campus master plan final

2

Message from the President

To thrive an organization needs to have a clear sense of its future, it needs to set goals and priorities, and it needs to commit resources accordingly. In short, it needs a vision and a plan as to how to get there. As Alan Lakein has said, "Planning is bringing the future into the present so that you can do something about it now". The Master Plans contained in this document for Wilfrid Laurier University campuses in Brantford and Waterloo serve the important purpose of enabling the university community to act today to secure a vibrant and exciting campus environment in the future. The future is uncertain. Therefore it is certain that even the most carefully considered plans will change over time as unanticipated and unpredictable events and pressures act to modify what, and how much, can be accomplished toward achieving our stated goals. Nevertheless it is essential that we have a plan to guide us when such vagaries occur ‐ a plan enables us to reference the extent of modification that needs to be made from our original course, and the extent to which our longer‐range goals and objectives may have to shift to accommodate unanticipated events. Of course it is also essential that a plan be reviewed and refreshed regularly to enable adjustments in course even when there are no significant perturbations in the external environment of the university. This is because internal change is constant, and the

goals and objectives that our students, staff and faculty had last year, or the year before, will shift. This natural evolution of institutional priorities and plans is critical to the growth and competitiveness of the university and must be reflected in the master campus plan to ensure ongoing alignment of institutional aspirations and activities with institutional resources. Therefore the campus master plans will be reviewed and refreshed on a three to five year cycle, the timing of which will depend in part on the extent of change in the internal and external environment. I am grateful to all those who contributed to assembling the plans that follow. They were developed in a highly consultative process that enabled all voices to be heard, and in a very compressed time frame. I look forward to the next master campus planning cycle which will begin in three to five years, or even sooner if there are major forces to which the university must respond. Another quote from Alan Lakein is "Failing to plan is planning to fail". Laurier will thrive with well laid and frequently refreshed plans for a bright and exciting future.

Dr. Max Blouw President and Vice‐Chancellor Wilfrid Laurier University

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

1 Wilfrid Laurier UniversityIBI GROUP

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Wilfrid Laurier University Campus Master Plan was developed through a collaborative process involving a broad range of stakeholders and interest groups, under the leadership of Jim Butler, Vice‐President of Finance and Administration, and, Gary Nower, Assistant Vice‐President: Physical Resources, and the Campus Master Plan Steering Committee. The participation of representatives from WLU’s senior management, the faculty, staff and the students of the Brantford and Waterloo campuses has been invaluable to establishing a creative, innovative, new vision for the future growth of each urban campus. Contributions to this process were also provided by the, staff and councillors for the City of Waterloo, City of Brantford, Region of Waterloo, residents and business owners of these communities.

The Master Plan for the WLU Waterloo and Brantford campuses has been prepared by the following staff members of IBI Group:

• Trevor McIntyre, Director • Paul Puopolo, Project Manager • John Lohmus, Project Advisor on Campus Planning • Don Drackley • Richard Young • Scott Henderson • Laura Dowell • Meghan Radford • Betty Anne White • Rino Dal Bello • Paul De Figueiredo • Neno Kovacevic • Deborah Perry • Louise Puopolo

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

Wilfrid Laurier University IBI GROUP2

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

1.1 THE NEED FOR A CAMPUS MASTER PLAN ......................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS ..................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CAMPUS MASTER PLAN ..................................................... 3

B. BRANTFORD CAMPUS ........................................................................................................... 5 2.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 A HISTORY OF CAMPUS GROWTH ....................................................................................................................................... 7

2.3 THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................... 9

2.4 EXISTING CAMPUS CONDITIONS AND TRENDS ............................................................................................................... 10

3.0 PLANNING FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 12

3.1 CAMPUS GROWTH PROJECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 12

3.2 GOALS TO DIRECT CAMPUS GROWTH .............................................................................................................................. 15

3.3 STRUCTURING ELEMENTS OF THE CAMPUS MASTER PLAN ........................................................................................ 16

4.0 CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN .............................................................................................................................................. 21

5.0 BUILT FORM AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER .................................................................................................................... 23

5.1 OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 23

5.2 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENHANCED CAMPUS LIFE ............................................................................................................ 24

5.3 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES ........................................................................................................................................... 25

5.4 AREA SPECIFIC GUIDELINES .............................................................................................................................................. 27

5.5 CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES ...................................................................................................................................... 29

6.0 OPEN SPACE GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................................................................ 33

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


6.1 OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 33

6.2 STREETSCAPE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 34

6.3 PLANT MATERIAL ................................................................................................................................................................. 44

7.0 TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................................................................................... 48

7.1 OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 48

7.2 PARKING ................................................................................................................................................................................ 48

7.3 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................... 49

7.4 PUBLIC TRANSIT ................................................................................................................................................................... 50

7.5 CYCLISTS ............................................................................................................................................................................... 50

7.6 PEDESTRIANS ....................................................................................................................................................................... 51

8.0 IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................................................................................... 52

8.1 LAND TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH ................................................................................................................................. 52

8.2 PHASING TO ACCOMMODATE CAMPUS GROWTH .......................................................................................................... 56

C. WATERLOO CAMPUS ........................................................................................................... 59 9.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR WATERLOO CAMPUS .......................................................................................... 60

9.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 60

9.2 A HISTORY OF CAMPUS GROWTH ..................................................................................................................................... 61

9.3 THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................. 63

9.4 EXISTING CAMPUS CONDITIONS AND TRENDS ............................................................................................................... 64

10.0 PLANNING FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 69

10.1 CAMPUS GROWTH PROJECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 69

10.2 PARKING AT THE WATERLOO CAMPUS TODAY .............................................................................................................. 70

10.3 FUTURE PARKING NEEDS ................................................................................................................................................... 71

10.4 GOALS TO DIRECT CAMPUS GROWTH .............................................................................................................................. 72

10.5 STRUCTURING ELEMENTS OF THE CAMPUS PLAN ........................................................................................................ 73

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


11.0 THE CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN ........................................................................................................................................ 76

12.0 BUILT FORM AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER ...................................................................................................................... 78

12.1 OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 78

12.2 OPPORTUNITITES FOR ENHANCED CAMPUS LIFE .......................................................................................................... 79

12.3 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES ........................................................................................................................................... 79

12.4 CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES ...................................................................................................................................... 85

13.0 OPEN SPACE GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................................................................ 89

13.1 OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 89

14.0 WATERLOO CAMPUS TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY ............................................................................................................ 120

14.1 PARKING ALLOCATION APPROACH ................................................................................................................................ 120

14.2 PARKING PLAN .................................................................................................................................................................... 121

14.3 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................. 122

14.4 PROTOTYPICAL PARKING DESIGN SCENARIOS ............................................................................................................ 123

14.5 PUBLIC TRANSIT ................................................................................................................................................................. 125

15.0 SITE SELECTION AND PHASING ................................................................................................................................................. 126

15.1 SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................................................................................. 126

15.2 ACQUISITION & CONSOLIDATION .................................................................................................................................... 128

15.3 PHASING ............................................................................................................................................................................... 128

D. IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................................................................. 141 16.0 IMPLEMENTATION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 142

16.1 PLAN REVIEW AND MONITORING ..................................................................................................................................... 142

16.2 SUSTAINABILITY ................................................................................................................................................................. 143

16.3 COLLABORATION ............................................................................................................................................................... 148

16.4 SUMMATION ......................................................................................................................................................................... 149

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


1

INTRODUCTION

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


1.0 INTRODUCTION Wilfrid Laurier University has undergone significant transformations in academic programming and physical expansion over the past decade to become a major academic institution distinguished by a distinct and intimate sense of community. Known for its innovation in academic programming and delivery, it is one of the fastest growing universities in Canada, with enrolment doubling over the last ten years.

Major capital projects have expanded the presence of the University within the City of Waterloo, and established satellite campuses in Downtown Brantford and Kitchener.

With Laurier entering its second century in 2011, a new long‐term vision and practical framework for the physical development of the Waterloo and Brantford Campuses is fundamental to ensure the strategic, sustainable growth of the University as a premier institution over the next 25 years.

As a vision for the future physical development of the University, the Campus Master Plan is intended to complement the Academic Plan and be supportive of Laurier’s mission, policies and directives. The layout and character of the campus that will result from the implementation of the Campus Master Plan will reinforce and enhance the intimate sense of campus community as the University grows, complement the University’s connection to the surrounding community, and foster Laurier’s student‐focused approach to campus and academic life ‐ providing an inspirational environment for learning, research and collaboration.

1.1 THE NEED FOR A CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

Laurier University has ambitious plans for the future – to grow each campus to 15,000 students by 2023.

Today, the Waterloo Campus faces the challenge of its current layout as it transitions to a University with comprehensive, research‐intensive and international status through intensification of the central campus and outer campus lands while remedying stubborn design issues to create a sustainable, distinctive and pedestrian‐friendly campus.

The rapid growth of the Brantford Campus over the past decade, from its inception in 1999 with 39 students to approximately 2,350 students in 2009, has created the need for a master plan. It has also shown the challenges of ad hoc institutional growth in an established downtown urban setting in the absence of a defined campus. To achieve its potential, its future growth must take place within a framework that recognizes the context of its downtown location.

The significant growth of the University over the past decade, over multiple locations, and ambitious plans for the future indicates that Laurier will become increasingly more visible in the urban fabric of Waterloo and Brantford. As such, a Campus Master Plan document that guides this future growth for both campuses, each with its own and different character and challenges, is necessary.

1.2 THE MASTER PLANNING PROCESS

The magnitude of change occurring at Laurier and the need for an overarching strategic vision prompted the University to commission a Campus Master Plan in late 2008. A number of objectives were established to guide the Campus Master Plan process: • To analyze the use of current space resources and scheduling

practices to identify opportunities for more efficient use of space within current operations and as new buildings are brought on stream.

• To provide the University with a vision to serve as the framework for

future campus growth over the next twenty‐five years. • To provide design guidelines to improve the functionality and

appearance of existing and future facilities and amenities, including elements such as the key gateways to the campus.

The Campus Master Plan is intended to complement the Academic Plan, ensuring that the physical Campus continues to accommodate the vision and aspirations of the Laurier Community. The Campus Master Plan and Academic Plan should be viewed as documents that support and inform one another.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Throughout the spring and summer of 2009, a number of interviews with University and community stakeholders were conducted in both Brantford and Waterloo. Interactive workshops were held on both campuses in March, 2009, in which participants openly discussed and debated guiding principles, preliminary concepts and key opportunities for each campus. A series of open houses were held in October, 2009 at each campus to present concepts to Laurier and the greater communities, and to receive their feedback. Throughout the project, presentations were made to the Steering Committee and representatives of Laurier’s management group and their feedback directed the development of the Campus Master Plan. A series of meetings were held with a range of groups (e.g., Laurier Senate, the Building and Property Committee, Board of Governors, City of Waterloo, City of Brantford) in both communities with a special interest in the Campus Master Plan which has also been incorporated into the final document. These consultations have provided the foundation upon which the Campus Master Plan has been built. The Campus Master Plan provides a framework for the continued growth of the University in both Waterloo and Brantford that attempts to balance the creation of new buildings and open spaces that will inspire and nurture a sense of identity and pride. The Plan for the Waterloo Campus offers a new framework to guide the transformation of a restructured campus core and intensification of the surrounding lands. A contemporary approach to campus parking, transportation and internal circulation puts the emphasis back on alternative modes of travel and makes pedestrians and cyclists the priority. Through the development of an integrated cross‐campus network of corridors and pathways, and revitalized open spaces, the Plan focuses on maintaining the unparalleled sense of community, and elevating the individual’s campus experience to ensure the University maintains their competitive edge as a high‐caliber institution devoted to personal growth and academic excellence. The Plan for the Brantford Campus builds upon the heritage character of the City core – an asset that is fundamental to the University’s identity, seeks to integrate the University campus with other Downtown

functions, and provides a flexible framework for the future growth of the campus in an evolving urban environment.

1.3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

In order to implement a sustainable multi‐campus vision for the University, the Campus Master Plan is guided by eleven overarching principles. As they develop and mature, each campus must be planned as a ‘complete community’ for learning and living, and should also be integrated with the surrounding urban fabric. Based on the ‘Smart Growth’ approach to community planning, which aims to concentrate growth in core areas or nodes to make efficient use of land and infrastructure, the principles were further refined through consultation with a range of University and community stakeholders. Adopting such an approach to campus growth and development will allow Laurier to maintain a strong sense of community and maintain the sense of the belonging that is an attractive quality of the University. The following principles were identified to serve as building blocks of the Campus Master Plan and guide campus development in the future. • Create distinctive, attractive and inspirational campuses with a

strong visual identity and sense of place from a local and international perspective.

• Create a pedestrian and cyclist friendly campus.

• Preserve existing landscapes and develop new open spaces.

• Promote compact building and site design to maintain the close‐

knit Laurier campus experience. • Create a range of housing opportunities for first year, senior and

graduate students. • Utilize existing and new campus lands efficiently by pursuing

intensification, infill and redevelopment.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Make land acquisition and development decisions that are practical and cost efficient.

• Encourage mixed use campus buildings along urban corridors and

nodes. • Provide for a variety of transportation alternatives and minimize

parking demand within the core area. • Strengthen relationships and encourage cooperation between the

University and surrounding community. • Recognize the University’s Sustainability Policies within all new

development. While the guiding principles set an overall vision and direction for campus development, the unique contexts and urban settings of the Waterloo and Brantford campuses call for a distinct interpretation and implementation of these principles. Such an approach will ensure the

future growth of the University captures the unique identity and sense of place at each campus. In Waterloo, the Campus Master Plan will address the challenge of adapting the existing campus lands as it grows into a comprehensive and international institution. This development will occur primarily through the intensification and reorganization of the main campus lands. In Brantford, the Campus Master Plan will provide a clear strategy for growth and development in the downtown to create a cohesive and distinctive urban campus with an identifiable sense of community. The challenge will be to define the campus within the city core while remaining compatible with surrounding land uses. These guiding principles will be implemented through a series specific goals and objectives for each campus, which are then distilled into specific guidelines that will direct the design of new buildings and campus open spaces.

5

BRANTFORD CAMPUS

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


2.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Laurier Brantford campus has been established through partnerships and collaboration between the University, City of Brantford, Mohawk College, Nipissing University and members of the Brantford community. The development of a 1996 business plan for the establishment of a University in Brantford, commissioned by the Brant Community Futures Development Corporation, became the catalyst for discussions that resulted in the creation of a Brant University Steering Committee. In 1997, this committee presented an official proposal to Wilfrid Laurier University in 1998 and Professor Terry Copp of the History Department suggested that the University should create a satellite campus to meet Brantford’s needs. In 1999, Laurier Brantford opened its doors to 39 students and higher education, housed within the Carnegie Building.

Since the opening of the campus, Laurier Brantford has experienced significant growth resulting from a unique vision and distinctive campus setting coupled with innovative academic programming centred around the core discipline of Contemporary Studies. Through growth, the University has been one of the major forces of downtown revitalization and renewal through the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings, new construction that has recognized the Downtown’s architectural heritage and diversifying the demographics of the core area. As a result, the campus has established a reputation as a small university with a distinct heritage identity that is integrated into its urban environment. Laurier Brantford has embraced this aspect of its development, and will continue to foster campus through integration and play a key role in helping transform the Downtown into a centre for post‐secondary education as well as a vibrant destination for all Brantford residents.

In 2009, the University presented a degree to its 1,000th graduating student, and also celebrated its 10th Anniversary – significant milestones in the history of the campus. With 2,350 students, Laurier will be looking to expand undergraduate enrolment through new programming

as well as academic partnerships with Mohawk College, establishing graduate programming by increasing research activities.

Laurier Brantford opened its doors in Brantford in 1999, occupying the renovated Carnegie Library. The Carnegie Building remains as the signature building of the Laurier Brantford Campus.

Colin Bailey, the 1,000th

graduating student of Laurier Brantford, receives his degree from Wilfrid Laurier University Chancellor John Pollock. (Photograph by Brian Thompson, The Expositor)

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


2.2 A HISTORY OF CAMPUS GROWTH

Laurier Brantford has grown though partnerships with the City of Brantford, Mohawk College, Nipissing University, as well as public and private sector partners, and has become increasingly integrated into the Downtown over the past decade. University‐occupied buildings outside of the Heritage Block are interspersed throughout the downtown with surrounding commercial, institutional and residential uses. The Heritage Block is defined as the area of George Street, Darling Street, Charlotte Street and Dalhousie Street. The University’s practice of adaptively reusing existing buildings to accommodate a majority of its growth has resulted in the rehabilitation and maintenance of a number of heritage buildings in the Downtown.

Campus growth through adaptive reuse and new construction has successfully accommodated substantial increases in student enrollment while maintaining compatibility with the urban environment. The introduction of the campus in the Downtown has resulted in a continued interaction between the Laurier and Brantford communities –

a distinctive feature of the campus. The University makes use of public buildings such as the Sanderson Centre, open spaces such as Harmony Square and Victoria Park and the Brantford Public Library represent the synergies between campus and community.

The Downtown contains a mix of land uses characteristic of a typical downtown urban environment, as well as many vacant and underutilized properties.

Harmony Square is a good example of the synergy between the University and the City. The recently completed open space is regularly used for campus activities such as Orientation Week.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Campus Growth 1999 To 2004 The first five years of campus growth was characterized by the rehabilitation and conversion of existing buildings within the downtown for academic use. The former Carnegie Public Library, now the Carnegie Building, was renovated to serve as the main academic and administrative centre for the campus. Grand River Hall, formerly the Holstein Building, was renovated in 2001 to house the campus bookstore and additional classrooms and office space on the lower two floors, as well as residence beds on the upper three floors. For the 2003‐04 academic year, additional residence space was created within the Post House Residence for 41 students through the renovation and conversion of the original Post Office building.

The renovation of the old Odeon Theatre on Market Street provided shared academic space between the University and Mohawk College for their joint academic programs. The Odeon Building currently houses two large lecture theatres, as well as a computer lab, additional classroom space and lounge. The Odeon Annex is located adjacent to the Odeon Building and is leased to Nipissing University to provide classrooms and office space for the concurrent BA/BEd program.

Campus Growth 2005 to Today

Over the past five years, the Brantford Campus has experienced significant growth. The development of the Heritage Block is a testament to the University’s effort to develop a more cohesive campus footprint within the downtown core. The first campus building within this Block was the Student Union Building and was the first new building project undertaken by the University. The Journalism House was established through the renovation of the Prison Arts Foundation House in 2006 to accommodate the Journalism faculty and a state‐of‐the‐art newsroom. Wilkes House was established through the conversion of the original Wilkes residence and subsequent additions, residence beds as well as a small fitness facility.

Recent increases in first‐year student enrolment have resulted in the need for further expansion of the campus. In 2009, the University acquired 97 Dalhousie Street, which will be renovated and converted for administrative offices and lecture space. The acquisition of Lucy Marco Place was completed in partnership with the City of Brantford, who will own and operate the affordable housing component of this building. The former CIBC Building, located on Dalhousie Street, was acquired and renovated to house academic, administrative, and lab uses in 2009.

The Laurier Brantford Campus in 2009

Laurier Brantford has accommodated campus growth through adaptive reuse of existing buildings such as Wilkes House and new construction that reflects the Downtown’s architectural heritage such as the Student Union and Post House.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Construction of the Research and Academic Centre commenced in 2009. The building will house lecture theatres, academic and administrative offices, research space and study rooms.

Laurier Brantford also leases additional academic space in St. Andrew’s Community Centre, 41‐45 Market Street for administrative uses and the Sanderson Centre for large lectures. The University’s document collection is housed in the Brantford Public Library. The City in partnership with the University provides library and research resources for staff, students and faculty. Additional residence space is leased from the private sector in Rizzo Residence, Lawyer’s Hall and Imperial Hall.

2.3 THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT

Downtown Brantford is a distinctive and transforming urban environment that is continuing to revitalize after a period of significant deterioration in urban function and built form. Established largely in the late 19th century and early 20th century the area was historically a prosperous commercial area. Its building fabric dates mostly from this

time period and consists primarily of 2‐3 storey masonry buildings often built with commercial uses at grade and residential above.

Land uses within the area are generally a mix of residential, commercial, recreational, cultural, entertainment and civic uses, in addition to post‐secondary educational institutions. The presence and organization of these land uses result from the historical function of the downtown core and the decline of that function over time. While many existing

CAMPUS GROWTH 1999 ‐ 2009

Year Sq.ft. Sq.m.

Carnegie Building 1999 18,212 1,692

Grand River Hall 2001 82,860 7,698

Post House Residence 2003 30,440 2,828

Odeon Building 2004 21,075 1,958

Student Union Building 2005 16,641 1,546

Odeon Annex 2005 13,078 1,215

Journalism House 2006 5,414 503

Wilkes House 2006 23,734 2,205

97 Dalhousie Street 2009 5,930 551

Lucy Marco Place 2009 73,840 6,859

102 Dalhousie Street 2009 13,282 1,234

Research and Academic Centre 2010 65,000 6,038

369,506 34,327

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


buildings in the downtown are vacant or underutilized, opportunities for redevelopment are numerous. The deterioration of the downtown has resulted in the erosion of any definable commercial or retail district. Currently, there are some existing retail and commercial uses clustered along Colborne, Dalhousie and Market Streets, in single purpose and mixed‐use buildings.

The Downtown is now in a period of rejuvenation and change which was initially spurred by the establishment and continued growth of Laurier Brantford, as well as Mohawk College and Nipissing University. The City of Brantford has been a consistent financial partner, booster and supporter of Laurier and other post‐secondary educational institutions. A new vision has been established for the downtown as a centre for learning and education, as well as a destination for business, arts and culture, entertainment and residence, increased its post‐secondary educational institution space.

2.4 EXISTING CAMPUS CONDITIONS AND TRENDS

Built Form and Architecture Unlike most other universities, the Laurier Brantford campus is not located in a defined area separate from other public and private landholdings. It is located in the historic downtown area of the City of Brantford on a number of discrete properties, owned or used by the University.

Most university buildings were originally built for other purposes and have been adapted for re‐use for academic and associated activities. The buildings were built at various times from the 19th century through to the last quarter of the 20th century. Most are of masonry construction reflecting the predominant building material in the area. All their interiors have been extensively redesigned to suit contemporary needs however, the exteriors have been restored to their original character and historical period. New building construction or additions on university property have been sympathetically designed with exterior finishes that support the historic character of the Downtown.

Adaptive re‐use by Laurier is transforming and preserving many heritage buildings in the Downtown.

The Downtown contains some retail and commercial functions in mixed use and single purpose buildings, such as on Dalhousie Street.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Open Space The open space system of the Laurier Brantford Campus is decidedly different than that found at most other university campuses. The Campus is very urban in nature given the buildings are oriented to public streets. Individual properties generally have little open space; however the ongoing development of the Heritage Block represents an opportunity to create a near campus courtyard.

In the city’s core, there are few large open spaces. Brant County War Memorial Park, Bell Memorial Park and Victoria Park are the Downtown’s only three public greenspaces. The Carnegie Building fronts onto Victoria Park, where cross cutting pathways and perimeter sidewalks encourage interaction between students, faculty and staff with city residents. These pathways also offer a short walking time between campus buildings and other downtown destinations. The Park is well lit, has mature shade trees and benches that provide people with reading, meeting, and other types of passive recreation opportunities. While pathways facilitate movement through and within the park, the organization of seating areas encourages users to stay and enjoy the space for passive recreation.

Harmony Square is used by residents and Laurier Brantford for a number of campus events, again facilitating the interaction of the Laurier Brantford community with that of the broader urban community. The Grand River and a network of associated walking and biking trails are in proximity to the Downtown and are easily accessed by staff, faculty, students and city residents.

Circulation and Access Pedestrian circulation between campus buildings occurs along public streets, except within the Heritage Block where students can move between buildings. The downtown area is characterized by a grid pattern of streets with relatively short blocks between intersections. Along longer blocks, such as between Queen and Market Streets, there are other opportunities for pedestrian movement via open spaces such as Harmony Square. Parking lots such as the Darling Street public parking lot are also used as informal pedestrian linkages.

Vehicular circulation is by the same public street pattern. Traffic is however restricted by a one way street movement on both Colborne and Dalhousie Streets.

Parking and Transportation There are a number of opportunities for public off‐street parking, but very limited parking is available at current university locations. The University issues a limited number of parking permits for campus parking spaces, and a lottery determines the parking permit holders. Students who living within 4 km of the university are not eligible for parking permits with the exception of those requiring mobility aids and those living in residence. Car‐pooling is also encouraged through the provision of parking permits, whereby up to four vehicles can be registered on a single permit but only one vehicle can be parked on campus at any point in time. Many students compete with the public for available spaces, as on‐street parking is free. Parking by students around Victoria Park and in the immediate area has become a concern for downtown business owners who are becoming increasingly concerned with the number of students parking and re‐parking on downtown streets, thereby occupying spaces that could be used by patrons. The Downtown transit terminal is located in the Downtown in close proximity to the campus, providing access to all routes that allow students to travel to other parts of the City without the use of a vehicle.

Victoria Park is one of the largest green spaces in downtown Brantford.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


3.0 PLANNING FOUNDATIONS

3.1 CAMPUS GROWTH PROJECTIONS

The Campus Master Plan for the Laurier Brantford Campus addresses four planning horizons:

The first phase or immediate time horizon would address future campus growth over the next two years to the academic year 2010/2011. Development in this phase would occur on existing or recently acquired University landholdings and will require the acquisition of additional landholdings to accommodate new student residences. Campus growth will be accommodated through the adaptive reuse of existing Downtown buildings, and new construction on the Heritage Block and an additional location in the downtown. The acquisition of large blocks of land for future growth should be also be pursued in this phase.

The second phase or short‐range time horizon includes the future growth of the campus over 2 to 7 years to the academic year 2016/2017. Development in this phase will require additional land beyond the existing University landholdings and would address current academic space shortfalls, provide additional academic space, as well as new residence space and parking to accommodate student enrolment growth. Intensive development of University landholdings should be pursued in this phase to ensure additional student growth can be accommodated beyond the 2016/2017 academic year. The University will need to continue to acquire larger blocks of land for future growth.

The third phase or mid‐range time horizon addresses future growth over a 7 to 12 year period, between 2017 to the academic year 2022/2023. Additional land will also be required in this phase of development to accommodate additional academic space, residences and potentially parking. Continued intensification of University landholdings through new development may decrease the amount of new landholdings required to accommodate growth into the long‐range horizon.

The fourth phase or long‐range time horizon commences after 2023. During this phase, the Brantford Campus is expected to reach its ultimate enrolment of 15,000 “Full Time Equivalent” (FTE) students. To accommodate the academic and residence space needs for this campus, the University may need to continue to pursue the acquisition of lands beyond its landholdings, depending on the amount of land acquired and the density of new development.

University Growth Projections There are multiple factors which affect the need for growth in campus facilities in the short, mid and long range future at Laurier. The single most important long term factor, however, is the projected increase in student enrolment over the next 15 years to 15,000 FTE students at the Brantford Campus.

In 2007/08, Laurier Brantford had 1,725 FTE students. For planning purposes, it is assumed that the current faculty to student, as well as staff to student ratios would remain constant as the student enrolment grows. The table below shows the expected number of students and Laurier Brantford faculty and staff for the immediate, short, mid and long term horizons of the Plan.

Academic Building Space Needs

Laurier Brantford will require a substantial amount of new academic space to accommodate such a significant increase in student enrolment. The current gross floor area available on campus is 7,389 and 4,324

Phase Total Students

Additional Students

Total Faculty

Additional Faculty

Total Staff

Additional Staff

Baseline (2007/2008)

1,725 ‐ 43 ‐ 39 ‐

1 (2009‐2010/2011) 2,800 1,075 69 26 63 24

2 (2011‐2016/ 2017)

4,000 1,200 152 83 276 213

3 (2017‐2022/ 2023)

8,000 4,000 303 151 553 277

4 (2023+)

15,000 7,000 569 266 1,037 484

Total 15,000 13,275 569 526 1,037 998

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


square metres of owned and leased space respectively, for a total of 11,713 square metres. The existing space shortfall is experienced in all functional space categories, with the majority found in Faculty, Graduate and Undergraduate labs, Central Services, Library Facilities and Campus Study Space, Food Services, Recreation and Athletic Space and Assembly and Exhibition facilities.

For master planning purposes, a building space plan targeting 100% “entitlement” to provide the highest quality living and learning environment at the University. Based on the current building programme of Laurier Brantford, the desire of the University to address existing space shortfalls in the short range time horizon of growth, and projected space needs to accommodate 15,000 FTE students, the following levels of entitlement can be reached in each phase:

In the mid term time horizon, student entitlement on the Laurier Brantford Campus is similar to that currently available at the Waterloo Campus and 100% entitlement is reached in the third phase and maintained throughout the fourth. In total, to achieve 100% entitlement for 15,000 students on the Laurier Brantford Campus, 2.6 million additional square feet of building space is required, for a total projected space of 2.7 million square feet. This does not include space for student residences.

Student Residences In 2009, Laurier Brantford had 427 residence beds of which 333 beds are owned by the University and 94 are leased from the private sector. These residence beds provide housing for first‐year students. Currently, the University provides student residence beds at a ratio of 0.26 beds per FTE student, but will look to increase the ratio to 0.35 in ten years

with the objective of increasing the inventory of senior‐level and graduate student housing on the campus.

To support the additional enrolment growth of 13,725 students over the planning horizon and provide housing for first‐year students over the immediate to short‐term and senior‐level and graduate housing over the mid to long term, the University will need to add a total of 4,917 beds to its current inventory. Based on the current building program of the University, it will be providing an additional 500 beds in the first and second phase, the need to lease additional beds from the private sector can be eliminated in the first phase of development.

