Preserving heritage and historical buildings within universities is a subject of increasing academic, architectural, and cultural relevance (Huang et al., 2024). Universities serve not only as centers of education and research but also as historical landmarks that reflect the evolution of national identity and intellectual traditions (Mora and La Porte, 2024). Among these institutions is Universitas Diponegoro (UNDIP), a major public university located in Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia. Established in 1957, UNDIP has grown into one of Indonesia’s leading academic institutions, with multiple campuses embodying its historical roots and modern aspirations.

One of UNDIP’s most historically rich areas is the Pleburan Campus, located near Semarang’s city center. Originally serving as the university’s main academic hub, Pleburan hosts several colonial and early post-independence heritage and historical buildings that carry architectural, cultural, and educational significance. Today, the campus is undergoing rapid transformation as the university expands its facilities to meet 21st-century educational standards.

The central challenge faced by UNDIP—and the focus of this study—is how to introduce new educational infrastructure while maintaining architectural continuity and preserving the historical and cultural value of its existing built environment. This challenge has become particularly relevant as the university implements its 2023–2032 campus development master plan, which includes the construction of modern facilities such as the Twin Towers, designed to house smart classrooms, digital learning environments, and interdisciplinary research centers.

While modern construction offers much-needed space and enhanced functionality, it raises concerns about the erosion of institutional memory and the visual and spatial disjunctions it may introduce within historic settings (Mavromatidis, 2025). The conflict between modernization and architectural heritage in university campuses underscores the need for context-sensitive design approaches that preserve identity, support sustainability, and enable academic progress (Noaime et al., 2025).

Scholars argue that heritage and historical buildings contribute to a university’s educational mission by fostering a sense of continuity, identity, and belonging among students, faculty, and alumni (Soto-González et al., 2025). However, shifting pedagogical approaches, increased enrollment, and the growing demand for digital infrastructure often require new spatial solutions (Zou et al., 2025). These pressures prompt universities to expand and upgrade their facilities, potentially placing historic environments at risk unless carefully managed through integrated planning and design.

Urban development and technological innovation have also transformed the physical context of many campuses, creating new demands on spatial organization, ecological sensitivity, and architectural cohesiveness (Jiang et al., 2024). In response, universities are increasingly adopting strategies that emphasize the harmonious integration of new structures within historic environments (Mouwen, 2000). This includes maintaining material palettes, respecting height and scale, and aligning spatial layouts to sustain architectural continuity while introducing contemporary functions (Chiesi et al., 2024).

At UNDIP, these design principles are exemplified in the development of the Pleburan Twin Towers—a bold and modern project situated within a historically sensitive zone. The initiative symbolizes the university’s commitment to future-oriented learning while acknowledging its historical context. The spatial master plan, shown in Figure 1, emphasizes linear connectivity, mixed-use zones, and green corridors that promote environmental quality and walkability. Complementary developments such as the Muladi Dome and new faculty buildings further reinforce a strategy of balanced growth, ensuring that modern architecture enhances rather than disrupts the legacy of the campus.

The spatial master plan of Pleburan Campus demonstrates an intentional effort to preserve architectural continuity by blending modern educational needs with cultural and environmental stewardship (Chiesi et al., 2024). As seen in the campus layout (Figure 1), built-up and non-built-up areas are strategically organized to optimize academic functionality and sustainability, while respecting the historic character and identity of the site.

The Pleburan Campus master plan exemplifies a strategic effort to introduce contemporary educational infrastructure—most notably through the design and construction of the new twin towers—within the context of a historically significant campus. This approach carefully balances modernization with the preservation of architectural and cultural heritage, a key objective of the master plan.

The twin towers are situated within the zone designated for planned development, yet their placement, scale, and architectural language are consciously harmonized with the surrounding heritage structures (labeled 1–10), such as the Rectorate and Creative Center. The design process respected existing sightlines, building heights, and material palettes, ensuring that the new additions complement rather than overshadow the original campus fabric. This fosters architectural continuity, allowing the old and new to coexist in a cohesive spatial narrative (Bassey et al., 2024).

