CWS
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 272
|
Post by CWS on Oct 3, 2013 8:14:23 GMT -5
4. Still no discussions, publicly anyway, about what to do with Ryan, Gervase, and Mulledy. this update was posted yesterday about the old jes res: blogs.commons.georgetown.edu/masterplanning/2013/10/01/university-requests-change-in-use-for-old-jesuit-residence/However, something is off about that post. It says that "the Mulledy Building and Ryan Hall are vacant." I know for a fact that Ryan Hall is not vacant. The 2nd floor of Ryan houses offices for the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life, the Catholic Studies Program, and the Office of the President. I can't speak to the other floors, but I was recently on the 2nd floor myself and the offices seem to be recently renovated and were most certainly occupied. As the post mentions, Gervase is also largely occupied by offices. No idea what's up with Mulledy. I believe the space you're talking about was the old Woodstock center (and the hall way leading up to it -- 2nd floor). I think that is the only space being used at present.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Oct 10, 2013 14:35:43 GMT -5
I posted this link on the IAC thread over on the main board, but if anyone is curious as to what the current state of campus planning and construction looks like, there's a pretty good overview in this slide deck from the Planning 201 session held recently: www.georgetown.edu/master-planning/planning-202-slides/index.html (yes, the URL says planning 202 for some reason). The current thinking on the dorm situation seems to be that between the Northeast Triangle (relatively soon), Kober-Cogan (next in line?), and a second dorm on top of Harbin Patio, that'll get us to the 90% on-campus number that is the long-term goal. The old Jes Res complex could be another option, whether as a temporary stopgap or as a longer-term solution. If a satellite building needs to be rented temporarily to get us up to the numbers we promised by the deadlines we agreed to, that remains an option. It can convert to graduate housing once the necessary new capacity on campus comes online.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 18, 2014 8:23:49 GMT -5
The Voice has a writeup of the Planning 203 session held this week. You can download the slides from the session at www.georgetown.edu/master-planning/planning-203-slides/index.htmlTakeaways: - Northeast Triangle - Construction starts Summer 2014, wraps up Summer 2016
- Old Jesuit Residence - Remediation and internal rebuild starts Spring 2014, finished by Summer 2015
- IAC - Construction starts Summer 2014, finished Summer 2016
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 18, 2014 9:37:40 GMT -5
Russky, thanks for keeping us informed. The info on the slides is pretty good and gives me ideas for other projects I'm involved in. So they're going forth with the NE Triangle building. Yikes! I guess the U is running out of space alternatives. The "greening" of the Hospital/Dar. Parking would be awesome. No GU funding?
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 18, 2014 11:04:01 GMT -5
Russky, thanks for keeping us informed. The info on the slides is pretty good and gives me ideas for other projects I'm involved in. So they're going forth with the NE Triangle building. Yikes! I guess the U is running out of space alternatives. The "greening" of the Hospital/Dar. Parking would be awesome. No GU funding? I don't know - I wasn't able to attend. It's a good question. That lot (Lot A, IIRC) is probably my biggest pet peeve on campus. On an extremely space-constricted campus, wasting space on surface parking lots - the worst use of space imaginable - is unconscionable. When I asked about putting the new dorm on top of Lot A, rather than wedging it into the Northeast Triangle location, I got the boilerplate answer that it didn't fit in with the residential nodes/corridors they were going for. After some prodding, I got a further answer that boiled down to: it's MedStar's parking lot and they say they need it. If MedStar is amenable to losing use of the lot for some amount of time (~ 2 years' construction time, say), in exchange for getting underground parking after the fact, then this is an opportunity that needs to be seized. Maybe that means putting housing there (we're talking long-term here anyway, and I can't imagine that the University wants to continue using the Old Jes Res as undergrad housing long-term). Maybe it means another academic space (another building's worth of classrooms and offices would make it a lot easier to renovate/unsuck ICC). Maybe it's something we haven't even thought of yet. Whatever it is, it'll be much, much better than what is there now. I'd also love to know what the status of Kober-Cogan is in terms of long-term vision for the site. It's an awkward parcel and, from what I can tell, a functionally obsolete structure. Gotta do something with it... In other potentially campus-related news, DDOT is finally getting started on decking over the I-395 trench near GULC, with the eventual outcome of building the Capitol Crossing development on top of it and reconnecting F and G Streets. The Post had a great graphic of how it will work, but I can't find it for the life of me, and searching for anything on the Post's website is an exercise in frustration. Anyway, I know that Georgetown was looking at this development as a potential permanent home for the Public Policy school.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,701
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 18, 2014 12:19:12 GMT -5
It must be frustrating for Robin Morey (and Alan Brangman before him) that Georgetown is so reactive on campus planning. It often appears that someone walked past Regents Hall, saw some green space, and said, "Uh, let's build something here!"