Parking Needs Parking to accommodate future campus growth is calculated based on the City of Brantford Zoning By‐law, which requires on‐site parking for post secondary land uses on the basis of 1 space per 70 square metres of gross floor area. Also, the By‐law currently provides for three parking exemption areas in the downtown:

• Parking Exemption Area 1 extending from Darling Street to Icomm Drive and West Street to Clarence Street where 50% of required parking spaces must be provided;

• Parking Exemption Area 2 from Darling Street to Nelson Street between West Street and Clarence Street where 75% of required parking must be provided; and

Year

Total FTE Students

Additional Space (m2) Cumulative Space (m2)

Entitlement

1 (2009‐2010/2011) 2,800 6,050 17,763 37 %

2 (2011‐ 2016/2017) 4,000 27,295 25,058 66 %

3 (2017‐ 2022/2023) 8,000 116,892 161,950 110%

4 (2023+) 15,000 92,704 254,654 100%

Total in Phase 4 15,000 242,941 m2 2,614,995 ft2

254,654 m2 2,741,072 ft2

100%

Year Total FTE Students Total Beds New Beds Required

Phase 1 (2009 – 2010/2011) 2,800 728 395

Phase 2 (2011‐2016/2017) 4,000 1,040 312

Phase 3 (2017 – 2022/2023) 8,000 2,800 1,760

Phase 4 (2023+) 15,000 5,250 2,450

Total 5,250 4,917

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Parking Exemption Area 3 from half a block north of Colborne Street to Wharfe Street between Brant Avenue and Market Street where all land uses are exempt from providing parking.

Based on the current academic and residence building programme for Laurier Brantford to accommodate 15,000 students and assuming that the Zoning By‐Law parking provisions remain unchanged, a hypothetical range of future parking needs are shown below:

Therefore, based on current Zoning By‐Law provisions and related assumptions, the ultimate student target could require between 2,945 and 4,416 additional parking spaces if development occurs within Exemption Areas 1 and 2, and not within Exemption Area 3 or areas in where no exemptions are available.

2009 – 2010/2011

2011‐2016/2017

2017 – 2022/2023

2023+ Total

Gross Academic and Residence Building Space*

22,308 m2 43,553 m2 174,120 m2 172,368 m2

412,349 m2

Parking requirement if all development located in Exemption Area 1

159 311 1,243 1,232 2,945

Parking requirement if all development located in Exemption Area 2

239 466 1,865 1,846 4,416

* Residence Space based on 32.5m2/bed.

Parking Exemption Areas in the Downtown as identified in the Zoning By‐Law.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


3.2 GOALS TO DIRECT CAMPUS GROWTH

The Guiding Principles of the Campus Master Plan would be implemented through the following goals. They recognize the distinct context of the Brantford Campus. These goals, in conjunction with the Guiding Principles and Planning Foundations, will direct the future growth of the campus.

CREATE AN INTEGRATED URBAN CAMPUS Build on the past success of integrating the campus into the Downtown through strategically located new building construction and adaptive reuse of existing buildings that contribute to the cohesion and heritage of the campus as it grows. The construction of mixed use campus buildings should be considered, where appropriate, to support other Downtown functions and provide for commercial uses that cater to the needs of both the Laurier and Brantford communities. Continue the practice of using public buildings and open spaces to support university programming and invite public use of select new campus buildings and future campus open spaces.

INTEGRATE AN OPEN SPACE AND PEDESTRIAN NETWORK Maintain Victoria Park and the Carnegie Building as the heart of the campus through the establishment of Market and Darling Streets as the main pedestrian corridors of the campus. New campus buildings should be connected to the Pedestrian Corridor and existing campus buildings, existing and future open spaces and pedestrian linkages throughout the Downtown. Pedestrian movement should be directed to intersections through the design of new buildings and construct intersection treatments close to campus buildings. Create courtyards through new campus building siting and introduce plazas as gathering places at building entrances. PLAN FOR A TRANSIT ORIENTED CAMPUS Build on the opportunity of housing the city’s main transit terminal located in the Downtown to reduce reliance on the automobile for transportation to and from the campus. Encourage alternative forms of transportation to the campus providing secure bicycle parking in main campus buildings and all student residences. Accommodate the majority of required University parking in centralized structures through

public and private partnerships, while evaluating opportunities to provide some parking adjacent to new campus buildings where appropriate.

CREATE A DISTINCT CAMPUS IDENTITY Build on the strength of Laurier Brantford as a student‐centred University that is integrated into its downtown built environment. Continue to foster the identity of Laurier Brantford in the public realm through consistency in architecture, landscape improvements, branding and gateway statements. Establish a connection to the Waterloo Campus through select architectural and landscape elements that compliment Laurier Brantford’s urban context. EXCELLENCE IN DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE Establish a commitment to excellence in architecture, landscape design, and the application of sustainable building principles in the construction of new buildings and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. Continue to respect existing architectural heritage and building typologies of the Downtown through new campus development that is urban in nature. Design excellence in all University buildings should be pursued so that they will provide a rich building heritage for future generations and set a high‐quality standard for future Downtown development.

EFFICIENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION AND PHASED DEVELOPMENT Contemplated growth for the Laurier Brantford Campus will require a significant acquisition of new landholdings. Where feasible, new land acquisitions should be made along the Pedestrian Corridor and adjacent to existing campus buildings. Existing buildings being considered for adaptive reuse should be evaluated for their appropriateness to accommodate space needs. Locations for campus growth should be chosen that allow for the intensification of the campus and maintain the cohesiveness of non‐university uses. Existing partnerships should be maintained in the acquisition of land and construction of new campus buildings where appropriate.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


3.3 STRUCTURING ELEMENTS OF THE CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

The Brantford Campus Master Plan applies to lands owned by the University and other parties. The Guiding Principles and Goals form the building blocks of the Campus Master Plan and provide the strategic framework to guide future land acquisition, campus growth and development.

University opportunities, priorities and academic programs will evolve over time. These changes together with the continued revitalization of the Downtown by other stakeholders, will influence the location and size of many new campus buildings. Therefore, the Plan must provide a flexible framework that can be adapted over time. What should remain constant, however, is an adherence to the Guiding Principles and Goals that embody the values of the University and the following structuring elements that provide a sense of predictability for campus growth as this urban centre evolves over time. This approach will ensure the creation of a welcoming, integrated and attractive environment for living, learning and community building.

A series of Structuring Elements have been developed through the master plan process, in association with Guiding Principles and Goals, to guide future campus development.

These Structuring Elements are as follows:

• An Integrated Downtown Academic District

• The Downtown Master Plan

• Main Pedestrian Corridors

• A Compact Campus

• Laurier’s Role in City Building

• Creating a Distinct Campus Identity

An Integrated Downtown Academic District As Laurier Brantford, as well as Mohawk College and Nipissing University continue to grow the Downtown will increasingly become more of a centre for post‐secondary education. However, the Downtown will also continue to evolve as a destination for business, civic, commercial and retail activities, culture, entertainment and residence. Therefore, the Integrated Downtown Academic District is seen as the space in which the University grows and becomes further integrated and connected with commercial, business, civic and cultural activities in the Downtown as they evolve and develop. Fostering the continued integration of the campus in the Downtown ensures that the Core remains a destination for all, as well as a centre for education, learning and research.

The Integrated Downtown Academic District should accommodate campus expansion as well as traditional core uses.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The Downtown Master Plan The Downtown Master Plan provides a framework to guide both public and private sector investment within the core over the next 25 years. Given that the Laurier Brantford will continue to be a significant partner in the revitalization of the Downtown, the Downtown Master Plan will in part shape the growth of the Campus.

The Downtown Master Plan proposes new pedestrian connections, open spaces and streetscape improvements that provide opportunities for the enhancement of the campus, and an approach to built form that will in part inform the design of new campus buildings to ensure they are compatible with the existing urban fabric. By incorporating the recommendations and direction of the Downtown Master Plan into the Campus Master Plan, campus growth will be integrated with the growth of the whole downtown.

Main Pedestrian Corridors Establishing the main pedestrian corridors of the campus on Market and Dalhousie Streets reinforces Victoria Park and the Carnegie Building as the heart of the campus will connect existing campus buildings and public open spaces provide a structure for the acquisition of additional landholdings to accommodate future growth and the creation of new open spaces. The pedestrian corridors will also facilitate movement through the campus and the Downtown, provide for the establishment of campus gateways and a focus for streetscape improvements and expression of the University in the public realm.

Market and Darling Streets will be established as the main pedestrian corridors of the campus, anchored by the spiritual centre – Victoria Park.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


A Compact Campus In the planning of educational institutions, walking distance is a key determinant in the siting of academic buildings, since students, faculty, and staff must be able to travel between classes and buildings usually in less than five to ten minutes. The walking distance radius shown below generally establishes the outer functional limits of the future campus. It illustrates the importance of maintaining academic and residences buildings within the Integrated Downtown Academic District. Priority should therefore be given to establishing new facilities in this district.

Laurier’s Role in City Building Laurier Brantford has demonstrated a long‐term commitment to providing a high‐quality post‐secondary education and playing a major role in the revitalization of the Downtown. Every day, the University becomes increasingly connected to the activity and functions of the Downtown. This in turn influences and shapes the ongoing revitalization and transformation of downtown Brantford.

Given its geographical, social, cultural and economic importance, Laurier Brantford has a responsibility to continually enhance its involvement in the exercise of city building. This will consist of continuing its direct involvement with other stakeholders in the downtown development, participating in reciprocal relationships and making decisions in the context of the wider community’s interests and desires for the state of the downtown.

Academic buildings, ideally, should be located within a convenient walking distance (a maximum 400 metres or 5 minutes).

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Balancing of Sensitivity to Heritage Laurier Brantford has demonstrated a commitment to preserving, respecting and enhancing the architectural heritage of the Downtown through the adaptive reuse of significant buildings and new construction. As the campus grows and the need for space increases, the University should continue this practice not only in the design, massing and siting of new buildings, but also in its selection of downtown locations to accommodate growth. To ensure the significant heritage components of the Downtown are maintained over time, the heritage quality of properties of interest to the University should be evaluated in conjunction with the Heritage Resources of the City of Brantford to determine the significance of a particular building or site. If significance is determined, then the University should carefully consider whether the building meets the needs of the University for academic, residence or administrative needs, or if another location should be selected.

While new buildings should be designed to be complementary to the existing heritage character of the area, this does not mean that be replica buildings resembling the existing architectural design of buildings will be used exclusively in the future for new campus facilities. Instead, the design of future buildings should be approached with a high degree of design that will ensure that new facilities will complement the Downtown’s architectural character and not negatively impact it. Designers will be charged with establishing a design ethic that will meet the dual responsibility of supplying buildings that meet the university’s functional requirements while ensuring that these new buildings fit their surroundings.

This approach to properties of interest to the University, as well as new facility construction will maintain the heritage image and identity of the campus and further establish Laurier Brantford as a partner in the maintenance and enhancement of architectural heritage of the downtown while providing campus facilities that can serve as the heritage structures for future generations.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Creating a Distinct Campus Identity One of the biggest challenges of the Master Plan will be to create a distinct campus identity within the downtown core of Brantford. The general character of downtown Brantford is not strongly defined. As noted in, A Master Plan for Downtown Brantford (2008), the core is dominated by parking lots, vacant buildings and uninspiring streetscapes. The first temptation for the campus master plan is to declare the university as the solution to the core identity crisis. This is clearly not the case.

The vision of Laurier Brantford cannot be based upon an idea that ‘Laurier is Brantford’ but that Laurier is a large part of the character of Brantford. The way in which this campus develops, determines in a large part, the way in which the downtown shall develop. Therefore, a reciprocal relationship must be established whereby the community’s needs are balanced with the University’s needs.

Given the proposed scale of Laurier Brantford and its potential impact on the core, a great deal of attention must be given to how the campus appears from the public realm. Laurier Brantford must define itself within the core. The following objectives will guide the campus identity into the future:

• Employ consistency in the use of building materials, architecture and landscape treatments to promote the identity and cohesion of campus buildings in the urban environment.

• Consider the built form character of the Waterloo Campus in the future development of the Brantford Campus thereby creating a connection to the Waterloo campus.

• Pursue the creation of smaller campus nodes in the north, east, and west areas of the downtown.

• Distinguish the campus district in the public realm through the consistent application of a specific type of urban furniture, streetscape treatments and light standards.

• Consider similar approaches to public realm expression on the Waterloo and Brantford Campuses to reinforce connections and identities.

• Improve signage and wayfinding approaches to recognize the campus in the downtown and facilitate navigation.

• Establish gateway features through built form, landscape treatments and signage at key entrances to the downtown to symbolize arrival on the campus for new students, faculty, staff and visitors.

The Brantford Research and Academic Centre combines contemporary and heritage architecture and contributes to the heritage identity of the campus while branding the University in the Downtown.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


4.0 CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN The Campus Concept Plan builds on the organization of existing campus buildings and incorporates the Integrated Downtown Academic District identified to accommodate campus growth and the Main Pedestrian Corridors of the Campus. The pedestrian corridors and organization of existing campus buildings should be used to guide land acquisitions to accommodate future campus growth and provide a focus for University investment in streetscape upgrades and reinforcing the identity of the campus in the public realm.

The location of the campus in the Integrated Academic District requires the development of new campus buildings that not only respect the architectural character of the Downtown, but also provide opportunities for the establishment of uses that are essential to the maintenance of a healthy Downtown, such as commercial services, shops, offices, and entertainment and cultural activities. Campus buildings should also be sited so as not to fragment existing Downtown uses as they develop over time. Such an approach will result in a distinct campus environment that combines campus and community, and academics with Downtown life – contributing to a vibrant Downtown core that is truly a destination for the Laurier and greater community.

Some of the primary features of the Campus Concept Plan include:

• The development of the major pedestrian corridors being Darling and Market.

• The heart and centre of the campus, being Victoria Park and Carnegie Building.

• The Integrated Academic District is the preferred area of growth for the University, being Sheridan Street/Clarence Street/ Wharfe Street and West Street.

• The integration of the existing Open Space and future space with the pedestrian corridors.

• The existing and planned building footprints to be integrated into the historic fabric of the downtown.

• The development of gateway features at the key entrances to the downtown core (Clarence and Darling, Market and Sheridan, Brant and Colborne, Clarence and Colborne).

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


5.0 BUILT FORM AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER

5.1 OBJECTIVES

The design and architecture of future campus buildings should maintain the heritage character and identity of the campus, while incorporating contemporary design elements where appropriate to establish built heritage for future generations. Future new and adaptively re‐used building should also respect and enhance the Downtown’s architectural heritage, be compatible with the City’s vision for future downtown development and support the continued integration of the campus – qualities that currently contribute to the attractiveness and quality of Laurier Brantford. Aside from ensuring compatibility with the downtown urban environment, maintaining the heritage identity of Laurier Brantford is critical in future campus development as the appearance of a campus is increasingly used as a marketing and recruiting tool.

Every new project can positively contribute to the reliability of the University, Downtown and greater community as a whole. As such, it is essential that the design team of future campus buildings develop an approach that takes into consideration the campus and Downtown beyond the specific project and project requirements.

The following objectives, in conjunction with the design guidelines, should be met in the planning, design and construction of new campus buildings and adaptive reuse of downtown buildings:

Maintaining the Laurier Experience • Brand the campus locally, nationally, and internationally

through signature buildings that are consistent with Laurier Brantford’s commitment to heritage.

• Create buildings and open spaces for the University that are learning and teaching environments consistent with the Mission of the University, and which provide through their

design, a sense of belonging for day, evening, and commuting students.

• Recognize the needs of students, faculty and staff in the design of new and renovated buildings and create spaces to facilitate social interaction and academic collaboration.

• Employ an intensified and compact approach to building design that reflects the most efficient use of University lands while maintaining the unique Laurier Campus Experience and respecting the scale, massing and siting of existing buildings in the downtown.

Maintaining City/Campus Synergies

• Where appropriate, employ a mixed‐use building approach to new campus developments to maintain the urban nature of the downtown landscape and enhance the core as a destination for all. Ensure commercial, office, and service uses in mixed‐use building are compatible with both academic and residence uses.

New residences at John’s Hopkins University combine student housing with commercial activities such as a dining hall and bookstore.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Increase the visibility of the campus through university‐focused activities such as student services, food services, study spaces and gathering areas on the ground floor of non‐mixed use campus buildings. Ensure the ground floor plane is transparent, creating more ‘eyes on the street’ and enhancing safety.

• Respect the architectural heritage of existing campus and downtown buildings and design new campus buildings with the intent of providing the built heritage for future generations.

• Establish an urban approach to housing that includes low‐rise, mid‐rise and high‐rise developments to compliment the current housing mix in the downtown and provide a variety of housing options for students.

Maintaining a Commitment to Sustainable Development

• All new campus buildings should embrace the principle of sustainability and meet the guidelines of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED©) rating system. The feasibility of retrofitting campus buildings to be more sustainable in operation should be assessed.

Maintaining a Commitment to Heritage

• Incorporate the architectural heritage of the Downtown into the design of new campus buildings to highlight the University’s respect of its urban heritage. Consider a blend of contemporary elements that complement this urban heritage.

• Respect and conserve existing built heritage where feasible and incorporate heritage elements into new buildings where conservation is impractical.

5.2 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENHANCED CAMPUS LIFE

A university campus is more than just the physical components of bricks and mortar. It must recognize the needs and wants of its students, faculty and staff for quality of life, work and play in order to enhance

the academic experience. Consultations revealed the following elements as important to enhance the experience of the Laurier Community:

An Enhanced Cultural Scene Wilfrid Laurier University’s long‐standing cultural character, well‐developed at the Waterloo Campus, needs to be extended to the Brantford campus. Here the university has an opportunity to cultivate a rich cultural scene for dual audiences: the University community and the wider public community.

The City’s Downtown Master Plan sees the area’s traditional cultural role being expanded and built on over time. This provides an opportunity for the University to assist in achieving a cultural vision. The City’s existing downtown cultural facilities, such as the Sanderson Centre, and private cultural organizations such as the Brantford Arts Block, should be strategic partners with the university in developing a

The University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture provides gallery space to display student work as well as public exhibits.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


cultural framework for visual and performing arts serving both the university and the general public.

In addition to its other reciprocal relationships to develop the physical campus the university should formally establish ongoing, functional relationships in the local cultural community to foster and develop the cultural character of the Brantford Campus interchangeably using university and local resources to do so. The university has an important role to play in developing and hosting cultural events of interest to a wide audience. These events could be pursued both independently and in conjunction with other organizations. New university buildings are to consider in their design, where appropriate, a multi‐purpose cultural role, informed by the results of the functional relationships between the university’s cultural and that of the public community. An Enhanced Student Life Scene A number of students indicated that there is a lack of activities, facilities and venues geared to students in the Downtown. These facilities and activities provide opportunities for socializing off‐campus. While the provision of the majority of such venues is beyond the scope of the University, there will be opportunities for the public and/or private sectors to fill this void. This will become increasingly important as the campus grows over time – demand will increase and opportunities for service providers will emerge as economies of scale are realized. The University, as a member of the Downtown Business Improvement Area, could act as the accumulator and communicator of information on student needs in terms of commercial services, employment opportunities and entertainment to the local business community through the BIA. New businesses and services established with the needs of students, faculty and staff in mind will assist in the transformation of the Downtown into a destination for entertainment and commercial activities, contribute to the vibrancy of the core and provide a number of businesses that can also benefit people living and working in the Downtown and in the City as a whole.

Central Gathering Space Students noted that the Student Union Building does not serve its intended function as a central gathering place. Students need a place on campus to call their own, to act as a location where students can meet on social and academic activity. This space should be centrally located in the campus, near Victoria Park and offer food and services catering to student needs. This gathering space should be located in the ground floor of a building that has access to outdoor space, providing students with a choice of an indoor or outdoor environment.

5.3 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES

To ensure cohesion in design and architecture of campus buildings and to reinforce the identity of Laurier Brantford in the community while respecting existing architecture in the Downtown, the following general guidelines should be observed in the design of all new campus buildings.

Heritage Design Campus development should respect and enhance the existing architectural character of Laurier Brantford and the urban fabric of the Downtown through consistency in the use of building materials and architectural treatments, promoting the University’s identity and for the cohesion of campus buildings in the downtown environment. However, the design of buildings should not necessarily be based on a literal interpretation of heritage elements and a repetition of the historical language; moreover the spirit and context of existing buildings should be incorporated into the design of new buildings.

• Deteriorated architectural elements should be repaired rather than replaced where ever possible.

• Where replacement is necessary the new material should match the original in terms of color, texture, material and design.

• The buildings in Brantford that are to be retained should be respected as heritage buildings, regardless of their age.

• Avoid massing, architectural elements and signage that overpower the existing buildings or detract from their existing character.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Scale and Massing The scale and massing of new campus buildings must be sensitive to the surrounding context. The scale of the building elements and massing should correspond to available vantage points. The outline of a building should be designed to be read from a distance as either a landmark or a member of a group, depending on its location in both the campus and the Downtown. The massing/volume of a building should reflect its immediate context. The details of the building should be designed to be read from a short distance and incorporate heritage details and materials or contemporary interpretations of those details.

• In large buildings, the mass should be broken down into components through step or setbacks rather than remaining an unarticulated monolithic volume.

• Step back buildings at appropriate heights to maintain a human building scale respecting building heights in immediate proximity and simultaneously allowing for the realization of maximum development potential of University lands.

• Buildings and associated open spaces should establish a mutually supportive relationship in which the outdoor and indoor spaces both animated and connected.

• The massing and design of a building should reflect the role that it will play among other buildings on the campus or in the Downtown.

• Atriums should be included to provide natural light in indoor open spaces in large buildings

• Buildings should define new and existing open spaces as distinct spaces with a strong sense of identity and place.

• New open spaces, defined by building masses, should form part of a continuous network.

Orientation and Circulation Each building should be regarded as a part of a continuum in the movement of students, staff and faculty, and as such special attention should be paid to the orientation and circulation patterns within new buildings and their relationship to existing buildings on campus. Buildings should frame new campus quadrangles, infill discontinuities in the urban/campus fabric, frame landscape elements such as open spaces and pathways and, create a continuous pedestrian friendly and accessible environment.

• The main building façade should face the public street. • Where possible, buildings should be setback from the property

line to allow for streetscaping, planting and a generous sidewalk width to accommodate outdoor seating and planting.

• The entrance to campus buildings should be oriented to the street frontage and facilitate pedestrian movement to existing intersections. Establish entries to buildings at regular intervals consistent with the patterns of the existing buildings in the surrounding area.

• Buildings should be visually engaging and transparent at the ground level and where possible, with sheltering elements for pedestrians.

• Pedestrian walkways should be integrated into new buildings and added to existing buildings in close proximity to each other to enhance pedestrian movement between buildings in colder months.

• Buildings and all associated open spaces must be universally accessible to all individuals.

• Interior circulation paths and routes should be easily understood and employ a hierarchical system with the most important routes providing access to the most public functions of the building.

• Buildings should enhance the safety and efficiency of pedestrian circulation. Dead end spaces should be avoided as much as possible to create a safe campus environment.

• Pedestrian walkways located at grade should be considered as all season connections by providing movable glazing partitions. These colonnaded “breezeways” can mitigate the effects of adverse climatic. The can be opened during the summer months to become a colonnade and closed during the colder months to provide shelter.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Facades and Roof Articulation Building façades should be aligned or work in conjunction with adjacent buildings to reinforce the context, public network, to create cohesive building assemblies. Building heights should adhere to the scale and massing principles of the outline, help preserve the image of a campus and to take full advantage of the walk‐up format. Eaves and/ or roof lines should align or correspond to adjacent buildings to reinforce and keep the organization and integrity of the building context or group.

• Windows should facilitate two‐way visual connections between both indoor and outdoor areas in major campus facilities and those located on urban arterials

• Facades should incorporate architectural techniques so that the building reads at different scales from a distance in their silhouette, from the middle distance through massing and close up in their detailing and ornamentation. Architectural elements such as projections, recesses, vertical or horizontal emphasised treatments are some of the techniques that could be used to articulate the building façade and provide relief.

• The vertical composition of the building should clearly illustrate a base, a main body, and a top. Whereever possible, the base should be transparent and part of the public domain. The main body should be predominantly comprised of masonry and the top illustrated by a pronounced parapet, pitched roof or other roof feature.

• Entrances should employ distinct architectural features and should project or be recessed from the building façade to mark their location and aid with orientation.

• Ground level of all buildings should be well‐lit and transparent. • Rooftop mechanical equipment should be carefully sited and

integrated into the building composition. • In mixed‐use campus buildings, University entrances should be

prominent from the façade, distinguishing the academic component from other components.

• Create animated building frontages through the use of windows and lighting, and by incorporating canopies, awnings, and public art where appropriate.

Select roof forms that harmonize the surrounding built context and the architectural treatment of the streetscape. Where flat roofs are used,

prominent projections, parapets, or setbacks are encouraged to differentiate the façade from the roofline.

Materials In keeping with Laurier, the long‐standing academic building tradition, masonry should be used as the dominant building material. Each building should be evaluated on its own merits in terms of the opportunity to combine both the contextual palette of the campus and Downtown, as well as the existing palette on the Waterloo Campus. Where possible the texture and color of the roofing and masonry should complement the existing approach used in order to create a textural reference between both campuses. It is not the intention to discourage the use of more contemporary materials such as synthetic stone, curtain wall and metal panel, but they should be employed carefully to ensure harmony with the traditional palette.

• Encouraged materials include stone, copper, brick and glass whereas large areas of concrete should be avoided.

• The use of materials should be selected to complement existing materials and should reinforce campus cohesion while simultaneously communicating the buildings role.

• Materials used in additions should be selected to complement the materials of the existing building.

5.4 AREA SPECIFIC GUIDELINES

To further ensure that the architecture and design of new campus development continues to complement the character of the Downtown, the Integrated Downtown Academic District can be divided into four distinct areas – Central, North, East and West – based upon streetscape, neighbourhood character and architectural form. The homogeneity of the built form in these areas should be used in conjunction with the architectural guidelines direct future campus development.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Central Buildings fronting onto Victoria Park within the central part of Downtown are designated as part of the Victoria Park Square Heritage District. As such, the establishment of University functions in this area will primarily occur through the adaptive re‐use of these buildings. The restoration and renovation of buildings in this area will require consistency with the policies of the Victoria Park Square Heritage Conservation District Plan (1991). Because of the comprehensiveness of these policies and guidelines, they have not been replicated here.

East Private redevelopment of this part of the Downtown over the last thirty years has resulted in the introduction of buildings that do not represent the area’s architectural heritage. While Laurier has incorporated many of the Downtown’s architectural design features in new construction on the Heritage Block, the lack of architecturally significant buildings provides an opportunity to incorporate more contemporary design

elements in new buildings in this area. New buildings to be constructed within the east part of downtown should continue to incorporate architectural features of the Heritage Block and emphasize those contemporary elements which are compatible with surrounding buildings. In addition, with a lack of architecturally significant buildings, parks and public paths in this area, it would gain considerably from the assembly or grouping of university buildings in a complete city block.

There is the potential to establish smaller university communities in this area with commercial and student/social related activities on grade with lecture room and support above. The building massing should reflect the programme requirements, such as a greater ground floor ceiling heights for commercial and social activity spaces, a main body appropriate to the height along the street and a two storey top set back from the property line. This should not lead to a complete uniformity of building profiles. Height variation is needed to provide visual interest, particularly along major paths and axis or corner block locations. Building heights should be exploited to create gateway features at major intersections such as the points where Clarence Street intersects Dalhousie and Colborne Streets.

West A number of buildings of architectural significance remain in this area of the Downtown, and the design of new buildings should emphasize existing architectural elements with minimal incorporation of contemporary elements to achieve compatibility with the built form characteristics of neighbouring properties. A number of potential opportunities for building restoration exist in this area that should be encouraged through campus growth. It also has the highest percentage of single ownership which should be taken into consideration for any University building type that may require future expansion.

The lack of lot coverage restrictions and an allowable four to six storey building height offers potential for mixed use development in this area. A mix of retail and commercial uses on the ground level and student residences above would complement the traditional downtown functions in this area, especially along Colborne and Dalhousie Streets.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


North This area is characterized primarily by a low density residential neighbourhood with many residences constructed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Therefore, any campus growth within this area should occur primarily through adaptive reuse and should contain uses that are compatible with existing residential uses. The Market Street corridor is the exception within this area, where new campus development would achieve more efficient use of these underutilized lands. Any new development in this area should have the lowest building height of all areas in the Integrated Downtown Academic District. The Downtown Master Plan encourages the development of four storey buildings along Market Street and six storey buildings around the Via Rail Hub to fulfill a gateway function. Corridor buildings (i.e., buildings fronting onto the street) should have a generous setback to allow pedestrian walkways and street landscaping.

5.5 CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES

The milieu of existing building types and their historic function in the downtown should be respected in campus development to ensure the building compatibility and continued integration of the campus in the downtown. To guide campus development in the core three building typologies have been identified to provide direction for the siting and form of campus buildings.

Arterial Buildings

New campus developments along the downtown “Main Streets” of Colborne, Dalhousie and Market should reflect the original mixed‐use character of existing buildings and be designed to accommodate commercial uses at grade to maintain the viability of the pedestrian street front throughout the year, restore the historical function of these corridors in the downtown, and further integrate university buildings into the Downtown. Incorporating a commercial component in campus buildings provides space for commercial and service uses for the University and Brantford communities; provides an opportunity for

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


businesses and organizations related to academic programming and University operations to locate within campus buildings; enhances safety by creating vibrant spaces and ‘eyes on the street’; and provides an additional revenue stream for the University.

Mixing commercial uses with university functions should be carefully considered by the University to ensure that one use is not compromised at the expense of the other. An appropriate mix could include commercial uses combined with student residences, student services or student activity spaces.

