1388 m.plan Report to Present

8/14/2019 1388 m.plan Report to Present

1/33


2/33

Lancaster University Landscape Masterplan

July 2005

LANCASTER UNIVERSITY CAMPUS LANDSCAPE MASTERPLAN

CONTENTS

1.0 Summary

2.0 Introduction

3.0 Site Analysis

4.0 Key Issues

5.0 Masterplan proposals:

Strategies Masterplan (whole campus) Masterplan (core area)

6.0 Materials & Unit Costs

7.0 Implementation Schemes and Costs:

Design Review Committee Woodland management Woodland creation Campus grass maintenance Sports eld rehabilitation Sculpture Park & Thomas Mawson Garden Chaplaincy Perimeter road

Service areas Pedestrian Spine Alexandra Square College Quadrangles New crescent route Furniture and bicycle storage Covered walkways

8.0 Priorities

9.0 Conclusion

Appendices:

A Landscape Maintenance & Woodland Management Plan

B Scheme Cost Spreadsheet

C Sports eld soil analysis


3/33


July 2005

1.0 Summary

1.1 Lancaster University forms an attractive campuswith a large and varied landscape estate. Theoriginal Epstein and Shepheard building layout haschanged, particularly in recent years as expansionand replacement of buildings has accelerated.Much of the external fabric is at the end of its lifeand in need of renewal, Increased car use and areducing maintenance budget have also exertedpressure on the quality of external spaces andsoft landscape. The University has recognised theimpact that these various factors are having onthe campus landscape, and the need to reappraisethe campus landscape design so that progressiveimprovements can be commenced.

1.2 The proposed Landscape Masterplan presents an

analysis of the current site, identifying key factorswhich need to be addressed, and develops aunifying plan and language of materials which willsuccessfully regenerate the University campus.This masterplan is broken down into a numberof discrete projects which have been costed andprioritised, so that the University can adopt anincremental approach in response to funding andprogramme constraints. The Action Plan whichthese projects make up is a simple means toensure continual improvements are taken forwardin a coherent manner, and allows nancial planning

in the medium and long term.

1.3 The Landscape Masterplan complements theLancaster University Masterplan produced byFaulkner Brown Architects. It incorporates newbuilding developments which are currently inprogress or likely to be implemented in the nearfuture; in some cases amended layouts have beenproposed to improve the landscape design.

1.4 Key to taking the masterplan and action planforward will be instigation of a Design ReviewPanel within the University, tasked with assessingeach new building project against the needs of themasterplan so that full co-ordination is achieved.The quality and character of landscape worksmust be consistent between different sites oncampus, and no development should impair theaims of the masterplan without well-informedreason.


4/33


July 2005

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Lancaster University possesses an extensivecampus setting of varied character and quality.Established during the early 1960s on the estateof Bailrigg House and adjacent farmland, the

campus expressed a well considered relationshipof architecture to landscape.

2.2 A comprehensive landscape master planwas implemented in the 1960s. The strongwoodland structure, which creates a parklandsetting, generous amount of sports ground, anda segregated pedestrian core with an intimatecollegiate atmosphere gave the university aunique character. However, over recent yearsdevelopment pressures have increased as theuniversity has sought to expand to meet demand

for Higher Education. The campus has neededto accommodate new buildings, replace existingbuildings and nd room for ancillary uses such ascar parking; all have impacted upon the landscapecharacter and quality. In addition, maintenanceresources have been gradually reduced so that thesize of workforce available to maintain the newcampus in the 1960s is no longer viable; this hasthrown into light some of the demands imposedby the original design. An updated master planis required to renew the quality of setting andaccommodate new developments.

2.3 Lookin g toward the future , with ongoingnew academic and residential constructiontransforming the campus, the universitycommissioned the development of a landscapemasterplan for the campus in September 2004.

2.4 The brief for this study required the following:

Assessment of the current campus to identifywhat does and does not work. With thisunderstanding, the task of generating acoherent approach to the campus as a whole,

exploiting positive aspects of the existingsite whilst addressing past problems, is maderelevant and site specic.

Development of a master plan which is bothsustainable and deliverable, to last for thenext 10 years.

Production of a landscape management plan,to include a woodland management plan forthe campus.

The master plan to address in particularimprovements to pedestrian routes and the

variety of social and breakout space.

2.5 As a vital part of this process, denition of costs andpriorities has been drawn into an Action Plan.This breaks down the proposed masterplaninto a series of separate projects, allowing an

incremental approach according to the availabilityof funds or site areas.

2.6 The action plan is prioritised according to cost,complexity and urgency of action; this approachsuits such a complex and long term project,allowing a rolling programme of incrementalimprovements.

2.7 The masterplan will guide future developments,to ensure a unied approach to external spacesand the landscape structure.


5/33


July 2005

3.0 Site Analysis

3.1 The University occupies a site of 264 acres inarea (107 hectares), between the M6 and A6roads. It has a clear structure in two parts; thecore campus of University buildings lies withinan encircling road and woodlands; beyond this

lies an extensive area of remnant parkland thatcontains sports elds and minor ancillary uses,access roads etc. extending to further woodlandon the site perimeter.

3.2 The built core of the campus lies on a ridge toplocation sloping towards the west and south; ittakes up 79 acres (32 hectares). The M6 lies in

partial cutting immediately to the east; the A6runs along the local valley bottom to the west.Rising up from the A6, there are two minor

ridge features which divide the site into distinctparts; the sports pitches lie on at land alongthe foot of these slopes, with open grassland andwoodlands on the slopes.


6/33


July 2005

3.3 Woodlands provide very effective containmentof the original University Colleges, despite theirelevated position. Woodlands occupy a steepslope which runs north-south across the centre ofthe site, so that on entering the campus the visitorpasses rst through a parkland landscape beforewinding up the slope through the woodlandto reach an arrival point in front of the RuskinLibrary. The northern and eastern boundariesbenet from retained estate woodlands dating

from the 1850s, providing substantial screening ofthe M6 (although noise remains intrusive). Mostof the other woodlands date from the 1960s,being planted at the time of construction of theUniversity. There are also thinner shelterbeltwoodlands alongside the A6, affording glimpseviews into the University.

