Concept Development
|
Concept development is the idea generation phase of the planning process, which provides a foundation for decision-making during the development of the Master Plan. This phase of planning includes two steps:
Both steps provide an evaluative framework allowing consideration of a range of campus-wide and site-specific planning and development issues. |
|
Site Opportunity Analyses consider existing conditions and influences as they test development potential and explore alternative ways to accommodate growth and future development. Five Site Opportunity Analyses were explored. |
|
Three analyses addressed a campus-wide approach considering linkages, connections, and future development. Two analyses focused specifically on representing development opportunities at North Campus. These analyses form the basis for the development of Master Plan Concepts. |
| Master Plan Concepts build upon Site Opportunity Analyses and further explore alternative ways to accommodate future development at North Campus. Master Plan Concepts represent a more detailed look at development potential at North Campus and include consideration of the specific program elements that must be accommodated. Identified planning objectives are also considered in the development of these concepts, balanced with specific site development considerations such as vehicular and pedestrian access and circulation, parking, and service access. |  |
| Four concept alternatives were explored and presented to the UTHSCSA Steering Committee. Relative pros and cons were identified for each concept, including an evaluation of their ability to satisfy identified goals and objectives. From this evaluative process, a preferred concept emerged (Concept D), which included portions of each of the concept alternatives. The preferred alternative, selected by the UTHSCSA Steering Committee, formed the basis for the development of the Master Plan. |  |
|
The diagrams presented in this section take into consideration the following planning parameters:
The Site Opportunity Analyses and Master Plan Concepts presented in this section are the result of on-site work sessions held in San Antonio on March 20-24, 2000, which included the entire UTHSCSA planning team. |
|
The exploration of Site Opportunity Analyses and the development of Master Plan Concepts were guided by many of the ideas that evolved from collaborative working sessions. The sessions addressed a range of planning and development objectives in the categories of facilities, expansion, site, utilities, image, and parking/access. FacilitiesIn the absence of a specific facility requirements analysis and the development of a detailed facility program, the planning team explored a range of possible uses to be incorporated into the master planning framework. Possible facilities and functions to be considered include:
Expansion
|
Site
|
|
Utilities
|
Image
|
|
Parking/Access
|
 |
Planning for long-range development in the Medical
Center should consider a range of possibilities. Floyd Curl could become the
primary north/south linkage for the Medical Center serving existing and future
development areas. As development occurs at North Campus and beyond, the
character and use of this roadway will change. Regional transportation
solutions, as referenced in the 1996 Urban Land Institute study commissioned by
the San Antonio Medical Foundation, should be considered.
As development of the UTHSCSA Campus continues to occur to the north, it will also become increasingly important to develop a strong system of pedestrian connections. This will not only provide a recreational amenity, but will also provide an environmentally responsible alternative to the car. |
Site Opportunity Analysis
Diagram 2
|
One of the major concerns of the campus community is
that of connections. A physical disconnect currently exists between the North
Campus and Main Campus. McDermott and Allied Health are isolated from the rest
of campus, with the car as the only means of connection. Students and faculty
must ride a shuttle or get in their cars to drive the very short distance to
Main Campus and park before reaching their destination. This situation is a
source of frustration and is not environmentally responsible.
The physical connection between the two properties is a major planning theme evident in all concepts explored. The natural drainage way could be developed as a "greenway" or a pedestrian connection to the Main Campus. This "greenway" would need to connect through the parcel of land across Wurzbach known as the "Golden Triangle." If acquired by the UTHSCSA, this property would provide the much needed linkage between the Main Campus and North Campus and would afford greater long-range development flexibility. Pedestrian safety is a major issue in making this connection feasible. The current vehicular-oriented environment that exists today at Wurzbach and Medical Drive is not conducive to pedestrian activity. Improvements would need to be made at this and other intersections (Wurzbach and Floyd Curl) to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings. Similar considerations would need to be given to Floyd Curl to facilitate pedestrian access to the 30-acre parcel. |
|
Site Opportunity Analysis
Diagram 3
 |
As development occurs north along Floyd Curl, the Wurzbach intersection will become the "gateway" to North Campus. The opportunity for a "new" campus or new identity is reinforced by the current development of design guidelines for the entire Medical Center campus. This idea also raises the issue of long-range traffic needs and the consideration for the Medical Foundation Loop Road that was also proposed in the Urban Land Institute study. |
Site Opportunity Analysis
Diagram 4
|
Building orientation and relationship to the street, the creek, and to each other are important planning considerations related to development form. This analysis considers buildings that are "externally" focused. For example, buildings are oriented to Floyd Curl with parking located along the creek, or to the rear of the buildings. Characteristics of this development form include:
|
|
 |
This analysis represents an "internally" oriented campus where buildings are located along the amenity and parking is located along the street. People are focused on the stream amenity, with buildings grouped together around the stream amenity, providing pleasant views from within as well as direct access to the "greenway" system. Cars are deposited as quickly as possible. This approach allows for minimal pedestrian and vehicular conflict since people would drive onto campus, park their cars, and then proceed on foot. Other variables considered in this analysis include:
|
|
The following concepts focus on North Campus, which
includes the 50 acres at 8403 Floyd Curl, where the McDermott and Allied Health
Buildings are located, and the 30-acre site located across the street at Floyd
Curl and Wurzbach.
