The University of Oregon's current planning processes (as articulated in the Campus Plan of 2005) are based on principles adopted by the University in 1974. The principles have come to be known as "The Oregon Experiment" and are also the subject of a book of the same name by Christopher Alexander of The Center for Environmental Structure in Berkeley California.

The Oregon Experiment approach was based on the University's desire to develop a planning method that met three goals as it guided growth and change:

1. that the solution be a process and not just a map; 2. that the process honor and strengthen the University's tradition of meaningful consultation with students, faculty, and staff; and 3. that the plan provide for continuous adjustment of campus facilities in response to changing educational policies and programs.

The principal characteristic of the Oregon Experiment approach is the establishment of a process for making development decisions on an ongoing basis as a replacement for the static "fixed image" master plan. This concept acknowledges the fact that although change will occur, the exact nature and magnitude of that change cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty, and that object oriented plans based on explicit assumptions about the future become outdated as that "future" becomes known. The adoption of the Oregon Experiment approach resulted in the establishment of six fundamental principles that guide our planning processes today.

1. Organic Order: The Campus emerges through a process, not from a map.

This principle suggests that development of the campus should be guided by explicitly debated and approved basic policies (or "patterns") that articulate shared traditions and understandings of the University community, rather than a "fixed image" master plan (the dreaded map). This principle developed largely in response to the notion that "fixed image" plans could not reflect or adapt to changes in community values, expectations, or goals as effectively as could stated policies.

2. Incremental Growth: Development occurs in large and small pieces.

This principle acknowledges that development of the campus occurs gradually over time and that although there will be need for large projects from time to time, available funds ought to be distributed in a way that allows for continuous care and improvement of the entire campus.

3. Patterns: Shared design statements guide the planning process.

Patterns are design statements that describe and analyze development related issues and suggest ways in which those issues might be resolved. This principle, which is perhaps the most famous, largely because of Alexander's book A Pattern Language, calls for the establishment of patterns that articulate commonly held values as they pertain to the campus environment. (We often refer to patterns as "policy statements," a term that seems to be more easily understood.)

4. Diagnosis: Assessing existing conditions informs ongoing improvements.

This principle calls for a periodic analysis of the campus to provide a general context for implementing new projects. Because the University has not been able to provide staff for regular diagnoses, they are performed in conjunction with the early planning stages of new projects.

5. Participation: User involvement must prevail throughout the planning process.

The virtual cornerstone for the entire planning process is the notion that the people most directly affected by the results of development are best equipped to guide it and should be directly involved in its planning. This concept, which seemed radical in 1975, has now become more of the norm than the exception in planning efforts everywhere.

6. Coordination: Working together benefits the campus as a whole.

This principle recognizes that the University as a whole has a wide range of interests to be considered and that separate development activities must be coordinated. The Campus Planning Committee serves as the coordinating agent. It makes recommendations to the President on the acceptance of all projects and also serves as advisory to the President and to the Planning Office staff on policy issues relating to transportation, design, and other campus-wide development activities. The Campus Planning Committee has the authority to recommend approval of a project that violates the letter but not the spirit of any one policy, and thus serves as a sort of continuous monitor of the health of those policies.

The Campus Plan guides the development of individual projects on the campus within the intent of these principles. The document provides for the principle of Organic Order in the way it prescribes planning efforts. It lists the Patterns which are most important to the campus. Its procedures dictate the use of Participation on individual projects and call for Coordination through the review of all projects by the Campus Planning Committee. Incremental Growth and Diagnosis are principles that each individual project must accommodate.

Because of the modest size of the campus, our planning efforts are mostly spent on the implementation of specific projects rather than the refinement of the Campus Plan itself. The management of the process takes some effort, but we have found the results--both in terms of the flexibility gained and the buildings produced--to be worthwhile.