Buildings should be setback from the street to allow adequate streetscaping, outdoor seating and opportunities for active university uses and commercial uses to spill onto the street where appropriate.

• Building footprints should be maximized on University landholdings at a minimum 90% coverage.

• Define entrances for university‐related uses from commercial entrances through different façade treatments and canopies.

• Investigate opportunities to increase building height through stepping back of buildings while maintaining consistency with adjacent buildings.

• Ensure Laurier signage is distinguishable and prominent in comparison to signage associated with commercial uses.

• Consider using the at grade space in Arterial Buildings for University use until the commercial uses are viable.

Building A

Green Space

Schematic Site Plan

Street

Schematic Building Massing

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Infill Typology

Developments that do not occupy more than half a downtown block and are not located on Colborne, Dalhousie and Market streets should be considered for an infill approach to campus development. Active university uses, or spaces that are frequented by students, staff and faculty, should be located at grade in these new buildings to contribute to the vibrancy of streetscape. Infill buildings could also incorporate a mixing of academic uses and potentially faculties that would benefit from being housed within the same building. The creation of small internal courtyards or plazas to provide space for interaction should be accommodated while ensuring the most efficient use of campus lands.

• Transparency at grade should be maintained through glazing and window treatments to maintain interaction between indoor uses and the public realm.

• Ensure university uses at grade are compatible with those on upper floors.

• The height of the primary façade should be in scale with surrounding buildings. Stepping back of additional two or more stories where height allowances permit will maximize the efficient use of new landholdings.

• Locate small courtyards and plazas at the side or rear of buildings to create small open spaces for use by students, faculty and staff.

• Employ a zero metre setback and continuous build face at 80% of the lot frontage.

Green Space

Building A

Schematic Site Plan

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Block Typology

For areas in the downtown where the University is able to acquire the majority or entirety of a downtown block, the traditional courtyard approach to campus development should be used. Through framing buildings on an internal open space, courtyards provide outdoor gathering spaces for passive recreation, gathering, and interaction. Courtyards create additional open space in the downtown environment that can be enjoyed by both Laurier and the general community. Courtyard spaces should be connected where possible to existing and planned open spaces in the Downtown through pedestrian linkages and building siting.

• Buildings to frame courtyards and create quadrangles and should be designed so that courtyards are sheltered from wind and to create human scaled spaces.

• Mid‐block crossings should be discouraged while pedestrian traffic should be directed towards intersections.

• Employ a minimum building coverage of 70% to ensure the development of new campus open space while maximizing efficient use of landholdings.

• Step back the building façade on the interior of courtyards to avoid an enclosed feeling from the ground plane.

• Where appropriate, design courtyard spaces to be accessed by the public.

• Provide for multi‐use activity both at ground level and above. Encourage four season usage of the courtyard through programmatic and landscape interaction.

Schematic Building Massing

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


6.0 OPEN SPACE GUIDELINES

6.1 OBJECTIVES

Open Space Design Guidelines have been established as criteria for future site design as the campus Master Plan is implemented. These guidelines can also be used to retro‐fit existing landscapes. Standards for Open Space Development will ensure that the campus will, over time, develop a consistency in materials, form and character. The goal is to achieve an integrated, congruent campus landscape.

The Open Space Guidelines will address streetscape treatments, built form typologies and landscape design. Discussions on streetscape will address the treatment of streets and sidewalks in and around the campus as well as pedestrian and cyclist circulation. The treatment of the edges will define how the public views the campus and how the campus is used by the students, staff and faculty.

In general the built form (architecture and streetscape) will be the ordering mechanism for open space. Open space approaches will compliment the built form typologies outlined in Section 6.0. Built features will tend to be formal and rectilinear in nature while planting will be more informal and organic – buffering hard edges.

Landscape design will outline approaches for built form and the planting associated with it. Plant material will be used in a complimentary manner to reinforce shape and form or to highlight special areas within the campus.

The public realm surrounding the Brantford campus consists of a network of streets. This street network in and around the campuses requires a hierarchy of treatment to define the importance and role of these routes. The treatment of each type of street will be unified in terms of paving material, street tree planting and site furniture.

Streetscape development at Laurier Brantford should be guided by the following objectives:

• Encourage the City of Brantford to implement suggested streetscape improvements in the Downtown Master Plan. Act as a partner in these improvements to ensure Laurier identity in the public realm compliments the courtyard model.

• New campus buildings can provide a backdrop to significant streetscape upgrades. A linear landscape of street trees, seating and pedestrian amenities will complement campus and community buildings.

• Encourage canopies and colonnades where applicable on streetscapes.

The guiding principle for streetscape design is to keep the palette simple and clean, allowing improvements and upgrades to occur over time, and offering a smooth transition from the existing conditions. The streetscape design will complement a wide variety of building designs from historic to contemporary. The clarity and simplicity of the plan will be maintainable over time.

Streetscape initiatives associated with campus expansion must be coordinated with the goals of the City and the details of the Downtown Brantford Master Plan. Where possible, the Laurier ‘Brand’ should be incorporated into the public realm to improve wayfinding and the creation of a campus identity.

Existing Municipal sidewalks are the main pedestrian linkages through the Laurier Brantford campus. In general city standards will apply to the paving between building facades and the street edge.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


6.2 STREETSCAPE

Gateways Gateway features will be developed at key entrances to the downtown core to symbolize arrival on the campus for new students, faculty, staff and visitors. These gateway features may include architectural elements, landscape treatments, signage or a combination of all these forms.

The major gateway locations will be:

• Clarence and Darling/Dalhousie • Market and Sheridan • Brant Avenue and Colborne • Clarence and Colborne (in the event of two‐way conversion)

Corridors One of the key ordering features of the Campus Concept Plan is the development of major pedestrian corridors along Darling and Market

Streets. The main corridors will be Market and Darling Streets; anchored around the ‘heart of the campuses – Victoria Park. A cross campus network of linkages will focus on these streets.

Market Street As noted in the Downtown Master Plan, Market Street is the most prominent north‐south street in the core. Market Street is a high profile corridor with the downtown that serves many civic and institutional uses.

As a major collector, Market Street functions to provide access and circulation within the downtown ands between the core and the VIA station.

The Downtown Master Plan has introduced a series of intersection improvements along Market Street, specifically at the corners of Market and Colborne and Market and Dalhousie. The intersection of Market and Darling should be upgraded in unison with the other three corners surrounding Victoria Park. Some form of Laurier branding (e.g., signage) should be incorporated at the intersection of Market and Darling.

The connection to the parkade at the south end of Market Street offers an opportunity for a pedestrian gateway to the campus. An urban plaza with features similar to Harmony Square would be appropriate.

Campus gateways should include a combination of architectural and streetscape elements to signify to drivers and pedestrians that they are entering into a unique section of the downtown core. The current plaza in front of Grand River Hall should be incorporated into the

pedestrian gateway of the terminus of Market Street

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The treatment of Market Street should include the following: • Street trees are to be planted wherever the sidewalk widths,

road widths and building setbacks permit. • Street furniture to follow the City of Brantford standards. • No surface parking fronting onto the street. • Unique intersection treatments at the corners of Market and

Darling and Market and Wellington.

Darling Street Darling Street is a minor collector that will increase in importance as the transit terminal and associated parking lot are redeveloped. The re‐development of the transit terminal includes recommendations for commercial or residential land uses along Darling to activate the street edge. The corner of Queen and Darling is a prime location for a mixed use institutional building.

Since Darling Street is not identified as a significant street within the downtown core, there is an opportunity for Laurier to create a campus corridor that has a distinct look that is ‘Laurier.’

The treatment of Darling Street should include the following:

• Street trees are to be planted wherever the sidewalk widths, road widths and building setbacks permit.

• Street furniture to follow Laurier standards in front of campus properties.

• Allow surface parking lots but provide upgraded streetscape to screen views of these parking lots.

The pedestrian linkage to the Market Centre parkade is a significant gateway into Laurier Brantford.

Sections of Darling Street offer opportunities for re‐development including upgrades to the streetscape.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Pedestrian and Cycling Linkages A cross campus network of corridors and linkages will be established within the downtown core of Brantford in order to link campus buildings.

The following objectives will be used to guide linkage development in Brantford:

• Main Campus Corridors will converge or near Victoria Park.

• Openings between buildings will provide direct and convenient access to both corridors and linkages.

• Discourage the establishment of mid‐block crossings on city streets to ensure safety of students, faculty, staff and visitors. Direct pedestrian movement to street intersections through new campus buildings.

• Create linkages to the Grand River, Harmony Square and planned new public open spaces, such as Bridge Street Linear Park, Navigation Park with associated Pathway and Shallow Creek Park.

• Utilize and build upon the recommended path and linkage system in the Downtown Master Plan to enhance connections to both public spaces and facilities. Encourage the City of Brantford to undertake the development of these linkages as the campus grows.

• Ensure accessibility for all members of the Laurier community in the design and development of campus corridors and linkages.

The Laurier Brantford Campus is connected to larger pedestrian and cycling networks, primarily along streets, sidewalks, and laneways.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


BUILT FORM TYPOLOGIES AND OPEN SPACE As noted in Section 6.0, the building typologies – arterial, infill and block were introduced to address the massing, scale and siting of campus buildings depending on their location in the Downtown.

Arterial Streetscapes

To reinforce the function of “Main Streets” ‐ Colborne, Dalhousie and Market Streets – the streetscape will be designed to accommodate commercial uses at grade. Wider sidewalks should be introduced to accommodate functions such as patios where feasible. University initiatives should be coordinated with the recommendations in the Downtown Master Plan.

• The sidewalk surface is proposed as poured‐in‐place concrete using a mix design that allows surface treatments to offer a diversity of finishes and tonality.

• Colour will be established with integral colour additives to ease maintenance, cost of repair and maintain consistency over time.

• Main building entrances to be defined with precast concrete unit pavers and/or granite pavers.

• Street trees should be grouped into larger planting beds to maximize paved areas.

• The sidewalk treatment in front of Laurier Brantford buildings should be augmented with precast concrete unit paving and sign panels to ‘brand’ the campus facilities.

Infill Streetscapes

Infill built form and streetscape typologies will generally be found on secondary streets. Branding of University uses such as food services, student services and study spaces is important for wayfinding. The creation of small internal courtyards or plazas shall be introduced to support campus functions and activities.

• The proposed sidewalk surface is poured‐in‐place concrete using a mix design that allows surface treatments to offer a diversity of finishes and tonality.


CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Main building entrances to be defined with precast concrete unit pavers and/or granite pavers.

• Street trees should be grouped into larger planting beds to maximize paved areas.

• The sidewalk treatment in front of Laurier Brantford buildings should be augmented with precast concrete unit paving and sign panels to ‘brand’ the campus facilities.

Block Streetscapes

For areas in the downtown where the University is able to acquire the majority or entirety of a downtown block, the traditional courtyard approach to campus development should be used. Through framing buildings on an internal open space, courtyards provide outdoor gathering spaces for passive recreation, gathering, and interaction. Courtyards create additional open space in the downtown environment that can be enjoyed by both Laurier and the general community. Courtyard spaces should be connected where possible to existing and planned open spaces in the Downtown through pedestrian linkages and building siting.

• Buildings should frame courtyards, create quadrangles, and be designed to shelter courtyards from wind and also to create human scaled spaces.

• Mid‐block crossings should be discouraged and pedestrian traffic should be directed towards intersections.

Quads and Courtyards New courtyards throughout the campus will anchor new and existing buildings and provide a focal point for gathering, studying and outdoor recreation. These spaces will be linked by pedestrian corridors to provide direct and convenient access through campus. Courtyards could also be integrated within future built form to create dynamic outdoor spaces.

Quadrangles (or quads) are open spaces, usually having a rectangular or square shape. They are typically defined by building edges and are commonly associated with university and campus architecture. Courtyards are enclosed spaces, open to the sky, surrounded entirely by a building. For the purposes of the Master Plan, quads will be considered ‘public’ spaces, while courtyards will be considered to be more private in nature.

The following principles will be used to guide quad and courtyard development in Brantford;

• Employ a courtyard model of university development to anchor new and existing campus buildings. Design courtyards and arrange new buildings to create a focal point for gathering, studying and outdoor recreation.

• Design courtyards closer to the downtown core to be inviting for general public use and to provide a finer grain of ground plane use.

• Encourage the City of Brantford to pursue the development of the public parks and open space components recommended in the Downtown Master Plan which would increase the amount of urban open space that would be available to students, faculty and staff.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Consider the creation of small plazas at the entrance of select campus buildings to serve as casual gathering places, and to promote interaction between both the Laurier and Brantford communities.

• Where feasible, maintain as a maximum 20% open space area in new campus block developments.

• Building mass defining quads and courtyards must provide a comfortable pedestrian scale (e.g., the building base should be at a well defined pedestrian scale). This building scale can be reinforced through the use of building materials, design detail, cornices, a change in plane or mass or the use of podium elements.

• Building Height to Width ratios should not exceed 1:1 for courtyards.

• Courtyards should be oriented according to microclimate (e.g., south facing to maximize sunlight levels, and to mitigate wind).

Building height to width ratios are important considerations for courtyard development. As the ratio approaches 1:1, larger openings should be provided.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Sidewalks • The sidewalk surface is proposed as poured‐in‐place concrete

using a mix design that allows surface treatments to offer a diversity of finishes and tonality.


• Stamped concrete should be avoided since it is difficult to match the same pattern and colour with future patching.

• Pedestrian pavement should be designed in terms of width, slope, contrasting banding, and finish for people with disabilities.

• Pedestrian/cyclist crosswalks should be clearly marked with distinct paving and should include curb cuts or raised crossings. All crossings should be sited for both safety, as well as design integrity.

• Sodded boulevards along primary and secondary streets are to be avoided.

• Main building entrances should be defined with precast concrete unit pavers and/or granite pavers.

• The concrete should be saw cut to provide control joints, and a linear pattern perpendicular to the direction of travel. Typically bands will be a minimum of 1.5 metres – 3.0 metres in width.

As noted in the Downtown Brantford Master Plan, poured‐in‐place concrete will comprise the majority of the walking surface. The sidewalk treatment in front of Laurier Brantford buildings should be augmented with precast concrete unit paving and sign panels (possibly engraved into natural stone slabs).

The sidewalk treatment in front of Laurier Brantford buildings should

be augmented with sign panels to ‘brand’ the campus facilities.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Street Furniture Site furnishings include functional elements that help to establish and reinforce the image and character of the campus. Benches, bicycle racks, waste receptacles and bollards should have a standard form throughout the Downtown to unify the campus grounds visually, to reduce maintenance, and to simplify replacement.

• A collection of site furniture should be selected for its durability, its compatibility with the southern Ontario climate, and its availability for additional future purchases.

• Canadian made site furniture should be chosen for ease of distribution and to ensure that it can withstand Canadian winters.

• Different types of site furniture should be grouped together – ash urns, benches, trash receptacles – to enhance use and avoid clutter.

• Site furniture including light posts signage and furnishing, should be placed out of the way of emergency and maintenance vehicles, especially snow removal vehicles.

The following materials and furnishings are recommended for use on the Laurier campuses. The photographs and descriptions are intended to convey the desired character, not specific manufacturers or exact styles.

• Seating should be provided throughout the campus to promote collegiality, and to enhance the outdoor character of the campus.

• Seating should be located in groups and individually at building entrances, in gathering places, and along streets and paths.

• Benches consistent with the new streetscape palette would have both backed and backless seats. All metal benches should be powder coated with flat black paint.

• Bike racks should be provided throughout the campus to promote cycling.

• Loop style bike rings are to be consistent in form and colour.

• Racks should be installed in a linear fashion, parallel to the primary building face, with the loops oriented perpendicular to that building face.

• Racks are to be installed on a concrete base (preferable). A 450mm depth slab thickness is to be provided under bike parking areas.

• Bike parking areas are to be well lit and installed within a convenient distance of main entrances (maximum 45 metres).

• Trash, recycling and ash containers should be provided within a 10 metre radius of all main building entrances.

• Seating areas should have a combination of trash and ash containers.

• Ash containers to be located the appropriate distance away from main building entrances if a smoking by‐law is in effect.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Public Art Public art sited throughout the campus can enrich the landscape by providing focal points and centres of interest. By displaying public art, Laurier can showcase local artists, encourage the development of programs and attract the larger artistic community onto the campus. The following guidelines should be followed for the selection and placement of public art in the campus;

• Pieces of artists should promote the unique cultural heritage of Brantford.

• Pieces should be located or displayed in such a manner to reduce maintenance (e.g., planting beds, raised platform).

• The backdrop and how the piece could be viewed is an important consideration.

• Outdoor lighting should illuminate the work.

• The pieces should be low maintenance and vandal proof.

Five prominent public art locations have been noted in the Downtown Brantford Master Plan; three of which are located within the proposed campus. The City and Laurier Brantford could explore partnerships at the following locations:

• The West End of Colborne

• The Market Street Parkade

• The East End of Dalhousie

Courtyards and Quads also offer an opportunity for the inclusion of public art.

The Conversation by William McElcheran. McElcheran is a world renowned artistfrom Hamilton. The promotion of local artists should be encouraged in the public realm.

Reclining Figure (1951) by Henry Moore. Moore was a champion of British modernism and his works, amongst others of his time, reinforced the importance of artists as commentators, researchers and provocateurs.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Lighting Light fixtures, in addition to their obvious safety and security function, could be used as structural design elements. The rhythm and repetition of uniform light standards could be used to define the edges of both walkways, as well as the campus core.

Three styles of fixtures should be used consistently through the campus for streets, walkways, and parking areas.

The following guidelines should be applied to lighting of campus buildings and open spaces in Brantford:

• Light standards to be arranged in a regular pattern to reinforce campus structure and organization.

• A consistent style of light standard should be used for streets, parking lots, and walkways.

• Metal halide luminaires should be used for all light fixtures.

• Lighting should be designed to minimize glare onto residences, streets or adjacent properties; maximize energy conservation and to be dark sky compliant.

• Street lights should have a mounting height of 7‐9 metres. Fixtures should be located to provide uniform coverage and shielded from both residence and academic buildings.

• Pedestrian fixtures along parking lots and secondary paths should be shoe box luminaires (Gullwing by Gardco) mounted at a height of 3.5 to 4.0 metres and have approximately 15 metre spacing. Tree spacing and site furniture locations should be coordinated to provide a regular visual rhythm.

The style of luminaire along major corridors should be consistent with the existing standards along the Heritage Walk (Westminster by Lumec) on the Waterloo campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


6.3 PLANT MATERIAL

Trees, shrubs and perennials should be used as design elements that define open space, provide spatial order and compliment built form. Planting with purpose and function can significantly affect the look and feel of the campus. Plant material can be used to:

• Define major open spaces, corridors and gateways;

• Limit or direct views;

• Frame spaces to give a sense of enclosure;

• Provide structure and organization to open space;

• Create microclimates;

• Reduce maintenance;

• Create a sense of place;

• Provide ecological diversity.

The scale and massing of plant material should relate to the size of buildings, roads, pathways and adjacent spaces. Large, high branching trees can be used to edge formal open spaces and corridors. Smaller trees, shrubs and perennials can be used to highlight important spaces such as building entrances or courtyards. In general, intricate planting design should be avoided. Massed plantings of both trees and shrubs would be more appropriate for the campus setting.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Selection of Plant Material In Southern Ontario, most natural habitats have been lost to urban sprawl and agriculture. As a result, natural systems such as watersheds and geological communities are severely degraded, and many plant and animal species have been designated as ‘at‐risk’. University campuses are often large contiguous land holdings within urban areas with extensive open space. The open spaces within each campus offer an opportunity to develop strategies to protect and restore some woodlands and other habitats and natural systems.

Environment Canada recommends a minimum threshold of 30% forest cover in a watershed whereas currently there is less than 20% forest coverage in Brantford.

In order to create a sustainable landscape, plant material for the Brantford campus will be indigenous to the natural plant communities of the Region. Native plant material is naturally adapted to local growing conditions and as a result requires less maintenance, water and fertilizer to maintain healthy growth.

The Brantford campus is located in the Deciduous Forest region of Ontario. Within this region there are unique plant associations:

• The Carolinian Zone;

• Tall Grass Prairie and Savanna.

Both of these native landscapes are rare and endangered in Ontario. Large portions of these plant communities have been lost over the past 200 years due to agriculture and urbanization. For example, less than 3 percent of the Ontario tall grass prairie remains today. One of the goals of the landscape guidelines will be to re‐introduce native plants into the campus environment. A palette of recommended plant material will be provided at the end of this section.

Trees can be used to add a pattern and rhythm to the landscape that can tie the campus together. Trees should be used to reinforce pedestrian corridors, roadways and open spaces. The screening of undesirable elements such as parking and service areas must be balanced with both aesthetics and safety.

Street trees in particular will require sensitive treatment. Consideration will need to be given to the soil structure along major arterials or other innovative planting techniques to ensure the success of plantings in urban conditions. The relocation or burying of overhead services along major streets should be considered.

The following guidelines should be considered for the planting of new trees:

• Deciduous trees to be minimum 60mm calliper;

• Coniferous trees to be minimum 180cm height;

• Wood stakes with flexible restraints (Arbortie or VStrap);

• The minimum planting area is to be 3.0 metres x 3.0 metres;

• In paved areas, structural soil or Silva Cells shall be used;

• Lower branches to be trimmed 2.4 metres above sidewalks and 4.5 metres above streets and service roads;

• Tree grates should be avoided;

• Trees to be planted with top of root ball level with finished grade;

• Fruit or nut bearing trees are to be avoided.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


PLANTING PALETTE Large canopy trees will be used to define street edges and to line major pedestrian corridors. Planting should be directed to areas where trees have the best chance of becoming fully developed (i.e., avoid conflicts with services and heavily paved surfaces). Ideally planting should be balanced on both sides of the street or corridor.

Native Red Maples and their cultivars will be used as a signature trees throughout the Waterloo campus. Larger canopy cultivars will be used as street trees and for defining the edges of large open spaces.

The following cultivars are preferred: Acer rubrum Acer rubrum ‘October Glory’ Acer rubrum ‘Northwood’ Acer rubrum ‘Karpick’ Acer x freemanii ‘Autumn Blaze’ or ‘Red Sunset’

Although considered to be sensitive to pollution and drought, typical of urban areas, many cultivars can be used in a campus setting. Given their size Sugar Maples are best used in combination with Red Maples as street trees and along large open spaces. In addition to the Maples, the following large canopy trees are preferred:

Kentucky Coffeetree Tulip Tree Sycamore Oak

Medium Canopy Trees Medium canopy trees may be used in plazas and along minor pedestrian corridors. Planting should be incorporated into larger beds and turfed areas. Smaller tree varieties may tolerate raised planters or tree pits in paved areas. Showy varieties of trees can be used as specimens. Flowering Dogwoods are excellent specimen trees that can be located, near a patio, corners of buildings, or open courtyards. They are especially effective against a dark backdrop of evergreens or building material where the flowers are accentuated, as is the branching habit in the winter.

Hop Hornbeams are hardy native trees that perform well in urban conditions. They tolerate a variety of soil conditions. In addition to Flowering Dogwoods and Hop Hornbeams the following medium canopy trees are preferred:

Blue Beech Red Bud Sassafras

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Recommended Shrubs and Perennials The preferred approach to shrubs and perennial planting is to mass plant material. Plantings should be concentrated at building edges or other key locations to direct pedestrians and to provide visual interest. Perennial planting should be located in a few prominent locations to maximize visual impact and to reduce maintenance. The main areas for perennial beds will be building entrances, courtyard edges and planters.

Vines such as Boston Ivy and Virginia Creeper evoke images of old, established schools. They create visual interest on both contemporary and heritage buildings. Vines, due to maintenance concerns, should be used sparingly to soften architectural edges and to animate blank facades.

The following guidelines should be considered for the planting of new shrubs and perennials:

• Deciduous shrubs to be minimum 60cm height, #3 cont.;

• Evergreen shrubs to be minimum 50cm spread, #3 cont.;

• Large specimen flowering shrubs to be minimum 80‐150cm height;

• A minimum double row of shrubs is preferred for foundation planting;

• Large perennials to be #2 cont.;

• Small perennials to be #1 cont.;

• Minimum 100mm depth shredded bark mulch for all beds.

The following native shrubs are preferred:

Serviceberry Ninebark New Jersey Tea Sumac Buttonbush Currant Dogwoods Bayberry Burning Bush Elderberry Spicebush Rose Meadowsweet Lowbush Blueberry Viburnum

The following ornamental shrubs are preferred:

Yew Colorata Euonymus The following native perennials are preferred:

Blazing Star Evening Primrose Big Bluestem Little Bluestem Foamflower Ferns Black‐eyed Susan Sedges New England Aster Indian Grass Beebalm

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


7.0 TRANSPORTATION

7.1 OBJECTIVES

Transportation and parking have, and will continue to be key issues at the Brantford Campus as the Downtown continues to revitalize and more people come to the core to live, work, shop, and learn. As such, transportation to and from the campus must be balanced between the private car and alternative forms of transportation such as public transit, cycling, and walking in order to accommodate the needs of commuting and local students, faculty and staff. Building on the University’s commitment to supporting the alternative transportation options available to faculty, staff and students in its Sustainability Policy, the following objectives should be observed to facilitate transportation to, from and within the campus:

• Investigate, implement, and encourage the use of ride‐sharing initiatives, incentives and programs for students, staff and faculty;

• Encourage the City of Brantford to pursue the development of multi‐use trails and on‐road bike lanes to and through the Downtown, with enhanced pedestrian linkages as recommended in the Downtown Master Plan, Transportation Master Plan and the Multi‐Use Trail/Bikeway Master Plan;

• Establish secure all‐season bicycle parking in select campus buildings and new residence buildings;

• Ensure an average five‐minute walking distance is maintained between all academic and residence buildings as the campus grows;

• Monitor the establishment of off‐campus housing outside of the Downtown and encourage improved transit connections over time to such housing as it develops; and

• Adopt an integrated parking approach to accommodate parking needs resulting from campus growth. Investigate opportunities to partner with the City of Brantford or the private sector in the development of new and upgraded parking facilities.

7.2 PARKING

The ultimate number of parking spaces that would be required to support University growth would be determined by both the size and location of new campus buildings. An urban campus environment implies that surface parking should be minimized and the majority of new parking be accommodated in parking structures. Opportunities for providing parking in above ground structures currently exist in two locations:

1. The proposed redevelopment of the Downtown Transit Terminal with a potential new parking structure on Darling Street; and

2. The currently underutilized Market Centre Parkade, with an opportunity to add parking with levels approximately 600‐650 parking spaces (at a cost to the University).

Current structured parking options for University partnership are located adjacent to the campus, making them feasible options to increase available parking for students, faculty, staff and visitors.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Both of these parking opportunities are located in close proximity to existing campus buildings and within the Integrated Academic District. Acknowledging current issues with student on‐street parking and the need for a significant amount of parking due to campus growth, Laurier Brantford should discuss the potential for partnerships in the development of a Darling Street parking structure and the establishment of a joint use agreement with the City to guarantee an amount of University parking to support future capital projects and campus growth. Successful acquisition of blocks in the Downtown presents an opportunity to provide additional structured parking underground and above grade integrated within other new campus academic uses. The following guidelines should guide the decision making process on whether a specific Downtown block under University ownership is the appropriate location for structured parking:

• It is located adjacent to an arterial road; • The structure entrance would not disrupt pedestrian

circulation; • The block is of sufficient size to accommodate a significant

number of parking spaces (i.e., minimum 120 spaces), ensuring cost‐efficiency and long term provision of parking to support campus growth;

• The maximum number of parking spaces accommodated in the structure continues to encourage non‐single auto travel and does not result in an oversupply of parking, and;

• Consultation with the City of Brantford to confirm that it would not disrupt the desired traffic/pedestrian circulation patterns.

The provision of surface parking as part of the construction of new campus buildings should:

• Be used to accommodate barrier‐free spaces, campus operation vehicles, and passenger drop off;

• Be incorporated into the building design through treatments that maximize use of land area for academic or residence purposes;

• Locate surface parking at the rear or side of their buildings, thereby decreasing visibility from the street;

• Be adequately buffered to achieve discreetness and a pedestrianized streetscape; and

• Be considered only in special circumstances as an interim use in advance of new building construction.

7.3 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Implementing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives for the campus can benefit both commuting and local members of the Laurier Community by encouraging a greater use of sustainable modes of transportation, as well as trip decision making that reduces, combines or shortens vehicle trips. The following initiatives should be considered for implementation as student enrolment increases and the number of commuting and local students of Laurier Brantford change over time: Parking Opt‐Out – Faculty and staff on the Waterloo Campus can currently opt out of the payroll deduction for permit parking. This approach could be implemented on the Brantford Campus and include as a choice, a University‐subsidized Brantford Transit pass to further encourage transit use. Car‐Sharing – Encourage students, staff and faculty to share private transportation to campus through a University‐run website that links drivers with riders to and from the campus. This initiative could not only reduce the number of vehicles coming to the campus and Downtown, but also facilitate greater interaction between individuals on campus. Guaranteed Ride Home – As part of the University’s current carpooling initiatives, a guaranteed ride home program could enhance carpooling use by providing a subsidized ride home in cases of an emergency or an unexpected delay for the carpooler to leave the campus. Brantford Taxi or a University vehicle could be used for the service.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


7.4 PUBLIC TRANSIT

Laurier Brantford has the unique advantage of having the City’s main transit terminal located in the Downtown, providing access to all transit routes throughout Brantford. As campus enrolment grows, so too will the demand on the public transit system as students, faculty and staff look to access other areas of the City. As such, the University should ensure Brantford Transit continues to meet the needs of the campus by:

• Providing information regarding popular destinations for members of the Laurier community often accessed by Transit to improve service to these destinations;

• Monitor the development of off‐campus housing, ensuring that transit access is provided to these locations where required;

• Ensuring buses on routes that directly serve the Laurier Community are scheduled to coincide with peak class periods at the campus; and

• Advising of any reorganization of transit stops along existing routes to ensure their strategic reorganization or relocation serves the needs of students, faculty and staff.

