I was reading this rather heavy article (see link below) on Universities and Urban Planning in USA and it reminded me of being at event in Strathclyde University last Saturday (no, not the Student Union bar). I was struck by the huge disparity between the course of development at Strathclyde Uni and Glasgow Uni. Both universities stretched outwards in cramped, densely developed , inner city neighbourhoods.
The outcome has been in Strathclyde's case a modern, modulated and
fairly integrated campus that has replaced a previously run-down, mixed use neighbourhood - working class housing and community infrastructure seem to have been the casualties.
In the case of the University of Glasgow the outcome seems to have been an unattractive and disparate collection of mostly unrelated buildings - some of which are pretty awful examples of 60s and early 70s designs and constructions. This has left much of the earlier community infrastructure in place, and there is a character about the neighbourhood that does not exist around Strathclyde.
Having also studied at both, I have to say that the physical facilities in Strathclyde were far superior to Glasgow's.
Dunno if this is all right and fair, but it came to mind.
http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2005/03/20/universities_are_the_new_city_planners/