3.4 Expansion of the new residential facilities tothe south-west of the site has broken through

the previous woodland containment, and liesvery exposed to views from the south and west.Whilst Infolab 21 is a building of architecturaldistinction, the new residences are of indifferentquality and are out of character with the originalcampus buildings. This site occupies 23 acres(9 hectares). Re-establishment of an effectivewoodland belt around the southern boundary ofthe site is key to achieving a cohesive landscapemasterplan.


7/33


July 2005

3.5 Existing woodlands are of 2 age types. Originalwoods dating from the 1850s consist of Beech,Elm, Oak, Austrian Pine and self-sown Sycamore;the structure is rather dense and lacks youngergenerations in some parts; ground flora is

limited, and there are broad swathes of invasiveRhododendron ponticumunderstorey. These woodsare in need of selective thinning and restockingto improve age structure and species balance.Newer woods dating from the 1960s consist of

Norway Maple , Poplar, Alder and Beech; structureis dense and they require selective thinning (toremove pioneer species Poplar and Alder inparticular) with some restocking of Oak, Beechand Pine to improve species balance.


8/33


July 2005

3.6 Extensive grassland covers approximately a thirdof the campus area. The majority of this is mownon a regular basis, although this is relaxed on thesteepest slopes and immediately around somewoodland edges. Seasonal reduction of mowingfor the benet of wildlife does not form part ofthe maintenance regime.

3.7 Sports pitches occupy the lowest ground alongthe foot of the slopes. Pitches suffer from verypoor surface drainage, and remain unplayable forlarge parts of the winter season. It is probablethat the original eld drainage installed in 1960 hasdeteriorated and no longer functions effectively;this is vital due to the location of the pitches ata natural seepage line in the base of the slope.In addition, a soil texture analysis has revealed

that the soil has a high proportion of ne gradedsand which is not conducive to good drainage.Proposals for amelioration of pitch conditionsare given later in the report.

3.8 Lake Carter lies on the rst terrace along theentrance road; it is an attractive feature marredby poor water quality. The water body is narrowand shallow, extensively shaded by overhangingtrees and subject to heavy leaf fall. Water enteringthe pond from seepage in the adjacent grasslandappears to be anaerobic and the pond water itself

suffers seasonal uctuation in quality and visualappearance. Given the scale of the campus, LakeCarter is rather insignicant, and would benetfrom enlargement and deepening to improve itsvisual and water quality; proposals are given laterin the report.

3.9 There are 3 roads entering the campus, each ofdifferent character. The main entrance forms anattractive sequence passing through the parklandand rising up to meet the University collegesrevealed between woodland copses. It is treelined and does not have the character of a standardpublic road. Green Lane is more rural in natureand serves only a limited function in accessing thehotel. The new road access to the south westcorner of the site is by contrast visually intrusive;dominated by standard highway design featuresand crude ear thworks, it lacks sensitivity to thesetting. Combined with the massing of the newresidences, this campus gateway presents a poorvisual quality greatly contrasting with the carefuldesign evident elsewhere.


9/33


July 2005

3.10 The perimeter road denes the edge of theoriginal University buildings. It is both a 2-wayroad and an aisle for the car parking bays to bothsides along much of its length; this is not ideal andresults in congestion at busy periods. Congestionis exacerbated by the number of service yards thatgain access onto the road. Pedestrian footwaysare absent in many places, and where present areof insufcient width once the overhang of parkedcars is taken into account. There is a paucity ofsafely demarcated pedestrian crossings. Cyclistsare especially ill-served due to their vulnerabilityto cars reversing from parking spaces.

3.11 Due to recent developmen t works causingdisruption and to past failures of trees, theperimeter road lacks a coherent landscape

framework. Rows of trees are present in someparts (for instance at Grizedale or CountyColleges), however they are often located tooclose to buildings or to paths and roads; thinningto re-space maturing trees is required throughout.The quality of trees is variable, many showingpoor canopy shape or damage.

3.12 Grass areas around the perimeter road andaccess areas suffer from vehicle over-run andpedestrian desire-lines. Due to the presenceof steep transition slopes, fragmented areas and

numerous signposts etc, maintenance of grassverges is difcult and an untidy effect results.

3.13 Within the core area there are many externalspaces of varying scale and complexity; anintimate pedestrian scale creates a comfortableenvironment. A primary pedestrian routeruns through the heart of the University withAlexandra Square at its centre, colleges andacademic departments lying to either side. Thisroute has a canopy over much of its length; thesewalkways are rather gloomy spaces due to darklycoloured softs and limited external lighting. Thepaving consists of pre-cast concrete slabs, withlines and panels of blue brick paviors at drainagefeatures and surrounding trees; it is drab inappearance and showing signs of wear and tear(open joints, spalled surfaces and staining).


10/33


July 2005

3.14 Alexandra Square is a well-proportioned spacepopular with students and staff. Steps along thenorthern side are very well used for sitting outin the summer. Paving is a simple diagonal grid ofpre-cast concrete slabs in two contrasting tones,the pattern enlivens the space and distinguishes itfrom other areas. There is a coiled ramp in thenortheast corner which is heavy in appearanceand creates a dark corner to the square. NorwayMaples along the south side of the square are ingood condition although the paving below themhas been lifted by root heave.

3.15 A range of courtyards is accessed from the spineroute. In general these are plain and austere(consisting of either slab paving or grass lawn)although well-proportioned with a college

quadrangle character. There is nothing in thetreatment of external spaces to distinguish eachcollege.

3.16 Trees planted within the core areas adjacent tobuildings comprise Norway Maple, Ash, Lime,Cherry, Rowan, Whitebeam and Oak; otherspecies occur occasionally. Many are planted tooclose to buildings or hard surfaces, and after 40years of growth are impeding windows and liftingadjacent paving. Many exhibit signs of stress,which appears to be due to poor soil conditions,poor planting, physical damage and compactionof soil (by vehicles, pedestrians and mowingmachinery).

3.17 Away from the main part of the University,the south-west residential area is currently inthe process of construction. Those parts thathave been completed do not demonstrategood landscape design. Mixing of vehicles withpedestrian surfaces through the core areas hasresulted in damage to planting, and invites abuseby car owners wishing to park outside their door.The central paved space outside the bar couldbe an attractive focal point, however it requiresnew trees of large stock and adequate protection(tree guards and bollards). The amount of denseshrubbery will require an ongoing maintenancecommitment.