Future interregional transit is also an access option for the campus. Given the City of Brantford’s interest in the extension of GO Transit to the Downtown and GO Transit’s plan to extend peak period GO Bus or GO Train service to Brantford, the University should support the City of Brantford in their future efforts to have interregional transit extended to the Downtown as it is a mutually beneficial service.

7.5 CYCLISTS

Cycling as a means of travel to and within the campus is a popular choice for many students, faculty and staff and it helps to reduce reliance on the private car for transportation and the need to provide parking. Given that increased cycling infrastructure benefits both the Campus and Brantford communities, the University should encourage cycling as a preferred transportation alternative through:

• Encourage the City of Brantford to implement the proposed bikeways along Clarence Street and Icomm Drive to facilitate the campus and Downtown accessibility;

• Urge the City of Brantford to investigate the feasibility of improving Downtown Streets such as Colborne, Dalhousie, Darling and Market to increase the safety of cyclists; and

• Provide secure bicycle parking in all new residences and main academic buildings for exclusive use by the Laurier community.

Bicycle parking can be accommodated within campus buildings and new parking structures in a variety of ways and promotes cycling to campus by providing a secure location for storage while on campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


7.6 PEDESTRIANS

Public streets currently provide the means of pedestrian access to, from, and through the campus, with the exception of the Heritage Block, where students can also access buildings through surface parking lots. To ensure pedestrian safety, the following should be undertaken:

• Investigate opportunities with the City of Brantford of enhancing pedestrian crossings at established‐remove intersections in close proximity to a grouping of campus buildings.

• Work with the City of Brantford to ensure high priority snow and ice clearance during winter months, on an ongoing basis, to ensure pedestrian safety on city sidewalks.

• Entrances and accesses to campus buildings should be designed to direct pedestrians to road intersections and to avoid mid‐block crossings wherever feasible.

As the campus expands over time, it is expected that Laurier Brantford will grow to occupy complete or the majority of the land within selected blocks in the Downtown. Establishing pedestrian connections between buildings on these blocks is important because it would shorten travel time between classes and buildings, and also enhance pedestrian safety.

To ensure pedestrian connections are maintained within campus blocks as they are developed over time, the following should be undertaken:

• The establishment of pedestrian connections between buildings should be one of the primary objectives for development of new campus blocks. How buildings will be connected through pedestrian walkways should be determined before the first campus building is designed to ensure connectivity between buildings is maintained as the campus block is constructed over time.

• When a block is under University ownership, is should investigate the opportunity and feasibility of connecting campus buildings through underground walkways or above‐grade breezeways to facilitate pedestrian movement in all seasons.

• Ensure the universal accessibility of all campus walkways and entrances to buildings.

• Provide directional and way‐finding signage at the pedestrian level through the campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


8.0 IMPLEMENTATION

8.1 LAND TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH

Given that existing campus lands provide little opportunity for intensification through new development, a significant amount of additional land will need to be secured for campus growth over the next 25 years.

A number of opportunities currently exist in the Downtown to acquire land to facilitate campus growth. To ensure growth will contribute to the cohesiveness of the campus and reinforce one of the many roles of the downtown as a centre for post‐secondary education, the University should look to acquire new landholdings within the Integrated Downtown Academic District. It is anticipated that there is sufficient land within this area to accommodate campus growth over both the short and medium terms. However, with the growth of Mohawk College and Nipissing University, coupled with the continued revitalization of the Downtown as a destination for residents, civic, business, commercial, retail and cultural activities, it is anticipated that opportunities for Laurier needs may have to be found outside of the District over time.

The Downtown Master Plan identifies a number of development opportunities for Post‐Secondary expansion within and outside of the Integrated Downtown Academic District, as well as for other future Downtown uses.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Resulting from the need for the University to strategically use its resources to acquire new landholdings, the following objectives and framework should be used to guide the University in its decision making process with respect to land acquisition. Adhering to this framework ensures that the University builds the existing campus, making the most efficient use of newly acquired lands, structures future growth and creates a cohesive campus environment, and facilitates the continued integration of the campus in the Downtown.

Acquire as a priority downtown blocks that anchor the limits of the campus pedestrian corridor to reinforce Darling and Market Streets as one of the main structuring elements of the campus.

Acquisition of complete downtown blocks provides the opportunity to anchor the pedestrian corridor, encouraging the movement of the Laurier Community throughout the campus and downtown. Landholdings and complete blocks will also allow the creation of internal courtyard and open spaces to anchor new campus buildings and provide gathering and study spaces for students, faculty and staff. These blocks will also function as gateways to the campus to enhance Laurier’s identity in the downtown.

Use acquired downtown blocks as a basis for the acquisition of smaller infill assemblies. Infill campus developments connected to campus blocks through discussions with the City to achieve upgraded streetscapes will assist in the further integration of the campus into the downtown.

Opportunities exist in the west and east areas of the downtown for the acquisition of smaller infill assemblies that can accommodate campus growth. Focus efforts on those infill opportunities that allow for greater building heights to maximize development potential, such as east of Market Street. Ensure infill sites can be connected to new campus blocks or existing campus buildings through upgraded streetscapes to facilitate campus cohesiveness.

Continue to pursue the acquisition of existing heritage buildings around Victoria Park to strengthen the role of the

Carnegie Building and Victoria Park as the heart of the campus.

Campus growth around Victoria Park will occur through the adaptive reuse of existing Heritage Buildings with limited intensification opportunities. Laurier should continue to approach the other owners of the land adjacent to the Park to determine feasibility of acquiring additional buildings in the future, with a focus on existing church buildings.

Campus growth northwest of Victoria Park should be carefully considered. The primary residential neighbourhood characteristics of Heritage architecture will require adaptive reuse and careful replacement of buildings that represent architectural heritage in the downtown. Lower building heights and smaller parcel sizes make the northwest suitable for smaller‐scale university uses such as graduate housing. Ensure maintenance of the stability of the surrounding residential neighbourhood when pursuing growth in this area.

Opportunities to expand the campus northwest of Victoria Park currently exist. Given this area is currently a relatively stable residential neighbourhood, the University should expand carefully in this area and locate university uses that are compatible with a residential setting. Such expansion should be located close to future campus buildings along Market and Darling Streets to ensure the cohesiveness of campus buildings and reinforcement of the pedestrian corridor. A need to maintain the character of the neighbourhood will require primarily adaptive reuse of existing buildings. New buildings should be sensitive to building heights and siting.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Concentrate efforts on parcels that offer greater building heights to maximize development potential for future campus buildings.

The Downtown Master Plan has identified areas in the Downtown where greater heights are acceptable. These areas generally include lands along Colborne and Dalhousie Streets, adjacent to the Darling Street Parking Lot and east of Market Street and the Victoria Park Heritage District south of Wellington Street; greatest heights are acceptable in the redevelopment of the Market Square lands. Some off‐campus housing could be accommodated around the VIA Rail station, where the Downtown Plan supports greater building heights.

Continue the Laurier tradition of adaptively reusing existing buildings in the downtown to contribute to the heritage image of the campus. Place priority on those buildings which are located close to the campus pedestrian corridor and have floor space suitable for adaption to University use.

The University has established its identity and legacy in Brantford through the adaptive reuse of a number of existing heritage buildings in the downtown as well as by building new structures which are sensitive to the Downtown’s existing architectural heritage. This tradition should be continued. The heritage value of existing buildings should be assessed. The adaptive reuse of heritage buildings that provide sufficient space for University use should also be assessed.

Investigate the potential redevelopment of the Market Square lands with the City of Brantford, Mohawk College, Nipissing University, existing landowners, and the private sector.

The Market Square lands represent the largest consolidated block in the downtown. Greater building heights on this block provide the opportunity to accommodate Laurier growth as well as that of Mohawk, Nipissing and other private sector developments that provide office, commercial, and residential space to support the downtown as a destination for work, recreation, culture and a permanent place to live. While an ambitious project, the redevelopment of this block could benefit all post‐secondary institutions and the City of Brantford. Such a redevelopment would also represent a signature development in the downtown that demonstrates the strengths of partnerships between the post‐secondary institutions, City and private sector.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Investigate potential partnerships with the City of Brantford for the acquisition of campus lands that facilitate the development of campus buildings that are a benefit to the public and City as a whole.

Many campus buildings can be a benefit for public use. Partnerships with the City of Brantford should be pursued where there is a mutual benefit in the construction and operation of campus buildings. A mutual benefit should be determined before pursuing the construction of a facility so that potential partnerships can be framed.

Consider private sector partnerships in the assembly of lands for campus growth. Ensure partnerships result in the acquisition of land that provides the opportunity to maximize building size while contributing to the cohesiveness of the campus.

A significant portion of the Heritage Block was acquired through partnerships with local landowners. This approach could be continued into the future to consolidate landholdings in key areas of the downtown. Such partnerships could also be pursued for the adaptive reuse of existing buildings or properties that possess development permissions that represent the efficient use of land and density.

Coordinate and partner in expansion initiatives with other post‐secondary institutions.

Mohawk College intends to relocate their Elgin Street Campus to the Downtown and Nipissing will look to expand to some degree in the future. The expansion of these institutions as well as Laurier provide an opportunity to develop new buildings that house joint academic programs and potentially partner in other facilities that benefit all institutions such as a library/learning commons. Open communication between all institutions must also be strengthened to ensure expansion plans are organized so that the commercial, civic, cultural and

residential function of the downtown is not fragmented over time.

Acquire lands in a phased manner to the new campus in a timely fashion to facilitate Campus growth.

Campus growth projections indicate the need for additional academic and residence space based on student enrolment. To ensure the University can construct new campus buildings when they are required, lands must be acquired in advance. The ability to have lands for growth in advance of the need for new buildings will allow the University to maintain a high percentage of space entitlement for students that will result in a high‐quality campus environment with facilities for learning, study, research, and community building. Such an environment will be instrumental in attracting local, national and international students, researchers, and faculty to the University.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


8.2 PHASING TO ACCOMMODATE CAMPUS GROWTH

The implementation of the Campus Master Plan is subject to a number of external factors that cannot be predicted here. While the Plan is intended to provide a flexible framework for the evolution of the campus, a forecast of the sequence of implementation is provided to guide the physical development of the Campus. Given that the University is currently developing new academic programming, which will in part dictate the uses of new campus buildings, and the size of new campus buildings will be determined by the location and size of new campus lands, the phasing strategy only highlights capital projects that could be regarded as the ‘infrastructure’ required to support the functioning of the campus and enhance academic and campus life.

IMMEDIATE TERM: 2009 to 2010‐2011ACADEMIC YEAR

Brantford Research and Academic Centre (BRAC) The Brantford Research and Academic Centre is currently under construction on the Heritage Block and will provide state‐of‐the‐art research , teaching space, as well as administrative areas for several campus programs in 65,000 square feet of building area. The construction of the Centre will contribute to the research and academic infrastructure on campus, accommodating growth to approximately 3,200 students. The building design is consistent with existing University buildings and will facilitate the creation of a courtyard open space within the Heritage Block.

102 Dalhousie Street The renovation of the former CIBC Building at 102 Dalhousie Street will provide additional lecture theatres, classroom space, and faculty and administration offices.

Student Residences A dormitory‐style student residence containing 300 beds, as well as a cafeteria and meeting room is planned to contribute to the University owned residence inventory. The location of this residence is yet to be determined.

200 additional beds will need to be constructed to meet the goal of adding 500 residence beds to the supply of existing housing stock.

The adaptive re‐use of the CIBC Building for academic uses maintains Laurier Brantford’s tradition of conserving and restoring Downtown architectural heritage.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


SHORT TERM: 2011 to 2016‐2017 ACADEMIC YEAR

Library Facility

Input from faculty and students indicated a need for an improved and dedicated library facility to better meet the academic and research needs of the University. While the Brantford Public Library is currently the best example of the synergy between the campus and Brantford communities, a dedicated library facility is needed on campus facilitate future growth in enrolment, academic programming and research activities of Laurier Brantford.

Given the need to address current space shortfalls, and to support the academic goals of Laurier Brantford, the provision of additional library facilities over time would be required. A flexible facility designed to accommodate the needs of the ultimate student population is required to provide the University to attract students and scholars to the Brantford Campus, and for temporary classrooms, offices, and study spaces. As the need for library and research space increases in the future, temporary uses can be relocated and the University will have more centralized space for library, learning and research facilities.

The impending growth of post‐secondary institutions in the Downtown provides the opportunity to develop an integrated library facility to meet both the academic and research needs of Laurier, Mohawk and Nipissing. These facilities would promote the collaboration of these institutions. Consideration should be given to the feasibility of a dedicated library facility that invites public use of appropriate spaces to maintain a degree of the synergy between the post secondary and public community currently experienced in the Brantford Public Library. Ongoing dialogue with the Brantford Public Library should occur to evaluate options in continuing the University’s use of the library and approaches to maintain ongoing relationships in the event that a new post‐secondary library is constructed.

It is essential that a dedicated library facility to meet the academic and research needs of a growing student and faculty enrolment, it is strongly recommended that a library facility be considered at the front end of the short term phase, potentially in 2011 or 2012.

YMCA/Laurier Brantford Athletic and Recreation Centre

The combined Brantford Family YMCA & Wilfrid Laurier University Athletic and Recreation Centre will meet the athletic and recreation needs for students, staff, faculty, varsity teams and intramural programs. The Laurier Brantford component of the facility, accommodated in 47,715 square feet of space, will house a double gymnasium with seating for 1,000 spectators, varsity and general‐use change rooms, boardroom and athletic therapist room. Shared facilities between the YMCA and Laurier will include a running track, community room and café.

This facility would meet the athletic and recreation needs of an enrolment of 4,000 students.

Student Residences

An additional 500 student residence beds are also planned in the short term. An additional 500 beds will negate the need to lease beds from the private sector to guarantee housing for first year students. This will provide housing for a small number of senior level and graduate students.

Rendering of proposed YMCA‐Laurier Joint Athletic Facility, 2009

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


MEDIUM TERM: 2017 to 2022‐2023 ACADEMIC YEAR

Additional Athletic/Recreation Facility

While the joint YMCA/Laurier Athletic and Recreation facility will continue to serve the needs of the campus community, additional athletic and recreation space, as well as a pool facility, will be required to accommodate the needs of a growing student population and increased intramural programs, and potentially an expanded varsity athletics program. Providing additional athletic space to support varsity sports on the Brantford Campus would provide a “point of pride” for Laurier Brantford students, attract new students, and offer another avenue for community involvement by Brantford residents. They could then support a varsity team.

Land area to accommodate such a facility is not provided within the Integrated Downtown Academic District. An opportunity exists to build on the existing Civic Centre facility located on Market Street South. Laurier currently uses this facility for intramural hockey. The facility could accommodate intramural programming that is currently accommodated on fields surrounding elementary schools core. The facility could also provide expanded recreation opportunities for Brantford residents that may be under‐served in the areas of athletic and recreation facilities. The City of Brantford should provide this facility and has the authority to meet the need as the current owner of the lands and building.

Conference Centre Facility

Consideration should be given to a Conference Facility located on campus to accommodate the needs of the University. The location of the campus in the Downtown also provides an opportunity for this facility to be used by local businesses and the City of Brantford, further integrating the campus and community and providing an additional revenue stream for the University.

Student Residences

An additional 1,760 residence beds will be required for construction over the medium term. 1,040 beds would be required to guarantee residence beds for first year students at a student population of 8,000 to provide graduate and senior‐level housing. The University will require 720 additional beds for these students will be required.

LONG TERM: 2023+

No major building projects are recommended for the long term given the future uncertainty and the additional need to update this Campus Master Plan before this threshold is reached. Based upon the Council of Ontario Universities Standards, additional space is required to accommodate food and central services, academic and administrative offices, health science facilities, classrooms, undergraduate, graduate and faculty labs, campus study spaces, activity and athletic space. Approximately 1 million square feet of space is required.

An additional 2,450 residence beds (1,820 first‐year, 630 graduate and senior‐level) would be required to support the ultimate student enrolment of 15,000 students on campus.

59

WATERLOO CAMPUS

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

60 Wilfrid Laurier University IBI GROUP

9.0 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR WATERLOO CAMPUS

9.1 INTRODUCTION

Laurier’s enrolment has doubled over the past ten years. Offering a range of undergraduate and graduate programs in Arts, Social Sciences, Business and Economics, Education, Music, Science, Social Work and Theology, Laurier aims to continue the transition to a comprehensive and research‐intensive university recognized for its excellence in teaching and learning and a student‐centred environment. In the 2008‐09 academic year, more than 11,000 students were members of the Laurier community. The University is home to the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy, the Laurier Centre for Military, Strategic and Disarmament Studies, the Cold Regions Research Centre, International Migration Research Centre, Movement Disorders Research & Rehabilitation Centre (MDRC) and several other research centres. Today, the central campus occupies the 36 acre block bounded by University Avenue to the north, King Street North to the east, Bricker Avenue to the south, and Albert Street to the west with the exception of a single privately owned parcel on Bricker Avenue.

The outer campus occupies approximately 32 acres:

• west of Albert Street ‐ Seagram Drive, Waterloo College Hall, Laurier Place Residence)

• north of University Avenue ‐ the former St. Michael’s School site and the former Northdale School site

• east of King Street ‐ King Street Residence, 232 King Street, 202 Regina Street, University Place Residence

• other housing, academic and administration buildings on Lodge Street.

Historically, these areas to the east and west of the central campus have been the preferred areas for growth and expansion and will continue to be in the future.

Existing Campus Lands, 2009

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

Wilfrid Laurier UniversityIBI GROUP 61

9.2 A HISTORY OF CAMPUS GROWTH

1911 ‐ 1972 The University was established in 1911 as the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary of Canada. Willison Hall was built in 1914, and underwent major expansion in 1924 when Waterloo College was established. The College provided post‐secondary education and became Waterloo Lutheran University in 1960. Willison Hall was demolished in 1970 and reconstructed in its current location overlooking Alumni Field. In 1973, the College changed its name to Wilfrid Laurier University; dropping the church affiliation meant the University was now a public institution and eligible for capital funding from the province.

1973 ‐ 1992 Immediately following this transition, enrolment increased and significant new construction and expansion occurred including a two storey addition to the Library, the Students’ Union Building, Athletic Complex and Frank Peters Building. Bouckaert Hall, a women’s residence, was erected in 1986, and the same year construction commenced on the Aird Building. Buildings outside the inner campus, such as 232 King Street, were added to the campus between 1985 and 1992. Development continued into the early 1990s, with the conversion of a former manufacturing plant at 202 Regina Street

for University support functions, and the prominent student residence at 44 Bricker Street was opened in 1991. Wilfrid Laurier University purchased houses on the east side of King Street, and took possession of Seagram Stadium in 1992. The Outer Campus covered 15 acres and consisted of Seagram Stadium, 232 King Street North, Regina/Lodge Street Building and a collection of commercial properties in the area east of King Street in 1992. 1993 to Today A Campus Master Plan was prepared in 1992 by Roger De Toit Architects Ltd. and Paul Merrick Architect Ltd. to address physical campus growth and improvements over a 15 year period to 2007. Since that time, major construction and renovation projects have transformed the Waterloo Central Campus into a dense cluster of buildings for academic, social and cultural activities; University landholdings also doubled to over 32 acres. The Science Building opened in 1995 and Laurier acquired both University Place and Laurier Place residences to accommodate enrolment increases. In 2001, the University acquired St. Michael Catholic Elementary School, now St. Michael’s Campus, on the north side of University Avenue. The building was adapted and reused for classrooms and the associated land is also used for parking. Significant growth in enrolment and academic programming through this time period has resulted in a $132‐million capital expansion program including the Athletic Complex upgrades, an expanded Dining Hall, updated library, the Schlegel School of Entrepreneurship, the new Science Research Centre and Bricker Academic Building, Waterloo College Hall Residence, and updated Student Services.

The former Northdale School, now the Northdale Campus, was acquired by the University in 2004, and housed the arts and business academic programs. An expansion of the Fitness Centre and the Kinesiology labs addition were both opened in 2005 and Alumni Field was transformed in 2006 into a state‐of‐the‐art, multi‐sport field within an amphitheatre‐style environment.

King Street Residence is the newest residence at Laurier. The 8 storey building with structured parking on the east side of King Street North opened in 2006. Adjacent to the residence, the Co‐Op Education and Career Development Centre was opened in 2007.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


School of Social Work – Kitchener Campus With support from the City of Kitchener, Laurier established a Satellite Campus in downtown Kitchener for its Faculty of Social Work which was relocated from the Aird Building to 150 Duke Street in downtown Kitchener. The former St. Jerome’s High School building, a historical landmark constructed in 1907 was renovated into a 40,000 ft2 state‐of‐the‐art facility, housing seven classrooms, computer labs, library, interview‐viewing room, a large conference/ lecture hall, community meeting space, student lounges, a spiritual room and a café.

Academic program delivery commenced in 2006.

CAMPUS GROWTH 1995 ‐ 2009

Year Sq.ft. Sq.m.

Science Building 1995 137,465 12,771

University Place Residences 1998 72, 161 6,704

Laurier Place Residences 1999 120,598 11,204

St. Michael’s Campus 2001 22,184 2,061

Waterloo College Hall Res. 2002 94,768 8,804

Bricker Academic Building 2003 84,919 7,889

Dining Hall Renovations / Paul Martin Centre

2003 unknown unknown

Science Research Building 2003 43,013 3,996

Schlegel Building 2004 39,623 3,681

Northdale Campus 2004 24,617 2,287

Fitness Centre and Kinesiology Labs

2005 unknown unknown

King Street Residence 2006 118,815 11,038

Co‐Op Education and Career Development Centre

2007 25,500 2,369

Alumni Hall Addition 2007 9,000 836

792,663 73,640

WLU School of Social Work, Kitchener

Southwestern corner of main campus – Library and Seminary in the background – as viewed from Bricker Avenue.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


9.3 THE SURROUNDING URBAN CONTEXT

The Waterloo Campus occupies approximately 68 acres of land within the heart of the City, anchoring the busiest urban intersection at King Street & University Avenue and a major gateway to the downtown district.

As the university has grown beyond the central campus, it has become increasingly integrated within the surrounding urban environment, and is located half a kilometre from Uptown Waterloo and four blocks east of the University of Waterloo campus.

University Avenue and King Street North are major mixed use corridors and have been targeted for intensification through increased building heights and gradual streetscape upgrades. The neighbourhood north of the central campus is characterized primarily by single family houses and converted dwellings occupied by students, with student‐oriented retail and commercial uses focused around the King Street and University Avenue intersection. This area has undergone a significant transformation over the past decade into a prime location for student housing. The City and WLU continue to work together to establish a long‐term strategy for this area.

The southwest boundary of the campus around Seagram Stadium is fused with Waterloo Park, one of the largest green spaces in the City of Waterloo offering University students access to additional sports fields. A Master Plan for Waterloo Park has recently been completed. The Ironhorse Trail extending through the future Light Rail Transit Line, connects such destinations as Uptown Waterloo, the Canadian Clay and Glass Gallery, Waterloo Library, Perimeter Institute and the Memorial Recreation Complex within close walking distance of the University.

The area two blocks south of the Bricker Avenue has been redeveloped as primarily for low to mid‐rise student housing developments. The residential neighbourhood extending along Albert Street forms MacGregor/Albert Heritage Conservation District and new development of these properties is strictly controlled.

The area located to the west of the campus and east of Regina Street is a stable low density residential neighbourhood, with a mix of permanent residences and student housing rentals. Between Lodge Street and University Avenue, the area is a commercial/ industrial district that holds potential for infill and redevelopment.

Aerial Photo of Existing Waterloo Campus

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


9.4 EXISTING CAMPUS CONDITIONS AND TRENDS

Built Form and Architecture The majority of the residences tend to be clustered within the main campus allowing first year students to be located close to classes and student services facilitating easier orientation of the campus environment. Recent new construction has been directed to the outer campus leaving the organization of the central campus the same as it was 20 years ago. The average height of the campus buildings is three to four storeys with the exception of some academic residence buildings. King Street and Bricker Street residences are the tallest on campus being 8 to 10 storeys respectively.

Most Waterloo campus buildings were constructed in the 1960s and reflect a utilitarian design style typified by concrete slabs, minimal building articulation and ornamentation, and a low or flat roof profile. The lack of architectural detailing and variety in fenestration minimize the overall visual interest of these prominently located structures.

This utilitarian design approach continued from the 1960’s to the present with few notable exceptions. Buildings constructed in the past decade still lack a consistent design theme, although the general style and cladding is more contemporary.

Completed in 2003, the King Street Residence uses terracing of the building for a more pedestrian friendly streetscape. Towers of glass at opposite ends highlight the common areas of the building, and activate the façade.

The Library is a typical example of 1960s architecture on the Waterloo campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Open Space There are few large functional open spaces on the main campus. Parking, paths, service and loading have taken precedence over the use of land for passive recreational open space. Alumni Field and Seagram Stadium are the largest recreational open space facilities on campus.

The Waterloo campus lacks formal walkways of sufficient size and prominence. Currently the campus is criss‐crossed with paths of varying widths and materials. The significant grade change across the campus requires many sets of stairs, which break up the flow of these pedestrian corridors and hinder accessibility.

Sports fields should be attractive open space elements for athletes, spectators and pedestrians who walk past or look onto them.

Featuring a variety of plantings, the existing plant palette on the campus is mixed and does not have an overall theme or structure. Planting beds are poorly defined and lack continuous groundcover or mulch. Turf areas dominate open spaces and in high traffic areas show signs of wear. The area surrounding the Seminary contains the largest tract of trees and should be preserved due to its historical association with the founding Lutheran College. There are numerous memorial trees located on campus.

Site furnishings; including lighting, seating, bike racks, bollards, trash receptacles, and handrails, are not consistent across the campus. A palette of materials was established with a design review committee for the redevelopment of the Heritage Walk and Quad in the spring of 2009. The University intends to carry this palette of materials throughout the rest of the campus.

The Schlegel Centre was used as a analog for the design of site furniture along the recently constructed Heritage Walk.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Streetscape As major arterial roads, King Street North and University Avenue primarily serve vehicular traffic travel. The associated streetscapes at the roads are utilitarian in nature, not pedestrian friendly, and lack both street trees, as well as street lights in some areas. There are also no benches or trash receptacles for pedestrian use.

Signage for the campus can be found at the corners of University Avenue and King Street North, King Street North and Bricker Street, Midcampus Drive and at the corner of Albert Street and University Avenue.

King Street looking north

University Avenue looking west

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Circulation and Access The transportation system serving the Waterloo Campus today consists of the following sub‐systems:

• The access network bringing students, faculty, staff and products to and from the campus;

• The internal circulation network connecting campus buildings and spaces, including loading and unloading facilities; and

• The parking facilities and management.

This is a multi‐modal transportation system accommodating pedestrian, cycling, transit, delivery and personal vehicle services through the following sub‐systems.

Pedestrian Movement All Regional and City roads providing access to and from the campus include sidewalks, and therefore provide the primary pedestrian access between the campus and the surrounding community. The volume of pedestrian crossings to and from the campus is high, with the busiest pedestrian crossing at University Avenue and Hazel Street, experiencing 4,200 daily crossings. This high volume of crossings reflects the location of the University/Hazel intersection at the main campus entrance, and the transit and iXpress stops at this location.

Pedestrian crossings, both formal signalized and informal unsignalized, at the perimeter of the main campus represent an important interface for a high volume of pedestrians travelling between the University and the surrounding community. Although pedestrian crossing safety relies on the judgement exercised by pedestrians and drivers, crossings can be identified and designed to minimize conflict. Vehicular Movement and Access The Waterloo campus is strategically located at the intersection of two of the Region of Waterloo’s major Regional Arterial Roads that have the capacity to move upwards of 36,000 vehicles a day to and from the Waterloo campus.

Also providing campus accessibility to and from the surrounding community are both Albert Street and Lester Street on the west side of the campus, Hazel Street extending north from University Avenue and Bricker Street forming the south edge of the Waterloo Campus.

Lester, Hazel and Bricker Streets are designated Local Streets to facilitate traffic movement within the neighbourhood surrounding the Waterloo Campus and are designed to discourage excessive speeds and through traffic, and to encourage and facilitate pedestrian and bicycle transportation. Internal Campus Circulation No public roads provide internal circulation within the central campus. Internal access is provided by a series of drives and sidewalks, such as Midcampus Drive and Chancellor Drive, which link the external public roads with the internal parking lots, delivery facilities, open spaces and building entrances, as well as exits. Public Transit The Waterloo campus is currently very well served by Grand River Transit (GRT) service and there are eight public transit bus stops located around the perimeter of the main campus. Parking A permit is required to park anywhere on the Waterloo campus at all times Monday to Friday, with the exception of paid parking or in the evenings. Faculty, staff, and student parking is accommodated in designated lots located in various locations on campus. Laurier Place, University Place and King Street residence all provide parking for student residents. Visitor parking at meters and Pay & Display is provided at various campus locations.

On‐street parking meters with a three hour limit are also provided on Bricker Street along the south edge of the campus. Some additional campus‐related on‐street parking also takes place in the Central‐Albert neighbourhood on streets such as Clayfield Avenue and Ezra Avenue. Currently, additional faculty, staff, and student parking spaces are leased from various churches which are located in close proximity to the campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Laurier has added a new rideshare program available for faculty, staff and students and is looking to increase its participation in alternative transportation means by allowing faculty, staff and students to take part in the new carpooling initiative. This program allows participants to reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles traveling to the campus, thereby reducing parking demands, decreasing emissions and combating the rising price of gas. The program is run by Carpool.ca, a Canadian rideshare program designed specifically for the post‐secondary environment, and is designed to be a 'self‐serve' ride‐matching service.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


10.0 PLANNING FOUNDATIONS Laurier will continue to experience increases in first year undergraduate and graduate student enrolment over the next 15 years to 2023, and will need to increase the residence supply and academic space in tandem with this growth.

