyer Pick up / Drop Off

Event Lawn

Noyer Service Area

New Entrance for Entrepreneurship Center

Dri ve

Grad Plaza Space

Pick up / drop off area Close-Up View C

Bracken Library

New Entrance to Library

Library Plaza

ve.

Main Water Feature

Limited Access Drive

Figure 7.5.5c Ball State University

7.6 PERSPECTIVES

7.6.1 Birds Eye View Looking South

This birds eye view shows a comprehensive examination of spatial development throughout the entire north / south corridor system. Plazas, gathering spaces, event lawns, and flexible spaces are knitted together throughout this visual sequence of dynamic public spaces. 96

Figure 7.6 .1

7.6.2 Legacy Lawn Amphitheater

Figure 7.6 .2

The Legacy Lawn Amphitheater provides opportunities for either formal or informal performances, special events, and gathering. This multi-level seating arrangement allows for exceptional views and spatial development within this segment of the corridor system. 97

7.6 PERSPECTIVES

7.6.3 Main Thoroughfare Pathway

With the main goal of achieving optimal and efficient circulation systems, bike lanes and thoroughfare pedestrian pathways will be separated throughout the site. In addition shaded, tree lined walkways and seating elements promote active and engaging landscapes. 98

Figure 7.6 .3

7.6.4 Approach to Bracken Square Plaza

Figure 7.6 .4

Shaded areas for seating and gathering promote sociability along major pathways. Controlled approach as seen above add to the sequential spatial development as users progress throughout the site towards Bracken Square Plaza. 99

7.6 PERSPECTIVES

7.6.5 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza Looking North

The approach to Bracken Square Plaza orients the site user in a controlled experience that serves as a transition between the Legacy Lawn Amphitheater and Bracken Square Plaza. This shaded area condenses views and reveals a striking landmark as users progress throughout the site. 100

Figure 7.6 .5

7.6.6 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza

Figure 7.6 .6

Bracken Square Plaza anchors the space between several large academic buildings while also serves as the heart of the entire corridor system. Here a sense of flexibility and control are maintained in regards to programing and circulation systems. 101

7.6 PERSPECTIVES

7.6.7 Bracken Square Plaza

Bracken Square Plaza provides enhanced sociability and multi-programmable opportunities through the addition of new building entrances and additions that activate adjacent campus landscape shown above. Plenty of shade, seating, and informal gathering is provided for all to enjoy. 102

Figure 7.6 7

7.6.8 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza

Figure 7.6 .8

Bracken Square Plaza Fountain features a captivating and striking new landmark to the campus environment. As the heart of the corridor system, Bracken Square Plaza will anchor this dynamic public space corridor and provide exceptional views for site users. 103

7.6 PERSPECTIVES

7.6.9 Noyer Event Lawn

Shaded gathering spaces and large multi-purpose event lawns will allow for flexibility of programing throughout portions of the site. Shown here is the space between the Noyer Residence hall and the Miller College of Business with a view of Bracken Square Plaza Fountain. 104

Figure 7.6 .9

7.6.10 Pick Up / Drop Off Plaza and Connection to University Green

Figure 7.6 .10

New shaded gathering spaces and pick up / drop opportunities will welcome site users toward the northern end of the pedestrian corridor system. Show here is the space between Noyer Residence Hall, Miller College of Business, and the College of Architecture and Planning. 105

7.7a MATERIAL PALLET Pathways

Seating Elements

Retaining Walls

Brick Paving

Brushed Concrete

Brick

Brick Paving

Wood Planks

Limestone

Field Stone

Modular Paving

Limestone

Rusted Steel

Rough Texture Limestone

Gravel

Granite

Aluminum

Field Stone

7.7a1 Material Selection

Materials selected above represent an effort to seamlessly develop a cohesive pallet of material options that relate to the existing campus context. While this corridor system will contain visually distinctive elements specific to this section of campus, the overall composition will relate to the broader campus environment to ensure an appropriate contextual relationship with the existing campus fabric.

