Master Plan for Galbreath Wildlands Facilities

But I absolutely believe that architecture is a social activity that has to do with some sort of communication or places of interaction, and that to change the environment is to change behaviour. - Thom Mayne

drawing of tree and computer evoking the goals for the facilitiesphotos from facility site taped to a large arial photocharette participants in the field

The Galbreath Preserve is our diamond in the rough - 3,600 acres of diverse and inspirational lands without the overnight facilities needed for students and faculty to fully engage in research, education and interactions with the local community. We envision a suite of zero carbon emission facilities that will enhance interactions of persons conducting research and educational activities on site.

The planning process for the facilities creates a unique opportunity for the Center to work with local communities and create opportunties for student scholarship and training. This project will complete three initial steps in the development of the Galbreath Faciltities.

  1. Identify how facilities and associated infrastructure can best be sited to avoid sensitive or unstable areas (i.e., initial CEQA, cultural resources, and geotechnical scoping).
  2. Create a Conceptual Master Plan that provides design, construction footprints, cost estimates for the full-complement of stand-alone facilities needed to promote research and educational programs.
  3. Draft conceptual drawings needed for further fundraising for the project

Project Lead(s):Claudia Luke (Center for Environmental Inquiry); Christopher Dinno and Nora Hild (SSU Facilities & Planning)

Dates: Winter 2011 to present

Scholarship: student assistantships, service-learning

Course(s): ANTH 569b: Internship in Cultural Resources Management (as part of initial CEQA documentation)

Funding: Bob and Sue Johnson

Faculty & Staff:  Facility charrette participants included Scott Severson (Astronomy & Physics); Derek Girman (Biology); Kate Erickson (Anthopological Studies Center); Farid Farahmand (Engineering), Greg Roberts (Art), Michelle Covington (Development). Additional faculty and staff were engaged as part of a separate campus-wide event to provide input on facility goals.

Students: Matthew Thompson (ITDS); Kristi Yost (Computer Science/Math); Stacey Zolnoski (Anthropology); Neal Ramus (Business); Emily Harvey (Biology); Kandis Gilmore (Biology); Linden Schneider (Biology); Christoph Schopfer (Geography); James Sherwood (Geography)

Partners: SSU Facilities and Planning, Bob Johnson Family; School of Social Sciences, School of Science & Technology; School of Arts & Humanities, School of Business & Economics; Jasper Ridge Biological Field Station; Yorkville Community Members, SSU Development Office; Academic Affairs

Contractors: RIM Architects (lead)

The Galbreath Preserve facility planning process is a unique opportunity to create scholarship opportunities for our students and engage our local communities. In addition to the planning charette coordinated with our architects, we hosted campus-wide and community-wide workshops to solicit ideas and input from faculty, staff, students, and local communities. Students are engaged both in charette planning and as part of environmental surveys and permitting required for facility construction. This work included the Galbreath Special Status Species Assessment project, a project that created a long-term management guidance document for 110 special status species with potential to occur on the Preserve, and archaeological surveys conducted as part of service-learning course work and student asssitantships. All aspects of planning for the Galbreath facilities are being conducted with SSU Facilities and Planning.

Charette Report: The report summarizes the ideas that were brainstormed as part of the RIM Architects charette.

Report of Findings - The report compiles initial information on: (1) programs to be undertaken at the facilities; (2) types of services and level of comfort needed; (3) applicable codes, such as zoning and accessibility; (4) biophysical characteristics (i.e. solar exposure, soil composition, plants and wildlife), (5) available services and utilities; (6) local conditions, such as access, and their impact on construction.

Master Plan: - pending