11/33


July 2005

4.0 Key Issues

4.1 Analysis of the existing campus reveals a widerange of issues which affect current landscapequality and point to fu ture landscape development.These key issues are presented below in terms ofstrengths, weaknesses and opportunities.

4.2 STRENGTHS

The University has a strong large scale structureformed by the original estate shelterbelts andyounger woodland blocks planted in the 1960s.An attractive approach from the A6 passesthrough extensive parkland containing anabundance of land suitable for sports pitches. Thecore part of the campus is pedestrianised, withan intimate human scale and variety of external

spaces dened by the architectural layout.Interesting buildings such as the Chaplaincy andthe Ruskin library form landmark features withstrong identity.

4.3 WEAKNESSES

New building works have caused extensive damageto verges, trees and footways which have not beeneffectively reinstated. The new residential areais visually prominent with inadequate woodlandscreening. A lack of effective integrated designreview for new developments has led to a declinein landscape quality and to difficulties withgrounds maintenance. The volume of cars present on campus isoverwhelming current car parking facilities. Theperimeter road is congested and poorly servespedestrians and cyclists; it has damaged verges,poor tree quality and an absence of containmentto car parking.

Changes in levels have been unresolved aroundbuildings and service roads, leaving awkward pavedslopes, retaining walls and verges. Maintenance ofthe landscape is hindered by the fragmentationand unmanageable gradients of grass verges inthese areas. Insufcient space has been allowedfor the growth of trees which have often beenplanted into narrow verges or too close tobuildings. Within the pedestrian realm speciesselection of trees has been poor in places,resulting in excessive shade or damage to pavingsurfaces.

The quality of paving materials is utilitarian; itis dull in appearance and, with the exception ofthe main square, lacking in pattern or variety;some areas show signs of damage and wear.College courtyards are rather austere and lackvegetation in many cases. Walkway canopiescast heavy shade, making conned spaces dulland unattractive.

Sports pitches are poorly drained and areoften unplayable despite the notionally highlevel of provision. There is no effective formalmanagement plan for the pitches to ensureconsistency. Lake Carter is foul smelling,overshadowed by trees, overstocked withwildfowl and subject to anaerobic runoff.


12/33


July 2005

4.4 OPPORTUNITIES

The regular orthogonal layout of service yardsand car parks offers the chance for a simpleunifying landscape treatment to create orderand containment around the perimeter road and

service areas. Tree and hedge planting, combinedwith improved verge nishes and slopes, wouldtransform these spaces. Additional and betterquality cycle parking facilities would complementthe Green Travel Plan objectives of encouragingmodal share and managing car parking demand,and reduce obstructions to pedestrian routes(where bicycles are currently locked to railings,downpipes, seats etc).

Renement of the pedestrian paving, replacingthe plain concrete slabs with a simple patternof contrasting slab tones, would bring greatervisual liveliness to the pedestrian realm. Newplanting of climbers and groundcover plants willalso soften the appearance, especially withinthe college courtyards. Allied to renewal ofthe paving, progressive replacement of thecanopies would rejuvenate the currently gloomywalkways.

Regrading of some grass verges to removeawkward mounded prole would permit easierand more effective maintenance; some steep grassslopes might be replaced with low-maintenancegroundcover planting.

New woodland planting to enclose the evolvingcampus would maintain an attractive parklandsetting. Woodland management could improvewoodland canopy structure and species balance,to favour native forest tree species. Grass mowingregime can be adapted to favour increased swarddiversity in lightly used areas, both improvingbiodiversity and reducing maintenance costs.

4.5 In summary the key issues that requireaddressing in the Landscape Masterplan are:

Development pressure in the core area hasdamaged landscape character and quality

Traffic and car parking demand have

increased New and future developments need to beintegrated into the masterplan

Trees and grass areas in core of campus arein poor condition

Paving materials are reaching end of life The pedestrian realm is utilitarian in

appearance and lacking in comfort A woodland management plan is needed to

improve woodland structure and diversity Landscape quality and sports provision are

major attractants to prospective students


13/33


July 2005

5.0 Masterplan Proposals

A series of strategies have been drawn up foreach distinctive part of the campus landscape.These have then been developed into a landscapemasterplan layout.

5.1 Strateg y : Woodland Management

Underplant original 1850 woodlands withreplacement native broadleaves in gapsOriginal woods dating from the 1850s are inneed of selective thinning and restocking toimprove age structure and species balance

Selective removal of rhododendron fromwoodland alongside paths and roads; retainalong the eastern boundary as a managedunderstorey to screen the M6.

Selective thin of 1965 plantings to removepioneer and self-sown species (alder,sycamore and white poplar). The increasedspacing will improve tree form and amenityvalue. Interplant with native trees (oak,beech and pine) and shrub species toimprove structure and species balance.

5.2 Landscape Strategy : Parkland and entry roads

Maintain the quality of approach from theA6 by controlling ancillary developments,access points etc along the entrance drive.

Extend new large scale woodland plantingfrom main campus along A6 frontage of newcampus land, and along rising land abovesports elds.

South west access road verge gradients tobe eased, woodland planting extended to llresidual spaces to site boundary, SuDS pondregraded to form an attractive feature.

Develop a network of walking/runningpaths around the woods and parkland, usingwood chippings generated by woodlandmanagement operations

Expand and deepen Lake Carter, inconjunction with redevelopment of the Byrefor the Peter Walker Gallery and a sculpturepark. Integrate the Lake into roof and surfacewater drainage as part of a SuDS network.

5.3 Landscape Strategy : Sports elds

Undertake investigation of eld drainageto determine whether system requires

replacement. Install an interceptor drain along the foot

of the slopes to intercept seepage ofgroundwater before it enters the pitches. Ifnecessary, replace eld drains (laterals) andconnect in to the toe drain as collector. Moleplough to connect into eld drainage.

Where pitches have deteriorated badly, thesurface should be renewed. Apply herbicideto sward, plough soil, spread and incorporatemedium/coarse sand, harrow and re-seedwith a site-specific seed mix (to STRIdesign).

Implement a written maintenance plan forsports pitches, to include verti-draining, sandtop-dress, feeding and selective herbicide.