Yet there are obvious candidates for underutilized space that would make interesting candidates for academic/residential pairings:
1. Demolish Village A. By 2020, this project will be 40 years old, the only complex I've ever seen where the wheelchair rooms were on the upper level (yes, it was a government project). It wasn't designed for the long haul (the name gives that away) and it's not space efficient between the buildings. Rebuild it as a living-learning area, Relocate these students off campus for two years (rotate in one year increments) and build for the 2020's, not the 1970's.
2. Demolish Harbin Hall. By 2020, this project will be almost 60 years old and there are no Brutalist architecture snobs campaigning for its permanent place in the skyline. The span from Harbin across the patio is centrally located but woefully underused. Rather than "Harbin II" peering over the unfinished MSF, consider an alternative that is more efficient and leverages its place on the campus. Relocate students off campus for two years (rotate in one year increments).
3. Move the hospital off campus. (Already discussed here.)
4. Repurpose the second floor of Leavey Center, now underground parking, as classroom space.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Apr 18, 2014 12:47:04 GMT -5
Rusky, thanks and pls keep us updated. DFW, the neighbors will love your suggestions. Btw, I haven't been back to campus for more than five years. What's that soccer field or green area on the campus map in the PowerPoint presentation bordering with Yates field, the hospital and the campus perimeter. Also, is Yates underutilized these days? A Hoya dad who recently visited campus with his accepted hs senior daughter considering several schools told me that the student was impressed with how old, unkept and dirty the inside of Yates looked. Would that space combined with that soccer field be in consideration? The alum got the same impression of Lauinger...
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 18, 2014 14:08:14 GMT -5
Rusky, thanks and pls keep us updated. DFW, the neighbors will love your suggestions. Btw, I haven't been back to campus for more than five years. What's that soccer field or green area on the campus map in the PowerPoint presentation bordering with Yates field, the hospital and the campus perimeter. Also, is Yates underutilized these days? A Hoya dad who recently visited campus with his accepted hs senior daughter considering several schools told me that the student was impressed with how old, unkept and dirty the inside of Yates looked. Would that space combined with that soccer field be in consideration? The alum got the same impression of Lauinger... You bet. Yes, Shaw (formerly North Kehoe) Field is the soccer field between Yates and the medical center. They haven't quite updated the URL yet: www.guhoyas.com/facilities/gu-north-kehoe-field.htmlYates is... a dump. Cheap 70s architecture, tons of empty space (it looks like it's missing at least a second story, and most critically, it has a giant flat roof. As Alan Brangman explained to me once, there's a reason roofs are slanted... water has to go somewhere, and it will follow gravity. In this case, the water pools, seeps in between the Kehoe Field turf and the roof base, expands and contracts with temperature changes, and wreaks havoc on the whole thing, causing cascading waterfall leaks. They've already done full replacements two or three times, and there's just no way to solve the problem more than temporarily. Alan said that there's only two other buildings in the U.S. with roofs as big and flat as Yates, and they've both been converted into green roofs to solve the problem. It's an open question whether Yates could structurally support that much topsoil and vegetation, though... probably not. Lauinger is also in somewhat rough shape. They've embarked on some renovations - an electrical systems upgrade, including added outlets, was done back in 2011 and a major renovation of the 5th floor kicks off this summer. The big renovation and overhaul will have to wait until this current building spree is complete, though. As always, one of the big issues with renovating things is that their functions have to be replaced during the renovation. Nothing significant could be done with Yates as long as all the varsity teams were using it for their own weightlifting and training. Hopefully, once the IAC opens, that will enable a piecemeal renovation of the complex, even if the structural issues remain. This is also why DFW's first two suggestions will never happen - undergrads would Occupy DeGioia's House before they let the University "relocate" them off campus.
|
|
boxout05
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 569
|
Post by boxout05 on Apr 18, 2014 16:59:16 GMT -5
As it's one of the ugliest buildings on campus, libraries with rows and rows of books are becoming increasingly obsolete, and the Library of Congress is a busride away... has there been talk of demolishing or repurposing Lauinger?
