Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
more evident. In addition, increasing the opportunities for collaboration is
assumed as an important aspect to be developed in the North campus (an area
oriented to the interaction between academic and other institutions), while in the
South campus it is possible to observe a higher importance of the aspects related
to the “experiences” arising from social interaction among the users of the
campus.
Clearly, the purpose of this work is not to identify one single campus profile
as a priority for the development of the campus, but to identify the different
viable priorities that should be given to each of them according to their impacts
on the performance of the University and the problems and preferences of the
users (future oriented). Therefore, in our study a more detailed observation of
each different campus profile has been developed with the Strategic Choice
Analysis, in order to identify what can be improved in each of these aspects of
the University campus, clearly distinguishing among the North and South areas
of the campus, once different activities are performed by different kind of
stakeholders in these places.
The choice results from the MCA Regime Analysis call for a balanced,
differentiated and well-framed future campus design, in which all elements
from five campus profiles play a role, but the Functional, Ecological and
Accessible criteria will be decisive for any future campus Image
.
Regarding the future, an important distinction between the North and South
campus must be emphasized: while the North has still land available for physical
expansion allowing the implementation of new facilities or mobility infrastructures
and preserving the ecological balance, the development of the South campus does
not leave room for a physical expansion, in order to preserve (or increase) the
quality of public spaces. This distinction is defined in the Plans for the development
of the University and was expressed by the users of the campus.
Regarding the questions related to accessibility and mobility inside the
campus, the disconnection between North and South and problems with mobility
in winter have been mentioned several times by stakeholders from both
campuses. Congestion is a major concern in the South campus, while isolation
(difficult access from inside and outside the campus) is a problem in the North
campus. A renovation of the circulation infrastructure is already defined in the
Plans for the campus, but new regulations for mobility, an improvement in the
transport services, better infra-strictures for mobility in winter and better
accessibilities to North campus are required.
The facilities for the provision of “traditional” academic services (related to
education and research) or to basic services (like food or convenience stores)
seem adequate in the South campus, but should be improved in the North
campus. On the other hand, the provision of wi-fi access to Internet all over
the campus is a major demand of the users of South campus and it is not included
in the Plans for the development of the campus.
Social interaction in public spaces, cafes, dining rooms, entertainment areas,
leisure areas or sports facilities are not sufficient in the South campus and almost
non-existent in the North campus. Although the general purposes of the Plans for
