Good point. That are certainly many areas that are more conducive to future development (ie. banal surface lots). I think what needs to be emphasized is that the current master plan is more of "conceptual" plan rather than an articulated, "practical" plan. A lot of areas are not addressed.
A few thoughts.
The CC has to balance contrasting elements; approachability/containment, urban/convenient, inviting/sterile, and even, historic/modern. I think that right now, the Clinic's biggest success has been the cohesiveness from their recently built buildings. Hopefully that leads to a more defined "campus" instead of the sprawling hodge-podge we have now. Marking the perimeter/entries and providing definition to the CC would help.
In general, I am a fan of building up to the ROW and incorporating perimeter landscape elements as they seem to be doing. These gestures are urban and approachable and convey the right aesthetic. I hope subsequent efforts can add cohesion and continue to add successful green spaces throughout the campus.