10.1 CAMPUS GROWTH PROJECTIONS

There are multiple factors that affect the need for new and expanded campus facilities in the short, mid and long term future at the Waterloo Campus.

The single most important long term factor is an increase in student enrolment over the next 15 years to 15,000 “Full Time Equivalent” (FTE) students at the Waterloo Campus. In 2007/2008, Wilfrid Laurier University had 10,840 FTE students at the Waterloo Campus and 255 at the Kitchener Campus. If enrolment growth is to continue at the average rate of the past 10 years of 2.15%, then the University would reach its ultimate enrolment of 15,000 FTE students by the year 2023. It is assumed that both the current faculty‐to‐student ratio and staff‐to‐student ratio would remain constant as student enrolment grows:

Phase Total Students New

Students

Total

Staff

New

Staff

Baseline

(2007/2008)

11,095 ‐ 1,290

1 (2009‐

2012/2013)

12,340 1,245 1,390 100

2 (2013 –

2017/2018)

13,720 1,385 1,502 112

3 (2018 –

2022/2023)

15,000 1,275 1,606 104

Total 15,000 3,905 1,606 316

Academic Building Space Needs Laurier will require significant additional space to accommodate anticipated enrolment. The current gross floor area available to the Waterloo campus is 117,486 square metres. This translates into 10.5 square metres per FTE student. This existing space represents only 60.7% of the Council of Ontario Universities’ (COU) entitlement standards. This existing shortfall is primarily in the functional space categories of Central Services, Campus Study Space and Libraries facilities, Lab Undergrad, and Food services. To reach full entitlement would require an additional 76,073 square metres of space which would increase the total of 193,559 square metres or 17.0 square metres per FTE student. This 76,073 square metres of space is referred to as the ‘academic space shortfall’. For master planning purposes, it is assumed that the University should develop the building plan that aims to achieve a target 100% of “entitlement” to provide the highest quality living and learning environment at Wilfrid Laurier University.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Future academic space requirements based on student enrolment growth over the three planning horizons and accommodation of the academic space shortfall result in a need for additional academic space. Year Total FTE

Students Floor Area Required as % of Entitlement

New Space Required (m2)100% target

New Space Required (m2) with Shortfall in Phases 1,2,3

New Space Required (ft2) with Shortfall in Phases 1,2,3

61.7% today (10.5 m2)

100% target (17.0 m2)

Base year (2007/2008)

11,095 117,486 193,559 76,073 n/a n/a

Phase 1 (2009 – 2012/2013)

12,340 129,570 209,780 16,221 41,578 447,556

Phase 2 (2013‐2017/2018)

13,725 144,112 233,325 23,545 48,903 526,405

Phase 3 (2018 – 2022/2023)

15,000 (ultimate)

157,500 255,000 21,675 47,033 506,276

Total in Phase 3

15,000 - 255,000m2 2,744,887ft2

61,441 m2 137,514 m2 1,480,237 ft2

Student Residences In 2009, Laurier provided student residence beds at a ratio of 0.266 beds per full time student. As an interim solution to the current shortfall of University owned accommodations, the University currently leases 468 private beds for first year students and has reconfigured off campus housing to create an additional 190 beds. The University intends to make up this shortfall of 658 beds in the next four years. To support the additional enrolment growth of 3,905 students over the next 15 years, an additional 1,619 beds will be required with the intent of providing additional graduate beds beyond 2014.

10.2 PARKING AT THE WATERLOO CAMPUS TODAY

The current parking supply at the Waterloo Campus is 1,833 spaces; 812 for students, 921 for faculty and staff, and 100 spaces for special needs, service vehicles, drop‐off and miscellaneous spaces. Based on the current B1(wlu) zoning provisions in the City of Waterloo Zoning Bylaw, there is a current shortfall of 427 parking spaces on the campus as summarized in the following table.

Students Employees

Existing Total 10,840 1,256 Existing Parking Spaces 812 921 Required Parking Spaces 1,239 717 Shortfall/Surplus ‐ 427 +204 Approximately 720 of the total spaces are provided in surface lots on the main campus. The remaining 1,110 spaces are in outer campus and off campus parking lots. This amounts to 40% of the supply being centralized on the main campus and 60% being located in the outer campus. The visual amenity of the Waterloo campus is currently compromised by the abundance of surface parking lots on the central campus. Pedestrians and cyclists tend to use parking aisles as their primary routes for wayfinding and access across campus. Reduced surface parking on the main campus and decentralized parking in the outer campus is consistent with a sustainable long term vision for the Waterloo campus that emphasizes walking and biking over vehicular transportation. This was also identified as a priority of the 1992 Campus Master Plan, and has been described by many stakeholders as an issue that needs to be addressed.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


10.3 FUTURE PARKING NEEDS

Parking supply will continue to grow in tandem with enrolment and staffing growth. The required parking supply is calculated using all University parking facilities on lands zoned Bl(wlu) within 650 metres of the main campus (bounded by Albert Street, Bricker Avenue, King Street North and University Avenue), and a minimum of 500 spaces must be maintained on the main campus. All campus owned lands and parking facilities are within 650 metres of the main campus, with the exception of the property at 266 Marsland Drive. The assumption made in the last column of the table to the right, is that once the planned Light Rail Transit (LRT) service is operational in 2013, the transit mode share of travel to and from the campus would grow and parking ratio reductions will evolve over the next 20 years. It is not expected to impact the Phase 1 need for 569 additional student parking spaces. However, the Region of Waterloo’s travel demand forecasting model used to forecast transit ridership, has it growing by 53% in the Uptown Waterloo area and 37% in the Waterloo Conestoga area by 2031 for a combined long term increase in transit ridership of 45%. As a result, this table applies a mid‐term transit ridership increase of 20% and ultimate increase of 40% to the student parking forecasts, with the added transit riders it would reduce the additional parking supply required at the campus in favour of corresponding transit rides. The result is a planning range of from 780 to 870 additional student parking space requirement on the campus by the end of Phase 3 in 2023. With the existing over‐supply of faculty/staff parking, no additional supply is forecast.

Phase New Students

New Staff

New Parking for Students

New Parking for Staff

Total Parking Supply

LRT‐Adjusted New Parking Required for Students

2007/2008 (Baseline)

• • • • 1,833

1 (2009 – 2012/2013)

1,245 100 142 + 427 shortfall=569

57 (included in surplus)

2,402 0% reduction = 569

2 (2013 – 2017/2018)

1,385 112 158 64 (included in surplus)

2,560 20% reduction = 126

3 (2018 – 2022/2023)

1,275 104 146 59 (included in surplus)

2,706 40% reduction = 86

Total 3,905 316 873 0 2,706 780

Also, as the campus expands to the north, east and west, the University will have to rationalize its existing delineation of faculty, staff and student parking so that ultimately there will be a total supply of a maximum 2,700 parking stalls where a minimum of 100 stalls are accommodated on the central campus and the balance within a 650 metre radius.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


10.4 GOALS TO DIRECT CAMPUS GROWTH

Building on the Guiding Principles of the Campus Master Plan, the following goals will direct growth and development in the campus over the next 25 years.

ESTABLISH A REVITALIZED OPEN SPACE AND PEDESTRIAN NETWORK Create new open spaces and improve pedestrian linkages through the siting and design of new campus buildings. Designate a portion of new open spaces as formal spaces that foster a sense of place while maintaining others for active or passive recreation. Ensure new and existing spaces are linked by pedestrian walkways forming a complete network.

This network will act as a unifying framework for the future built form and will transform the campus in several ways:

• Conditions for large number of pedestrians on campus will improve;

• A focus on quality design will make the campus physically distinctive and memorable;

• Interconnectedness will be restored; • Multi‐functionality of these spaces will increase the number of

people using them.

MAINTAIN A COMPACT CAMPUS CORE CHARACTER Apply an urban approach to new development by increasing building heights within the core area oriented to open spaces, extending buildings toward the street edge and exploring mixed use along University Avenue. Campus edges should be improved by streetscape upgrades, the establishment of gateways to signify arrival and to identify the campus in the public realm. In selecting sites for future growth and improvement, the focus on the better utilization, as well as intensification of its existing landholdings, before pursuing the acquisition of new lands to accommodate growth. This site selection process should also ensure a campus environment that remains compact, walkable, and that the student oriented community is maintained and enhanced.

SUPPORT ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION Build on the opportunity of having the future Light Rail Transit Station on Seagram Drive within a 5 minute walk of the central campus to reduce reliance on the automobile. Work with Grand River Transit to monitor ridership and ensure optimal location of bus stops and frequency of iXpress and regular transit routes to accommodate day and night commuters.

Maintain smaller surface parking lots on the central campus while accommodating the majority of required parking in structured facilities as part of new building projects. Utilize existing landholdings for decentralized parking areas beyond the periphery of the campus core and evaluate opportunities to develop structured parking facilities through partnerships with the private or public sector.

Focus on building a cyclist friendly campus through new spacious cross‐campus pathways, an increased distribution of convenient, safe, and accessible bike parking across campus, and a new centralized Cycle Centre.

DEVELOP HIGH QUALITY RESIDENCES FOR FIRST YEAR, SENIOR LEVEL, AND GRADUATE STUDENTS Adopt the ‘residence village’ as the model for all new university housing development, meaning the clustering of residence buildings in order to foster both social and academic networks. Ensure 50% of first‐year student housing is located on the central campus and the balance is within a 5 minute walk of the campus core. Pursue opportunities to provide graduate, faculty and other undergraduate student housing in outer campus lands.

REINFORCE CAMPUS IDENTITY THROUGH URBAN DESIGN, LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL EXCELLENCE Establish a commitment to excellence in design, architecture and the application of sustainable building principles, materials and technologies in the construction of all new buildings and the renovation of existing structures and facilities. Respect the past while building a legacy for the future through innovative design of both indoor and outdoor spaces that would inspire learning, living, and collaboration on campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


10.5 STRUCTURING ELEMENTS OF THE CAMPUS PLAN

Guiding Principles and Goals and Structuring Elements have been developed as the fundamental building blocks of the Campus Master Plan. These elements are used to identify priority sites, appropriate building footprints and their possible use, in addition to a revised circulation and open space system.

As with any Campus Master Plan – opportunities and priorities that evolve over time may dictate that the specific configuration this Plan proposes, be altered. The Plan must provide a flexible framework that can be adapted over time. What must remain firm are the structuring elements and guiding principles that embody the values of the University and community as it relates to the creation of a welcoming, efficient and attractive environment for learning and living.

The following elements have structured the Campus Concept Plan:

• A Walkable Core Centred Campus • Residential Villages • Growth on Existing Land • Expansion within the Academic District • Creating Gateways and Edges

A Walkable Core‐Centred Campus A compact walkable campus shall facilitate interaction between different social, cultural and academic groups. A network of both new and upgraded pedestrian / cyclist pathways will enhance wayfinding and strengthen the connections between indoor and outdoor spaces. The Master Plan aims to maintain and enhance this campus structure by focusing on a core‐centered approach to growth and development. This is achieved by concentrating growth efforts within 400 metres or an approximate 5‐minute walk from the outer boundary of the main campus. This is considered a walkable distance from the main campus boundary, and an area with a high concentration of student accommodations, and student oriented businesses, amenities and services.

The Plan focuses on intensification of the central campus first and only exploring the acquisition of new lands when the intensification of existing landholdings has reached its highest potential. To the extent possible, the Main Campus will continue to be the academic and social hub of the campus community with the greatest concentration of social and cultural venues. The full range of campus uses, from athletic and recreational, academic, research and teaching facilities, and residences will be on the main campus. This will also house the majority of residences. The major improvements to the landscape inventory and open space system are concentrated here. Strong physical connections must be made between the central core district and the east, west and north districts to stimulate interdisciplinary communication, as well as social, academic, and research synergy.

Improving the pedestrian environment is a primary focus of the Campus Master Plan. Photo courtesy of WLU Public Affairs.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Establishing New ‘Residential Villages’ Currently, there are 1,300 beds on the main campus. Throughout the phasing of development on the main campus, the master plan aims to maintain a continuous supply of 1,300 beds on the main campus within new and existing residence buildings and expand the total number of students in residences on the main campus. Centralizing student residences allows first year students to quickly and easily orient themselves to the campus environment.

Clustering of residences to create ‘residence villages’ supported by other integrated amenities and services also fosters a sense of community and facilitates social networks.

New residences buildings will be clustered in three key areas:

• Main Campus Core Areas – the majority of new residence beds will be constructed on the main campus.

• East Campus – in close proximity to King Street Residence. • West Campus – Laurier Place Residences and Waterloo College

Hall.

Capacity for Growth on Existing Land Holdings Development will focus on existing lands ‐ “repairing” or “replacing” those buildings or spaces in poor condition or those that represent an underutilization of valuable land assets. The highest priority building sites are those that will restore organization and clarity to the high traffic areas of the campus core. Secondary sites are underutilized lands at the perimeter of the campus, such as the Northdale campus. Criterion to be used to evaluate building sites and buildings for removal include:

• Age and Building Condition • Proximity to the Campus Core • Utilization of Land (Height and Density) • Size and Use of Building or Site • Overall Aesthetic Quality

Aging low rise residences in the centre of the campus offer prime opportunities for redevelopment

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Opportunities for Expansion As the existing University land holdings are intensified and redeveloped with new facilities, there will eventually be a need for the University to acquire additional land to accommodate the facilities needed for 15,000 students. In 2001, the City of Waterloo amended their Official Plan to include Special Policy Area No. 57 – an area surrounding the main campus, as shown on the map below. Within this Special Policy Area boundary, the University is permitted to use and develop the lands for specific institutional uses and other uses that solely serve the University. This boundary, which includes the Northdale campus, is referred to as the Academic District.

Creating Inviting Gateways and Attractive Edges The presence of the University in the community can be enhanced through special attention to the character of the campus edges. Perimeter streets, landscapes and building frontages can be beautified through tree plantings, sidewalk upgrades and landscaped medians. New Buildings along these major edges should have entrances oriented to the street, with prominent architectural features. New pathways to these buildings will improve the street presence of the campus.

Key gateways to the main campus have been identified along University Avenue and King Street North. These gateways should be formally marked through gateway structures and attractive signage.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


11.0 THE CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN The Campus Concept Plan is a comprehensive illustrated vision for the ultimate build out of the Waterloo Campus over the 25 year time horizon of this Plan. The primary built form and landscape elements depicted include the open spaces, pedestrian and cyclist pathways, internal roads and points of access, parking areas, streetscape upgrades, and building footprints (existing and proposed). The primary elements of the Concept Plan include:

• The development of an open space network that consolidates all the major elements of outdoor space.

• The development of major pedestrian and cyclist corridors such as the Promenade.

• The development of major gateways and focal nodes such as the skywalk, prominent buildings on University Avenue and King Street.

• The maintenance of a compact character of the campus by intensifying the core with high quality residences (central/east/west campuses), the new Campus Learning Commons (CLC), skywalk, and Global Innovation Building.

• The creation of an internal road and circulation system including Chancellor Drive, anchored by the new Administration/ Convention Building.

Specific features of the Concept Plan include:

• Central Common Green and Quad / Amphitheatre • Alumni Field and Underground Parking Facility • The Promenade (East – West Corridor to King Street) • The Heritage Walk • Chancellor Drive • Student Residence Clusters (Central, East, West campuses) • Convocation Hall • Campus Learning Commons / Skywalk spanning University

Avenue / Global Innovation Exchange Building • Visitors Centre • Major Expansions to Athletic Centre, Library, Arts Wing • Connection to LRT Station on Seagram Drive • Gateway and Streetscape Improvements • Strategic Land Acquisitions

As with the overall Master Plan document, the intent of the Campus Concept Plan is to provide a flexible framework for long‐term physical growth and change.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


CAMPUS CONCEPT MASTER PLAN

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


12.0 BUILT FORM AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER

12.1 OBJECTIVES

The intent of the built form and architectural design guidelines for the Waterloo campus is to establish a set of criteria and standards for the planning, design and construction all new campus developments, additions and renovations. The intent of these guidelines to maintain the unparalleled sense of community and human‐scale character of the campus, while contributing to the University’s local, national and international profile. How we design and build campus spaces to meet our future growth needs has a direct impact on how we function and thrive individually and collectively. These guidelines encourage an innovative, urban, design‐based approach to development, blending contemporary and traditional design elements with modern technologies that reflect a commitment to recapturing the built history of the campus while advancing the University towards comprehensive status, with increased research intensity, program development and excellence in both teaching and learning. Adhering to these guidelines will also assist the University in achieving the overarching goals of the campus master plan, and ensure compatibility with the City of Waterloo’s Urban Design Guidelines, and the City and Region’s long‐term vision for a sustainable, integrated campus supporting economic prosperity and cultural vitality. While new projects are driven by programmatic requirements and funding considerations, each project carries a responsibility to enhance each individual’s campus experience and contribute to the greater Laurier community. The following five objectives provide a basis for the design guidelines:

• Achieve excellence in design and architecture ‐ Approach each new development, building addition or renovation as an opportunity to brand the campus locally, nationally, and internationally. Uphold a commitment to using consistent high quality materials, architectural

treatments, and unique signature elements which are consistent with Laurier’s built history and set precedents for the future.

• Respect the urban campus context and promote a unique sense of place ‐ Ensure new built form and architecture respects and enhances the existing campus structures and surrounding urban fabric. Use design to emphasize gateways, views and vistas and landmark elements to establish vibrant streetscapes, and human scale environments that strengthen the visual identity of the campus. Blend contemporary building techniques with traditional architectural references to celebrate the built history of the campus.

• Encourage sustainable design ‐ As part of each new building program, incorporate new ‘green’ technologies and features, adhere to the principles of sustainability and, whenever possible, meet the guidelines of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating system.

• Enhance connectivity and interaction ‐ Design new developments and spaces to improve circulation across campus and between buildings, enhance connections to the surrounding urban community, and foster interaction and collegiality between diverse social, cultural and academic groups at Laurier. Blur the boundaries between indoor and outdoor space, provide transparency to active uses at grade (study space, gathering areas, food services and other amenities) for a dynamic public realm.

• Develop an environment that nurtures creativity, innovation and academic excellence ‐ Design academic and student focused buildings that advances the ambitions of the Academic Plan and Century Plan and supports a distinctive and stimulating living, learning and teaching environment. Recognize the needs of students, faculty and staff in the design of new and renovated buildings and create spaces to facilitate academic collaboration.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


12.2 OPPORTUNITITES FOR ENHANCED CAMPUS LIFE

Through focus group consultation and open houses, students, faculty and staff identified a number of key elements that could be incorporated into the construction of new buildings to address campus‐wide needs and enhance the quality of their day to day experience at Laurier.

• Bike Storage – Laurier has a growing ‘bike culture’ supported by an increasing number of people choosing to cycle to, from and around campus. To satisfy the demands of an increasing number of cyclists new buildings should incorporate bike storage, more outdoor bike racks should be provided, and consideration should also be given to supplying a centralized bike storage facility. This facility could include a repair/workshop area, lockers and showers. Security and surveillance should be a priority when locating bike parking.

• Information Technology –New building design should consider space for telecommunication and computer equipment and widespread access to wireless high‐tech amenities.

• ‘Green’ Infrastructure – Many members of the Laurier community want to see new buildings and renovation projects incorporate environmentally sustainable features. These might include a living wall, rainwater collection tanks (water cisterns), low flush toilets, green roofs, or low maintenance landscaping.

• Accessibility – Accessibility for people with disabilities should be

woven into the retrofit of all buildings and at the onset of the design process. Efforts should continue to eliminate accessibility barriers across campus.

• Winter Protection – Whenever possible provide covered

walkways, integrated breezeways, and semi‐weather protected colonnades that flank or connect buildings to improve pedestrian comfort during the colder months. Entrances especially should have an enhanced degree of protection from the elements.

12.3 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES

Where the special building typologies described in the previous section require additional consideration, given their location or function on campus, the following are general guidelines that apply to all new developments or renovations across campus and should be adhered to on a project by project basis. Heritage Design The Waterloo campus has historically contained a milieu of architectural styles which have contributed to the character of the campus. The original founding structures, Conrad Hall and Willison Hall were torn down as Laurier underwent significant expansion in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

The remaining building stock reflects the architectural style of the 1960’s ‐ angular geometries, repetition and symmetry in window openings, minimal facade articulation and a low‐rise utilitarian form. Examples include the Theatre Auditorium, The Library, and Residences such as Conrad Hall and MacDonald House. Based on their Condition Index Rating, many of these buildings are to be retained over the planning horizon of this campus master plan. The following principles should be observed:

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• The original buildings across campus that are to be retained

should be respected as heritage buildings, regardless of age. Each new building should be designed to become a heritage building in the future.

• Design new buildings to architecturally complement the existing campus buildings that will remain over the planning horizon of this Plan by providing a transition in mass, such as façade step backs, sympathetic design features and materials.

• Avoid massing, architectural elements and signage that overpower the existing buildings or detract from their existing character.

• Distinctive architectural elements should be preserved and enhanced. For example, the original doors to the Arts A Wing, the Science Building Tower, the Fred Nichols Centre Turret, the Seminary Building.

• All campus development must provide a sensitive transition to the MacGregor Albert Heritage Conservation District on the southwest corner of the campus.

Scale and Massing • Building depths should be narrow where possible to ensure

access to natural light and ventilation, particularly for residences.

• Long and large buildings should incorporate articulations in massing to provide variation and visual interest.

• The recommended height for academic buildings is five to six storeys or 25 metres. Some exceptions include prominent buildings at major transit nodes, including the recommended Academic Building addition to the Athletic Complex at the corner of King Street North & University Avenue. This may be ten storeys in height.

• The recommended height for residence buildings is eight to ten storeys or 33 to 42 metres.

• Buildings above four storeys should be terraced to reduce the perception of height from the ground.

• Taller landmark elements should be used to terminate important view corridors and mark main building entrances.

• Buildings framing major open spaces and streets should maintain a ratio of between 1:1 height to width to 1:4 height to width to ensure an appropriate sense of enclose and human scale proportions, and access to natural light. Less than a 1:4 ratio and a sense of enclosure is lost, exceeding a 1:1 ratio and the buildings overpower the street or open space.

Facades • Buildings should be visually engaging and transparent at the

ground level, and where possible, integrate sheltering elements for pedestrians such as canopies, breezeways and colonnades.

• Preferred materials for facades include natural stone, red brick, and synthetic stone. More contemporary materials to be incorporated include pre‐cast concrete, copper and metal curtain wall systems.

• Facades should incorporate projections, recesses or windows to articulate the façade and provide relief to long flat surfaces. These should mark public areas of the building, including lounges, meeting rooms and cafes.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Windows should facilitate two way visual connections between

indoor and outdoor areas through the use of clear glass. Tinted and mirrored glass is discouraged.

• Architectural detailing should be used to highlight windows and door frames cornices and corners.

• Blank or windowless walls to be avoided, particularly at the ground floor level. Where they are necessary or pre‐existing, they should feature changes in material or texture, such as projecting brick pattern, and vines and plantings should be incorporated.

Blank walls can be animated with the addition of vines.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Roof Forms and Materials • Select roof forms that complement the surrounding built form

and architectural character of the streetscape and internal campus buildings. Discourage radical roof pitches that create overly prominent or out‐of‐character.

• Rooflines should emphasis main entrances. • Where flat roofs are used, projections or setbacks are

recommended to distinguish the roofline from the façade. • Planted or “green” roofs should be encouraged as they keep

water away from storm sewers, provide additional outdoor amenity space (where permissible), and absorb carbon dioxide.

• Rooftop mechanical equipment should be fully enclosed, setback out of view, or screened and integrated into the architectural composition of the building.

• Rooflines across campus are typically flat or a front gable. Both sloped roofs and flat roofs are acceptable. Gross gabled and mansard are recommended to reference the architecture of the original Willison Hall and Conrad Hall.

• In larger buildings and fused buildings, an atrium should be included to introduce natural light, visual orientation and indoor open spaces to use during the winter months.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Orientation and Circulation • Buildings should frame streets, pathways and open spaces. • Main facades should face primary open spaces. • Ground floors should be designed to encourage active uses that

support pedestrian interest and social interaction. Common spaces for studying, socializing and other public uses should be clearly accessible and provide views to the outdoors to encourage use of open spaces.

• Dead end spaces should be avoided to ensure a safe campus environment.

• Service areas should be located away from public spaces and appropriately screened through planting and fencing composed of materials integral to the architecture of the building.

• A system of interconected pedestrian walkways should be integrated into all new building projects and added to existing buildings where possible. Breezeways can create an interface between indoors and the outdoors. They can open up during the summer months to become a colonnade and can mitigate climate during the colder months.

• Entrances should features clear architectural expression to mark their location and aid with orientation.

• Entrances should reinforce and provide direct connections to internal courtyards, open spaces and the street.

• Entrances should project or be recessed from the façade to articulate the façade and create shadow lines.

• Entrances should be highly transparent, either through the use of glazed doorways or solid doorways set into a glazed surround.

• Highly visible signage should be located outside each entrance. • Entrances should be connected to social space or lobby to create

a sense of arrival and to accommodate informal meetings and waiting area. Directional information should be provided at entrances.

• High quality materials, including stone, copper, brick and glass and architectural elements such as light fixtures, canopies, breezeways and colonnades should be used to mark entrances.

• All entrances should be accessible in accordance with the University’s Accessibility Policy.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Materials and Palette Across the campus, red brick has been used as the dominant building material, often accented by grey stone trim. Modern materials have been added successfully to this palette. The existing palette shown below illustrates the variety of materials that exist on the Waterloo campus.

Design buildings with architecturally interesting and durable building materials. Use of brick, stone, masonry and other durable elements that relate to the surrounding context should be considered.

• Discourage lower quality or conflicting materials in public view

such as concrete blocks, vinyl siding, plastic and mirrored glass. • Steps, access ramps and railings should be integrated into site

and building design. • Materials used in new buildings and additions should be selected

to complement existing materials. • “Green” materials that are acceptable under LEED© standards

should be chosen, whenever possible.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


12.4 CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES

To guide campus development on the Waterloo campus four building typologies have been created to provide direction for the massing, scale and siting of campus buildings. The Landmark, Infill and Street Face, Courtyard and Framing typologies tend to be building specific but may be used in combination as the University continues to develop it landholdings over time. Landmark Building Typology These are signature or iconic buildings that are recognizable and associated with the Laurier identity. They may be located on an arterial street or internal to the campus.

The Skywalk Building connecting the new Campus Learning Commons on the south side of University and the new Global Innovation Exchange Building on the north side of University Avenue is an integrated series of landmark buildings designed to make a statement and a visual impact along this major urban corridor.

Centred on the newly realigned Chancellor Drive, a new convocation hall would provide the largest venue on campus for special events, including graduation ceremonies and fall orientation, with seating for up to 3,000 persons. This prominent building will become a visual landmark on the approach into campus along Chancellor Drive from the University Avenue and King Street gateways.

Infill and Street Face Typology University Avenue and King Street North are major urban corridors within the City of Waterloo, well served by public transit and intended for high volume traffic (pedestrian/cyclist/vehicular) and intensive land uses. New campus development along these major arterial streets should apply an Infill and Street Face typology of design. This includes increased building heights, creative techniques for massing, articulated facades with a commitment to visual transparency and direct access to active uses at grade, connectivity and orientation to transit stops, and the opportunity to accommodate other non‐academic uses in a mixed use format.

By comparison to Landmark Building, Infill Buildings may be considered functional in nature. The following guidelines are recommended for this typology:

• Avoid major or abrupt changes in grade between street and building entrance(s) where possible.

• Buildings should contribute to animate streetscapes, with articulated building facades facing public streets and orient windows and doors to the street. Avoid blank, flat walls along street frontages.

• Provide amenity space at grade, such as gathering, lounge and study space to enliven the public and semi‐public realm and

UNIVERSITY AVENUE

Global Innovation Centre

Arts Building

Campus Learning

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


create a more transparent relationship between the University and the community.

• Generally, buildings should range in height from 6 to 10 storeys or 18 to 30 metres. More specifically, on the north side of University Avenue, the maximum building height is 6 storeys. On the south side of University Avenue, the maximum height is 10 storeys. These may be increased through an amendment to the City’s zoning by‐law, on a project by project basis, and requires consultation with City staff.

• Use a variety of massing techniques to reduce the scale of building height and bulk:

o Vertical articulation along facades o Lower storey step back or pedestrian scale podium

structures; and o Use terracing to ensure human scale proportions and

reduce shadow impacts: Step back the building a minimum of 3 metres

from the face of the building, after the fourth storey.

Step back the building 6 metres from the face of the building, after the eighth storey.

• Minimum setback from the street is 7.5 metre setback from the street. These may be reduced through an amendment to the City’s Zoning By‐Law, on a project by project basis, and requires consultation with City staff.

• Locate building entrances adjacent to transit stops, where possible. Coordinate sidewalks between building entrances and transit stops.

• Design corner buildings with expressive massing and architectural features that relate to and reinforce the street corner. Encourage vertical elements such as towers, turrets and other features that accentuate the street corner and address both street frontages with equal importance.

• Retrofit existing building facades – such as the Peters Building and Aird Building – to have more transparency at grade, and more animate/articulated facade. This would greatly enhance the campus image along University Avenue.

• Separation distance between street facing buildings should be at least 10 to 12 metres to allow pedestrian access into the campus

and enhance visual permeability into the campus core areas from the street. This also promotes natural surveillance and provides enhanced opportunities for landscaping.

