Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMouras, Steven L.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:57:32Z
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:57:32Z
dc.date.issued2004-12-07en_US
dc.identifier.otheretd-01202005-181318en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/37066
dc.description.abstractUniversities, particularly large ones, often operate as autonomously as towns, with their own police departments, residential neighborhoods, public transit, and power plants. Universities and towns also address similar issues such as future land use, housing development; public services such as utilities, parks, recreational facilities and libraries; public safety; and transportation, transit and parking. There are areas where towns and universities are different such as a universityâ s focus on education, research, and learning facilities. There is also a difference in the primary planning tool with campus master plan versus the comprehensive plan for towns. This paper examined four campus master plans to determine whether a need exists to establish basic guidelines for campus master plans, to ensure they address the complex requirements of large campuses. The examination looked at both the uniformity and completeness of the four master plans. The results of the examination showed a wide variety of documents. The master plans lacked uniformity in basic areas such as implementation guidance, a summary of existing conditions, or even an executive summary. Additionally there were a number of core planning criteria that were incomplete (planning in land use, housing, and public safety). The conclusion of this evaluation is these plans are interesting and even insightful, but generally lack some basic areas of good planning. In particular there is a need for land use analysis for current or future growth management, inclusion of public safety planning, and a more complete explanation of methodology and data analysis.en_US
dc.publisherVirginia Techen_US
dc.relation.haspartcampusmasterplanning1.pdfen_US
dc.relation.haspartcampusmasterplanning2.pdfen_US
dc.rightsI hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to Virginia Tech or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report.en_US
dc.subjectUniversity Planningen_US
dc.subjectComprehensive Planen_US
dc.subjectCampus Master Planningen_US
dc.titleCampus Master Planning; A Need for Standardsen_US
dc.typeMajor paperen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUrban Affairs and Planningen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Urban and Regional Planningen_US
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Urban and Regional Planningen_US
thesis.degree.levelmastersen_US
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineUrban Affairs and Planningen_US
dc.contributor.committeechairZahm, Diane L.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberJohnson, Benjamin C.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberStephenson, Max O. Jr.en_US
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-01202005-181318/en_US
dc.date.sdate2005-01-20en_US
dc.date.rdate2005-02-01
dc.date.adate2005-02-01en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record