Functionally, the towers serve as educational and innovation hubs, expanding academic capacity while supporting interdisciplinary collaboration and entrepreneurial activity. Their vertical orientation optimizes land use efficiency without encroaching on the campus’s valuable open spaces—62% of which remain dedicated to green and recreational functions. This careful spatial planning allows the campus to grow upward rather than outward, preserving the environmental and cultural integrity of the site.

The integration of the Twin Towers also reflects campus planning principles rooted in continuity, where contemporary needs are addressed through design solutions that are sensitive to the past. Circulation routes, both vehicular and pedestrian, are reconfigured to accommodate the new buildings without disrupting the existing heritage axis, while façade treatments and structural proportions subtly echo the rhythm of the surrounding historic architecture.

In essence, the introduction of the twin towers marks a model of heritage-informed development—a demonstration of how modern educational facilities can be woven into the historic campus fabric without compromising its identity (Hong, 2020). This aligns directly with the article’s aim: to showcase how universities can modernize infrastructure while safeguarding their cultural legacy, ultimately creating a campus environment that is forward-looking, inclusive, and historically grounded.

This major construction initiative represents a thoughtful transformation of UNDIP’s Pleburan Campus, where modern educational infrastructure is being developed with deliberate respect for the campus’s architectural identity and heritage values. Rather than replacing the past, the initiative seeks to harmonize it with the future, retaining the character of the historic environment while introducing contemporary, multi-functional buildings that meet the evolving demands of higher education (Al-Musawi and Ali, 2025).

A key example is the design and construction of the new Twin Towers, which blend modern architectural features with contextual sensitivity to the heritage fabric of the campus. UNDIP’s collaboration with PT PP (Persero) Tbk, a state-owned construction company known for sustainable and high-quality projects, reinforces its commitment to safety, environmental responsibility, and design continuity. All new facilities are developed according to green building principles and are carefully integrated into the existing urban and cultural landscape (Liu et al., 2022).

In addition to the Twin Towers, UNDIP has recently completed other major projects—including the Muladi Dome, inaugurated in April 2024, and new buildings for the Faculty of Law, Faculty of Psychology, and Faculty of Animal and Agricultural Sciences—each designed to enhance academic functionality while maintaining visual and spatial coherence with the historic campus layout.

Together, these developments reflect a master plan that balances innovation with preservation, ensuring that UNDIP evolves into a world-class university without losing its unique architectural and cultural identity. The future vision of the campus, as shown in Figure 2, illustrates this integration of heritage and progress, showing a 3D proposed twin tower building.

Figure 2 above is a 3D architectural image showing Universitas Diponegoro’s (UNDIP) planned Twin Towers at the Pleburan Campus. The two high-rise buildings dominate the center of the image and reflect the university’s vision for modern, integrated educational spaces. Each tower features a contemporary design with glass facades and rooftop facilities, likely intended for academic or social purposes. The buildings are surrounded by green landscaping, organized parking areas, and supporting structures, blending academic spaces with environmental consciousness. Figure 2 is reflected in the master plan as illustrated in Figure 3 below:

The master plan Figure 3 illustrates a cohesive spatial vision for the proposed campus development, with a central architectural focal point: the Twin Tower. Located prominently in the northern segment of the site, the tower is highlighted in the plan through a detailed callout box that outlines its spatial specifications and functional programming.

Designed as a 12-story structure with a ground floor footprint of 1,000 m² and a total built area of 12,000 m², the Twin Tower occupies a land parcel of 1,660 m² at an elevation of 59 m above sea level. Its position along the main northern campus axis, adjacent to a primary vehicular ingress point, reinforces its status as a landmark and signals its significance in the overall spatial hierarchy of the campus.

Functionally, the tower is intended to accommodate academic spaces, administrative offices, and support facilities, indicating its dual role as a symbolic center of knowledge and a pragmatic node for campus operations. It is situated within a mixed-use zone, framed by surrounding academic, residential, and communal buildings, contributing to a multi-nodal and integrated urban campus environment.