The four concepts presented (A, B, C & D) are the result of many studies done by the planning team to determine the optimal layout of facilities on the site. These concepts test ideas related to:
The challenge was to identify a preferred concept that addresses the needed building program and associated parking balanced with a sensitivity towards preserving the natural character of the site. The four concepts presented test various means of organizing facilities, in addition to exploring alternatives to accommodate parking. Concepts were evaluated by :
FAR is a common planning tool used to analyze density. It represents a ratio of total building square footage over total site area and is expressed in decimal form. GAC (building coverage) is used to analyze the percentage of site area occupied by building footprints. The planning assumptions include a basic building module of 250,000 GSF. This module is based on the combined program for the Children’s and Adult’s Cancer Buildings equaling 250,000 GSF. (Since the charette, the square footage has been reduced to 160,000 GSF). Since programs for future buildings have not been identified, the team used the cancer research buildings as a baseline. This allowed the various concepts to be evaluated evenly. The exact configuration of the 250,000 GSF building module is based on a five- floor building with a 50,000 GSF floorplate. The buildings are assumed to have two laboratory wings (+/- 100,000 GSF each) connected by a 50,000-square-foot central administrative / office / support core. Parking is planned to be accommodated in garages. This decision is the result of focused dialogue during the programming phase dealing with issues of density and land conservation. It was a clear consensus of the UTHSCSA community that land preservation was critically important and the garages were the appropriate approach. In the planning exercise, the garages were sized based on an assumption of 325 square feet per car. To minimize site impact or avoid the floodplain, certain garages are assumed to be incorporated into the footprint of the adjacent lab / classroom building. Depending on the actual building size, this will either require a certain number of levels of the garage to be constructed under the building below grade, or for the building to be built on top of the garage. |
|
Concept A tests grouping the lab buildings around a common plaza. This plaza pavilion is envisioned to be developed as a common base for each two-building group. The building groups mirror one another across the natural green space of the creek. Parking is located in garages that are partially located under the lab buildings. Primary vehicular access is provided at the existing curb cuts on Floyd Curl Drive and Medical Drive. Additional access is located south of these existing points and enters the parking garages. A conference center is proposed in the northwest corner of the site. Parking is provided under a portion of the conference center to serve it, as well as buildings in close proximity. |
|
|
Pros:
Cons:
Concept Assumptions:
|
Concept BThe "Sawtooth Scheme" aligns the facilities along the creek in a linear fashion. The linear arrangement provides maximum stream frontage and a variety of views. The cancer research buildings are directly accessible to the Cancer Therapy & Research Center and are highly visible from Floyd Curl Drive. The Conference Center is located on the west side of the creek adjacent to a lab building and directly across the creek from a parking garage. A parking garage replaces the existing surface parking at the McDermott and Allied Health Buildings. Additional garages are located behind or under the proposed lab buildings. |
|
|
Pros:
Cons:
Concept Assumptions:
|
|
In this concept, the buildings on the 50-acre site are arranged in smaller groupings to take advantage of views of the creek. Two building groups and the Conference Center are located on the east side of the site, with three building groups located on the west. Three additional building groups are accommodated on the 30-acre parcel. Two are located directly adjacent to each other and the third is at the corner of Wurzbach and Floyd Curl, offering outstanding visibility. The Conference Center is located in close proximity to the Phase I cancer research buildings adjacent to the creek. Parking is accommodated in a total of 6 garages, 4 on the 50-acre site and 2 on the 30-acre site. On the 50-acre site, one garage is located adjacent to the Phase I cancer research buildings, and for purposes of this analysis, is assumed to replace the CTRC garage. The concept of the cancer research buildings and the CTRC sharing a garage was discussed as part of the programming effort. An additional garage is located adjacent to the McDermott Building. The garages on the west side of the creek are partially located under the northern and southern group of buildings. |
|
|
Pros:
Cons:
Concept Assumptions:
|
Concept DThis concept incorporates the best ideas of the previous three alternatives and was developed as a result of discussions with the UTHSCSA team. Elements of Concepts A, B, and C were combined and strengthened to respond to the identified master plan goals. Buildings are arranged in clusters along the creek with parking located directly adjacent to each building group. There are four building groups totaling 1 million GSF on the 50-acre site and four building groups totaling 1 million GSF on the 30-acre site. These building groups are oriented to maximize access and views to the creek, as well as to maximize visibility from Floyd Curl, Wurzbach, and Medical Drive. |
|
|
The front doors of each building group are clearly visible from the road and are accessed via an internal access road. Major entrances to the two sites are located directly adjacent to each other, creating a strong internal circulation pattern, linking the east and west campuses, maximizing curb cuts required along Floyd Curl, and providing clear orientation for visitors. The creek is envisioned to be enlarged and dammed to create a central site amenity as well as to accommodate stormwater runoff. This enlarged area, which is not expected to hold water continuously, will provide a much needed focal point of the campus whether wet or dry. The Conference Center is located along the creek directly adjacent to Phase I of the cancer research buildings. This central location will allow the facility to serve the needs of the campus throughout the buildout process. The central plant is also centrally located west of the cancer research buildings' parking structure adjacent to the Conference Center. In addition to accommodating views and visibility, the building wings are oriented to maximize the connections between facilities. Covered pedestrian walkways are intended to allow direct, protected access throughout the campus. The parking garages shown on the plan are assumed
to be 3 floors. Each floor accommodates approximately 470 cars. This is based on
3 cars per 1,000 GSF of building assuming, as illustrated in the plan, that all
future buildings are 250,000 GSF. If future buildings are a different size, the
parking requirement will change. This scheme provides 4,230 parking spaces.
|
The stream could be dammed to create a central focus and important amenity. |
Pros:
|
Landscaped entrances to buildings provides a campus-like image. |
Cons:
|