106

Signage

7.7b PLANT PALLET Trees

Shrubs

Grasses

Perennials

Red Maple

Serviceberry

Prairie Dropseed

Hardy Geranium

Sugar Maple

Winterberry

Red Fountain Grass

Purple Cone Flower

Eastern Red Bud

Hydrangea

Little Bluestem

Liriope

Honey Locust

Arcadia Juniper

Feather Reed Grass

Coral Bells

7.7a1 Material Selection

Trees, shrubs, grasses, and perennials displayed above are selected to achieve optimal visual and aesthetic qualities that contribute to year-round seasonal interest throughout the entire pedestrian corridor. Assisting with controlling circulation, viewsheds, and spatial development all plant-life will serve an important role in achieving the overall mission of the project.

107

7.8 DESIGN DETAILS

Figure 7.8.1

Gateway Signage

Defining entrance features add to sense of place and contribute to campus identity.

Figure 7.8.2

Figure 7.8.3

Providing a decorative motif as a base adds to the composition of materials used throughout campus.

Seating options with lighting features add to the sociability of spaces for all times of day.

Lighting w/ Banner Option 108

Seating / Lighting Combo

Figure 7.8.4

Lighting w/ Banner Option

Lighting features with banners contribute to sense of place and advertising campus events.

Figure 7.8.5

Lawn Lighting w/ Audio Box

Lighting the lawn area provides opportunities to activate social spaces throughout all times of day.

Figure 7.8.6

Light / Audio Tower

Throughout performance spaces, lighting / audio towers can emerge for special events.

109

110

CONCLUSION

8 111

8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 PROJECT CONCLUSION This comprehensive project effectively addressed a dynamic topic in the vast filed of landscape architecture. The process of this project took a cohesive research approach to campus design that developed a successful solution that responds to challenges and opportunities that exist within the campus landscape of Ball State University. The development of engaging spaces and a connected circulation network serves as critical components that contribute to the success of a college campus environment. The design solutions represented in this document truly represent the collaborative and spirited approach to developing a dynamic public space corridor that serves the social, functional, and programmable needs of a university campus. This project not only provides others with an example of the endless possibilities for transforming a forgotten campus landscape into socially active, safe, and functionally efficient environment, but also creates a connected and captivating campus community.

112

Figure 8.1a Benny at Ball State University / Photo by Weston Rogers

113

114

APPENDICES

9 115

9.0 APPENDICES 9.1 METHODOLOGY INTERVIEWS A series of interviews was completed with experts in the field of campus design, place making design, and pedestrian experience design. To better understand design patterns and aesthetics established within the Ball State University campus environment an interview with the Ball State University Facilities Planning and Management Office was conducted. This interview collected information such as campus design standards in relation to the proposed pedestrian corridor, potential suggested design opportunities, and future trends / wishes of the university at large. An interview was also conducted with Michael Johnson of Smith Group JJR based out of Grand Rapids Michigan in order to understand the campus master planning efforts that have recently taken place to promote the future growth of Ball State University. This interview gathered information that informs design decisions for the pedestrian corridor in the topical areas of Smith Group JJR’s proposed campus design guidelines, future suggestions, and student feedback regarding the future of Ball State University that was gathered through the campus master planning efforts in 2014. Assessment of the interviews included a comparison between the information gathered directly from the Ball State University facilities planning and management and from an outside consultant Smith Group JJR. This will provide foundational information to build guidelines for the creation of exceptional campus landscape design standards and qualities. This proposed information was documented through notes, checklists, and presented in illustrative diagrams and informational graphics within the final project document. These findings assisted with proposing design solutions that create a functional, safe, and sociable pedestrian corridor that contains a sense of place and campus identity. CASE STUDY INVESTIGATION In order to understand how this landscape intervention of this proposed pedestrian corridor will relate and respond to the existing campus landscape and organizational fabric a case study investigation was completed. First examined was the campus master plans prepared for Indiana University – Bloomington, Iowa State University. Noted was the patterns of design suggestions and decision making themes for campus landscape designs. These two documents were secured from Professor Malcolm Cairns at Ball State University. The resulting information gathered from these two case studies (Indiana University and Iowa 116