The spatial logic of the tower’s placement reveals several key considerations:

Urban Gateway Function: Serving as a visual and functional anchor near the main northern entrance, the Twin Tower operates as an institutional gateway. Its prominent height and immediate visibility reinforce the university’s identity and create a strong sense of arrival for visitors.

The proposed Twin Tower transcends its role as a mere high-rise structure. It represents a deliberate spatial and architectural intervention that encapsulates core principles of sustainable campus planning: visibility, multifunctionality, accessibility, and environmental integration. Its placement within the master plan reflects a forward-thinking approach that balances density with openness and innovation with tradition.

Rather than pursuing wholesale demolition, UNDIP has opted for architectural integration. The surrounding area of the new towers still contains lower-rise buildings—likely retained administrative or faculty offices—which have been incorporated into the renewed campus design. This coexistence of old and new reflects an intentional layering of architectural eras, allowing the university to expand its infrastructure without severing ties to its institutional history and physical heritage. The result is not simply modernization, but a form of spatial continuity that visually and symbolically connects UNDIP’s past with its future.

Introducing new infrastructure into heritage contexts, however, demands more than thoughtful design, where applicable, requires flexible legal frameworks that support preservation without stifling innovation (Sobieraj and Metelski, 2025), as well as financial strategies for upgrading historical buildings with contemporary technologies in a way that retains their original character (Savoie et al., 2025).

In environmentally vulnerable regions like Semarang, where land subsidence is an ongoing concern, these challenges become even more pronounced. New structures must be designed not only to withstand current environmental stresses but also to protect the integrity of adjacent historical buildings (Bahrami, 2024). This necessitates advanced engineering, conservation planning, and long-term risk mitigation strategies embedded within the design process (Nahid et al., 2024).

Equally critical is the cultural function of academic buildings. These are not just educational facilities but also carriers of institutional memory and identity. Preserving them fosters continuity, strengthens campus identity, and deepens the emotional and symbolic connection students, faculty, and alumni have to their university. Hence, any new development must respond not only to physical site conditions but also to these less tangible yet equally important dimensions of heritage. To balance these demands, institutions like UNDIP must embrace collaborative, cross-disciplinary approaches. Architects, urban planners, engineers, conservation experts, and policymakers must co-develop strategies that integrate preservation into modernization efforts (Li et al., 2025). Tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies can support this process, enabling real-time monitoring and informed maintenance decisions (Liu et al., 2025).

By blending contemporary educational needs with respect for its architectural and cultural heritage, UNDIP exemplifies a sustainable and context-sensitive approach to campus development. Its case illustrates how universities can expand and innovate while safeguarding the physical and symbolic values embedded in their existing environments.

As universities across the globe expand their physical infrastructure to accommodate shifting pedagogical models and growing student populations, the question of how to do so without eroding cultural identity and architectural heritage has emerged as a significant challenge in campus planning (Ashworth, 2011; Lucchi and Fayez, 2024). Scholars and practitioners alike have argued that university campuses are more than functional spaces; they are complex cultural landscapes imbued with symbolic, historical, and emotional significance (Wong, 2024). This has led to a growing body of literature that explores strategies for reconciling the dual imperatives of modernization and heritage preservation (Li et al., 2020).

This study adopted a case study and design-based approach to investigate how heritage preservation can coexist with the development of modern educational infrastructure at Universitas Diponegoro. It focused on preserving architectural heritage while developing educational infrastructure, particularly about the Pleburan Campus and the construction of the Twin Towers. Drawing on architectural planning principles and spatial analysis, the research aimed to propose sustainable design strategies that uphold the campus’s cultural and historical identity while supporting its academic expansion (Mba et al., 2024).