• Refer to the City of Waterloo Zoning By‐Law and City of Waterloo Urban Design Guidelines as part of the design and planning of all new buildings.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Development along the collector and local streets require special considerations for height, massing, and setbacks. These including the following: Balsam Avenue:

• Maximum height for 47 metres back from Balsam Street is 3 storeys

East Side of Albert Street: • Minimum building setback is 7.5 metres • Above the 4th story, buildings should step back a minimum of 3

metres from the face of the building. • For storeys above the 8th storey, the minimum setback is 13.5

metres • Does not apply to the Library, unless replaced. • Maximum building height of 6 Storeys.

King‐ Lodge‐ Regina Block: • Non‐university commercial uses are restricted to the first floor

of any University owned and operated building • Maximum building height of 10 storeys

East of Regina, West of Albert Street: • Minimum building setback is 7.5 metres or for residential

buildings, building setback along a public street is one third the building height, whichever is greater

• Where a building exceeds 4 storeys in height, the stories above the fourth storey shall be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the face of the fourth storey.

• For storeys above the 8th storey, the minimum setback is 13.5 metres

• East of Regina, maximum building height of 10 storeys • West of Albert Street, maximum building height of 12 storeys

Courtyard Building Typology Courtyard buildings are groups or clusters of buildings that create a defined inward facing open space. The siting of buildings is extremely important when it comes to creating a cluster of multiple buildings with a defined inward looking courtyard. It is vital in this typology that the building/courtyard relationship be understood and respected in the planning process. Open spaces and future buildings should be carefully evaluated to assess the long‐term impact.

CMHC Lands

New Residences

Athletic Centre

Promenade

Athletic Field

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The mass, height, composition and scale of the buildings contributes greatly to the feeling of identity and enclosure. Special care should be employed in considering ratios of height versus open space. When academic imperatives, student’s needs, and new technologies dictate an increase in the size of new buildings and larger structures are necessary, they should be broken into units that are compatible with the scale and intent determined here.

• The width of the street or adjacent buildings should not exceed approximately 1.25 the height of the facing building. This will ensure an adequate sensation of enclosure in the street space while admitting proper levels of sunlight into the courtyard for plant growth.

• Buildings above 6 storeys in height should not be configured in continuous linear slabs parallel to the street unless the street/building distance can be expanded to 1.25 times the building height.

• Buildings surrounding a courtyard should have a maximum height equal to the plan dimensions of their common outdoor space so that a maximum sight angle of 45 degrees to the sky is achieved from the center of the block

• Care must be taken that the texture, color, range, and details is maintained throughout the evolution of the quad development. The use of brick as an example can tie together buildings that may vary in function.

The potential to establish a courtyard/quad identity (a campus with in a campus) that can add to the existing distinctive academic campus should be exploited in this typology.

Framing Building Typology Framing buildings are singular buildings that provide an edge to open space. The master plan design incorporates axes, courts, and vistas as major organizing devices. It is important to maintain these formal elements and, in some cases, to strengthen spatial relationships that might be less defined. The devices for framing are varied and can incorporate landscape elements to strengthen the framing intent. An example would be larger trees planted on both sides of the street, if they are of the same species, relative size, and of sufficient canopy to form a viewing corridor and pass through. In a similar way a building or series of buildings can be a framing device. These happen most often at the corner or at the end of vista/axes. In this case of a corner building, the ‘framing buildings’ should be of similar mass, and material and as close to the sidewalk as possible. Both sides of the corner should address the street and in some cases vertical masses can aid in the framing. In a case of a vista terminus building the range of opportunities can be broad from strengthening views towards existing significant architectural heritage features to a new prominent academic building. It is important to keep in mind that Framing Typology is much more varied than the other typologies mentioned here, and they could also be both a Landmark building and/or a component in a courtyard and in such cases the principles and guidelines of those typologies should be adhered to.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


13.0 OPEN SPACE GUIDELINES

13.1 OBJECTIVES

Design Guidelines have been established as criteria for future site development as the campus Master Plan is implemented. Generally open space form is driven by or influenced by built form. As phased development occurs, the removal of old buildings and the construction of new buildings will begin to transform open spaces. The standards for streetscape, campus spaces and plant material will ensure that the campus will, over time, develop a consistency in materials, form and character. The goal is to achieve an integrated, congruent campus landscape.

The following chapter on Open Space will be divided into three sections:

• Streetscape – will address the treatment of streets and sidewalks in and around the campus. The treatment of the edges will define how the public views the campus and how the campus is used by the students, staff and faculty.

• Campus Space – will identify ways of managing existing open spaces and directing future built form on campus. This section will include discussions on pedestrian and cyclist circulation and will outline the following:

• Formal open spaces, • Quads and courtyards, • Corridors.

• Plant Material – will outline approaches for built form and the planting associated with it. In general the built form (architecture and streetscape) will be the ordering mechanism for open space. Plant material will be used in a complimentary manner to reinforce shape and form or to highlight special areas within the campus. Built features will tend to be formal and rectilinear in nature while planting will be more informal and organic – buffering hard edges.

The Open Space Master Plan illustrates the major elements and components ranging from the Central Commons to the Seagram Drive LRT corridor. The Plan will form the building blocks for the redevelopment of the Waterloo Campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


STREETSCAPE The public realm surrounding the Waterloo campus consists of a network of streets. This street network in and around the campus requires a hierarchy of treatment to define the importance and role of these routes. The treatment of each type of street will be unified in terms of paving material, street tree planting and site furniture.

For the Waterloo campus the most important streets are King and University. Secondary streets are Bricker, Albert and Seagram. Other streets within the campus core and connecting to satellite building serve a support or service role.

The guiding principle for streetscape design is to keep the palette simple and clean, allowing improvements and upgrades to occur over time, and offering a smooth transition from the existing conditions. The streetscape design will complement a wide variety of building designs from historic to contemporary. The clarity and simplicity of the plan will be maintainable over time.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


University Avenue An important initiative of the Plan is the transformation of the streetscape of University Avenue to become a treelined boulevard recognizing its symbolic role as the gateway to Waterloo’s academic district and the downtown core.

• One main entrance at Hazel. New entry to Chancellor Drive

• Service entrance at new Aird Building entrance to be reduced in prominence (possible underground structure)

• Provide service entrance to Athletics complex

• Provide service entrances to proposed courtyard buildings

• Reduce utilitarian feel

• Wider sidewalks

• Gateway feature at corner of King and University

• Improve signage

• Plaza feature at Skywalk

• Future LRT stop

• Discuss benefits of centre landscaped median with Region and City (e.g., as a traffic calming feature)

• Upgraded crosswalks

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


King Street An important initiative of the Plan is the transformation of the streetscape of King Street to become a ‘green street’ and to act as a gateway to Waterloo’s academic district and the downtown core.

• One main entrance by Science Building, entry to Chancellor Drive

• Terminus of new Promenade


• Wider sidewalks

• Gateway feature at corner of King and University

• Improve signage

• Plaza feature at Alumni Field

• Improve Alumni Field frontage along King

• Street trees

• Introduce ‘Laurier Brand’ site furniture


CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Albert Street Albert Street acts as a collector street for the campus and plays a secondary role to University Avenue and King Street. The street has a decidedly residential feel which should be maintained. The existing open space at the seminary should be maintained and perhaps should be balanced with an upgraded streetscape on the west side of Albert Street. Buildings and access ponds should not dominate this streetscape. Increased setbacks should be maintained so that buildings appear to be situated in a park like setting.

• Incorporate into residential/ heritage district

• Create a Green Street – maintain trees at Seminary, balance existing vegetation with wider landscaped setbacks on west side of street


• Library Expansion to be Landmark Building along street

• Wider sidewalks

• Eliminate entrance at Schlegel Building

• Increase importance of DAWB Drop Off area

• Consider underground service and loading for Library expansion

• Improve signage; consider signage at Seminary

• Improve connection to Seagram Drive and Seagram Stadium

• Street trees



CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Bricker Street Bricker Street acts primarily as a service street for residential development on the south side, service road access and access to larger surface parking areas. The service function of this street should be maintained. A mid‐block crossing at Clayfield Avenue should be considered.


• Wider sidewalks

• Single entrance for DAWB, Fred Nichols loading area

• Consider underground parking at Seminary

• Street trees


• Consider upgraded crosswalk mid‐block

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Seagram Drive The future introduction of the Regional LRT Station between Laurier and the University of Waterloo will increase the importance of Seagram Drive. As visitors travel eastward on this street, a sense of entry into Laurier will be required. Upgrades to the streetscape such as street trees, street lights, and site furniture should be considered. A signalized intersection with cross‐walks and upgrades at Albert Street may be required as pedestrian traffic increases. Other required improvements to Seagram Drive include:

• Wider sidewalks

• Street trees

• Connection to future LRT Hub

• Improve signage and sense of entry into Laurier

• Soften parking lot at Seagram Stadium

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Chancellor Drive Chancellor Drive will become a functional and ceremonial corridor through the centre of the campus. Street treatments should focus on vehicular requirements (e.g., service, fire) and pedestrian linkages.

• Wider sidewalks

• Street trees

• Introduce ceremonial/ gateway function

• Consider one way traffic

• Maintain as fire route

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Service Road The prominence of the Service Road (the former Chancellor Drive) should be reduced. Sidewalk connections on the east side of this road would reduce vehicle – pedestrian conflicts. The introduction of an underground waiting/service area should be considered to screen the service area and to improve the pedestrian linkage from the Dr. Alvin Woods Building to The Quad, The Commons, and the Fred Nichols Building.

• Wider sidewalks

• Street trees

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Gateways The Seagram Drive approach to the main campus from the future rapid transit station is important. A structure should be introduced to signify a major pedestrian entrance to the campus from Albert Street.

At the perimeter of the main campus, several landscaped gateways will be created.

Recommended gateway locations include:

• Hazel Street and University Avenue

• The Skywalk

• King Street and University Avenue

• King Street and Chancellor Drive

• The Dr. Alvin Woods Building

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Hazel Street and University Avenue This campus gateway will have two plazas with unique landscape features which will transform this entry into a distinctive landmark destination along University Avenue. These Plazas would be designed to serve pedestrians using the public transit, and will include comfortable places to sit near building entrances.

Two plazas will be introduced along University Avenue to improve the entry into the campus. A plaza opposite the Hazel Street intersection will highlight the connection to Chancellor Drive and the entrance to the John Aird Centre.

A plaza at the base of the Skywalk building will accommodate large volumes of pedestrians moving along University Avenue. Along University Avenue large seating areas will be provided for students lingering between classes or waiting for buses.

King Street and University Avenue The plaza will be designed to complement the refurnished athletic complex building and act as a major gathering place at the edge of the campus. This area would support a mixed use building at grade. Outdoor patios or cafes would activate the street edge.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


King Street and Chancellor Drive The Visitor’s Centre fronting onto King Street will feature a wide entry off Chancellor Drive. A plaza area to the west can be used as a gathering area for campus tours. A campus map/kiosk should be installed in this area.

The Dr. Alvin Woods Building The front of the Dr. Alvin Woods Building (DAWB) has traditionally been used as a campus landmark. The recently completed landscaping in 2009 will compliment the DAWB’s function as a meeting place on campus. The access road off Albert Street can be closed temporarily and the area in front of the DAWB can be used for campus events.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


CAMPUS SPACE The creation of formal open spaces are a key component of the Open Space Master Plan. The following subsections will discuss the Quad/ Amphitheatre, The Commons, and Alumni Field. Quad / Amphitheatre The creation of the Quad / Amphitheatre and the Common Green will transform the centre of the campus. The elevated Amphitheatre will function as an outdoor teaching space, entertainment venue, and a place to eat, study, interact and relax. This space will also provide a meeting place and ceremonial stage for special events.

The Commons This will be a rectangular green space edged by colonnades along buildings and by trees and walkways, adjoined at the north end to the Quad / Amphitheatre. This landmark green space will unify the central campus buildings and will provide opportunities for programmed and un‐programmed events throughout the year.

To balance the formal geometry of the amphitheatre, a semi‐circular meadow will be used to anchor the south end of The Commons.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The South Commons The South Commons will be a secondary open space located south of the Commons and the proposed Convocation Hall. This green space will link residences, academic and administrative buildings.

Alumni Field As the recreational heart of the Waterloo campus, Alumni Field will be maintained in its current location as the largest open space on the main campus. The field acts like a traditional campus quadrangle and is often used for unprogrammed activities. Future development of the lands fronting King Street will require the improvement of the Field by shifting westward, closer to the interior of the campus. The safety nets along King Street should be augmented with column features to improve the view along the street.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


BUILT FORM TYPOLOGIES AND OPEN SPACE

Built form typologies have been developed for the Waterloo Campus to address the massing, scale, and siting of campus buildings. The typologies – landmark buildings, infill buildings, courtyard buildings, and framing buildings will require complimentary open space treatments.

Landmark Buildings The treatment of the open space surrounding signature campus buildings should also make a statement and provide a strong visual impact. Plant material and surface treatments should relate to buildings in terms of mass, colour, and form.

Infill Buildings Infill and street face buildings are associated with urban streetscapes along University Avenue and King Street. Given the potential scale and massing of these buildings, the landscape should be bold, simple, and should build upon streetscape treatments at the street edge. Formal geometrics of plantings should be encouraged (e.g., bosques or allees along frontages with larger setbacks). Within the front setback, incorporate architectural protection, hard and soft landscape treatments,

including street furniture, stonework, street trees, shrub planting, and massed ground covers.

Courtyard Buildings Courtyards will become important spatial ordering systems within the Waterloo Campus. They are typically defined by edges – often surrounded entirely by a single building or a series of buildings. For the Waterloo Campus, accessibility to and linkages to courtyards will be essential. The following principles will be used to develop courtyards in Waterloo:

• Employ a courtyard model to anchor new and existing campus buildings. Design courtyards and arrange new campus buildings to provide a focal point for gathering, studying, and outdoor recreation.

• Building mass defining courtyards must provide a comfortable pedestrian scale (e.g., the building base should be well defined at a scale related to the pedestrian). The scale can be reinforced through the use of building materials, design detail, cornices, a change in plane or mass or the use of podium elements.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Building height to width ratios should not exceed 1:1.

• Courtyards and entries into courtyards should be oriented according to microclimate considerations (e.g., south facing to maximize levels of sunlight and to mitigate wind).

• Minimum 3.0m width landscaped area along building faces, except along colonnades or at main entrances.

• Minimum 4.0m width walkways to compliment rectilinear geometry.

• Courtyards less than 650 m2 should be mostly finished in a hard surface.

• Turf areas should be centralized.

• Trees along walkways are encouraged to reinforce geometry and sense of enclosure.

• Seating for informal study areas, social gathering, or smoking are encouraged.

Framing Buildings

Landscaping associated with framing buildings will compliment the function of built form – to provide an edge to an open space or to terminate a view or vista. Framing buildings on the Waterloo Campus will be used to define larger open spaces such The Commons, the South Common, or Alumni Field.

Quadrangles are rectangular open spaces commonly associated with campus architecture. Framing buildings surrounding the quad often become secondary to the open space.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


CROSS CAMPUS LINKAGES A cross campus network of wide corridors and linkages will provide structure to this open space plan for the Waterloo campus. The recently completed Heritage Walk on the west side of the campus and the east‐west promenade will be the most significant corridors.

Outer Campus Corridors will connect the outer campus to the main campus. Recommended outer campus corridors include:

• Columbia Street to Northdale Campus to Innovation Exchange Centre to Main Campus.

• Laurier Place Residence / Waterloo College Hall Residence to Main Campus.

• Waterloo Park to Seagram Stadium to Main Campus.

• Three large surface parking lots will be located to the fringe of the main campus – Seagram Stadium, Lodge Street and the Northdale Campus. These lots will be connected with upgraded sidewalks, signage and landscaping.

The following guidelines will guide corridor development on the Laurier Campus:

• Design major circulation corridors on campus to be a minimum of 4 metres in width to safely accommodate cyclists and pedestrians without conflict.

• Minimize grade changes along corridors and avoid construction of stairs where possible.

• Maximum 5% slope on ramps.

• Surface materials to be cast‐in‐place concrete.

• Use of pre‐cast concrete unit pavers to be minimized.

• Combine with site furniture (Laurier standard palette of materials).

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Cycle Friendly Campus Design An increasing number of students, faculty and staff at Laurier are commuting to, from and around the campus on bicycles. The campus master plan aims to support this growing cyclist culture and ensure it continues to gain momentum in tandem with campus growth, by establishing guidelines for a more bicycle‐friendly campus. This means establishing cross‐campus mixed mode pathways, an expanded inventory of secure bicycle parking facilities (both indoors and outdoors) and a consistent functional approach to locating, sighting, spacing and designing these facilities. A major thrust of these guidelines is to improve cyclist access, convenience, safety and to provide weather protection on travel routes within the campus. The Plan recommends the development of at least one centralized Cycle Centre in the core area for secure long term indoor parking with enhanced ‘end of trip’ amenities (shower, lockers) and an integrated workshop/repair area.

The following guidelines provide direction for a cycle friendly approach to campus planning:

• Commit to expanding the number of sheltered and non‐sheltered bike racks across campus.

• Incorporate indoor and outdoor bike storage into all new buildings and site development projects, particularly student residences.

• Commit to retro‐fitting major buildings to include indoor bike storage (i.e., Science Building).

• Choose prominent and visible locations that are convenient and easy to find, near primary building entrances.

• Adequate clearance is required around racks to give cyclists room to manoeuvre, and to avoid conflicts with pedestrians, parking vehicles, landscaping, fire hydrants and entrances.

• Each bicycle parking space should be easily accessible. Cyclists should be able to securely lock their bicycles without undue inconvenience and their bicycles should be reasonably safeguarded from intentional or accidental damage.

• Each parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle – generally, allow for 0.6 metres (2 feet) by 1.8 metres (6

feet) for each bicycle parking space. Provide an aisle at least 1.5 metres (5 feet) wide behind all bicycle parking to allow room for manoeuvring.

The following chart provides targets for the number of bike parking spaces to be provided across campus, in indoor and outdoor settings over the planning horizon for the Campus Master Plan. Currently bike parking only accounts for 6% of the total vehicular parking spaces at the Waterloo campus. This inventory should be increased to the equivalent of 10% of the required vehicular parking within the next 5 years.

(1) This number has been calculated based upon the Zoning By‐Law parking requirements of 1 space per 8.75 full time students and 1 space per 1.75 full time employees.

(2) This is the current parking inventory available at the Waterloo campus. (3) This is the minimum bicycle parking requirement according to the City of

Waterloo Site Plan Guidelines.

Implementation • Work with both the City and the Region to extend the bike lanes

on University, King Street, Albert Street and Seagram Drive.

• Consult with Laurier Cyclist Club for recommended bike parking locations and assist with coordination of bike facilities.

• Maintain a campus wide inventory and mapping of bike facilities to manage appropriate distribution and ensure coordination with capital and building projects.

Scenario

Total # of

Student/Faculty and Staff

# of Min. Required Vehicle Parking Spaces (1)

# of Bike Parking Spaces

Bike Parking as a

Percentage of Total Vehicle

Parking

Ratio of Bike Parking Spaces to Students/Faculty/

Staff

Current (2008/2009)

12,385 1,733 (2) 100 6% 1:124

In 5 Years (2012/1013)

13,875 2220 220 10% (3) 1:63

In 10 Years (2017/1018)

15,287 2433 365 15% 1: 42

In 15 Years (2022/1023)

16,606 2631 526 20% 1:31

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Campus Open Space Design Elements The following elements will be outlined with respect to the treatment of primary and secondary corridors:

• Sidewalks;

• Street furniture;

• Lighting;

• Signage;

• Public art;

• Landscape.

Sidewalks • Cast‐in‐place concrete using a diversity of finishes and colour.


• Stamped concrete should be avoided since it is difficult to match the same pattern and colour with future patching.

• Pedestrian pavement should be designed in terms of width, slope, contrasting banding, and finish to accommodate people with disabilities.

• Pedestrian/cyclist crosswalks should be clearly marked with distinct paving and should include curb cuts or raised crossings. All crossings should be sited for both safety, as well as design integrity.

• Sodded boulevards along primary and secondary streets are to be avoided.

• Main building entrances should be defined with precast concrete unit pavers and/or granite pavers.

• Sidewalks along Primary Streets (e.g., University and King) will feature a two‐colour treatment.

• Sidewalks along Secondary Streets (e.g., Albert, Bricker, and Chancellor Drive) will feature a one‐colour treatment.

• The concrete should be saw‐cut to provide control joints, and a linear pattern perpendicular to the direction of travel. Typically bands will be a minimum of 1.5m – 3.0m in width.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Street Furniture Site furnishings include functional elements that help to establish and reinforce the image and character of the campus. Benches, bicycle racks, waste receptacles and bollards should have a standard form throughout the campus to unify the campus grounds visually, to reduce maintenance, and to simplify replacement.

• A collection of site furniture should be selected for its durability, its compatibility with the southern Ontario climate, and its availability for additional future purchases.

• Canadian made site furniture should be chosen for ease of distribution and to ensure that it can withstand Canadian winters.

• Different types of site furniture should be grouped together – ash urns, benches, trash receptacles – to enhance use and avoid clutter.

• Site furniture including light posts signage and furnishing, should be placed out of the way of emergency and maintenance vehicles, especially snow removal vehicles.

The following materials and furnishings are recommended for use on the Laurier campus. The photographs and descriptions are intended to convey the desired character, not specific manufacturers or exact styles.

• Seating should be provided throughout the campus to promote collegiality, and to enhance the outdoor character of the campus.

• Seating should be located in groups and individually at building entrances, in gathering places, and along streets and paths.

• Benches consistent with the new streetscape palette would have both backed and backless seats. All metal benches should be powder coated with flat black paint.

• Bike racks should be provided throughout the campus to promote cycling.

• Loop style bike rings are to be consistent in form and colour.

• Racks should be installed in a linear fashion, parallel to the primary building face, with the loops oriented perpendicular to that building face.

• Racks are to be installed on a concrete base (preferable). A 450mm depth slab thickness is to be provided under bike parking areas.

• Bike parking areas are to be well lit and installed within a convenient distance of main entrances (maximum 45 metres).

• Trash, recycling and ash containers should be provided within a 10 metre radius of all main building entrances.

• Seating areas should have a combination of trash and ash containers.

• Ash containers to be located the appropriate distance away from main building entrances if a smoking by‐law is in effect.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Lighting Light fixtures, in addition to their obvious safety and security function, could be used as structural design elements. The rhythm and repetition of uniform light standards could be used to define the edges of both walkways, as well as the campus core.

Three styles of fixtures should be used consistently through the campus for streets, walkways, and parking areas.

The following guidelines should be applied to lighting of campus buildings and open spaces in Waterloo:

• Light standards to be arranged in a regular pattern to reinforce campus structure and organization.

• A consistent style of light standard should be used for streets, parking lots, and walkways.

• Metal halide luminaires should be used for all light fixtures.

• Lighting should be designed to minimize glare onto residences, streets or adjacent properties; maximize energy conservation and to be dark sky compliant.

• Street lights should have a mounting height of 7‐9 metres. Fixtures should be located to provide uniform coverage and shielded from both residence and academic buildings.

• Pedestrian fixtures along parking lots and secondary paths should be shoe box luminaires (Gullwing by Gardco) mounted at a height of 3.5 to 4.0 metres and have approximately 15 metre spacing. Tree spacing and site furniture locations should be coordinated to provide a regular visual rhythm.

The style of luminaire along major corridors should be consistent with the existing standards along the Heritage Walk (Westminster by Lumec).

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Signage Signage should be organized in a clear, effective manner that assists students and visitors through the campus. The current hierarchy of signs at prominent corners of the campus and at building entrances is adequate. The following guidelines should be referred to for existing and future signage programs;

• Signage should incorporate materials or colours that compliment architecture, hardscape and site furniture.

• Campus maps should be provided in highly visible locations. • Campus maps should be usable by persons with physical disabilities. • Campus maps should be accessible year round. • A standardized memorial plaque program should be established. • Landscaping should complement the scale and function of signs.

Three gateway signs are located at prominent corners of the Waterloo campus. Currently, the landscaping does not enhance the stature of these signs. The addition of massed shrubs and an evergreen backdrop would enhance the visibility of these signs.

Landscape materials should be coordinated with sign form and materials. Tall plant material and randomly placed armour stone at the corner of King and University does not complement the existing sign.

Masses shrub plantings in front of the sign at the corner of King and Bricker would improve the image of the campus.

With an existing evergreen backdrop, the sign at the corner of King and Albert is identifiable. Massed shrub plantings would improve this corner treatment.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Public Art Public art sited throughout the campus can enrich the landscape by providing focal points and centres of interest. By displaying public art, WLU can showcase local artists, encourage the development of programs and attract the larger artistic community onto the campus. The following guidelines should be followed for the selection and placement of public art in the campus:

• Pieces or artists should promote the unique cultural heritage of Waterloo and Brantford.

• Pieces should be located or displayed in such a manner to reduce maintenance (e.g., planting beds, raised platform).

• The backdrop and how the piece is viewed is important.

• Outdoor lighting should illuminate the work.

• The pieces should be low maintenance and vandal proof.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


LANDSCAPE Trees, shrubs and perennials should be used as design elements that define open space, provide spatial order and compliment built form. Planting with purpose and function can significantly affect the look and feel of the campus. Plant material can be used to:

• Define major open spaces, corridors and gateways;

• Limit or direct views;

• Frame spaces to give a sense of enclosure;

• Provide structure and organization to open space;

• Create microclimates;

• Reduce maintenance;

• Create a sense of place;

• Provide ecological diversity.

The scale and massing of plant material should relate to the size of buildings, roads, pathways and adjacent spaces. Large, high branching trees can be used to edge formal open spaces and corridors. Smaller trees, shrubs and perennials can be used to highlight important spaces such as building entrances or courtyards. In general, intricate planting design should be avoided. Massed plantings of trees and shrubs are more appropriate for a campus setting.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL In Southern Ontario, most natural habitats have been lost to urban sprawl and agriculture. As a result, natural systems such as watersheds and geological communities are severely degraded, and many plant and animal species have been designated as ‘at‐risk’. University campuses are often large contiguous land holdings within urban areas with extensive open space. The open spaces within each campus offer an opportunity to develop and implement strategies to protect and restore some woodlands, as well as other habitats and natural systems.

Environment Canada recommends a minimum threshold of 30% forest cover in a watershed. Currently there is 12.3% forest cover in Waterloo.

In order to create a sustainable landscape, plant material for the Waterloo campus will be indigenous to the natural plant communities of the Region. Native plant material is naturally adapted to local growing conditions and as a result requires less maintenance, water and fertilizer to maintain healthy growth.

The Waterloo campus is located in the Deciduous Forest region of Ontario. Within that region there are unique plant associations:

• The Carolinian Zone;

• Tall Grass Prairie and Savana.

Both of these native landscapes are rare and endangered in Ontario. Large portions of these plant communities have been lost over the past 200 years due to agriculture and urbanization. For example, less than 3 percent of the Ontario tall grass prairie remains today. One of the goals of the landscape guidelines will be to re‐introduce native plants into the campus environment. A palette of recommended plant material will be provided at the end of this section.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Trees can be use to add a pattern and rhythm to the landscape that can tie the campus together. Trees should be used to reinforce pedestrian corridors, roadways and open spaces. The screening of undesirable elements such as parking and service areas must be balanced with aesthetics and safety.

Tree groupings on the Waterloo campus are inconsistent varying from formal to random arrangements. Street trees lack continuity in form and species and are planted at irregular intervals – creating a weak campus edge along King, University, Albert and Bricker. There are a number of opportunities to introduce formal, geometrically arranged plant along streets and arterial walkways.

Street trees in particular will require sensitive treatment. This will include the consideration of structural soil along major arterials or other innovative planting techniques to ensure the success of plantings in urban conditions. The relocation or burying of overhead services should also be considered along King and University.

The following guidelines should be considered for the planting of new trees:

• Deciduous trees to be minimum 60mm calliper;

• Coniferous trees to be minimum 180cm height;

• Wood stakes with flexible restraints (Arbortie or VStrap);

• The minimum planting area is to be 3.0m x 3.0m;

• In paved areas, structural soil or Silva Cells shall be used;

• Lower branches to be trimmed 2.4m above sidewalks and 4.5m above streets and service roads;

• Tree grates should be avoided;

• Trees to be planted with top of root ball level with finished grade;

• Fruit or nut bearing trees are to be avoided.

The preferred approach to shrubs and perennial planting is to mass plant material. Plantings should be concentrated at building edges or other key locations to direct pedestrians and to provide visual interest. Perennial

planting should be located in a few prominent locations to maximize visual impact and to reduce maintenance. The main areas for perennial beds will be building entrances, courtyard edges and planters.

Vines such as Boston Ivy and Virginia Creeper evoke images of old, established schools. They create visual interest on both contemporary and heritage buildings. Vines, due to maintenance concerns, should be used sparingly to soften architectural edges and to animate blank facades. The east side of the Quad is a good example of the effective use of vines.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


PLANTING PALETTE Large canopy trees will be used to define street edges and to line major pedestrian corridors. Planting should be directed to areas where trees have the best chance of becoming fully developed (i.e., avoid conflicts with services and heavily paved surfaces). Ideally planting should be balanced on both sides of the street or corridor.

Native Red Maples and their cultivars will be used as a signature trees throughout the Waterloo campus. Larger canopy cultivars will be used as street trees and for defining the edges of large open spaces.

The following cultivars are preferred: Acer rubrum ‘October Glory’ Acer rubrum ‘Northwood’ Acer rubrum ‘Karpick’ Acer x freemanii ‘Autumn Blaze’

or ‘Red Sunset’ Although considered to be sensitive to pollution and drought, typical of urban areas, many cultivars can be used in a campus setting. Given their size Sugar Maples are best used in combination with Red Maples as street trees and along large open spaces.