14/33


July 2005

5.4 Landscape Strategy : Perimeter Road andService Areas

Establish a strong framework of specimen treesand hedging to visually and physically contain carparking. Remove existing damaged trees and

undertake thinning to re-space trees worthy ofretention.

Remove some car parking from the Chaplaincy toallow development of an appropriate setting tothis landmark building.

Provide new and widened pedestrian pathwaysaround the perimeter road and penetratingthrough service areas.

Rationalise the layout of service areas,concentrating tree planting only where viable,and creating a structure of hedges to separatedisparate uses

Introduce strengthened paving to junction corners,both to withstand damage and provide a setting forsignage.

Increase provision of secure sheltered cycle parkingbetween service areas and the pedestrian spineroute.

5.5 Landscape Strategy : Core Areas of ExistingCampus

Introduce planting to some of the paved courtyards.Planting to include climbers on masonry or wires,and especially on pillars of the covered walkways.

Selectively remove trees and large shrubs nolonger of appropriate scale or form for the smallspaces they occupy. Plant new specimens whereappropriate.

Introduce paving pattern through replacementof concrete slabs with new units in a simplecontrasting band and grid layout

Introduce break-out spaces for ofces, with semi-private character, utilising aspect and shelter ofthe buildings

Improve layout of ramped accesses to ensureDDA compliance

Enhance natural lighting of covered walkways,through replacement with transparent roof panels.Improve articial lighting.

Prioritise action using a heirarchy of routes: mainthoroughfares and squares, secondary connectionsto buildings, and functional alleyways not subjectto general use.

Introduce robust litter bins and seats throughoutthe campus; consider use of segregated bins toallow recyclables to be segregated at source.


15/33


July 2005

5.6 Landscape Strategy :Future Campus Developments

Create a second major pedestrian routelinking Alexandra Square to Pendle Collegeon an arc through Furness and Fylde

Colleges. Maintain the heirarchy of pedestrian routes

and gathering spaces, with an intimatepedestrian scale

Ensure high quality and coherence to hardand soft landscape, using a simple paletteof robust materials and a strong plantingstructure to enclose car parking (hedges,verges, avenue trees)

Integrate new and old with care, payingparticular attention to levels and nishesat the interfaces

Use a unied suite of furniture throughoutnew and existing external spaces (lightcolumns, seats, bins, bike stands andshelters)

Establish a new structure of woodlands tomaintain the campus character in the longterm

Initiate a procedure for design reviewand approval for all developments on thecampus. This will ensure that a commoncoherent strategy is applied to externalworks.

5.7 Landscape Strategy : Sustainability

SuDS on-site water management to reduceood impact, ensure water quality anddevelop valuable wetland habitat

Reduction of maintenance resources usedfor grass cutting

Promotion and provision of cycling facilitiesand a safe attractive pedestrian network

Use recycled aggregate, green-wastecompost, FSC sourced timber and materialwith low ENVEST score

Encouraging recycling through use ofsegregated bins

5.8 Whole Campus Landscape Masterplan(see A1 plan at 1:2500 scale)

5.9 Core Area Landscape Masterplan(see A1 plan at 1:1250 scale)


16/33


July 2005


17/33


July 2005


18/33


July 2005

6.0 Materials and Unit Costs

The palette of materials for the external works mustreect the need for robustness, attractiveness anddurability.

6.1 Hedge Planting Achieving visual order and physical separation of car

parking from footways and buildings is important;Beech hedging offers attractive year-round colourand solidity.

Prepared trench 750mm x 400mm depth, topsoil/compost backll and basal drainage

Metal post and wire fence 1.10m height to protecthedge during establishment

Planting stock to be 60-80cm bare root transplants,with thick collar, planted in triple staggered rows at

300mm centres. Composted ne bark mulch applied to 75mm depthover trench to control weeds

Where a mixed native hedge is more appropriate (eg.in the parkland landscape and site boundaries), plantdouble staggered rows at 400mm centres consistingof 40-60cm transplant Hawthorn, Blackthorn, Hazel,Guelder Rose and Dog-Rose. Vermin protection bytemporary mesh fencing may be required.

Establishment maintenance to include regular weeding,annual trim, fertiliser and watering as required

Beech hedge 21 per linear m Mixed hedge 14 per linear m Metal post and wire fence 30 per linear m

6.2 Avenue and Specimen Tree Planting New tree planting requires adequate space to grow

to maturity (both above and below ground) andthorough ground preparation.

Prepared pit 2.0 x 2.0 x 0.7m depth, topsoil/compostbackll, basal drainage and an aeration pipe aroundthe root-ball.

Timber stake and 2 ties, unless root-balled treesare used (when underground guying would be

preferable). Tree size to be 16-18cm or 18-20cm Semi Mature

specimen, minimum 2.2m clear stem to rst branch.Species to be Lime, Ash, Oak, Norway Maple, Pear,Birch.

Establishment maintenance to include regular weeding,light pruning, fertiliser and watering as required

16-18cm tree in pit 165 20-25cm tree in pit 300

6.3 Woodland Planting Forestry planting methods are economic and produce

dense cover of young trees within 5 years, providedweed control is adequate.

Ploughing to 450mm depth

40-60cm bare root transplant s planted at 1.50mcentres. Species to be Oak, Beech, Ash, Cherry, ScotsPine (container grown), Holly and Hazel

Timber post and wire fence 1.10m height with verminmesh erected around new planting areas.

Establishment maintenance to include regularweeding, fertiliser and watering as required

Preparation, planting and 1 year maintenance 1.25per m2

Timber post & wire fence 10 per m2


19/33


July 2005

6.4 Floral Meadow This is an alternative to rank grassland where maintenance

is awkward yet a vibrant display of ower colour is sought.It consists of native and non-native perennial meadowplants which produce a very long flowering season ofcomplimentary colours.

Existing grass sward killed with herbicide; prepare a cleanseed-bed

Sow Pictorial Meadow seed mix at specied rate Cut and remove arisings annually in Autumn 1.90 per m2

6.5 Groundcover planting This is proposed for small areas in the core adjacent to

buildings, paths and in courtyards. Evergreen, deciduous andherbaceous perennial planting designed to clothe the groundin foliage to prevent weed growth, with seasonal ower and

foliage effects and feature plants providing varied structure.Climbing plants to cloth walls and pillars introduce a verticaldimension that softens austere masonry.

