As new construction projects evolve and continue to develop on campus, the construction master plan adopted by the university board of trustees may not be referred to as often one might believe.

With the possibility of plan changes existing, it is only revisited to see if “the thinking is still the same as it was when (the plan) was put together,” said Stephen Shrake, director of physical plant.

Shrake said the master plan was developed to serve as a guideline not a schedule followed on a consistent basis.

“There is not a schedule (concerning the construction),” he said.

Shrake said the master plan depicts the proposed campus 10 years from now. He said it was based upon maintaining its current number of students and upgrading it to meet the university’s needs.

“The master plan provides us with a big picture view of campus, is a set of decision making tools, an analytical information base for decision-making and suggests phasing to accomplish the work,” said Carol Strode, interim director for facilities and management.

When the master plan is referred to it is revisited by the facilities planning and management department to see if it is in line, Shrake said. One of the highest priorities identified on the plan was the phasing construction work on the fine arts facility, he said.

Strode said not only does the plan include guidelines for construction, but also dreams the university has involving it.

“The guiding principles of the plan is plan for the dream, not the limitations,” Strode said.