State University) was compared and contrasted for the goals, design suggestions, and decision making themes with the preliminary Ball State University Campus Master Plan. This preliminary campus master plan for Ball State University can be located by contacting Michael Johnson from Smith Group JJR in Grand Rapids Michigan. Moreover, this comparison and contrasting of campus master plans informed the creation of guidelines to assist the design of this pedestrian corridor and the spaces along its route. This information was documented through the creation of goals and objectives for this project, additional design guidelines, and informational graphics that display and support this information. LITERATURE REVIEW In an effort to identify the growth of Ball State University over time and the resulting impact that has been made on the physical campus environment, a literature review was conducted that analyzed sources such as maps and aerial photographs that reveal the growth patterns of campus facilities, green spaces, roadways and circulation. This information that demonstrates campus growth over time was gathered mainly by using the Bracken Library map collection to identify a time line of successional maps that demonstrate the growth patterns of the university over time. Also, the locating of historic campus imagery from the Ball State University Digital Media Repository was used to understand the visual growth of the university. This information was used in conjunction with Richard Dober’s books “Campus Design” and “Environmental Design” to draw a set of conclusion in regards to how the formations and adjustments/additions of campus buildings can formulate space and circulation within the campus environment. Additionally, this information was compared with existing architecture floor plans of Bracken Library, Miller College of Business, Noyer Complex, and Architecture Building gathered from the Drawings and Documents Archives in the College of Architecture and Planning at Ball State University. This allowed for an assessment of circulation and access to be conducted through the creation of a base map with diagrammed desired paths of travel and access points for each building. This comparison guided the development of suggestions for potential improvements to existing campus facilities that can aid in the development of space making principles for campus design outlined in section one of the main literature review for this project. All of this information was gathered and then represented in the form maps, diagrams, and informational graphics that show the story of the university over time, and the future potential for the placement and design of this proposed pedestrian corridor.

117

ON SITE OBSERVATION In order to fully understand the functionality and opportunities that exists within the project limits, on site observation will be completed throughout the early portions of the spring semester. The information was gathered by visiting the site and first taking photographs of the site at Woodworth Commons, Bracken Library, and Noyer Complex during the afternoon. Also, notes were taken of the pedestrian movement patterns by recording paths of travel on a base map during class interchange periods such as at the top of each hour at least 5 times on separate days. In addition, specific weather conditions were documented on a base map during the winter and spring months taking note of wind, shade and sun. Also, pedestrian / vehicular conflicts were documented on a base map within the site by walking the length of the project site during the morning and evening at least 5 separate times, taking note of potential unsafe interchanges with pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Together, this information was analyzed through creating diagrams and informational graphics. This information suggested potential design considerations that propose creative solutions for directly observed conditions that could be changed, altered, or improved upon to create a safe, functional, and visually complimentary pedestrian corridor within the campus environment.