In addition to the Maples, the following large canopy trees are preferred:

Kentucky Coffeetree Tulip Tree Sycamore Oak

Medium canopy trees may be used in plazas and along minor pedestrian corridors. Planting should be incorporated into larger beds and turfed areas. Smaller tree varieties may tolerate raised planters or tree pits in paved areas. Showy varieties of trees can be used as specimens. Excellent as a specimen, near a patio, corners of buildings, parks, groupings; especially effective against a dark backdrop of evergreens or

building material where the flowers are accentuated, as is the branching habit in the winter. All season character (excellent flower, summer and fall foliage, fruit, and winter habit).

A medium sized tree that can be used for smaller scale open spaces. In addition to Flowering Dogwoods and

Hop Hornbeams the following medium canopy trees are preferred:

Blue Beech Red Bud Sassafras

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Recommended Shrubs and Perennials The planting of shrubs in campus landscaping is both functional and aesthetic. Massed plantings, to compliment the scale of campus buildings, will consist primarily of hedges and groundcovers. The use of ornamental plantings is to be restricted. Native Carolinian species are preferred provided they are suitable for a proposed site or function.

Ornamental plantings are to be masses, monochromatic species used primarily for contrast to specimen shrub or perennial plantings. For example, Yews or Currants can be used to reinforce the geometry of adjacent buildings or plazas, screen unsightly views or provide a backdrop to specimen plantings. Groundcovers such as Colorata Euonymus or Vines can be used to create a horizontal pattern and backdrop for vertical elements such as specimen shrubs or even Public Art.

Vines such as Boston Ivy and Virginia Creeper evoke images of old, established schools. They create visual interest on both contemporary and heritage buildings. Vines, due to maintenance concerns, should be used sparingly to soften architectural edges and to animate blank facades.

The following guidelines should be considered for the planting of new shrubs and perennials:

• Deciduous shrubs to be minimum 60cm height, #3 cont.;

• Evergreen shrubs to be minimum 50cm spread, #3 cont.;

• Large specimen flowering shrubs to be minimum 80‐150cm height;

• A minimum double row of shrubs is preferred for foundation planting;

• Large perennials to be #2 cont.;

• Small perennials to be #1 cont.;

• Minimum 100mm depth shredded bark mulch for all beds.

A wide variety of Native Carolinian shrubs are available for campus planning schemes. Plants may be selected for function (e.g., screening), interest (e.g., seasonal flowering), or site suitability (e.g., parking lot bioswales). The following is a list of preferred shrubs;

Serviceberry Ninebark New Jersey Tea Sumac Buttonbush Currant Dogwoods Bayberry Burning Bush Elderberry Spicebush Rose Meadowsweet Lowbush Blueberry Viburnum

The following ornamental shrubs are preferred;

Yew Colorata Euonymus

Massed ground covers and naturalized plantings can be used in remote areas and along steep slopes. The Waterloo campus terraces would benefit from naturalization.

The bank along Midcampus Drive could be naturalized with native trees, shrubs, and perennials to reduce maintenance. The plantings should be arranged to maintain visibility and safety along the edge of parking lots, sidewalks and stairways.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The use of perennials and grasses on campus will be concentrated on gateway plazas, building entries and courtyards. Typically the plants will be massed to provide the best visual impact and to limit maintenance. Low grasses and groundcovers will be used along edges. Plants will be arranged with taller species to the back (if against a building) or to the centre (if in an open area).

The following plants can be used in Woodland and Savanna settings, typical of the Carolinian Zone;

Blazing Star Evening Primrose Big Bluestem Little Bluestem Foamflower Ferns Black‐eyed Susan Sedges New England Aster Indian Grass Beebalm

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


MAINTENANCE Improvements to the open space of the campus should not be considered short term investments. Maintenance plays a key role in the image of the campus and the community. Ownership and pride is essential to the image of the school and this can be fostered by aesthetically pleasing, functional, and well maintained open space.

The following levels of maintenance are recommended:

• Sidewalks should be regularly power washed.

• Precast concrete surfaces should be sealed every five (5) years.

• Gum, stain, paint removal should occur regularly.

• Flyers and posters should be removed from all site furniture immediately.

• All damaged glass, metal, concrete or stone elements should be refinished regularly.

• Metal site elements (e.g., furniture, guardrails) should be refinished regularly.

• All glass surfaces should be cleaned at least four (4) times a year.

• All graffiti should be removed within 48 hours.

• All burnt out/damaged lights should be replaced within 58 hours.

• Abandoned bicycles should be removed after the first snowfall and at the end of the spring semester.

• Snow removal should allow physical and visual access to main entrances, signage, sidewalks, bus stops and parking areas.

• Garbage, recycling and ash urns should be emptied on a regular basis.

• Missing or damaged signs should be replaced immediately.

• Trip hazards should be addressed immediately.

• Pot holes in roadways should be repaired bi‐annually.

• New trees, shrubs and perennials should be watered regularly for two growing seasons.

• All dead or damaged branches should be removed monthly.

• Structural pruning of trees and shrubs should be done annually.

• Stakes or guylines should be removed after one growing season.

• Planting beds should be weeded regularly.

• Lawn areas should be weeded regularly.

• Lawn areas should be watered on a regular basis in high traffic areas.

• Bare patches of turf should be repaired regularly. Areas of constant wear should be replaced with hard surfaces (cast‐in‐place concrete is preferred).

Massed plantings with sufficient mulch should be used in raised planters to reduce maintenance.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


14.0 WATERLOO CAMPUS TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY

At the heart of the campus planning process are the needs of pedestrians. Academic and social exchange among students, faculty, staff and the community at large is fundamental to the success of the campus. The exchanges are most likely to take place in comfortable, attractive, and meaningful spaces on campus. Over time, some of the campus lands have been relegated to parking lots, resulting in the fragmentation or loss of this space for campus interaction, degradation of landscapes due to environmental stress and the shifting of the scale of campus life subtly away from that of the pedestrian to that of the automobile. At the same time, circulation routes through the main campus will still be required for the movement of goods and the servicing of campus buildings. Provisions are also needed that make the campus accessible for all users, no matter their mobility abilities or limitations. For those who choose to access the campus by automobile, space will still be required for vehicle parking. However, provision of surface parking is expected to take a secondary priority in some parts of the campus over other needs such as open space. Transportation and parking will become key issues at the Waterloo Campus as vehicular circulation and parking on the central campus are both displaced by infill development and new growth. In response, a transportation and parking strategy is necessary over the next 15 years. In general, parking should be gradually reduced in the core areas of the campus, through the development of decentralized parking lots at the campus periphery, innovative parking designs in new projects, underground parking where possible, increased drop off locations, an improved pedestrian and cyclist circulation system and growing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives.

14.1 PARKING ALLOCATION APPROACH

Overall, the general guidelines for vehicular parking allocation are as follows: • Aim to provide 25% of all parking spaces on the main campus, and

75% in the outer campus. • On the main campus, 80% of all parking spaces should be provided

as underground parking and 20% should be provided in the form of small clusters of surface parking.

• All parking should be screened from view of the street and new parking lots should not be created between the front of a building and the street. Buildings should front onto major collector streets, not parking lots.

• Any parking structures on parcels of land with frontage on a collector or arterial road (University Avenue) should provide mixed uses at grade integrated with the structure along the street.

• Maintain the parking demand and supply equilibrium on the main campus by replacing displaced spaces only to the extent warranted in the form of at grade or structured parking.

• All perimeter parking lots should be within 650 metres of the main campus.

• Consider buildings cantilevered over parking at grade to maximize use of valuable lands for open space and pedestrian walkways.

• Provide designated drop‐off locations along Chancellor Drive in close proximity to building entrances.

• Surface parking should be sited in close proximity to as many building entrances as possible to reduce conflicts with pedestrian walkways and routes.

• New parking spaces should be supplied underground or integrated within the building where possible (see parking alternative A2 below).

• Surface lots may be provided as an interim land‐use on sites planned for future development.

• Pursue the acquisition of land to the east and west of the main campus for parking purposes.

• Pursue opportunities for joint venture and partnerships for single use and integrated structured parking.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Continue to encourage ride‐sharing initiatives and other TDM incentives and programs for University students, staff and faculty.

• A greater percentage of main campus spaces should be reserved for users with mobility impairments than in outer campus parking lots.

• Signage should be used at parking lots to improve wayfinding through the campus and to structure parking entrances.

With regard to bicycle parking, the following number of spaces should be provided.

14.2 PARKING PLAN

To meet the additional parking needs to accommodate campus growth and reorganize existing campus parking to maintain a pedestrian friendly environment the following Campus Parking Plan should be implemented. The Campus Parking Plan illustrates the approach to reorganizing and accommodating additional parking needs for a total of 2,700 spaces. If these 2,700 parking spaces were all to be supplied in the form of surface parking, they would cover some 8.9 hectares (22 acres) of valuable campus property. This is why alternatives to surface parking must be considered, namely structured above ground and underground solutions. Where above ground and underground structures are recommended, they should be integrated into new buildings, especially in the case of above ground structures. Where surface parking is to be supplied, it should be screened with sufficient landscaping to maintain the visual amenity of the campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


The parking space allocation plan is as follows: On the main campus:

• 125 surface spaces (20% of existing supply on main campus) • 575 underground spaces (80% of existing supply on main

campus) • Total Spaces 700 (25% of total Waterloo Campus supply)

On the outer campus lands (within 650 metres of the main campus):

• 300 surface spaces at Seagram Stadium • 300 surface spaces at Northdale Campus • 200 surface and underground spaces at Laurier Place Residences

/ Waterloo College Residence • 200 surface spaces at Canada Mortgage & Housing Corporation

(CMHC) lands • 300 underground and integrated parking at Global Innovation

Exchange Building/Graduate Research Centre • 200 integrated/underground spaces at King Street Residence/

Lodge and Regina Street Residence • 100 surface spaces on other outer campus properties • 400 spaces in a potential new surface/structured parking facility • Total Spaces 2,000 (75% of total supply at Waterloo Campus)

It should be acknowledged that alternatives will ultimately need to be considered in the nearby the detailed design of each capital project and the site area.

14.3 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) on campus strengthens a commitment to encourage greater use of sustainable modes of transportation and trip decision‐making that reduces, combines, or shortens vehicle trips. The implementation of successful strategies and services at the Waterloo campus has the potential to reduce parking demand, as well as enhance air quality, thereby improving the quality of the overall campus environment.

The University’s commitment to sustainability should be both augmented and expanded with the application of the following Transportation Demand Management initiatives:

• Car‐Free Planning – Develop parts of the University campus where personal automobiles are unnecessary and auto traffic is restricted either through road design or control and enforcement. Restrictions can be full time or part time, and can exempt delivery vehicles, taxis and vehicles for people with disabilities.

• Parking Opt‐Out – Faculty and staff can currently opt out of the payroll deduction for permit parking. This reduction in campus parking demand could be further encouraged if the University offered, as a choice, to subsidize a Grand River Transit pass as an alternative to a parking pass.

• Car‐Share Parking – The University is currently facilitating car sharing at the Waterloo campus through Grand River Ride Share. Use of this service could be enhanced through the provision of designated car share parking spaces at the most conveniently located locations in campus parking lots.

• Guaranteed Ride Home – As part of the University’s current carpooling initiatives, a guaranteed ride home program can enhance carpooling use by providing a subsidized ride home in cases of an emergency or unexpected delay in leaving work. Taxis or University vehicles could be used for the service.

• Active Transportation – Continue to design the campus for both pedestrian and cyclist use as active modes of transportation. This includes the provision, maintenance and marketing of active transportation facilities that are safe and secure.

• Public Transit – Continue to encourage transit use through the return of the One Pass and consider making unlimited transit travel available to all students on campus within graduate tuition.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


14.4 PROTOTYPICAL PARKING DESIGN SCENARIOS

Parking can be accommodated in new campus buildings through a variety of approaches.

A1 ‐ No Parking Alternative (surface, cantilevered or on‐street)

A2 – Underground Parking

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


A3 – Above grade parking, integrated within building

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


14.5 PUBLIC TRANSIT

The Waterloo campus is currently very well served by Grand River Transit (GRT) service. The campus is accessed by four transit routes (7, 8, 9, 12) along University Avenue the King Street Route and Albert/Hazel Route. In addition, GRT’s iXpress service now includes a Laurier stop at the University Avenue/Hazel Street intersection. Currently, there are eight existing bus stops at the perimeter of the main campus –three on the north side and two on the south side of University Avenue West ‐ two on the west side and one on the east side of King Street. These stops should be upgraded in terms of their landscape treatment and with new shelters that reflect a Wilfrid Laurier University design theme. The University might wish to pursue advertising at these bus stops or work with the Region to develop a brand and signage program to identify these stops with the Laurier campus, creating a sense of entry into the campus district. The Region of Waterloo has selected the existing rail corridor that is located to the west of the campus and crosses Seagram Drive as the new route for the Light Rapid Transit (LRT). Although there is no direct link with the Laurier Campus, the centre of campus will be accessible and located within a 10 minute walk of the future Seagram Drive station. To ensure transit service is maintained, and improved as student enrolment increases, Laurier should:

• Continue to work with Regional Transportation Staff to ensure that transit services are improved as required by the campus growth. Route restructuring should also be planned in response to increased student ridership and an expanded commuting pattern.

• Work with both the Region and the City to determine whether additional bus stops are warranted along University Avenue.

• Work with both the Region and the City to upgrade the bus

stops at the perimeter of the main campus. Ensure that the upgraded landscaping adjacent to these stops is coordinated

with streetscape improvements along University Avenue and King Street North.

• Work with the Region to develop and implement a branding and

signage program for the bus stops at the perimeter of the campus.

• Place emphasis on the design of the planned Seagram Drive LRT station as a Wilfrid Laurier University gateway, with a direct, safe pedestrian connection between the station and the campus.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


15.0 SITE SELECTION AND PHASING For the Campus Concept Plan implementation strategies have been developed. This section is divided into two categories of strategies or guidelines to put the Master Plan into action.

• Site Selection ‐ intended to guide decisions on whether existing buildings should be retained, removed, renovated or repurposed; how to select existing landholdings/sites for infill and new buildings; and how to identify lands for acquisition to accommodate future campus growth requirements. An integrated campus with a full range of university uses throughout the campus is envisioned to establish a closer proximity among people, disciplines, activities and services.

• Phasing and Potential Building Projects – to assist with the sequence and timing of a range of potential academic and residence building projects. This is directed by projected growth in students, faculty, and staff and corresponds to projected needs for academic space, residence bed needs, and parking facilities. This also involves closely monitoring student enrolment increases and relies heavily on the availability of funding.

15.1 SITE SELECTION

When selecting sites for future growth and improvement, the University should first focus on the utilization and intensification of its existing landholdings, particularly those that are vacant, before pursuing the acquisition of additional land to accommodate growth. This will ensure the Waterloo campus’ character as a compact, walkable, student oriented community is maintained and enhanced. As a general principle to guide growth, Residence and Academic Buildings should both be sited within a 5 minute walk (400 metres) of the Quad. The Quad is the core of the campus. Campus Parking Lots should be within a 10 minute walk (800 metres) from the Quad. Students, Faculty, Staff, and Visitors should be able to comfortably walk from one end of the campus to the other within 10 minutes time.

PRESERVE THE BEST, REMOVE THE WORST, REPAIR THE REST The overriding campus development objective involves preserving and reinforcing the best aspects of the campus and “repairing” or “replacing” those in poor condition or that represent an underutilization of the University’s valuable land assets. The highest priority building sites are those that will restore organization and wayfinding clarity to the high traffic areas of the campus core and provide for an improved open space system or centre. Secondary sites are those underutilized lands which are located at the perimeter of the campus, such as the Northdale campus. Criterion used to determine building sites include:

• Age and Building Condition ‐ Approximately 35% of University owned buildings were constructed in the 1960’s, most of which are in poor condition and are 70 to 80 years old. Those buildings with FCI ratings higher than 0.50 that require replacement include the Clara House Residences (Wing A, B and C) and Euler Residence, Seminary, the Greenhouse associated with the former St. Michael’s School building and several smaller buildings fronting onto Regina Street and Seagram Drive, which are used for off‐campus housing. On the main campus, all of the residences built in the 1960s, listed below, have a “poor” FCI Rating (0.16 – 0.49):

- Willison Hall (0.34) - Little House (0.41 ‐ 0.43) - MacDonald House (0.45) - Leupold (0.48) - Clara Conrad (0.44 ‐ .71) - Euler (0.54).

• Proximity to the Campus Core–The new Amphitheatre / Quad –

a major central gathering spaces for the Laurier community and the core of the campus. The removal of some buildings and introducing new infill buildings in close proximity to this space presents opportunities to elevate the spatial organization and visual profile of this core area.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Utilization of Land (Height and Density) – Although the campus is compact with close building siting, some land is not currently utilized to the full extent permitted. Many buildings are set back from the street up to 20 metres, minimum 7.5 metre building setbacks from the street line currently apply. There are also many surface parking lots that could be redeveloped for new buildings. These priority areas identified as opportunities for expansion.

Many of the campus buildings are only three or four storeys in height. Buildings of one to two storeys in height include the Seagram Stadium, Recreation Centre, Theatre Auditorium, Student Services and the Dining Hall. Current policies permit a maximum 10 storey building height on the main campus except for the Albert Street frontage, where a six storey height is permitted. Increased height permissions on the main campus provide the University the opportunity to make more efficient use of land under its ownership.

The most underutilized University owned properties adjacent to the main campus are the former Northdale School site and the former St. Michael’s School site, with buildings only one to two storeys in height. On the former St. Michael’s School site, the Zoning By‐Law currently permits buildings up to six storeys in

height fronting University Avenue, and three storeys in height along the Balsam Street frontage. Up to four storey building heights are permitted on the Northdale Campus. The cluster of buildings closest to the centre of campus, a point between Little House and MacDonald House, range from three to four storeys in height. The discrepancy between the current density and the required density to accommodate future space in the heart of the campus has become increasingly apparent.

• Size and Use of Building or Site – Some buildings are small in size

and not well used. Their removal would present an opportunity to consolidate the lands they presently occupy with adjacent University landholdings for the development of a larger building. The uses from the small building would be incorporated into the large building.

• Overall Aesthetic Quality ‐ The expansion of some high profile

buildings, particularly those on major urban corridors, such as the Athletic Complex would significantly improve the aesthetic quality and profile of the campus.

• Repurpose Buildings – Some buildings may be better utilized for other purposes, as the current occupants of the space or use of the space is no longer functioning at an optimal level. An example is the current Library. This building could be repurposed for use as instructional and office space, and faculty lounges. Reclading the ground floor of this building to create a transparent podium base would also be desirable. Other uses at grade may include food services or an expanded art gallery or display space.

• Buildings occupying a prominent location along major corridors along Albert Street, University Avenue and King Street, should be expanded toward the street to reinforce the streetscape and make efficient use of land. Recommended sites include the Library, the Arts Wing and the Recreation Centre. A maximum setback from the street of 7.5 metres should be applied.

View of the low rise building profile along University Avenue, including the Arts Wing and Peter’s Building.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


15.2 ACQUISITION & CONSOLIDATION

The City of Waterloo has established a Special Policy Area (Special Policy No. 57) encompassing the Waterloo Campus. Within this area all lands have a dual designation of “University” and “Major Institutional” to recognize both existing University uses and provide guidance for future University growth. This Special Policy Area defines the land area where the University development and expansion may occur subject to land use compatibility with other use. For the purposes of the Campus Master Plan, this area is referred to as the ‘Academic District’ and specific opportunities for land acquisition opportunities within this area have been identified. The Northdale campus lands have been included in this district to reflect the inclusion of all major University land holdings. The following guidelines are intended to assist the University in selecting lands within the Academic District for acquisition for future growth. The following Map shows the limits of this ‘Academic District’ . Laurier should pursue the acquisition of:

Lands located within a 5 minute walking distance or 400 metres of the boundary of the central campus.

Lands located both to the south of University Avenue and

east of Regina Street, for the purposes of a remote parking lot or structured parking facility with access from University Avenue and Lodge Street. A structure fronting University Avenue would be required to have integrated commercial and/or academic uses across the front of the structure.

CMHC owned lands located on the north side of University

Avenue, opposite the main campus for new academic buildings and a graduate residency development.

Individual, privately owned parcels fronting Seagram Drive,

Albert Street, Lodge Street and Regina Street to facilitate their consolidation with adjacent University owned lands for future building and parking sites.

Acquire the remaining privately owned parcel on north side of Bricker Avenue, between King Street North and Albert Street on the central campus.

Liaise with the City of Waterloo staff and members of the

Waterloo Parks Advisory Committee to review opportunities for a joint venture/partnership for new recreational/athletic facilities on the west side of Seagram Stadium (a dual rink and indoor field house are University priorities).

Explore potential land acquisition opportunities for parking

structure development on the Industrial Lands located to the east of Regina Street. This initiative could also be pursued in partnership with the City of Waterloo or the private sector.

15.3 PHASING

While the Campus Master Plan is intended to offer a flexible framework for the evolution of the campus, a possible forecast for the sequence and timing of implementation is provided in the following phasing strategy. The building projects sequence has been developed on the basis of four criteria which are:

• Impact on the academic plan and programming priorities; • logical sequencing of construction; • availability of funding; • Prioritization of need.

Growth Factors Multiple factors influence the need for both new and expanded campus facilities in the short, mid and long term future at the Waterloo Campus. Some of these factors were identified in the Century Plan – 2005‐2011:

• Expansion of graduate and post‐graduate programs offered • Increase the number of graduate students by 50% by 2011

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Addition of new faculties (a Faculty of Education, a School of Public Policy and a Faculty of Law are priorities)

• Stepped up recruitment effort of international students • New research funding • Add 6 new research centres at a dedicated site • Create a “Learning Commons” to provide additional space for

studying, clubs and committees, student services The single most important long term factor is an increase in student enrolment over the next 15 years resulting in a total FTE student entrolment of 15,000 at the Waterloo Campus. Existing shortfalls in various space categories, such as study space, library facilities, and food services facilities are also addressed by this proposed phasing plan. Proposed Phasing of Campus Master Plan The Campus Master Plan would be implemented in three phases:

PHASE 1: The short‐range horizon represents a vision for the immediate future of the campus, over the next 5 years to the academic year 2012/2013. Phase 1 accommodates a student enrolment increase of 1,390 FTE students for a total of 12,485 FTE students. Approximately 474,000 square feet of new academic space and 1,025 new beds are planned. Development in this phase does not require additional lands beyond the existing University landholdings. Campus growth will be focused primarily one the infill, redevelopment and intensification of existing University landholdings, and the acquisition of individual parcels of land contiguous with University landholdings to create larger land assemblies for larger building projects. Removals:

• St. Michael’s Campus Building

• Toyota Solarium

• Existing Laurier Place Residence and Albert Street Buildings (removal of 258 beds)

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Built Form Phase 1, 2009 to 2012/2013

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Construction Projects: • Campus Learning Commons (C‐1)

The Campus Learning Commons (CLC) would function as the new student‐centred heart of the Waterloo main campus, uniquely positioned as the internal interface between several core buildings (the Fred Nichols Campus Centre, the Student Services Building, the Dining Hall, Arts ‘E’ Wing) and common gathering spaces, including the indoor Concourse and outdoor Central Green. The CLC is an opportunity to change the image of the Wilfrid Laurier University campus at University Avenue.

This building would be created by infilling the existing outdoor courtyard, between the Concourse and the Student Services Building, the removal of the Toyota Solarium and the addition of a terraced structure stepping down toward University Avenue. At 4 storeys, this building could provide up to 150,000 square feet of new space. Below grade parking and service vehicle facilities could be integrated into this new structure, and they would be both accessible through the existing parking lot in front of the Aird Building. The CLC would require about 60,000 square feet of the total building area. The space would be programmed to accommodate a number of functions, including student oriented space leadership activity, lounge area, volunteer centre, clubs, societies, gathering spaces, study space, research counselling and instructional space. An atrium is recommended to bring in natural light to the central courtyard, and an extensive north‐facing glass façade will provide a visual connection between passers‐by on University Avenue and the campus community.

• Arts ‘C’ Wing Extension (C‐2) By extending the façade of the Arts ‘C’ Wing toward University Avenue, an envelope is created for a prominent new building between the Arts ‘A’ Wing, Peters Building, and the Arts ‘E’ Wing., that could both complement and be connected with the new Campus Learning Commons (C‐1). At a height of three storeys, this new building extension could provide up to a total

of 50,000 square feet of new instructional and office space. It represents an important opportunity to strengthen Laurier’s presence at University Avenue and enhance the University’s identity through the use of lively and innovative architectural design.

• Global Innovation Exchange Building (N‐1)

As the first major development on the north campus, the Global Innovation Exchange Building would be designed primarily to house the School of Business and Economics and would also become the anchor for future expansions on the St. Michael’s site. The Global Innovation Exchange Building would be an “iconic representation of the important part that Laurier has and will continue to play in Waterloo’s development technology industry”. The building façade should be designed to reinforce the University Avenue streetscape through a total building height of six storeys and terracing at the fourth storey to maintain the pedestrian scale of buildings. The north side of the building should be configured to frame a courtyard style central green space.

• North Campus Research Buildings (N‐2, N‐3)

The parking lot at the north end of the St. Michael’s campus, opposite the proposed Global Innovation Exchange Building is a prime site for two new academic buildings. Special attention must be paid to both building massing and scale along Balsam Street frontage to respect the low density residential character of the surrounding neighbourhood. A pedestrian entry point between the two buildings, aligned with Larch Street, would lead to the internal courtyard green space. A series of pathways would connect this space and the surrounding buildings. This building cluster is intended to be the Laurier hub for technological research, business and innovation. This parcel, to be redeveloped in the first phase of the master plan, is of sufficient size to permit the architectural inclusion of underground parking, with the vehicular access being from Balsam Street and University Avenue.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Laurier Skyway Building (N‐4) With the development of the Campus Learning Commons and the Global Innovation Exchange Building on opposite sides of University Avenue, the University would have an opportunity to connect these buildings by a two storey bridge connection over University Avenue with programme space integrated within this circulation structure. This bridge connection could house those programme areas for faculties still residing in the south campus, that would benefit from a close proximity to the School of Business and Economics. It would be connected vertically by stairs or an elevator to transit stops on University Avenue, to encourage transit ridership. A green roof on the bridge would mitigate the heat island effect of University Avenue, while providing a high quality pedestrian link that would support the walkability of the campus. Lighting, artwork, signage and colour and architectural treatment would collectively add to the symbolic manifestation of the building’s intent.

• Laurier Place Residence Village (W‐1, W‐2, W‐3, W‐4)

The University has identified the Sunview Street lands located to the west of the main campus as a site for redevelopment and intensification for a new student residence cluster, or a residence ‘village’. The University also owns three individual Albert Street properties that adjoin these Sunview Street lands. The phased removal of the existing Laurier Place Residences and other buildings on these lands will create sufficient space for four new 8 storey buildings, for over 1,200 new beds and a range of other uses, including food services, a convenience store, fitness centre and common lounge areas. Buildings W1 and W2 will be adjoined by a glass atrium. Apartment style group accommodations would be created for first year and senior students. Apartments, 300 square feet in size, would also be available to graduate students. Parking for these buildings could be supplied through a combination of below grade and surface parking lots, with road access through the site by an extension of Sunview Street out to Lester Street.

The buildings would frame a central quadrangle, in keeping with the open space theme of the master plan. Wide landscaped pathways would provide internal cyclist and pedestrian circulation, as well as direct connections out to the surrounding street network. This residence cluster would include the existing Waterloo College Residence and would benefit from the close proximity of the recreational amenities at Seagram Stadium and Waterloo Park, and the planned Light Rail Transit Station at Seagram Drive.

• Library Laurier’s Academic Plan will be completed in 2010. At this time the ultimate location of the library and its potential role as a component of the Campus Learning Commons shall be reviewed internally in detail. It is strongly recommended that future planning decisions for the Library be made with planning decisions for the Campus Learning Commons. There is an opportunity for the Library to relocate to the ‘Existing Arts ‘C’ wing + Proposed Extension’, which would be adjacent to the Campus Learning Commons. The existing Library building could be repurposed to house the existing uses in the Arts ‘C’ Wing (instructional / office space). If this is the case, the Phase 3 extension shown for the existing Library Building would in fact be housed within a building extension of the ‘new Art C’ Wing’ Building.

Infrastructure and Open Space Improvements:

• Underground Parking below Global Innovation Exchange Building

• Underground Parking below Laurier Residence Village • Central Courtyard at Laurier Residence Village • Central Courtyard at Global Innovation Exchange Building

Land Acquisitions:

• None required.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


PHASE 2 The mid‐range horizon represents a vision for the more distant future in 5 to10 years, over the period between 2013 to the academic year 2017/2018. In this phase the University will require additional property beyond the University’s existing landholdings for campus parking spaces. Otherwise, campus growth would continue to focus on infill and redevelopment of existing University landholdings, with the acquisition of some individual properties contiguous with university landholdings to assemble blocks for larger building projects. Phase 2 accommodates an enrolment increase of 1,300 FTE students for a total of 13,785 FTE students. Approximately 512,000 square feet of new academic space and 1,464 new beds are planned. Proposed Construction Projects:

• Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine Clinic/Centre (W‐5) A new rehabilitation and sports medicine centre is proposed to be housed within a building addition to Seagram Stadium. This building would displace existing surface parking. This two to three storey facility would include weight training rooms, rehabilitation clinics and provide new programmable teaching space for the Kinesiology Department. This addition should be linked to the existing Seagram Stadium through a glazed atrium, and a landscaped colonnade or breezeway should be introduced proposed on the north side of this building to buffer the parking area. The acquisition of several properties fronting onto Seagram Drive, opposite this facility, would allow the University to expand its existing parking around Seagram Stadium. This satellite parking lot will replace those spaces displaced by new building activity on the main campus in the form of infilling and intensification. This expanded parking lot would provide additional metered and permit parking for spectators, students, faculty, staff and the community.

