Regents approve ‘Design Village’ vision to replace costly architecture renovation

The Texas Tech University System Board of Regents on Thursday authorized a new vision to replace a planned renovation of the Tommy J. Huckabee College of Architecture building with a consolidated “Design Village” that will house architecture and several allied programs.

The board approved an amendment to the design professional agreement and authorized about $3,000,000 in stage‑1 planning and design expenditures, to be funded with Higher Education Funds (HEF), gifts and revenue financing mechanisms. The motion passed with the committee’s unanimous voice vote.

Former board chairman Chris Huckabee, who led the presentation of the idea, told regents that after an extensive evaluation the current 1970 architecture building would cost “more than a hundred million dollars” to renovate for modern academic use. Huckabee said his team scanned the building, built a model and concluded a retrofit would be functionally infeasible and economically unwise. “This building was built in 1970,” he said. “When we finished and built it out, what we really came up with was a building over a hundred million dollars.”

Instead of repairing the existing 10‑story, 155,000‑square‑foot structure, the university developed a larger concept: a multi‑disciplinary, primarily two‑ to three‑story facility located near the library parking lot and Eighteenth Street that Huckabee and planners are calling the Design Village. The project would co‑locate architecture, interior design, landscape architecture, graphic design, construction engineering technology and portions of related engineering and business programs in a shared facility intended to increase cross‑discipline collaboration and student retention.

Billy (Mr.) Breedlove, who presented the facilities committee item, told the board the revised stage‑1 work will include program definition, schematic design, a statement of probable cost and a project schedule. He said HEF funding is available for the design services and that the system will also use revenue financing repaid with HEF and gifts as the project proceeds.

Regents pressed planners on program size and timeline. Breedlove said planners currently estimate roughly 150,000 gross square feet — “not a lot larger than what we currently have” — and a facility that will be more linear and two or three stories rather than tall vertical stacks. He estimated about 18 months to reach groundbreaking and two years for construction, with university leadership targeting late 2028 or early 2029 for occupancy.

Regents and presenters discussed naming and fundraising. Huckabee said the Huckabee gift to the College of Architecture will continue to support the college and that family members have expressed interest in associating the Huckabee name with the Design Village; additional, separate naming gifts will be sought for building components and academic programs. Huckabee described fundraising and dean alignment—six deans agreed to the collaborative model—as critical prerequisites before schematic design.

Regents emphasized coordination with campus master planning. Breedlove said the university’s DuMont Jenks master plan moved the site more central to campus and that the Davis College would be adjacent. Regent comments encouraged finalizing a master plan review process and ensuring the Design Village and Davis College serve as anchor projects for the promenade and campus consolidation strategy.

Planners said shared classrooms and daily interdisciplinary collaboration are core to the concept, and Huckabee argued the facility could reduce student attrition by making alternate design disciplines easier to access for students who change academic direction. “Today, about 50 percent of your architecture students who enter as a freshman do not graduate from an architecture degree,” Huckabee said, adding that the Design Village would make transfers to allied programs smoother.

Regents approved the recommendation to amend the design professional agreement, approve the expenditures for stage‑1 design services and to authorize the chancellor or chancellor’s designee to proceed with the revised scope as presented.