118

9.2 TIMELINE 9.2.1 Time line Schedule

119

9.2 TIMELINE 9.2.2 fall 2015

120

9.2.3 spring 2016

121

9.3 FIGURES

122

Figure 4.1a Ball State University Campus page 37 Figure 4.1b Project Scope Area page 37 Figure 4.3a Framework Plan page 39 Figure 4.4a Visual Focus Area Woodworth / Emens Auditorium page 40 Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map Woodworth / Emens Auditorium page 40 Figure 4.4.1a Site Photo page 40 Figure 4.4.1b Site Photo page 41 Figure 4.4.1c Site Photo page 41 Figure 4.4.1d Site Photo page 41 Figure 4.4.1e Site Photo page 41 Figure 4.4a Visual Focus Area Bracken Library / Pruis Hall page 42 Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map Bracken Library / Pruis Hall page 42 Figure 4.4.2a Site Photo page 42 Figure 4.4.2b Site Photo page 43 Figure 4.4.2c Site Photo page 43 Figure 4.4.2d Site Photo page 43 Figure 4.4.2e Site Photo page 43 Figure 4.4a Visual Focus Area Noyer / Business Building page 44 Figure 4.4.b Photo Location Map Woodworth / Emens Auditorium page 44 Figure 4.4.3a Site Photo page 45 Figure 4.4.3b Site Photo page 45 Figure 4.4.3c Site Photo page 45 Figure 4.4.3d Site Photo page 45 Figure 4.4.3e Site Photo page 45 Figure 4.4a Visual Focus Area CAP Parking Lot page 46 Figure 4.4.b Photo Location CAP Parking Lot page 46 Figure 4.4.4a Site Photo page 47 Figure 4.4.4b Site Photo page 47 Figure 4.4.4c Site Photo page 47 Figure 4.4.4d Site Photo page 47 Figure 4.4.4e Site Photo page 47 Figure 4.5.1a Project Scope page 48 Figure 4.5.1b Building Uses page 48 Figure 4.5.1c Campus Landmarks page 49 Figure 4.5.1d Character of Space page 49 Figure 4.5.1e Viewsheds page 49 Figure 4.5.2a User Paths of Travel page 50

Figure 4.5.2b Paths of Travel Context page 50 Figure 4.5.2c Major Circulation Patterns page 51 Figure 4.5.2d Major Nodes page 51 Figure 4.5.2e Campus Roadways page 51 Figure 4.5.3a Campus Roadways page 52 Figure 4.5.3b Service Access Areas page 52 Figure 4.5.3c Service Access Transport page 53 Figure 4.5.3d Paths of Travel / Service Access page 53 Figure 4.5.3e Conflict Areas page 53 Figure 4.5.4a Building Uses page 54 Figure 4.5.4b Active Social Zones page 54 Figure 4.5.4c Campus Anchor Point page 55 Figure 4.5.4d Building Relationships page 55 Figure 4.5.4e Transition Landscape page 55 Figure 5.1a University of Cincinnati page 58 Figure 5.1b University of Cincinnati page 58 Figure 5.1c University of Cincinnati page 58 Figure 5.2a University of Vancouver page 59 Figure 5.2b University of Vancouver page 59 Figure 5.2c University of Vancouver page 59 Figure 5.3a University of Pennsylvania page 60 Figure 5.3b University of Pennsylvania page 60 Figure 5.3c University of Pennsylvania page 60 Figure 6.2a Grand Plaza Concept page 65 Figure 6.2b Proposed Addition in Pink page 65 Figure 6.2c New Core Heart and Anchor Point page 65 Figure 6.3a Overall Circulation page 66 Figure 6.3b Circulation page 67 Figure 6.3c Concept Vegetation page 67 Figure 6.3d Spatial Development page 67 Figure 6.4a Overall Circulation page 68 Figure 6.4b Circulation page 69 Figure 6.4c Concept Vegetation page 69 Figure 6.4d Spatial Development page 69 Figure 6.5a Overall Circulation page 70 Figure 6.5b Circulation page 71 123