Prepared bed with minimum 300mm depth of topsoil withcompost

Planting at centres down to 300mm according to plant habit;container grown 2Litre stock

Composted ne bark mulch applied to 75mm depth tocontrol weeds

Establishment maintenance to include regular weeding, lightpruning, fertiliser and watering as required, and mulch top-up

16 per m2

6.6 Ground Finish Concrete Slab Paving The use of a high quality slab with a smooth ground nish,

such as Marshalls Conservation Slab smooth ground, bringsseveral benets. Such paving is bright in appearance due tothe crystalline aggregate at the surface, has a smooth facethat cleans relatively easily, and is more durable than standardpressed concrete slabs.

Lift and remove existing slab surfaces and bedding layer Regulate sub-base to suit adjusted nish levels and paving

slab depth Lay slabs on sand/cement bedding to a grid pattern, with fully

grouted joints 600 x 600 x 50mm depth is suitable for pedestrian areas; if

vehicle over-run is envisaged, then 400 x 400 x 65mm depth isappropriate. Marshalls Conservation slab smooth ground.

Silver-grey slabs form the main areas, charcoal-grey for gridbands and column lines etc.

Unit rate 37 per m2

6.7 Concrete Sett & Cube Paving Paving of surface drainage channels, doorways and transitions

using cube setts allows exibility in shaping to ramps andawkward corners whilst forming a contrast with the slabnishes.

Lift and remove existing slab surfaces and bedding layer Regulate sub-base to suit adjusted nish levels and paving

slab depth Lay setts on sand/cement bedding to a grid or radial pattern,

to manufacturers recommendations Marshalls Tegula cube 80 x 80 x 60mm, colour pennant

grey Cast iron yard gullies to be installed, connecting to existing

drain spurs Unit rate 36 per m2


20/33


July 2005

6.8 Concrete Dimple Slab Paving For minor pedestrian alleys and paths away from

the main spine route, the use of a British Standardgrey concrete slab is appropriate. In many cases theexisting slabs in these locations are in acceptablecondition and do not require replacement.

Lift and remove existing slab surfaces and beddinglayer

Regulate sub-base to suit adjusted nish levels Lay slabs on sand/cement bedding to a grid pattern,

with fully grouted joints 600 x 600 x 63mm depth Where laid through grass areas, no kerb edging is

required; edges should be haunched Unit rate 22 per m2

6.9 Other Paving Types Footways to the perimeter road to be asphalt, which

is durable and capable of withstanding occasionalvehicle over-run:

30mm asphalt wearing course with white chippingsapplied, 40mm dense bitumen macadam base course ,150mm DoT Type 1 sub-base

50 x 150mm concrete pin kerb ush edging withconcrete foundation and haunch

Paving Unit rate 19 per m2 Pin kerb edging Unit rate 8 per linear m

In the college courtyards it is appropriate todevelop specic materials palettes, so that each hasa distinctive feel unique to that college. The classiccollege quadrangle form with cloistered pathsaround a central space lends itself to smaller unitpaving such as brick paviors, setts and cubes. Anintimate garden scale, with strong pattern to pathform and paving layout, adds a richness in detail notappropriate to the bustle of the main pedestrianthoroughfares.

6.10 Furniture Presently there are few bins and seats, of indifferent

quality and appearance. A co-ordinated rangeof simple and robust litter bins, seats and wherenecessary bollards is proposed. Stainless steeloffers durability, low maintenance and aestheticappeal; it dries rapidly and is easy to clean; for anoverwhelmingly young population it is sufcientlycomfortable and able to withstand unorthodox use(such as sitting on the back-rest with feet on the seat,horseplay etc). Double container litter bins allowcollection of litter and recycling (cans, glass, papers)

separately, provided that waste collection and storagefacilities are able to deal with such segregation. This islikely to become standard practice in large premisesin the future, and the University might benet f romthe pro-active image this conveys to its staff andstudents.

Stainless steel benches and seats with in-groundmounting e.g. MWH Object B500. Unit rate1,100

Stainless steel litter bins with in ground mountinge.g. MWH Object A170. Unit rate 900

Stainless steel bollards 1000mm x 140mm diametere.g. Broxap BX47 0140. Unit rate 250

L t U i it L d M t l


21/33


July 2005

6.11 Cycle StorageA good distribution of cycle storage across thecampus is necessary, otherwise bicycles will bechained to other xings and cause obstructionto pathways. Cycle storage facilities must offersecure xings, shelter, lighting and surveillance

(natural or electronic). For most users a hoopstand is adequate, but for overnight storagegreater security is desirable. Individual cyclelockers are one solution, lockable cycle storesare another. The design of cycle storage at thenew Infolab 21 should be used as a guide.

Stainless steel cycle hoop with in-groundmounting e.g. Broxap Harrogate. Unit rate160

Galvanised steel cycle locker e.g. Broxap SLH.Unit rate 650

Cycle shelter e.g. Vekso GVE. Unit rate3000

6.11 Lighting Currently the core areas of the campus are lit

mainly from building mounted ttings; lamp postsare used for the service yards, perimeter road andperipheral areas beyond. This approach shouldbe maintained to avoid clutter.

Replace light ttings with modern luminairesto improve efciency of lighting, correctingcolour balance and reducing light pollution

For the new pedestrian route, which hasa more open character, lamp-posts areappropriate; attractive modern design willensure these columns are positive featuresrather than municipal in form.

6.12 Covered Walkways The existing covered walkways perform a useful

function in protecting people from the weather,but are rather dark and dated in appearance.Given their age it is likely that wholesalemaintenance or replacement is due.

Replace solid conventional at roof with atransparent canopy to improve daylighting

Remove brick pillars, so that a much lightersteel structure is used and increased spaceis created below the canopies

Canopy material can be glass patent glazing,or alternatively tensioned fabric, which mightcomplement well the white roofscape ofthe original University buildings. Glazing has

a longer design life than alternatives: whiteglass-PTFE cloth gives a 30-tear designlife whilst clear polycarbonate only offersapproximate ly 10 years. Glazing would alsooffer ease of maintenance and replacabilityif damaged, and would complement the

orthogonal architectural style. For the quantity of canopy and variety ofxings (column mounted, building mounted,combined) it would be best to develop abespoke design in discussion with a suitablesupplier. Costs are approximate due to thebespoke nature of the canopies.