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,701
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 18, 2014 20:42:53 GMT -5
DFW, the neighbors will love your suggestions. Btw, I haven't been back to campus for more than five years. What's that soccer field or green area on the campus map in the PowerPoint presentation bordering with Yates field, the hospital and the campus perimeter. Also, is Yates underutilized these days? A Hoya dad who recently visited campus with his accepted hs senior daughter considering several schools told me that the student was impressed with how old, unkept and dirty the inside of Yates looked. Would that space combined with that soccer field be in consideration? The alum got the same impression of Lauinger... 1. I never said that students need to be relocated within Georgetown; in fact, the opposite is true. The sturm und drang raised about a satellite campus obscured the fact that a four year residential experience is not in the school's bylaws. It was expected well into the 1980's that most students would live one, two, or sometimes three years off campus, and not always within walking distance. If Georgetown could put students up at the Key Bridge Marriott or the Holiday Inn in Rosslyn as a means to enact some serious construction efforts, it ought to be considered. 2. Another opportunity to ease housing is to promote more study abroad. A lot of majors make it almost impossible to accomplish. And one idea I've never seen discussed is taking the study abroad model and extending it domestically--studying finance in New York for a semester, for instance. How about a semester at Cal to study in Silicon Valley, or a semester at Penn to study nursing? At least two other major universities are building "semester in Washington" programs with dedicated facilities. 3. Yates needs to be razed, but there are a lot of issues that get in the way. A reasonable argument would not restore it to begin with, reopening that space for a suitable soccer/track facility. But where does the recreation go?
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Apr 19, 2014 12:33:17 GMT -5
Once these projects are done in 2016 it will amazing to think of how different the campus is from before the SWQ was built. As much crap as I have given the administration on this front they have accomplished a lot with so many constraints.
The next big thing is of course Yates as has been brought up already. Not just because the building is old, but it soon could become unsafe because of the water issue. The IAC will help to relieve pressure in the are as the athletes move out. But the IAC is also eliminating the out door tennis courts. I dont know what the Tennis program's plans are, but I assume using the indoor courts at Yates is a big part of it. So you would need to find a place for the Tennis team to practice/compete.
The space where Yates is needs to have space for a pool, tennis courts (ideally outside), locker rooms, student weight facilities, basketball courts and Track and Field facilities. The space that Yates takes up can support all of these needs with modern design and engineering. UMD has a relatively new student athletics center that houses mostly the same stuff (not tennis courts, I dont think), and is just a bit bigger. That space, though, does have a much larger pool facility that Gtown doesnt need.
Essentially adding a second floor to the cavernous indoor space would go a long way to improving use (this isnt possible as a retro fit, to many engineering issues). Tennis courts and a track facility could be put on the roof (with a modern water management system), pool on the bottom floor (probably where it is now is fine), more tennis courts, basketball, weights on the first floor too. Cardio, dance studios, student track, etc on the second floor.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 19, 2014 16:49:27 GMT -5
1. I never said that students need to be relocated within Georgetown; in fact, the opposite is true. The sturm und drang raised about a satellite campus obscured the fact that a four year residential experience is not in the school's bylaws. It was expected well into the 1980's that most students would live one, two, or sometimes three years off campus, and not always within walking distance. If Georgetown could put students up at the Key Bridge Marriott or the Holiday Inn in Rosslyn as a means to enact some serious construction efforts, it ought to be considered. It may not be in the school's bylaws, but it is very much in the school's vision for the future - not four years, necessarily, but your years in DC in any case. The recent neighborhood armistice has decisively pushed the University in that direction. A lot of things were expected well into the 1980s, including the ability to drink at age 18. Times have changed, and expectations have changed right along with them. Parents aren't paying $60,000/year - and students aren't taking on 5- and 6-digits' worth of debt - to live in the Rosslyn Holiday Inn. Charging different housing costs, meanwhile, creates major equity issues. It simply won't happen. 