124

Figure 6.5c Concept Vegetation page 71 Figure 6.5d Spatial Development page 71 Figure 7.1a Ball State Master Plan page 74 Figure 7.1b Ball State Master Plan Zoom In page 75 Figure 7.2.1a Pedestrian Circulation Before page 76 Figure 7.2.1b Pedestrian Circulation After page 76 Figure 7.2.2a Vehicular Circulation Before page 77 Figure 7.2.2b Vehicular Circulation After page 77 Figure 7.2.3a Land Uses Before page 78 Figure 7.2.3b Land Uses After page 78 Figure 7.2.4a Vegetation Before page 79 Figure 7.2.4b Vegetation After page 79 Figure 7.3a Zoom in Area Legacy Lawn Amphitheater page 80 Figure 7.3b Legacy Lawn Amphitheater page 80 Figure 7.3c Legacy Lawn Amphitheater Zoom In page 81 Figure 7.3d Legacy Lawn Grading page 82 Figure 7.3e Water Collection Detail page 83 Figure 7.3f Water Collection Plan page 83 Figure 7.3g Zoom in Area Bracken Square Plaza page 84 Figure 7.3h Bracken Square Plaza page 84 Figure 7.3i Bracken Square Plaza Zoom In page 85 Figure 7.3j Water Collection Detail page 86 Figure 7.3k Water Collection Plan page 86 Figure 7.3L Service Access Diagram page 87 Figure 7.4a Plaza Paving Detail page 88 Figure 7.4b Main Pathway Paving Detail page 88 Figure 7.4c Seating / Retaining Wall page 88 Figure 7.4d Seating Wall Detail page 88 Figure 7.4e Stairway Detail page 89 Figure 7.4f Retaining Wall Detail page 89 Figure 7.5.1 Legacy Lawn Close Up page 90 Figure 7.5.1a Woodworth Before Section page 90 Figure 7.5.1b Woodworth After Section page 90 Figure 7.5.2 Bracken Square Close Up page 91 Figure 7.5.2a Pruis Before Section page 91 Figure 7.5.2b Pruis After Section page 91 Figure 7.5.3 Bracken Square Plaza View page 92

Figure 7.5.3a Bracken Library Before Section page 92 Figure 7.5.3b Bracken Library After Section page 92 Figure 7.5.4 Bracken Square Plaza Close Up page 93 Figure 7.5.4a Noyer Lawn Before Section page 93 Figure 7.5.5 Pick up / Drop off Close Up View page 94 Figure 7.5.5a CAP Front Lawn Before Section page 94 Figure 7.5.5b CAP Front Lawn After Section page 94 Figure 7.6.1 Birds Eye View Looking South page 96 Figure 7.6.2 Legacy Lawn Amphitheater page 97 Figure 7.6.3 Main Thoroughfare Pathway page 98 Figure 7.6.4 Approach to Bracken Square page 99 Figure 7.6.5 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza Looking North page 100 Figure 7.6.6 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza page 101 Figure 7.6.7 Bracken Square Plaza page 102 Figure 7.6.8 Birds Eye View Bracken Square Plaza page 103 Figure 7.6.9 Noyer Event Lawn page 104 Figure 7.6.10 Pick Up / Drop Off Plaza and Connection to Univ. Green page 105 Figure 7.8.1 Gateway Signage page 108 Figure 7.8.2 Lighting w/ Banner Option page 108 Figure 7.8.3 Seating / Lighting Combo page 108 Figure 7.8.4 Lighting w/ Banner Option page 108 Figure 7.8.5 Lawn Lighting w/ Audio Box page 109 Figure 7.8.6 Light / Audio Tower page 109 Figure 8.1a Benny at Ball State University / Photo by Weston Rogers page 113 Figure 9.2.1 Timeline Schedule page 119 Figure 9.2.2 Fall 2015 Schedule page 120 Figure 9.2.3 Spring 2016 Schedule page 121

