The update session for the Campus Framework on Wednesday failed to present any substantive new information to answer the looming questions regarding the future landscape of Syracuse University.

Michael Speaks, the dean of SU’s School of Architecture, presented rudimentary concepts of changes that would be made to the university’s campus during the forum in Goldstein Auditorium. These proposals include the creation of three promenades connecting the east and west sides of campus, a renovation of Archbold Gymnasium and the creation of student housing along Waverly Avenue, among others.

But it is worrisome that the rehashing of old ideas without new substance comes at a time when SU is projected to present the framework to the Board of Trustees in about two months. For the university to host these information meetings under the guise of transparency and call on the community for input is futile when there still are not concrete plans to be commented on — an ironic circumstance considering it is the experiences of students, staff and faculty members that are most subject to these alterations.

The fact that the update session held nearly one year ago in April was more informative adds to the frustration that it does not seem feasible for the university to develop substantial plans, provide the opportunity for community feedback and have time for collaboration with Sasaki Associates, SU’s partner design firm, to make the adjustments before taking the proposals to the board for approval.

It is not SU’s responsibility as a private institution to discuss each detail and in-depth plan with the public. But the community should not be left in the dark completely when the design, location and purpose of key components of campus life — including the future of the Carrier Dome, the National Veterans Resource Complex and major university buildings — have the potential to be redefined by these decisions.

With nothing more than abstract concepts made available at this time, it is not possible to make informed judgments on what the ripple effects will be of the creation of campus promenades or what options have been ruled out for the future of the Dome. And at a time when SU is seemingly working to cut back on expenses, as was seen with the recent staff buyout, the university community is left to question the necessity of major construction and renovation without any clarification from the administration.

It is understood that the Campus Framework is a long-term outline for Syracuse University. But with the presentation to the Board of Trustees only two months away, it is clear that time is running out. And when the administration is working to take the university forward, it should be careful to not leave the value of community input behind.