At the core of Universitas Diponegoro’s current development agenda lies a fundamental challenge: how to introduce new educational infrastructure while maintaining architectural continuity and preserving the historical and cultural significance of its existing built environment. This dilemma has grown increasingly urgent with the implementation of UNDIP’s 2023–2032 campus development master plan, which envisions a major transformation of the academic landscape, including the construction of the Twin Towers. These modern facilities are intended to accommodate smart classrooms, digital learning platforms, and interdisciplinary research centers, reflecting the university’s strategic commitment to future-oriented education.

This study explores how academic institutions, specifically Universitas Diponegoro, can preserve the cultural and architectural value of heritage buildings while responding to the growing need for technologically advanced and flexible educational spaces. At the heart of the investigation is the tension between conserving aging campus structures and accommodating a rapidly expanding university’s evolving spatial and pedagogical demands. Through a case study of the coexistence of heritage preservation and modern infrastructure development—particularly about the planned construction of twin towers—the research yielded comprehensive findings. These span structural assessments of historic buildings, stakeholder perceptions, environmental concerns, and strategic approaches for integrating new development within a historically significant campus. The results provide critical insights into architectural integrity, cultural continuity, and urban planning, highlighting how heritage and modernization can be balanced within contemporary university environments.

This study underscores the intricate challenge faced by Universitas Diponegoro (UNDIP) in balancing heritage preservation with the urgent imperatives of modernization and spatial expansion. As universities globally grapple with similar dilemmas—expanding infrastructure to accommodate evolving pedagogical models and increasing student populations without compromising architectural heritage (Ashworth, 2011; Lucchi and Fayez, 2024)—UNDIP’s experience offers critical insights. It is the 2023–2032 master plan, and particularly the development of the Twin Towers, illustrates how universities can pursue innovation while respecting the historical character of their campuses.

The physical assessments conducted in this study reveal significant disparities in the condition and adaptability of campus structures. Heritage buildings constructed before 1980, while rich in symbolic and architectural value, face structural and spatial constraints that limit their compatibility with contemporary academic needs. These findings mirror broader concerns in the literature: historic campuses often house buildings that, while culturally significant, were not designed to support digital infrastructure, flexible layouts, or collaborative research environments (Hong, 2020; Baldini et al., 2006; Guerrero and Urbano, 2012). Retrofitting such structures is frequently costly and complex, yet their preservation is vital—not only for cultural reasons but also for maintaining alumni engagement, place identity, and institutional branding (Bulotaite, 2003; Temple, 2009; Wong, 2024).

Conversely, newer buildings—particularly those constructed after 2000—demonstrate greater structural resilience and spatial flexibility, making them more amenable to technological integration. This contrast reinforces the literature’s argument that a one-size-fits-all approach to campus development is impractical (Yan et al., 2025). Rather, a differentiated and adaptive strategy is required, one that blends selective modernization with targeted conservation, aligning with models of architectural continuity and contextual design (Shahriar et al., 2023; Chahbi, 2024).

The emotional and symbolic attachment that students and faculty express toward UNDIP’s heritage structures reflects findings in heritage scholarship that emphasize the cultural and affective dimensions of campus architecture (Wong, 2024; Bengson, 2024). These buildings are not just utilitarian assets; they are storied environments that encode the university’s institutional identity and collective memory (Bassett, 2021; Van Land et al., 2021). At the same time, administrative stakeholders underscore the necessity of expanding capacity to accommodate interdisciplinary research, digital pedagogy, and academic growth—echoing the global trend of integrating entrepreneurial and interdisciplinary functions within university design (Guerrero and Urbano, 2012).

The Twin Towers project emerges as a pivotal intervention in navigating these competing imperatives. Designed to host smart classrooms and cutting-edge facilities, the towers represent UNDIP’s strategic response to modernization. Yet, their success hinges on context-sensitive design principles that promote architectural continuity, such as respecting existing sightlines, materials, and building scale (Mohammed et al., 2022; Ruano-Borbalan, 2024). This aligns with international best practices where new infrastructure is designed not to replicate heritage forms but to complement them, thereby preserving visual harmony and reinforcing campus identity (Rashdan and Ashour, 2024).

