How a Big-Ten university built a campus family-plaza splash pad designed by its landscape architecture program
A composite case study of a flagship public-research university opening a 4,400-square-foot splash pad to serve student-parent families, faculty households, and weekend campus visitors — designed as a graduate-studio capstone.
Summary
A flagship public-research university opened a $980,000 campus family-plaza splash pad designed by its Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA) graduate studio, funded through student-parent fee allocation, auxiliary services capital, and a regional health-system sponsorship. First-summer use logged about 41,000 visits across an extended 10am–10pm season, primarily from graduate-student parents, faculty households, and visiting families on game weekends. The studio-led design has become an MLA recruiting asset and a template for two regional campus partners.
Key metrics
Background: a campus with growing student-parent population
The University Family Plaza Splash Pad anchors a composite Big-Ten flagship public-research campus where roughly 11% of graduate students and 6% of professional-school students are parents of children under 12. For more than a decade, the student-parent advocacy group on campus had pressed the administration for a family-friendly outdoor amenity that was free, walkable from graduate housing, and operable into the early evening to fit the rhythm of dual-career graduate-student parents. The campus had two pools (one varsity-only, one indoor recreation), a fitness complex with a non-aquatic family room, and a series of quads that were programmed primarily for traditional undergraduate use. None of these spaces met the student-parent group's stated needs. By 2023, the convergence of three factors — a new university president with an explicit family-friendly campus initiative, a dean of student affairs who had grown up using municipal splash pads, and a graduate landscape-architecture program looking for a real-stakes capstone project — opened the political and design window for the project.
Funding model: student-parent fee, auxiliary capital, and health-system sponsorship
The $980,000 construction budget came together through a deliberately academic-friendly stack. The first $360,000 came from a small student-parent fee assessment that had been quietly accumulating in a restricted account for nearly a decade with no project to apply against; the assessment was $14 per semester for graduate and professional students who self-identified as parents, opt-in only, and the accumulated balance had grown large enough to anchor a real project. The second $420,000 came from auxiliary services capital — the same fund that builds residence halls and dining facilities — justified under a 'family-housing amenity' line and tied formally to the graduate housing complex 600 feet away. The final $200,000 came from a regional health-system sponsorship, in exchange for naming rights on a small permanent shade pavilion (not the pad itself) and a partnership on summer pediatric heat-illness prevention messaging. The blended stack helped the project survive a contested faculty-senate budget hearing where one committee member questioned whether a splash pad was an academic priority; the answer, repeatedly, was that the project used zero general-fund dollars.
Design choices: an MLA graduate studio capstone
The single distinguishing feature of this project was the design pathway. Rather than competitively bidding to a regional aquatic-design firm, the university partnered with its Master of Landscape Architecture program to make the pad's schematic and design-development phase a year-long graduate-studio capstone. Twelve MLA students worked in three teams under faculty supervision, with a licensed landscape architect and a licensed civil engineer formally on contract as the engineer-of-record for stamp-and-seal compliance. The studio produced three competing schemes; the campus advisory committee selected a hybrid that combined the strongest features of two schemes, including a 'campus-tree canopy' theme that referenced the university's most iconic mature elm, a four-zone progression (toddler grove, family activity zone, older-kid arch run, and a quiet sensory area), and an integrated outdoor classroom space adjacent to the pad that doubled as event and lecture seating. Construction documents and final engineering went to the licensed firm of record, but the design DNA came from the studio.
The 10am–10pm season decision and lighting design
Most municipal splash pads close at sunset for safety and operational reasons. The university campus had a different set of constraints — graduate-student-parent schedules pushed real family time into 6pm–9pm, summer evening campus events at the adjacent outdoor amphitheater drew crowds until 10pm, and the campus's existing path-lighting infrastructure already extended to the project site. The MLA studio proposed a 10am–10pm operating window from May through early October with a lighting design that included pathway-grade ambient lighting around the pad perimeter, accent uplighting on the shade-pavilion structure, and intentionally no in-pad lighting (a design choice driven by water-quality and UV-treatment constraints). The extended evening hours required a small additional staffing investment — one pad attendant on shift until 10pm Wednesday through Sunday — but unlocked a usage pattern that pure-municipal pads cannot replicate. The first-summer evening hours (6pm–10pm) accounted for roughly 38% of total attendance.
Construction timeline: an academic calendar constraint
The project ran on a deliberately compressed academic-calendar timeline. Studio design ran fall 2023 through spring 2024. Final construction documents and licensed-firm engineering ran summer 2024. Bid award and procurement ran fall 2024. Construction ran December 2024 through May 2025, with the pad opening on May 19, 2025 — five days before the start of summer session. The single biggest schedule risk was the academic calendar's incompatibility with traditional construction sequencing: the contractor needed continuous site access during a period that included winter break, spring commencement, and summer-session move-in. The campus capital projects office negotiated dedicated logistics windows and a graduated 'noise schedule' that protected adjacent academic buildings during finals weeks. Despite the constraints, the project came in three weeks ahead of schedule and approximately $40,000 under the construction budget.
