Contextual Integration in Urban Campus Design Towards the Development of a Design Framework

The design and spatial configuration of campuses are important in allowing the
contextual integration between campuses and cities. Such integration allows the campus
to meet current needs and demands by sharing facilities with larger communities.
However, design approaches to campus physical development tend to prioritize
‘exclusivity’ intended to promote a safer campus environment. These designs have
faced criticism that universities in the 21st century should be physically integrated with
adjacent contexts to develop closer relationships with surrounding communities,
particularly in urban contexts. Campus layout, buildings and landscape are perceived as
the main physical characteristics of campus design. Therefore, it is critical to evaluate
these physical characteristics through a contextual design approach to ensure the
campus is more visible and inviting to the surrounding communities while
simultaneously maintaining a safe environment. Using a combination of Symbiosis
Theory and Integrative Theory of Urban Design, this research is to answer why the
physical design characteristics of Malaysian campuses are non-contextual integration
with its surroundings. The aim is to establish the reasons for non-contextual integration
from the perspective of universities towards developing a design framework for
contextual integration between Malaysian campuses and its surroundings. Twenty
Malaysian Public Universities (MPUs) were evaluated to develop a campus-city
typology. It was discovered that eighteen MPUs were classified as ‘contain’ typology
of gated campuses within the city context. Using the qualitative method of multiple case
studies, three MPUs with different integration opportunities were chosen to represent
this typology. Visual surveys, field observations for activity, semi-structured
interviews, document reviews and structured interviews with experts were the
techniques used for data collection. The data were analyzed using morphological
analysis, content analysis and thematic analysis. The results indicate that the design of
MPUs prioritized campus territoriality and fences along campus borders, resulting in a
disregard for the external context, particularly at the zone of the integration-interface
on campus edges. The primary reason for non-contextual integration relates to the
university's intention to control access with concerns for safety. Physical development
funding, university leadership and management and external constraints are other
related reasons. It is important to prioritize good campus forms that respond to context
and facilitate easy access in a legible environment. This also includes enhancing various
activities and cultivating a comfortable environment to increase physical integration and
ensure safety through natural surveillance. Providing ‘campus soft edges’ that serve as
a transition from public to private spaces is a significant design approach for MPUs to
allow unrestricted access for enhanced contextual integration. These findings contribute
to filling in the gaps of the contextual approach in campus design and establish four
levels of Contextual Integration Scales, (i) context of a single building in relation to its
adjacent spaces, (ii) the context of groups of buildings in relation to the space
connecting them, (iii) context of the entire campus masterplan, and ultimately (iv)
context of the campus in relation to its adjacent sites. Accordingly, this research
emphasizes the significance of contextual integration at different scales to achieve
satisfactory physical integration between campuses and cities.