2. Another opportunity to ease housing is to promote more study abroad. A lot of majors make it almost impossible to accomplish. And one idea I've never seen discussed is taking the study abroad model and extending it domestically--studying finance in New York for a semester, for instance. How about a semester at Cal to study in Silicon Valley, or a semester at Penn to study nursing? At least two other major universities are building "semester in Washington" programs with dedicated facilities. A core, absolutely critical part of Georgetown's pitch to prospective students of all stripes (SFS-Q and the online nursing program being the exceptions that prove the rule) is Washington, DC. Yes, other schools like Syracuse, Minnesota, the University of California, etc. build "semester in Washington" programs. You know why? Because Washington is the best place in America to go to college! That's our argument, anyway. We sure as s*** aren't going to dilute that by building 'domestic study abroad' programs. As for the notion that a lot of majors make it almost impossible to study abroad, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Everyone - even nurses has the ability to study abroad for at least a semester, and in most cases a full year, if they want. It may require some strategic course planning, but it is absolutely doable. 3. Yates needs to be razed, but there are a lot of issues that get in the way. A reasonable argument would not restore it to begin with, reopening that space for a suitable soccer/track facility. But where does the recreation go? A soccer/track facility on that massive of a footprint is a huge opportunity cost on a space-constrained campus. For a non-core academic activity, it would be well night impossible to justify. And, indeed, the absence of an alternative location for recreation makes it a non-starter. Long term, there could be some possibilities. Build a new campus recreation center on top of that blasted Lot A, for instance, then once it is online you excavate Yates. Or, if MedStar does decide to decamp, that increases your options dramatically. Once these projects are done in 2016 it will amazing to think of how different the campus is from before the SWQ was built. As much crap as I have given the administration on this front they have accomplished a lot with so many constraints. The next big thing is of course Yates as has been brought up already. Not just because the building is old, but it soon could become unsafe because of the water issue. The IAC will help to relieve pressure in the are as the athletes move out. But the IAC is also eliminating the out door tennis courts. I dont know what the Tennis program's plans are, but I assume using the indoor courts at Yates is a big part of it. So you would need to find a place for the Tennis team to practice/compete. The space where Yates is needs to have space for a pool, tennis courts (ideally outside), locker rooms, student weight facilities, basketball courts and Track and Field facilities. The space that Yates takes up can support all of these needs with modern design and engineering. UMD has a relatively new student athletics center that houses mostly the same stuff (not tennis courts, I dont think), and is just a bit bigger. That space, though, does have a much larger pool facility that Gtown doesnt need. Essentially adding a second floor to the cavernous indoor space would go a long way to improving use (this isnt possible as a retro fit, to many engineering issues). Tennis courts and a track facility could be put on the roof (with a modern water management system), pool on the bottom floor (probably where it is now is fine), more tennis courts, basketball, weights on the first floor too. Cardio, dance studios, student track, etc on the second floor. The tennis program has been using the Yates courts, but they could just as easily reach an arrangement with the Rock Creek Park Tennis Center to practice and play there. Not like they get spectators now anyway... The pool is actually, in my view, a potential major neighborhood amenity that the University could use to get neighbor and city approval for the kind of big, loud, disruptive project that a full rebuild of the Yates space would require. The Wilson Aquatic Center at the renovated Wilson HS is really the only publicly accessible year-round pool space in most of NW. Wilson is massively crowded and has been suffering from various logistical issues. Making even part of a big new pool available to outside residents would be a major sweeting of the deal.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Apr 19, 2014 23:56:04 GMT -5
The pool is actually, in my view, a potential major neighborhood amenity that the University could use to get neighbor and city approval for the kind of big, loud, disruptive project that a full rebuild of the Yates space would require. The Wilson Aquatic Center at the renovated Wilson HS is really the only publicly accessible year-round pool space in most of NW. Wilson is massively crowded and has been suffering from various logistical issues. Making even part of a big new pool available to outside residents would be a major sweeting of the deal. Could use that to convince the neighborhood a parking structure to fit public access year-round. I've always hoped that they could put student recreation in McDonough for the 2 school years it would take to finish a new and improved Yates. The main problem is the Athletic Department staff that will continue to use that building after IAC is built.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,701
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 20, 2014 13:42:11 GMT -5