125

9.4 BIBLIOGRAPHY Place Making Strategies for Campus Landscapes: • “Biography - Paul W. Ferguson - Office of the President.” - Ball State University. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. http://cms.bsu.edu/about/administrativeoffices/president/bio • Dober, Richard P. Campus Landscape: Functions, Forms, Features. New York: Wiley, 2000. Print. • Dober, Richard P. Environmental Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1969. Print. • Herz, Michael. Campus Landscape: Planning & Design. Hong Kong: Design Media Pub., 2013. Print. • Kenney, Daniel R., Ricardo Dumont, and Ginger Kenney. Mission and Place: Strengthening Learning and Community through Campus Design. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2005. Print. • “10 Principles for Successful Squares - Project for Public Spaces.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. http://www.pps. org/reference/squaresprinciples/ • Walljasper, Jay. “Big Plans on Campus - Project for Public Spaces.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. http://www.pps. org/reference/campusbulletin/ Methods and Principles of Campus Design: • Bach, John. “Meet Me on Main Street.” UC Magazine. University of Cincinnati, n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2015. • Dober, Richard P. Campus Design. New York, NY: J. Wiley, 1992. Print. • Dober, Richard P. Campus Landscape: Functions, Forms, Features. New York: Wiley, 2000. Print. • Gaines, Thomas A. The Campus as a Work of Art. New York: Praeger, 1991. Print. • “Houston Library Plaza: Building Knowledge, Building Community - Project for Public Spaces.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., 14 Nov. 2012. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. • Cynthia Nikitin, Josh Jackson. “Libraries That Matter - Project for Public Spaces.” Project for Public Spaces. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. http://www. pps.org/reference/librariesthatmatter-2/ • Iowa State University of Science and Technology Master Plan. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Johnson, Johnson, & Roy Associates, 1968. Print. • Neuman, David J. Building Type Basics for College and University Facilities. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013. Print. • Strange, Charles Carney., and James H. Banning. Educating by Design: Creating Campus Learning Environments That Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001. Print. • University of Cincinnati Master Plan 2000. San Francisco, California. Hargreaves Associates, 2000. Print.

126

Considerations for Pedestrian and Bicyclists Safety: • Anderson, R.W. G., McLean, A.J., Farmer, M.J.B., Lee, H., & Brooks, C.G. (1997). “Accident Analysis and Prevention”, 29(5), 667-674. • Dai, Dajun, Emily TAquechel, John Steward, and Sheryl Strasser. “The Impact of Built Environment on Pedestrian Crashes and the Identification of Crash Clusters on an Urban University Campus.” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine 11.3 (2010): 294-300. Print. • Dobbs, G. (2009). Pedestrian and bicycle safety on a college campus: Crash and conflict analyses with recommended design alternatives for Clemson University (Unpublished master’s thesis). Clemson University, Clemson, SC. Retrieved from http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/552. • Dumbaugh, Eric, and Wenhao Li. “Designing for the Safety of Pedestrians, Cyclists, and Motorists in Urban Environments.” Journal of the American Planning Association (2010): 69-88. Print. • Federal Highway Administration. (2014). Designing sidewalks and trails for access. Part II: Best practices design guideline. Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalk2/sidewalks214.cfm. • Gårder, Per Erik, “Pedestrian Safety in Maine,” Final Report, Report ME00-2, Maine Department of Transportation, May 2002. • Guyton, J.W. (1983). Campus traffic and parking problems and some solutions. Transportation and Land Use Planning. Transportation Research Record, 931, 80-82. Retrieved from http://trid.trb.org • Haines, G., Kochevar, R., & Surti, V.H. (1974). Analysis of campus traffic problems. Pedestrian Programs and Motorist Services, Transportation Research Record, 498, 1-12. Retrieved from http://trid.trb.org • Loukaitou-Sideris, Anastasia, Aditya Medury, Camille Fink, Offer Grembek, Kevan Shafizadeh, Norman Wong, and Phyllis Orrick. “Crashes on and Near College Campuses: A Comparative Analysis of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety.” Journal of the American Planning Association (2014): 198-217. Print. • “Parking Services - Ball State University.” Parking Services - Ball State University. Web. 1 Nov. 2015. http://cms.bsu.edu/about/administrativeoffices/parkingservices Precedent Studies • “Hargreaves Associates.” - University Of Cincinnati Main Street. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://www.hargreaves.com/projects/Academic/ UCinnMainStreet/ • “Meet Me on MainStreet.” University of Cincinnati. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://magazine.uc.edu/issues/0904/mainstreet.html • “University of British Columbia Main Mall.” PFS Studio. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://uat.circularstudio.pfs.ws2.tooit.com/project/university-of-british-columbia-main-mall/ • “Shoemaker Green.” PennConnects: — Overview. Web. 28 Apr. 2016. http://www.pennconnects.upenn.edu/find_a_project/alphabetical/ shoemaker_green_alpha/shoemaker_green_overview.php 127

128