Sustainability also plays a crucial role in this convergence. Research demonstrates that retrofitting and reusing existing structures often yields lower environmental impacts compared to new construction (Ahmed et al., 2025; Janssen et al., 2017). UNDIP’s integration of green infrastructure, low-impact construction methods, and passive environmental technologies within heritage environments reflects an emerging paradigm of environmentally and culturally integrated campus development (Marshall, 2018; Dawodu et al., 2022).

More fundamentally, the findings affirm that successful campus transformation depends not only on design and engineering but also on inclusive and participatory planning. Involving students, faculty, architects, planners, and conservationists in decision-making aligns with integrated planning frameworks advocated in recent scholarship (Sulaiman et al., 2024; Foroughi et al., 2023). Tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and IoT-based building monitoring enhance transparency and foster stakeholder engagement, enabling real-time assessments of heritage assets while promoting adaptive reuse and preventive conservation (Borkowski and Duc, 2024; Liu et al., 2025; Giovannini et al., 2025).

Such an approach is particularly relevant for UNDIP’s Pleburan Campus, where spatial density, heritage significance, and future growth intersect. As observed in case studies from the University of Oxford, NUS, and regional institutions like UGM and ITB, heritage-informed campus development is most effective when guided by principles of spatial continuity and stakeholder convergence (Abo-Khalil, 2024; Takeuchi et al., 2023; Gleason, 2018b). These universities demonstrate how compact, multifunctional buildings and master-planned growth can enhance capacity while preserving institutional character.

For UNDIP, this means designing new infrastructure—like the Twin Towers—not as isolated innovations, but as integrative components of a larger cultural and academic ecosystem. By echoing architectural rhythms, reinforcing circulation paths, and preserving meaningful heritage zones, the university can foster a coherent narrative that bridges past and future. Inclusive design processes, policy support, and community involvement further ensure that development reflects shared values and fosters campus stewardship (Lazzeroni and Piccaluga, 2015; Zyngier et al., 2015).

In conclusion, UNDIP’s experience affirms a broader truth articulated in the literature: sustainable campus development is not a dichotomy between preservation and progress but a dynamic synthesis of both. Heritage buildings are not static relics but evolving cultural assets. Through adaptive reuse, architectural convergence, stakeholder engagement, and environmental integration, UNDIP can transform its campus into a living testament to continuity, innovation, and sustainability. These findings contribute to global discourses on campus planning by offering a grounded case study of how Southeast Asian universities can lead in heritage-informed modernization.

This study has explored the complex intersection between heritage preservation and modern educational development within the context of Universitas Diponegoro’s (UNDIP) campus transformation, particularly focusing on the Pleburan Campus and the construction of the Twin Towers. The findings highlight that while heritage buildings serve as vital carriers of institutional memory and identity, their structural limitations pose significant challenges to technological adaptation and spatial flexibility. Conversely, newer buildings present greater opportunities for modernization but risk disrupting the architectural harmony if not thoughtfully integrated.

The research demonstrates that preserving heritage does not necessarily conflict with progress. Rather, it calls for a differentiated and context-sensitive approach that selectively conserves historically and culturally valuable structures while promoting architectural innovation where appropriate. The Twin Towers project illustrates a potential pathway forward, providing modern academic spaces while incorporating design strategies that respect the surrounding historical environment.

Importantly, the study emphasizes that sustainable campus development is not only a technical endeavour but also a social and cultural one. The inclusion of diverse stakeholders, students, faculty, planners, and heritage experts, enriches the planning process and fosters shared ownership of the evolving campus landscape. This participatory model can help prevent cultural dissonance and ensure that development aligns with both institutional values and future academic needs.

Ultimately, UNDIP’s experience offers broader lessons for historic universities globally. Balancing preservation with innovation requires an integrated strategy that bridges architectural continuity, environmental sustainability, and inclusive governance. As higher education continues to evolve, institutions must craft development frameworks that are both respectful of the past and responsive to the challenges of the future.