• Mid Campus Residences (C‐3, C‐4) Two new building sites are proposed to the west of Bricker Residence. The existing Ulrich Leupold Residence, a parking lot and the last privately owned parcel on the main campus block would all be redevelopment as part of the construction of these two new buildings. Apartment Style Residences are proposed for both of these building sites, and each could house up to 649 beds at 8 storeys. They would both benefit from their close proximity to the Bricker Residence. Along with Alumni Hall, these buildings would frame the west edge of the South Commons – a new green space that will act to unify the buildings within the southern quadrant of the campus. Access to the building would be provided from the existing service road that provides access to Alumni Hall.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Built Form Phase 2 – 2013 to 2017/2018

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Academic Buildings on the Central Green (C‐5, C‐6)

With the removal of the W.D. Euler Residence, Little House Residence and MacDonald House Residence, two new academic building sites would be created. The new buildings would frame the new Central Green. The first site is located between the Central Commons and the South Commons. This building site is important because the new building on it would anchor the south end of the Central Green benefit from a prominent view north to the amphitheatre. Large ground floor windows open in the warmer months would create an attractive indoor‐outdoor interface. The second site would be located between the east side of the Central Green and Chancellor Drive. The buildings on both of these sites should contain uses that benefit from being located at the centre of campus life, such as large seating classrooms, conference meeting space and public spaces opening onto adjoining green spaces.

• Convocation Hall (C‐7)

Centred on the newly realigned Chancellor Drive, a new convocation hall would provide the largest venue on campus for special events, including graduation ceremonies and fall orientation, with seating for up to 3,000 persons. This building would become a visual landmark because of its prominent corner location on the approach into campus along Chancellor Drive between the University Avenue and King Street gateways. Movable wall technology could allow the division of the larger convocation space to suit specific programming needs for lecture halls, conference rooms, and multi‐purposes assembly spaces. A wide formal stairway at the front of the building with enhanced wheelchair accessible entrances and traditional architectural design elements reflective of Laurier’s beginnings in 1911 would make a welcoming statement and reflect the symbolic importance of this building within the Laurier community.

• Residence Cluster by Alumni Field (C‐8, C‐9, C‐10) Upon removal of Willison Hall and parking lots at the west end of Alumni Field, a prime site is created on campus for a cluster of buildings, organized around a new central green space. These building have been positioned to align pedestrian routes through the campus, including the Laurier Allee to the north, and to preserve views of both the Central Green and Alumni Field. Extensive use of glass on the east facing façade of the eastern building will create an active interface between the users of the building and those on Alumni Field. Outdoor spectator space, both elevated and at grade, to view activities on Alumni Field should be integrated into the future detailed design of this building.

• Athletic Complex Expansion (C‐11) The current athletic complex building, at one and a half storeys in height and setback approximately 15 metres from the street corner represents a significant underutilization of University Lands at one of the busiest and most prominent intersections within the City of Waterloo. This corner is a key building site as the campus expands and the opportunity exists to increase the intensity at the streets edge, and create a gateway building to announce the Laurier campus. An addition of up to ten storeys in height, wrapping around the northeast corner of the existing structure would extend the building out to the street line and increase the building space available on this site. This building could house the department of kinesiology, kinesiology labs, other teaching space and multi‐disciplinary uses that would benefit from the close proximity of the other athletic centre uses. Mixed retail/commercial uses at grade that could serve the University and surrounding community. A landscaped plaza area is proposed at this intersection providing an outdoor café terrace in the summer months.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• Regina and Lodge Street Residences (E‐1, E‐2)

The University currently owns several buildings fronting onto both Lodge Street and Regina Street, which are being used for off‐campus housing. With the acquisition of several adjacent non‐University owned properties, a larger building site could be created. These property assemblies could be of sufficient size to accommodate two residence buildings. These residences would provide sufficient undergraduate and graduate housing to support projected student enrolment increases. At eight to eleven storeys, these two residences could house a total of 1,060 beds with integrated common amenity space modelled after the King Street Residence. As an objective of the master plan, residences are clustered to encourage social networking and sharing of amenities and facilities. These residences would share joint‐parking facilities, both below grade and surface spaces, and be anchored around a common green space or quadrangle unified by a series of linked walkways.

• Visitor’s Centre (C‐12) This building will assist in defining the King Street Gateway and creating a welcoming presence to the main campus. It would house an information desk, where visitors could obtain information about WLU and take campus tours, exhibition space and a public lounge with wireless access for students, faculty staff and visitors. Campus tours from this location will begin impressive views of some of the best features of the campus – including Alumni Field, the Science Building, Convocation Hall leading to the Central Green to the west.

A stone gateway structure adjacent to the visitors’ centre that incorporates Laurier signage is proposed to signify the entrance to the campus.

• Centralized Cycle Centre

This would be a secure indoor facility located near by the core of campus, and would accommodate approximately 150 bikes. It would include an integrated shower/locker area and a workshop repair centre.

• Northdale Campus The Northdale Campus property has is over 1.9 hectares (4.7) of vacant land available for future campus uses. Given its remote location from the main campus, this site is envisioned as a satellite parking lot, with a pedestrian walkway connection through the site between Columbia Street and Hickory Street. The existing building houses the Laurier Movement Disorders Research and Rehabilitation Centre (MDRC) and other kinesiology classroom space. Renovations may be undertaken to upgrade the existing building.

Infrastructure and Open Space Improvements: • Central Commons • South Commons • The Promenade • Alumni Field Underground Parking and Resurfacing and New

Seating on North Side of Field • Streetscape Upgrades along King Street, University Avenue and

Seagram Drive • LRT Station on Seagram Drive Operational • Realigned Chancellor Drive • Satellite Parking Lot at Northdale Campus • Expanded Parking at Seagram Stadium

Removals:

• Main Campus Residences (Willison Hall, MacDonald House, Little House, Leupold, Euler, Bouchaert)

• Low Rise off‐campus housing on Lodge/Regina Streets Land Acquisitions:

• 16 and 18 Lodge Street and 201 Regina Street (east campus)

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• 77, 8, 85, 89, 91, 95 Seagram Drive (west campus) • 46 Bricker Avenue (central campus)

PHASE 3 The long‐range horizon represents the time period of 10 to 15 years from today, between 2018 and the academic year of 2022/2023. During this phase, the University is expected to reach its ultimate enrolment of FTE 15,000 students. To accommodate the academic space needed for the campus, the University should pursue the acquisition of land beyond its current landholdings for future redevelopment. A 1,215 FTE student enrolment increase in this phase will require approximately 511,000 square feet of new academic space and 495 new residence beds. Construction Projects:

• New Residence/Academic Cluster by the Aird Building (C‐13, C14, C‐15) In the long term, the replacement of the Clara Conrad residence wings with a new cluster of residence and academic buildings would reinvent the space between the Athletic Complex and the Aird Building and adapt the original courtyard approach used for the Clara Conrad Residences to a new outdoor common area. Set close to University Avenue to improve the streetscape, a six storey residence building could accommodate up to 767 beds. On the ground floor of the buildings fronting University Avenue, near the main entrances, amenities such as coffee shops and lounges should be provided.

• Library Expansion (C‐16)

A new building site is available to on the west of the existing Library and fronting onto Albert Street, where a surface parking lot and loading area currently exists. An addition to the library could be cantilevered over the existing parking and loading area, to create new space for collections and archives. The opportunity to create an Albert Street entrance to the building should be explored as this can change the face of the

University along Albert Street and create a more welcoming entrance for students, staff, faculty and the community at large.

• New Academic Buildings North of University Avenue (N‐5, N‐6) On the north side of University Avenue, opposite the Athletic Complex and Clara Conrad Residences is a 1.9 hectare (4.7 acre) site owned by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) that contains an older affordable housing townhouse development. Acquisition of this property in the long term would provide a suitable building site for campus expansion. Two buildings are proposed, an academic building and a graduate residence. An internal ring road from Beech Street would provide direct access to rear entrances and a surface parking area. The buildings would be designed to frame a new quadrangle green space centered inside the ring road and will front onto the Veteran’s Green Parkette at the intersection of Hazel Street and University Avenue. Located within one of the city’s major commercial nodes, this development site may be conceived as a mixed use development, with retail and commercial uses on the ground floor and residences of academic uses on the upper floors. A landscaped terrace between the two buildings and at the west street corner of the academic building, next to the parkette, could be create to provide a gathering area for students, staff, faculty and the community.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Built Form Phase 3 – 2018 To 2022/2023

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Infrastructure and Open Space Improvements:

• Underground Parking below new Conrad Residences with a capacity of up to 275 spaces and access provided from Chancellor Drive.

Removals:

• Clara Conrad Residences

Land Acquisitions:

• CMHC Lands on north side of University Avenue – Maple Court and State Court (approximately 5 acres) This area is currently occupied by a Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporations veteran’s housing development. It is expected that this use will continue to operate for several years to come. However, it is expect that this site will become available to the University for redevelopment. A higher density form would be appropriate due to its proximity to the King/University Community Commercial Core.

Phasing Plan Summary The completion of the Proposed Phasing Plan will result in 1,497,000 ft2 of additional new academic space, and 2,985 additional residence beds accommodated in 847,000 ft2 of new residence space.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


141

IMPLEMENTATION

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


16.0 IMPLEMENTATION

16.1 PLAN REVIEW AND MONITORING

As part of the implementation of the Campus Master Plan, an internal monitoring process for the review of the Plan over the next 25 year time period will be required. The Campus Master Plan should guide future development and land use decisions at Laurier’s campuses, and as such it should have a status as a regulatory document. Therefore, The Campus Master Plan requires adoption by the Board of Governors as a policy document designed to facilitate change in growth management on the Brantford and Waterloo campuses over the coming 25 year period. The Campus Master Plan is presented as a long term vision and direction for campus development. Implementing this vision will ensure that sustainable, compact, vibrant campuses with dynamic and creative open space features. While the Plan represents the vision for the campus, it is acknowledged that Laurier will need to respond to changing circumstances and priorities over time, some of which may be related to government funding, private fundraising efforts, among others. To ensure that the Campus Master Plan intent and the vision is maintained over the long term and addresses land development realities, it is suggested that the following review mechanisms be undertaken:

1. A Five Year Update with yearly reviews should be undertaken to determine progress.

2. The review would be undertaken by a Development Review Committee.

The office of the Vice President and Finance & Facilities in conjunction with the Physical Resources Department should conduct the Plan review annually to evaluate the ongoing development activities on campus in accordance with a pre‐determined series of indicators.

Led by the Physical Resources Department, this Development Review Committee could include members of staff, faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate students and other members from such clubs/committees such as the Laurier Cyclist Club, Accessibility Committee, Sustainability Committee, and other applicable committees as determined by the University. The role of the Development Review Committee is to ensure the implementation of the Campus Master Plan and to act the “Campus Master Planner”. Consultation with this Committee would ensure consistency between institutional policies and plans, including the Academic Plan, the Accessibility Plan, the Sustainability Policy, the Campus Master Plan, the policy on Capital Priorities From Planning Process, the proposed Energy Management Plan, Space Allocation Study, and other applicable existing and future policy documents. It is also recommended that the Campus Master Plan (2009) is coordinated with the Academic Plan (2010) when it is completed to ensure that the land use components contained herein are merged with the future academic/faculty needs. In addition, an Open Space/Urban Design Review Panel be should established for each campus to review the greening of each campus, streetscape improvements, and new building projects at the campus level. The Panel could include internal and external landscape architects, urban designers, architects, and sustainability experts, charged with the responsibility to review more specific design details of individual projects. The implementation of the foregoing approach will be valuable over the next 25 years as the campus continues to experience student enrolment growth. Laurier’s fundraising and government funding programs are sure to create unanticipated fiscal realities that will require adjustments to forecasts and outstanding needs. To implement the Campus Master Plan, it is recommended that the benchmarks and principles of the proposed Energy Management Plan be incorporated in order to meet the objectives of sustainability as outlined in the following sections.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


16.2 SUSTAINABILITY

Introduction The WLU Sustainability Policy (2009) defines the term sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). Sustainability now is understood as the need for all development and activities, which include universities such as Laurier, to operate in an environmentally, socially and economically responsible fashion over the life of the Campus Master Plan. All universities are entrusted with the role of a catalyst for change, acting as a source and champion of innovation in the development and application of knowledge, technology and ethics. Laurier enjoys a high quality environment within two mid‐sized urban municipal settings – Brantford and Waterloo. As a major community leader, employer and educator, Laurier’s influence ranges from the local community to the national scale. Therefore, the transformation of the university as a catalyst for environmental sustainability should be an integral part of the University’s mission. Laurier must recognize that environmental initiatives not only result in a healthier environment over the long term, but can have an effect on the bottom line within a relatively short time. For instance energy savings, as a result of the replacement of light bulbs with power‐saving models, can yield substantial savings in operating costs for larger institutions. In addition, sustainable initiatives for the two campuses can:

• Enrich the reputation of Laurier and serve as a recruiting tool for faculty, staff and students;

• Increase opportunities for scientific research and information sharing;

• Assist to fulfill Canada’s international emissions reduction commitments;

• Contribute to healthier campus communities and the local environment of the cities of Waterloo and Brantford.

Laurier is taking sustainability into account in its development and operations in the following manner:

• The recent adoption of a University Sustainability Policy , which outlines objectives to address improvements to infrastructure and operations, incorporate sustainability into academic programs, improve communication (both on and off campus) and monitor and review the progress of sustainability initiatives on a regular basis.

• The establishment of an Environmental Policy Group to consider sustainability policies on campus

• Operation of an Office of Sustainability • Being an active member of the Association for the

Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE). • Taking an active role in the development of a new Regional

transit system. • The adaptive reuse of a number of existing buildings to house

University programming, activities, and student residences. Approach For the implementation of sustainable guidelines to be effective, a comprehensive, systematic and strategic approach must be pursued. This means that every process and activity on campus is reviewed for its environmental impact, taking into account its social and economic implications. The following components are suggested as part of this approach: A Bottom‐Up Approach The vision of a sustainable campus is the responsibility of all parties. While champions are needed at the senior level of WLU’s administration, all parties on campus should be involved in carrying out this vision. A number of methodologies have been developed to assist organizations in this regard. One is ‘The Natural Step’, an approach originally developed in Sweden for municipal governments. In ‘The Natural Step’, a ‘bottom up’ approach is pursued: instead of change being imposed from the top, sustainability becomes everyone’s business. Workshops are conducted in every department to ensure that each employee is made aware of the importance of sustainability and empowered to contribute solutions and to implement sustainable practices on the job. Targets and responsibilities are established at the department level. The ‘Bottom‐Up’

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


approach must be complemented with a ‘Top‐Down’ approach whereby senior management provides the leadership and initiative to empower the organization to change. This strategy often resembles a "seed" model, whereby the ideas are generated and noted by students and filtered up to the management level for approval. At the beginning these ideas are small, but they eventually grow in complexity and completeness. More importantly, the ownership of ideas are the users rather than management or consultants. The generation of ideas and implementation of initiatives can also be tied to future academic programs as part of the curriculum. Incentive Systems The implementation of the policies will only succeed with a solid process in place to ensure that job descriptions and incentives clearly specify the need for sustainable practices. Budgets must be revised to accommodate lifecycle costing and changes in labour requirements. For example, as drought‐tolerant grasses and ground covers limit the need for lawn mowing and irrigation, the effective costs or savings of these changes should be accounted for in the budgeting process. Sustainability in the Curriculum By integrating sustainability into its curriculum, Laurier can establish itself as a leader in environmental education and research, in addition to sparking new ideas on how to constantly improve its own practices. Because sustainability has social, environmental and economic dimensions, every discipline presents opportunities to include sustainability in its curriculum. Students can be provided with opportunities to work on long term projects that involve sustainability, and research programs can be established to further advance the state of knowledge in environmental science and education, with opportunities for partnerships with internal and external entities involved in the day‐to‐day implementation of sustainability. The Sustainability Program can also constitute a source of on‐campus employment for students, for example in recycling, composting, manual grounds maintenance and training others on campus as well as the Waterloo and Brantford communities in sustainability practices. A sustainable campus provides opportunities for outreach programs such

as summer camps, training sessions, and local community outreach programs. A Proactive Approach Laurier should pursue a proactive approach in collaboration with allied institutions such as the University of Waterloo, Mohawk College, Nipissing University, and local school boards, government agencies and private firms to encourage the growth of a market for sustainable products, services and practices within the Region, a prime example being public transit. The Office of Sustainability should encourage the participation of departments and administrative units in the sustainability effort by facilitating workshops and providing incentives, education opportunities and access to resources. The Office should assist departments in their efforts, by conducting research as needed and suggesting alternatives to current practices. This includes identifying alternative suppliers and products, evaluating competing solutions and researching the impact of alternatives. For example, the Office could recommend the use of power‐saving light bulbs, but point out their mercury content and coordinate their disposal. An important function is to ‘train the trainer’, which involves identifying and training departmental sustainability coordinators who can propagate information and centralize questions. The Office can also facilitate partnerships with suppliers and other public and private institutions to pool purchasing power and coordinate requirements. To facilitate the work of the Office of Sustainability and the implementation of sustainability on campus in general, adequate financial, human and administrative support is necessary. Some of the savings resulting from the implementation of some recommendations, such as improved energy efficiency, should be earmarked for other sustainable initiatives. The continuous support of senior management is crucial to ensure the success of the Office of Sustainability and sustainability initiatives in general over the long term. Performance and Monitoring Clear objective performance measures will be necessary to sustainability initiatives without limiting to the university’s operations, practices,

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


teaching, research, decisions, events, strategies, actions, planning and construction activity. Although different in nature, it will be also necessary for both the Waterloo and Brantford campuses to develop a set of common policies, guidelines and principles with clear set of performance measures that will guide future development based upon sustainable principles. Monitoring systems are needed to track progress over time against pre‐established targets and to identify areas in which further progress is needed. Over time, partnerships can be established with compatible institutions to agree on a common measuring system to allow benchmarking. Each year, a report should be produced to publicize WLU’s progress, inspire other organizations and encourage further efforts. Senior management or an ad‐hoc committee composed of various university stakeholders, should be accountable for progress. It is important to note that a Sustainability Coordinator will be appointed in January 2010 to coordinate all work related to sustainability issues from energy, to recycling who will engage in and respond to sustainability issues throughout the campus as well as within the community. The coordinator has a key role in the development of the centre including:

• Collecting and organizing information through surveys, etc. • Organizing workshops, movie nights, discussion groups, etc. • Writing short newsletter items, and brief reports. • Maintaining and staffing the Sustainability Centre office. • Motivating students and responding to questions. • Developing contacts and ties with various organizations with

interests in the themes noted above. Furthermore, the Energy Management Plan (final report is due beginning of 2010‐to confirm) will set clear baselines and targets for both campuses in terms of performance and can provide first step for Laurier to participate in The College Sustainability Report Card (http://www.greenreportcard.org).

Campus Sustainability Initiatives The following section provides an overview of areas where sustainable practices should be incorporated into the design and operation of the Waterloo and Brantford campuses and their functions. Master Planning Sustainable Land Use and Development Sustainable land use planning creates operational efficiencies, savings in resource and energy use over a large area and the long term, lasting aesthetics and a diversity of uses and activities on a campus. For example, Laurier should pursue mixed‐use development on both campuses whenever possible to efficiently use land and material resources, maximize the building space on existing and new campus lands, consider multi‐purpose buildings, and adaptively reuse existing buildings where feasible to reduce the need for new construction with the resulting consumption of building materials and energy. Lifecycle Costing An important step in the implementation of sustainability is the consideration of lifecycle costs: the added cost of acquisition, maintenance, replacement and operation over the lifetime of an object. The relevance of lifecycle costing to sustainability stems from the role of energy in the operation of buildings, machinery and vehicles. Since a premium is often attached to energy efficiency, it is important to consider lifecycle costs and to coordinate capital with operational budgets. Discussions could be held with funding organizations and government representatives to explain the benefit of lifecycle costing, especially as part of fundraising efforts for new buildings. In addition to lifecycle costing, external costs and benefits must be recognized as much as possible. This means that external financial and environmental costs are included in the decision‐making process. Transportation and Parking Laurier operates a small fleet of vehicles and can easily ensure that energy‐efficient models are selected, that they are used conservatively, and fine‐tuned for optimal operational efficiency. However, a significant amount of energy is consumed by campus users commuting to and from

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


the campus. Laurier should acknowledge its responsibility in transportation‐related energy use, and establish reduction targets. Managing access to the campus is strongly related to the supply of parking. The encouragement of other modes of transportation can decrease the need for new vehicle parking spaces. Reducing or consolidating the parking supply could result in the following benefits:

• Reduced encroachment on open space to accommodate parking;

• Encourage use of alternative modes of travel such as transit, biking and walking by facilitating them within the campus. For the Waterloo campus, given the proposed LRT System and new Seagram Station, staff should work with the Waterloo Region to review measures and to promote ridership on the new transit system;

• Reduced heat island effect in the summer (defined as the localized increase in temperature due to absorption of solar energy in flat paving surfaces);

• Increased opportunity to plant trees that capture carbon dioxide and enhance the appearance of the campus;

• Reduced asphalt use; • Reduced power use for lighting; • Reduced use of salt and de‐icing materials; • Reduced snow removal.

Laurier should continue to encourage alternative modes of transportation by restricting parking supply and encourage cycling and transit use in Waterloo and Brantford, as outlined in the strategies of the Campus Master Plan. Use Microclimate and Environmentally Responsive Site Design Strategies Design individual facility and building projects to respond to microclimate and environmental conditions. As such, the following approaches should be implemented:

• Locate trees and shrubs to support passive heating and to complement cooling in outdoor spaces and buildings and to create seasonally appropriate heatsinks and natural ventilation corridors.

• Locate site features (plazas, patios, etc.) to take advantage of seasonal sun angles, solar access, and solar orientation.

• Design the overall site to reduce “heat island” effects. Exploit shading opportunities, and explore the possible use of high albedo materials. Consider pervious surfaces for parking, walkways, plazas, etc. Use permeable paving for roads with infrequent use (e.g., fire roads).

• Design site lighting to eliminate light trespass from the building and sky pollution.

Infrastructure Planning Integrating utility infrastructure into physical planning can enable large scale efficiencies in resource use, and considerable energy and cost savings over the long term. Energy and Water Efficiency, and waste reduction should all be base line considerations for any new development. Promote Biodiversity, Use Native, and Drought‐Tolerant Plants Use vegetation on the campus that conserves water, reduces pesticide use, maintains a “sense of place,” reduces plant mortality, and lowers ongoing maintenance requirements. Carolinian plant material is to be considered for all new developments on both campuses. The development footprint should enhance the existing biodiversity and ecology of the site by strengthening the existing natural site patterns and making connections to the surrounding site context. Green roof technologies should be used to create additional habitat and to encourage biodiversity. Decision Making for New Construction Existing building renovation and upgrading should be considered before the new building design process is initiated. With respect to space planning, campus building use should be maximized during week days, evenings, and weekends. Online and distance education courses should be encouraged and could provide a viable alternative in the future to the construction of new buildings.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


Building Through their construction, maintenance and operation, buildings could have an impact on the environment. The LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) model is the most popular emerging standard for the design and construction of buildings. Laurier should target LEED Silver for its all new building projects to provide a clear benchmark for building performance. The LEED model also emphasizes human health through a healthy indoor environment, and is composed of the following elements, each contributing points towards an overall rating:

• Sustainable Sites – before considering new construction, existing buildings should be renovated or converted (especially at the Brantford Campus). New construction should only take place on serviced and accessible sites with minimum disturbance.

• Water Efficiency – water use and wastewater should be reduced, both within the building and the surrounding landscape.

• Energy and Atmosphere – energy use should be minimized, with a preference for renewable energy use. Ozone‐depleting chemicals must be avoided.

• Materials and Resources – the quantity of materials used in construction should be minimized (e.g., by reusing existing structures), materials with minimal impact should be selected (e.g., renewable), and construction waste should be minimized, recycled or adequately managed.

• Indoor Environmental Quality – buildings should be designed to foster a healthy environment through improved air quality, reduced indoor air pollutants, enhanced comfort and access to the outdoors through daylight, views, and operable windows.

• Innovation and Design – LEED encourages innovation and provides additional points for solutions not otherwise itemized within the LEED rating system.

Respect Principles of Integrated Buildings The University should undertake a constructive dialogue with its neighbours with respect to campus developments. Laurier should also respect architectural heritage on both campuses and use local materials, brick, stone and glass.

Procurement Procurement includes the sourcing of all products and services on the Laurier campuses. By actively managing its procurement policies, Laurier can obtain products and services that can result in a cleaner environment at Laurier and where they are manufactured. The following are some principles that should be followed in the selection of products and services.

• Repair and reuse existing products before purchasing additional products.

• Select products and services that are produced locally, employ local people and help perpetuate local culture and practices. Evaluate the life‐cycle cost implications of material options, since the initial cost of more durable materials are often more than their counterparts. This evaluation should compare the initial cost investment, the service life, and the annual maintenance costs over a 50‐year life cycle

• When products from developing countries must be purchased, choose products that have been produced with improved social practices (e.g., fair trade, etc).

• Use of recycled, salvaged, renewable, biodegradable and non‐toxic materials to be considered first. Divert materials from waste streams and minimize consumption of virgin resources by specifying materials with some recycled content wherever feasible.

Social/Environmental Responsibility University Social Responsibility is a concept whereby a university takes all necessary steps to improve quality of life for all its employees together with their families, students, faculty, and the local community as well as society. The following principles should be considered for both the Waterloo and Brantford Campuses:

• To promote the practice of social responsibility for sustainable development.

• To educate community residents of their social and environmental responsibilities, and to promote these principles and practices to encourage positive behavioral change.

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


• The university has a corporate responsibility to participate actively in the environmental decision‐making processes and initiatives of the municipality to contribute to the stewardship of the regional environment.

• To encourage and promote community access to the university resources including but not limited to recreation facilities, libraries, lectures and employment.

• To act as a good corporate citizen, generating enthusiasm, pride and partnership amongst our communities and stakeholders

Coordination and Implementation

1. To coordinate and implement the above action points, it is suggested that the Office of Sustainability work with the Development Review Committee on a continuous basis to review the University’s sustainable management procedures and their performance. The Office of Sustainability should also be liaising with the Physical Resource Department to assess and review site specific projects.

2. The Energy Management Plan, upon completion, will set baselines, targets, implementation strategies and monitoring/ measurement tools.

16.3 COLLABORATION

Laurier’s Role in City‐Building Laurier occupies a prime location at the heart of City of Waterloo, in immediate proximity to the downtown core, Waterloo Park, University of Waterloo and the major commercial node at University Avenue and King Street. In Brantford, its central location in the downtown core makes it an important partner in the vitality of the community. Laurier is an established and highly regarded mid‐size University, which attracts students both nationally and internationally, and is a major local employer. Given its mass, location and social, cultural and economic importance in the two communities, Wilfrid Laurier University has played an integral role in city building and should continue to positively contribute to the realization of the long‐term objectives of the greater community.

The Development Review Committee for the Waterloo Campus should also play the role as a working and communication group to facilitate ongoing dialogue with both City of Waterloo and Region of Waterloo staff to ensure that municipal and regional planning issues of interest to Laurier, including the review and updates to the City’s Official Plan, transportation and the Rapid Transit system, road widening and streetscape improvements, and issues on adjacent lands (such as Waterloo Park and the Northdale community) are discussed and addressed proactively with a common vision that is mutually beneficial. In addition, the group could also work with the local Councillors and City of Waterloo staff to investigate the new and broader vision for the Northdale community to include a variety of uses such as residential, bookstore, institutional, commercial, and other suitable uses. To implement the Campus Master Plan, Laurier will need to communicate with the City of Brantford, as well as the Downtown Business Improvement Area (BIA) and other organizations. The University will need to define its future infrastructure needs based on the growth projections contained in the Campus Master Plan. The City of Brantford needs to ensure that infrastructure required for campus growth is provided in a timely manner. The Development Review Committee can play a role in this liaison in this effort as well as act as a working/community group to provide continuous dialogue with the City of Brantford, Downtown BIA, partner post‐secondary institutions, and other organizations. The Post Secondary Committee and other forums are available to address the integration of the Laurier campus into the urban fabric of the downtown. Other matters that will need to be addressed include streetscape and public realm improvements, the development of the Downtown Transit Terminal and Parking Garage, and transit improvements. In both municipalities, the University should maintain its positive relationship with their respective City Planning Departments by engaging the staff in a preliminary review of any University development proposals to ensure that external consultants and the University achieve the best possible design for new development that complements both the Campus and urban environment. While such an approach could be considered a courtesy on the Waterloo Campus, given its current exemption for municipal site plan approval, it serves to maintain positive

CAMPUS MASTER PLAN


town and gown relationships and recognizes the University’s ongoing role as a City Builder in both the City of Brantford and City of Waterloo.

16.4 SUMMATION

The Laurier Campus Master Plan provides a clear vision for the future growth of the campuses located in Brantford and Waterloo. The ideas of the University community and other stakeholders have been instilled into a workable framework to manage this growth. This framework addresses the organizing elements for both physical campuses including: exterior boundary, gateways to create a sense of arrival, spatial distribution of academic space and residence beds, building typology, open space, circulation patterns both to and within the campus, parking, heritage considerations, sustainability, future development or redevelopment areas, land acquisition and municipal/regional policy objectives. The Plan also identifies the timing and sequence in which both of these campuses could be developed.

campus master plan final

Documents

collaborative process

waterloo campuses

cityof region of waterloo

director paulpuopolo

projectmanager johnlohmus