Texas A&M University 2017 Campus Master Plan
Expanding the definition of campus heritage
At Texas A&M University, history doesn’t just live in the buildings—it defines the place. When the institution set out to develop the 2017 Campus Master Plan, it had the foresight to bring a deeper lens to the physical legacy of its campus. Treanor’s Historic Preservation team was engaged to lead the preservation strategy, expanding the traditional boundaries of what the university chooses to honor and how it does it.
The result was a more inclusive, thoughtful plan that guides smart stewardship more grounded in preservation outcomes. It tells a richer story of the university’s architectural heritage while positioning it for a functional and flexible future.
Elevating the preservation conversation
Three previous efforts to identify historic buildings on the campus resulted in conflicting lists of early campus structures. Working closely with the university architect and planning team, Treanor looked holistically at the campus to identify the structures that define Texas A&M’s sense of place. Many of those were obvious: early campus structures, or iconic buildings long considered part of the university’s DNA. But the team expanded the traditional historic narrative to include lesser-known buildings and overlooked eras, most notably the university’s post-WWII growth and the outdoor spaces that provide context for the buildings and campus traditions.
Treanor’s team conducted a comprehensive campus-wide analysis of buildings and outdoor spaces constructed before 1975. This involved observational surveys, plan comparisons, and a study of architectural significance across decades. In doing so, they surfaced an important layer of mid-century modern architecture previously absent from the university’s preservation strategy. These mid-century academic buildings, often overlooked in campus planning, represent a pivotal era of institutional growth, architectural experimentation, and educational evolution. Additionally, open spaces and view corridors were identified; these spaces strengthen the unique character and identity of the campus. With this plan, Texas A&M formally recognized the value of those buildings.
To guide future decisions for the buildings, Treanor introduced a four-tiered classification system and identified emerging historic buildings with a watch list.
- Heritage buildings – high-priority resources with exceptional architectural or historical importance.
- Historic buildings – buildings that contribute significantly to the campus identity.
- Secondary buildings – of moderate value but still worth consideration.
- Non-contributing buildings – not historically significant.
- Watch list – buildings that will soon become historic due to age.
This structure allowed the university to plan with clarity and intention. It also broadened the lens, elevating previously unsung buildings and helping stakeholders recognize long-term value in overlooked campus assets that might otherwise be lost.
Preserving interiors, a first for Texas campuses
One of the most groundbreaking outcomes of the 2017 update was the formal inclusion of building interiors within the historic preservation framework. This marked the first time any campus master plan in Texas incorporated interior spaces into preservation planning.
Historically, preservation on campuses has focused almost entirely on exteriors and facades. Treanor challenged this convention by advocating for a holistic approach that acknowledged the full sensory experience of a historic place. From terrazzo flooring and original woodwork to stairwells, light fixtures, and spatial configurations, the team documented character-defining elements inside key buildings and proposed a framework for their future care.
Treanor also authored new preservation guidelines tailored to Texas A&M’s context. These addressed:
- Sensitive integration of accessibility features
- Placement of modern systems such as HVAC and data infrastructure
- Long-term maintenance considerations
- Design review protocols for renovations involving historic buildings
By providing a clear process, the team equipped the university with a toolkit that balanced preservation with practicality. It supported modernization without compromising integrity.
Materials that define legacy
The materials used across campus tell their own story. Early academic buildings at Texas A&M featured brick masonry with cast stone and limestone detailing, a vocabulary of durability and distinction that reflected the institution’s roots. These finishes, hallmarks of architect Frederick Giesecke’s era, remain central to the university’s identity.
Treanor’s survey captured these original materials while also highlighting shifts in architectural expression during the university’s expansion. Concrete and steel, common in the postwar academic buildings reviewed during the survey, symbolized progress and performance. Their presence marked a deliberate move toward modernization that still deserves recognition in today’s planning.
Rather than treat mid-century materials as liabilities, Treanor framed them as markers of an evolving legacy. The resulting guidelines emphasized adaptation over replacement and encouraged working with historic and existing materials rather than replacing them.
Smarter architecture through preservation
This was not a plan that boxed buildings into the past. It was a plan that brought context to the present and guidance for what’s next.
Treanor’s strategy aligned with the university’s vision. Preservation was treated not as a constraint but as a catalyst, supporting flexible use, easing long-term maintenance, and guiding updates that respect what makes each building distinct. The firm’s work reinforced the value of the existing campus fabric while allowing for growth that strengthens identity and enhances usability.
Key planning insights included:
- Protection of historic view corridors and landscapes as integral parts of place
- Preservation strategies aligned with sustainability and long-range capital planning
- Advocacy for adaptive reuse as a financially responsible and character-respecting approach
Project contacts
Related projects
