Workshops & Feedback/Outreach Efforts
The University of Massachusetts Boston is committed to an open and inclusive community participation process that seeks to involve students, faculty, staff, and external constituents and stakeholders in the development of the long range Campus Master Plan. Over the last several months UMass Boston has held a number of workshops and open meetings where it has engaged in dialogue and discussion with its internal and external communities on the redesign of the campus over the next 25 years. A list of these outreach efforts and corresponding participation and feedback is detailed below.
Master Planning Process
Internal Workshops Participation
Date |
Audience/Organization |
No. of Participants Students Faculty Staff Other* Total |
9/17/07 |
A&F Departments |
- - 16 - 16 |
9/24/07 |
Campus Community |
2 - 16 - 18 |
9/18/07 |
Chancellor’s Executive Staff |
- - 12 - 12 |
9/26/07 |
Alumni Board |
- - 3 7 10 |
9/27/07 |
Campus Community |
5 - 3 - 8 |
10/1/07 |
Faculty Council |
2 25 15 - 42 |
10/1/07 |
Campus Community |
- - 12 - 12 |
10/1/07 |
Management Class |
25 1 - - 26 |
10/5/07 |
Campus Community |
7 1 18 - 26 |
10/10/07 |
College of Management |
- 20 7 - 27 |
10/11/07 |
Campus Community |
4 - 29 2 35** |
10/17/07 |
College of Liberal Arts |
- 23 1 - 24 |
10/22/07 |
Athletics Dept. |
- - 20 - 20 |
10/30/07 |
Centers & Institutes |
- - 4 - 4 |
11/5/07 |
Political Science Class |
15 1 - - 16 |
11/7/07 |
Student Senate |
25 1 3 - 29 |
11/16/07 |
Academic Support Services |
- - 55 - 55 |
11/27/07 |
Student Affairs Leadership |
- - 10 - 10 |
|
SUBTOTAL (as of 11/27/07) |
85 72 224 9 390 |
Master Planning Process
External Workshops Participation
Date |
Audience/Organization |
No. of Participants Students Faculty Staff Other* Total |
10/24/07 |
Mayor’s Office/BRA |
- - - 10 10 |
10/25/07 |
Senator Hart |
- - - 3 3 |
11/1/07 |
City Council Pres. Feeney |
- - - 1 1 |
11/1/07 |
Community Council |
- - - 6 6 |
11/6/07 |
Mayor Menino |
- - - 3 3 |
11/8/07 |
Boston Delegation |
- - - 4 4 |
11/15/07 |
Open Community |
2 1 4 6 13 |
11/19/07 |
Open Community |
- - - 13 13 |
SUBTOTAL (as of 11/27/07) |
2 1 4 46 53 |
|
TOTAL (as of 11/27/07) |
87 73 228 55 443 |
* Other includes alumni, elected officials, and external constituents
** Estimated
Master Plan Workshops
Input and Feedback
September 2007 – November 2007
Campus Organization
Participants were very supportive of taking down the plaza and Science building and opening up the campus.
- A tighter connection with the JFK Library and Mass. Archives was generally supported, but we should be cognizant of overly encroaching on their property.
- Many participants liked the “Improving Connections” concept because it has an urban quality and offers more mixed use.
- Given the harsh weather conditions that exist on the Peninsula, many suggestions were made to maintain the catwalk between buildings.
- The Campus Center has opened up the University’s vista to the world and this should be maintained by not cutting off the vistas, but added to with well-considered and designed new architecture.
Integration with Surrounding Community and Neighbors
The notion that UMass Boston integrate the campus into the surrounding urban fabric and generally improve linkages was supported.
- The Master Plan should help to enliven Mt. Vernon Street, through placement of housing and retail space.
- There was consensus amongst staff present that the addition of attractively designed commercial and retail space combined with UMass buildings would be a real benefit to community neighbors beyond the campus.
- The University should be careful not to turn its “back” to the surrounding community as it reconfigures the campus – Expanding the Hub maintains the front door at the Campus Center.
- There was general appreciation how aspects of all plans open things up to the community – there was a feeling that the University is opening up the campus to create and encourage more community within and beyond UMass.
- UMass needs to improve connection and views to the community and the city.
- An enhanced Mt. Vernon St. entrance is one of UMass Boston’s opportunities to strengthen its connection to the city.
- A majority of attendees supported the idea of creating a tighter physical connection with the JFK Library.
Student/Campus Life
There was overwhelming acknowledgment that campus life needs to be more vibrant and active and a sense of community fostered.
- The University needs to program academic buildings that enhance activity on campus beyond typical school hours.
- It is very difficult to get a sense of community on campus; the second scheme opens up the campus, disperses people and offers more views of the surrounding area, the water and the city.
- New recreational space is needed for enhancing campus life and improving recruitment and retention of students.
Campus Housing
Most participants supportive of campus housing believe that residence halls should not be located in the center of campus, but on the edges near Mt. Vernon Street.
- Housing in the core of campus would send a message that resident students are more important than commuting students – creation of a two-tiered system.