Removal of existing canopy at 20 per m2 Glass canopy unit rate 300 per m2 Fabric canopy unit rate 200 per m2 Polycarbonate canopy rate 80 per m2



22/33


July 2005

7.0 Implementation Schemes

7.1 The proposals constitute a large quantity of workin renewing the external fabric and consisting of a varietyof hard and soft landscape works. It is important that a

realistic subdivision of the masterplan is made, generatinga range of projects which can be implemented as stand-alone schemes. In this way rapid progress can be madeon lower cost items, nancial allowance planned for largerprojects, and a sense of progress engendered as schemesare completed. This part of the report deals with each ofthese proposed implementation schemes.

Where a scheme cost is given this includes unit rates,15% for Contractors preliminaries/general-conditions/contingency, and 8% design costs. Where the schemeconsists of several sites likely to be implemented separately

(e.g. service yard areas) and is therefore not fully dened,a guide to cost is given. Guide cost ranges are Low (upto 100,000), Medium (100,000 - 250,000) and High(> 250,000).

7.2 Design Review Committee

Cost : Nil A committee consisting of Estate Management, BuildingManagement, Landscape working group and groundsmaintenance staff, constituted to review and approve thedesign of all proposed developments which might impactupon the landscape masterplan. By acting as a hub fordesign information the committee will be able to ensureproper integration of all new developments with thecampus masterplan, and require appropriate standard ofnew external works. This is especially important whenconstruction projects are delivered by the Design & Build

route, and the mechanism for design review should bewritten into Contract documents for future projects.

It is recommended that the Design Review Committee beestablished at the earliest opportunity, and meetings be heldas required dependent on construction activity.

7.3 Woodland Management Cost : Annual budget of 10,000

A woodland management plan is included in the appendixof this report. It aims to improve woodland structure ,biodiversity and long-term health through a programme ofselective felling and re-planting. Control of rhododendronwill improve woodland regeneration and visual access(important for personal security). It is recommended thatthe woodland management work be put in hand; it canprogress at a low intensity on a perennial basis.



23/33


July 2005

7.4 Woodland Creation Cost : 34,00 0 prepar ation and plant ing

(6,200 available as grant) 13,000 fencing

New woodland planting is proposed to thickenplanting along the A6, to cover the slopes abovethe southern sports elds, and reinforce thenorthern and southern boundaries. Total areaof new woodland creation is approximately 2.70hectares (6.7 acres); it would replace existingmown and unmown grassland, thereby reducingmowing requirements. Preparation of theground by ripping and ploughing is necessary,and enclosure of woodland blocks with timberpost and wire fence. Woodland planting must beundertaken during the winter season Novemberto March. Funding assistance would be possiblethrough the Forestry Commission which offersWoodland Creation Grant to the value of 2,300per hectare where public access is encouraged.

7.5 Campus Landscape Maintenance Plan Cost : Saving

Drawing up a new maintenance regime willthrow light on where resources are currentlyspent, allowing review of cost/benet for eachmaintenance operation. It is important thatlandscape management on such a complex siteis formalised as a written document completewith clear plan drawings; this ensures consistencyeven when key staff are absent or move on. Highfrequency of grass mowing is very costly, and itis proposed that much larger areas of grass inthe parkland area be left un-mown during earlysummer (until mid-July); this is beneficial towildlife and provides an attractive seasonal showof owers.

7.6 Sports Field Remedials Cost : 48,000 per pitch

Undertake investigation of eld drainage undereach pitch to determine extent of siltation andwhether system requires replacement. If defunct,a new network of lateral field drains at 8mcentres will be required. Mole ploughing shouldbe undertaken to connect into laterals. A newcut-off drain is proposed running along the toe ofthe slopes above the pitches, to intercept seepagefrom groundwater before it enters the pitches.

This will need to be deep and can function as thecollector drain for pitch lateral drains.

Where pitches have deteriorated badly or aredisrupted by drainage works, the surface shouldbe renewed. Apply herbicide to sward, plough

soil, spread and incorporate medium/coarse sand,harrow and re-seed with a site-specic seed mix(to STRI design).

Implement a written maintenance plan for sportspitches, to include verti-draining, sand top-dress,feeding and selective herbicide. Develop astrategy for future growth of sports provision,including all-weather pitches and removal ofredundant facilities such as the bowling green toallow new uses.



24/33

y p p

July 2005

7.7 Sculpture Park and Thomas Mawson Garden Cost : Low

Development of the proposed new gallery andsculpture park is focussed on Lake Carter and

the Byre. In landscape terms it is intended tocreate a series of attractive settings for externalsculptures, with owing footpaths and a parklandaesthetic. Bailrigg House has a garden designedby Thomas Mawson, and offers the opportunityfor sculptures within an intimate garden setting.Renewal of the garden would restore lost featuresand planting style appropriate to the originaldesign.

7.8 Lake Carter Cost : 52,000

Excavation to enlarge and deepen Lake Cartertowards the east. doubling the water area. Depth

increased to 1.80m max. Marginal planting tonew edge. Topsoil stripped from area to beexcavated and from deposition site for subsoil;subsoil excavated and deposited in parkland ascarefully sculpted landform. Topsoil spread andgrass seed.



25/33

y

July 2005

7.8 Chaplaincy Cost : 33,000

Removal of car parking to the frontage, extensionof pedestrian paving and creation of a crossing

table over the road, removal of existing treegroup and thinning of retained trees, hedge andfence to surround rear gardens, new footpaths,new seating and planting of garden space. Thiswork will provide an appropriate setting to thelandmark building of Lancaster University. It willinvolve re-organisation of visitor car parkingfacilities; staff car parking will need to be relocatedelsewhere as required. As part of this localredesign of visitor entry to the University, thepedestrian entry to Alexandra Square should beopened up and generous pedestrian pavementprovided to link to the Chaplaincy. As a wholethis scheme is small scale, discreet and relativelyeasy to implement.