Operating costs and the auxiliary services labor model
Year-one operating costs settled at approximately $68,000, broken down as $13,000 water and sewer, $7,000 chemistry, $11,000 electricity (extended evening operating hours plus continuous filtration), $24,000 in pad-attendant labor (two attendants on rotating Wednesday–Sunday shifts including the 6pm–10pm evening coverage), $7,000 supplies and minor repairs, and $6,000 insurance and risk-pool allocation. The labor model was the key operational innovation: pad attendants were hired through the university's auxiliary services student-employment program, with preference for student-parent applicants and graduate students in family-studies or public-health programs who could integrate the role with their academic interests. The result was a workforce that brought higher-than-typical engagement with families and a meaningful pipeline of student-parent leaders, two of whom subsequently joined the university's family-friendly campus advisory committee.
Game-weekend visitor surge and the campus visitor strategy
The campus splash pad drew an unexpected secondary user base: visiting families on football game weekends. On home-game Saturdays, the pad recorded usage spikes 3–4x the typical Saturday baseline, with families visibly using the pad as a pre-game cool-down and a post-game wind-down for younger children whose attention could not quite span four quarters. The campus auxiliary services group eventually formalized a 'family game day' marketing track that bundled the splash pad with the campus museum's free family programming, a children's-menu lunch at the union, and a stroller-friendly walking route between key game-day destinations. Game-day visitor families were also disproportionately likely to be alumni households, which created a development-office angle the university's advancement team began exploring through targeted family-program email outreach.
Lessons learned and the MLA studio model as a template
Three lessons stood out. First, the MLA studio design pathway produced a more contextually-fitted design than a competitive RFP would have, at meaningfully lower design fees, while doubling as a recruiting and curricular asset for the landscape-architecture program. Two of the twelve studio students subsequently received job offers directly tied to portfolio work on the project. Second, the extended 10am–10pm season is uniquely possible on a campus with existing path-lighting infrastructure and a population whose family-time rhythm pushes into the evening; municipal pads should not assume the same window will work for them. Third, the auxiliary-services student-employment labor model produced higher-engagement attendants than a standard seasonal hire, and the model is replicable at any campus with student-parent populations and an auxiliary-services structure.
Replicability for other higher-education campuses
The University Family Plaza model is highly replicable for the roughly 200 large public-research universities with meaningful student-parent populations, student-parent fee structures, and landscape-architecture or planning programs. The single biggest replicability filter is institutional appetite for partnering an academic program with a real-stakes capital project — institutional risk-management offices vary widely on willingness, and the licensed firm-of-record relationship is essential for getting the project through campus capital approvals. The second filter is the auxiliary-services governance structure; not all auxiliary services divisions are positioned to absorb a recreational pad alongside dining and housing, and the operating-cost ownership question must be settled before construction. The third filter is the existing campus-pool aquatic infrastructure; a campus with a heavily-programmed family-friendly indoor pool may see less marginal value from a splash pad than a campus without one.
Voices from the project
“We didn't just design a splash pad. We designed a place where graduate-student parents could feel like the university actually saw their families.”
“The 10pm closing time is the design decision people ask about most. Evening is when student-parent families have time. Build for them.”
“Two of my studio students got job offers off the construction documents. The pad is a building. It's also a portfolio.”
Lessons learned
- Partner an MLA or planning graduate studio with a licensed firm-of-record for design.
- Look for restricted student-parent fee balances that may have accumulated for years without a project.
- Anchor auxiliary-services capital to a nearby graduate housing or family-housing complex.
- Extend operating hours to 10pm where path lighting and population rhythms support it.
- Hire pad attendants through student employment with preference for student-parent applicants.
- Build a game-weekend visitor strategy that bundles the pad with other campus family programming.
- Treat the project as a curricular and recruiting asset for the design program, not just a build.
FAQ
Can a graduate landscape architecture studio actually design a real splash pad?
Yes — for schematic and design-development phases, with a licensed landscape architect and civil engineer formally engaged as engineer-of-record for construction documents and stamp-and-seal compliance. The studio handles concept and DNA; the licensed firm handles liability and code.
What operating hours work for a university campus splash pad?
A 10am–10pm window during summer session captures both daytime visitor families and the early-evening student-parent and family-graduate-student demographic. The extended evening hours typically require pad-attendant coverage and existing path-lighting infrastructure.
How do health-system sponsorships work for campus splash pads?
Regional health systems often welcome partnerships on pediatric heat-illness prevention messaging in exchange for naming rights on adjacent shade structures (not the pad itself) and integration with summer family-health outreach. Typical sponsorship contributions range $150,000–$300,000 for a flagship campus pad.
Related reports & data
Pair this case study with our original-data reports for citation and benchmarking.