- In response to the notion that athletic facilities potentially be included in the residences would be open to everyone on campus, a number of people felt that most students and staff outside of those living in the residences would not actually use the gym. If there is a need to add additional program to the residences, perhaps including classrooms in the residences would be more appropriate. That way, non-resident students would benefit from new housing on campus: brand new, state-of-the-art classroom space.
- The university needs to encourage buildings that operate 24/7 to enable activity on campus beyond typical school hours. The inclusion of mixed use residential with retail/commercial can enable greater activity and also benefit the adjacent community.
- Different housing types should be spread out, over campus, to which CKS replied that UMass must determine exactly what type (graduate, undergraduate, family, etc) and what type/or percentage of distribution they want to plan for.
Transportation and Parking
The general consensus reflected support for locating parking garages on the edges of campus, keeping vehicles out of the interior. Wide support was demonstrated for facilitating alternative modes of transportation to and within campus.
- Distributed parking, provides more convenience for accessing campus buildings.
- Many participants support the idea of pulling the loop road into campus, which allows for a stronger connection to the waterfront near the Campus Center.
- Has consideration been given to moving the loop road behind the Campus Center?
- The University should pursue the delivery of water transportation to the campus.
- A suggestion was made to build pedestrian bridges over the loop road to improve pedestrian safety. CKS explained that will be a consideration made by the road and transportation engineers and that pedestrian bridge crossings are often not effective and underused because people typically take the shortest path and will end up crossing the road where ever they please. This in turn is more dangerous than well planned pedestrian crossing at grade.
- Garages should be located closer to the Clark Building. That way, when people are dropped off or park, it encourages them to experience the ‘entire length’ of the campus.
- UMass should consider establishing a ferry that picks up and drops off between the JFK Library and downtown Boston.
- The design of the circulation system needs to be strategic given plans to grow the campus and enrollment.
Sustainability/Environmental Protection
Participants supported reinforcing and incorporating principles of sustainability into the Master Plan.
- Work to harness winds off Columbia Point for power on campus.
Athletic Facilities
A majority of participants did not like the idea of relocating UMB athletic facilities to BC High, however some liked the idea of shared space.
- Need to be careful about isolating athletic fields at the western edge of campus – facilities should be more integrated into the campus.
- Athletic facilities on campus enhance vibrancy.
- The need for upgrades to or replacement of existing athletic facilities in the future should be given the appropriate consideration in the list of priorities defined by the master plan.
Incorporation with Natural Surroundings
Strong support was expressed for taking better advantage of the waterfront; however, we need to be mindful of coastal changes and rising sea levels.
- General support was shown for schemes that encouraged greater use of the Harborwalk by the campus community and general public.
- We should conserve the area between the JFK Library and Harbor Point – environmental protection needs to have priority.
- The concepts don’t go far enough in using the waterfront as a resource.
Green, Open Space
Participants were very supportive of adding more green, open space to the campus.
- The idea of building parkland on the northern edge was enthusiastically embraced.
- Students actively use the harbor walk; therefore we should not plan to build new facilities too close to water, for fear of cutting off activity.
- The amphitheatre near the water in the Northern ‘Waterfront’ Park drawings is a favorable design/planning move.
- The addition of a permanent place for commencement (the amphitheatre in the North Park) would be a great addition.
- “A lot of first-rate institutions have quads. So should we.”
- “This is a wind-tortured peninsula.” UMass must ensure that outdoor spaces remain pleasant year-round, including winter.
Phasing/Implementation
- The University needs to be very deliberate in how it phases in changes to the campus in an effort to minimize disruption to University operations.
- Where will building occupants go after a building is demolished?
- People asked questions about scheduling: will it really take the full 25-year plan in order to implode and rebuild the key buildings on campus? UMass and CKS responded by saying the political reality of the situation does not allow for the most efficient demolition, design and construction process.
Response to Three Concept Plans
- There was desire by staff members to keep the guiding principles of the strategic plan and the master planning efforts at the forefront of decision-making.
- There was consensus among staff present that the addition of attractively designed commercial and retail space combined with UMass buildings would be a real benefit to their community neighbors beyond the campus.
- Many felt that pulling in the loop road under the ‘Expanding the Hub’ concept would also be a benefit to the campus, in establishing a much stronger connection to the water’s edge in front of the Campus Center.
- Opinions were expressed that improving connections through the campus addresses more of the entire peninsula, whereas the first two schemes seem to leave the middle section of the peninsula ‘fallow’. Also in claiming the peninsula as UMass Boston’s, the third scheme limits the temptation for other developers or institutions to come in and try to take over the un-built parcels of land.
- The views from the 11th floor impress visitors to UMass. The campus could benefit from more views such as – height and density should be considered in all the plans.
- The third scheme has a very ‘urban’ quality, which is less emphasized in the other schemes. “It’s got a conceptual framework that says ‘CITY’.”
- “The orientation of the third model is the most interesting and the most urban.”
- Those who expressed an opinion on the Calf Pasture Pumping Station believe it should be rebuilt and reused, and not torn down.