7.9 Perimeter RoadCost : High

Typically this will involve creation of new/widenedpedestrian footways (asphalt surface minimum2.0m width), lines of semi-mature trees in grassverge, beech hedging parallel to paths, andreinforcement of junction corners with cubepaving into which signs etc are placed. Where

vulnerable services are near, root barriersshould be included to avoid conict. A conditionsurvey of existing trees will guide removal andretention, many of the trees appearing in poorlong-term health. Thinning of retained treesshould be undertaken to double the spacing. Forthe perimeter road itself a one-way circulationshould be considered; this would operate as 2clockwise one-way cells, to north and south of theunderpass road, thereby reducing vehicle conicton the narrow roads.



26/33

July 2005

7.10 Service Areas Cost : Medium

As with the perimeter road, this will involvecreation of new/widened pedestrian footways

(asphalt surface minimum 2.0m width), lines ofsemi-mature trees in grass verge, beech hedgingparallel to paths, and reinforcement of junctioncorners with cube paving into which signs etcare placed. Where vulnerable services arenear, root barriers should be included to avoidconict. A condition survey of existing trees willguide removal and retention, many of the treesappearing in poor long-term health. Thinningof retained trees should be undertaken todouble the spacing. Other works proposed arere-grading of verges to reduce slopes, plantingof groundcover shrubs to clothe slopes andprovision of an adequate gravel/paved margin tobuildings to assist maintenance of planting andgrass.



27/33

July 2005

7.11 Pedestrian Spine Paving Cost : 352,000

Replacement of paving along the main pedestrianroute through the University core. Total area

of work for the primary route with limitedconnecting spurs is 6,500 m2. Smooth groundconcrete slabs generally, with small unit blocksto drain channels, door ingoes and awkwardcorners.

Careful phasing of works will be necessary dueto the heavy pedestrian trafc and limited scopefor diversions; key sections should be undertakenduring vacation periods.

7.12 Covered Walkway Canopies Cost : 250,000 - 600,000 (depend ing on

material)

Removal of existing canopies and columns alongthe length of the primary pedestrian spine(excluding more recent canopies at Grizedaleand Pendle), replacing with patent glazed canopyand modern steel frame. Total length 600m ataverage 4m width.

This work should accompany renewal of thepaving to have maximum impact and minimaldisruption.



28/33

July 2005

7.13 Alexandra Square Cost : 228,000

Replacement of paving throughout the mainpublic space on campus. Paving is generally in

reasonable condition and therefore this is less apriority than other paving works. Total area ofwork is 3700 m2. Smooth ground concrete slabsgenerally, using a strong pattern of contrastingsilver-grey and charcoal-grey slabs in the mannerof the existing d iagonal grid, orthogonal bandingaround the peripheral covered arcade. Small unitblocks to be used along the line of arcade columnsat the transition between the two grids.

Existing trees to be retained, but paving beneathto be removed due to root heave damage.Construct new surface of porous bound gravelto allow healthy root growth with a kerb upstandedge.

Existing disabled ramp and wing walls to beremoved; replace with a light-weight steel rampextending into the square as a feature, at a moreshallow gradient (1:20 ideally, however 1:15 maybe more reasonable due to space constraints.

7.14 College Quadrangles Cost : Low

Lonsdale, Bowland, Furness and Fylde Collegescontain very austere quadrangles. Each can bedealt with as a separate project, as funds allow.

Lonsdale and Bowland each have 2 quads ofidentical proportions, one hard and one soft.Introducing planting and lawns to the paved quads,and replacing paving with more distinctive slabsor brick paviors, will distinguish these spaces andexploit their attractive scale.

Furness and Fylde courtyards are bleak and hard.

Renewal of paving with quality slabs to introducestrong pattern, introduction of small planting bedswith shrubs and climbers, and the use of betterlighting and paint nishes will all help. The fountainin Furness courtyard should be repaired. Formingcomfortable connections to the new buildingsbeyond will be key to making these courtyardsattractive.



29/33

July 2005

7.15 New Crescent Street Cost : Medium/High

A secondary pedestrian route which links throughthe new college developments and provides a

bypass to the main spine route.Paving should be capable of taking occasionalvehicles; a block paving such as Marshalls Tegula240 x 160 x 60mm for the main path, with smoothground slabs for the gathering spaces along theroute and at building entrances. Semi-matureavenue trees reinforce the crescent form, withorthogonal groups at the nodes where pavingexpands.

Vehicle crossings to be by raised table with pavingcontinued over. Lighting of the route by lampcolumns of a contemporary design. Small lawnspaces, dened by hedging or buildings, ank theroute and contain seating.

7.16 Furniture and Bicycle Storage Cost : 75,000 for seats and bins (30) 13,000 per cycle store location (40 bicycles)

Provision of seating and litter bins throughoutthe core external spaces, of a complimentarydesign.

Bicycle storage requires shelter, lighting andgood surveillance. New facilities are proposedat key entry points to the core area and at

college courtyards . These locations are atThe Great Hall, Chaplaincy, Grizedale Avenue,Library Avenue, Sports Centre, County Avenue,Physics Avenue and Tower Avenue; replacementand additional cycle stands are proposed forbeneath existing canopies/buildings at Bowland,

Lonsdale, Furness and Fylde. Numbers of standsshould be calculated pro-rata on the number ofstudents in each college; secure enclosures shouldbe considered where nocturnal surveillance isinadequate.

A simple Shefeld hoop stand or toast-rackmultiple stand of stainless steel is recommendedfor most areas. Where no existing canopyor building offers shelter, an off-the-shelfcanopy should be specied. Cycle lockers arerecommended.



30/33

July 2005

8.0 Priorities

8.1 With such a range of projects proposed it is vitalthat the University decides on where prioritieslie. Some proposals are simple to implement andinvolve minimal cost, whilst others are complex,requiring extensive planning and causing greatdisruption and considerable cost. Availability offunding will to some extent drive the order inwhich projects are undertaken, but it is helpful todene a list in order of priority that has a balanceof low and high cost schemes at various stages.

8.2 The University will wish to see rapid progress onthe ground as a sign of action and encouragement.This is best suited to projects requiring limitedpreparation time and budget, whereby existingfunds can be rapidly allocated. Complex projectswill take time to prepare and gain fundingallocations, and so are suited to longer termdelivery.

8.3 Several of the schemes proposed depend uponpiecemeal implementation as new buildingdevelopments are constructed (e.g. service areasand perimeter road improvements to the south-east of the core area). This is where DesignReview becomes key; with good planning thesedevelopments should include completion of thelandscape improvement scheme.

8.4 The table below provides a prioritised list of thevarious proposals, with indication of relative cost,and forms the Action Plan for implementationof the Landscape Masterplan.

Project Priority Cost Notes

Design Review Process 1 nil Management procedure change

Woodland Management 1 Low Low intensity ongoing work

Woodland Creation 1 Low Low complexity; grant aided

Grass Maintenance 1 nil Management procedures

Sports Field Renewal 1 Medium Coupled with expansion of all-weath-er pitch capacity

Lake Carter 2 Low Links to Sculpture Park project

Chaplaincy 2 Low Potential early headline project

Perimeter Road 2 High Incremental and linked to new build-ing developments

Service Areas 2 Medium Incremental and linked to new build-ing developments

Pedestrian Spine 3 High Careful phasing required

Covered Walkway Canopies 3 High Phased with paving works

Alexandra Square 4 High Disabled ramp a higher priority

College quadrangles 3 Low Incremental

New pedestrian crescent 3 Medium To form part of new developments

Furniture & Bicycle Storage 2 Low Renewal and additional

Costs: Low = 250k

Priority: 1 = urgent 2 = short term (1-3 years) 3 = medium term (3-5 years) 4 = long term (>5 years)

9.0 Conclusion

9.1 The new Landscape Masterplan provides atemplate for renewal of the external spacesof Lancaster University campus. It will allow

for improved functioning of spaces, quality ofexperience and life-cycle costs. Developing anew coherence to the external face of the sitewill present a positive image of the Universityand better reect the qualities on offer withinits walls.

9.2 The Action Plan can be used as the basis forincremental planning and implementation of theLandscape Masterplan. It will be a long term

process likely to last ten years or more, thereforeachievement of interim targets is very importantto maintain impetus and interest. The ActionPlan allows long term nancial planning for theimprovement works.

9.3 The University should promote the landscapemasterplan as a design brief for furtherdevelopments in order that new buildings andhighway works respect its aims and include for

completion of a coherent landscape of high qualityon new development sites. Design review by theUniversity is vital in achieving the aims of the

landscape masterplan

9.4 The University should ensure that landscapemaintenance resources are kept at a level whichallows proper maintenance of the new landscapemasterplan. The effects of relatively smallreductions in budget can be disproportionatelylarge in landscape management, due to the highvisibility of external works and the capacity forplanting to change with management processes.

Lancaster University Landscape Masterplan APPENDIX


31/33

July 2005

ANNUAL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCESPECIFICATION

Specication to apply to all new works for the rst 3years of establishment

Woodland Planting8 weed visits2 rm ups1 fertiliser application

Native Hedgerows8 weed visits2 rm ups1 fertiliser application1 trim to top and sides

Beech & Yew Hedgerows8 weed visits2 rm ups1 fertiliser application1 trim to top and sides1 bark mulch top-up

Parkland, Specimen & Avenue Trees8 checks to guying/ties8 weed visits1 fertiliser application1 pruning to shape2 visits for fork aeration of soil surface1 bark mulch top-up

6 visits to water thoroughly

Sports Field Grass18 cuts to grass (35mm summer, 75mm winter)2 fertiliser applications1 liquid organic fertiliser application8 spike aerations to 150mm depth at 150mm centres1 vertidrain to 150mm depth at 150mm centres8 light chain harrows or scarier1 selective herbicideSeasonal marking set out from permanent bench marks

Lawn and Amenity Grass16 cuts and trim to edges2 slow release fertiliser applications1 organic fertiliser application1 spike aeration to 150mm depth at 150mm centres1 vertidrain to 150mm depth at 150mm centres1 edging with iron1 selective herbicide only if required

Meadow Grass

1 cut in Autumn, removing arisings1 spot weed treatment to remove pernicious weeds

Wet Meadow within swales and at pond edges1 ail/strim cut in late winter, removing arisings1 spot weed treatment to remove pernicious weeds

Aquatic Marginal & Reedbed Planting2 visits to rm plants1 visit to regulate and top-up grit margin to 50mmdepth

Groundcover Planting8 weed visits1 prune (seasonal) for compactness1 fertiliser application1 fork aeration of soil1 bark mulch top-up

WOODLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN

All woodland management works to be undertakenin the appropriate season and in accordance with BS3998 Recommendations For Tree Work. Works shallbe undertaken by personnel with certied training intechniques and machinery required for the tasks.

Woodland management is a continuous gradual process;care should be taken to avoid excessive felling workswhich may cause unsightly disturbance and increase

vulnerability to windthrow.

Mature Woodland (1850) of mixed native broad-leaves and Austrian Pine

Aim to maintain habitat value and long-term retention:

Selective removal of self-sown Sycamore andpoor specimens to make gaps

Interplanting of native broadleaved trees andshrubs (Oak, Ash, Beech, Holly and Hazel), withAustrian Pine in selected areas

Coppice tall shrubs along woodland edges andinterplant with Hawthorn and Hazel Clear and herbicide treat Rhododendron from

woodland edges and through accessed areas;retain cover along boundary with motorway.

Chip arisings for use developing campus run-ning paths

Remove dangerous dead wood overhangingpaths and buildings

Younger plantations (1965) consisting of Beech,Alder, Sycamore & Norway Maple

Aim to enhance habitat value and replace pioneer spe-cies with native forest tree species:

Selective thinning to favour retention of Beech,Oak and Norway Maple, removing 33-50% overa ve year period

Interplanting with Oak, Beech and Cherry innew gaps

Underplanting with native woodland shrubsHolly, Hazel and Lonicera

Chip arisings for use developing campus run-ning paths

Younger plantations (1965) consisting chiey of White Poplar, Beech and Sycamore

Aim to enhance habitat value and replace pioneer spe-cies with native forest tree species:

Selective thinning to favour retention of Beech,Oak and Norway Maple, removing 33-50% overa ve year period especially Poplar, Willow andAlder

Interplanting with Oak, Beech and Cherry innew gaps

Underplanting with native woodland shrubsHolly, Hazel and Lonicera

Chip arisings for use developing campus run-

ning paths Thinning to remove pioneer species Poplar,

Alder and Willow



32/33

July 2005



33/33

July 2005

1388 m.plan Report to Present

Documents

Transcript of 1388 m.plan Report to Present