Great discussion. Some more thoughts. It may not be in the school's bylaws, but it is very much in the school's vision for the future - not four years, necessarily, but your years in DC in any case. The recent neighborhood armistice has decisively pushed the University in that direction. A lot of things were expected well into the 1980s, including the ability to drink at age 18. Times have changed, and expectations have changed right along with them. Parents aren't paying $60,000/year - and students aren't taking on 5- and 6-digits' worth of debt - to live in the Rosslyn Holiday Inn. Charging different housing costs, meanwhile, creates major equity issues. It simply won't happen. "Equity" isn't the issue. If the proposal, as above, it to take a dorm like Harbin or Village A offline, you have to adjust the housing inventory, and short of sticking 400 kids in triples, there isn't the supply on campus to support it. How would you address a means to redevelop Village A, short of building temporary housing, which would be even less popular? As for the notion that a lot of majors make it almost impossible to study abroad, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Everyone - even nurses has the ability to study abroad for at least a semester, and in most cases a full year, if they want. It may require some strategic course planning, but it is absolutely doable. Pre-med is not well suited to study abroad. Some business majors are also difficult unless it;s in the summer. A soccer/track facility on that massive of a footprint is a huge opportunity cost on a space-constrained campus. For a non-core academic activity, it would be well night impossible to justify. By that argument, why have a field for just soccer? What about the MSF? For that matter, is a gymnasium largely just for volleyball and women's basketball games justifiable anymore? Of course they are, inasumuch as facilities are not a zero-sum game. Long term, there could be some possibilities. Build a new campus recreation center on top of that blasted Lot A, for instance, then once it is online you excavate Yates. But the larger problem is how Georgetown could ever get the money to build a new center. Look how long it has taken to build the IAC, and the money is still not there. A new rec center could easily top $80 million given the square footage. The tennis program has been using the Yates courts, but they could just as easily reach an arrangement with the Rock Creek Park Tennis Center to practice and play there. Not like they get spectators now anyway... Agreed.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 20, 2014 17:00:56 GMT -5
Great discussion. Some more thoughts. Yep. I'm glad that these discussions are, more and more, actually happening out in the open, with the involvement of administrators like Morey, Olson, and Groves. Much better than the opacity of years past. "Equity" isn't the issue. If the proposal, as above, it to take a dorm like Harbin or Village A offline, you have to adjust the housing inventory, and short of sticking 400 kids in triples, there isn't the supply on campus to support it. How would you address a means to redevelop Village A, short of building temporary housing, which would be even less popular? Equity absolutely is an issue, one that was explicitly raised when the notion of a satellite dorm was raised earlier this school year. One of the immediate criticisms of this idea was that it was a no-win for the University: if you charge students living there the same price, then they're paying the same amount for an inferior experience; if you charge them less, then you're creating a stratified system that houses the less wealthy kids out in a satellite dorm. There was no good response to this critique, and the satellite dorm idea was dismissed. As for redeveloping Village A... part of the issue here is that students generally really like Village A! Many people have great views, pretty much everyone prefers the apartment-style setup, it's in a convenient location. Is it space-efficient? Not particularly. But another name for space-efficiency is crampedness - no one, and specially not upperclassmen, want to live in a space-efficient repeat of Darnall. More apartment and suite style spaces are always at the top of students' wants for on-campus housing. So, I don't see Village A going anywhere, largely because it meets students' wants. You're right that the housing capacity issue is a real impediment to any redevelopment of existing housing stock. Some of this will depend on what on-campus % is mandated by the 2017 Campus Plan. The combination of the Northeast Triangle, the Old Jes Res, and perhaps a housing retrofit of Kober-Cogan and/or the construction of the Leavey addition would provide enough excess capacity to do something like fully renovate Harbin. A full teardown is extremely unlikely, in my view, not least because knocking buildings down is very expensive and environmentally unfriendly. The only way I see it happening is if it's determined that it would be impossible to build another structure on top of Harbin Patio and creating a sustainable, lasting use of the space requires starting from scratch. Pre-med is not well suited to study abroad. Some business majors are also difficult unless it;s in the summer. Nah. Pre-med is 10 courses out of the 40 you'll take in your time at Georgetown. If you're doing a major like biology or biochem where some of them count toward your major, then it is pretty easy to study abroad. Even if you're majoring in something with zero double-counting like Art History or Culture & Politics, it's still not that hard to find 4 or 5 courses' worth of space in your schedule to put toward study abroad. And there is a good chance you will be able to count at least one study abroad course toward a major or minor, whatever it may be. Plus, so many students these days come in with AP/IB credit that knocks out multiple gen eds, leaving space for study abroad electives. As for business: "All students enrolled in McDonough are eligible to participate in designated and approved programs abroad, organized through the Office of International Programs. Nearly 70 study abroad programs from across the globe are available to McDonough students for business credit. Programs are available during the full academic year, each semester, and each summer."By that argument, why have a field for just soccer? What about the MSF? For that matter, is a gymnasium largely just for volleyball and women's basketball games justifiable anymore? Of course they are, inasumuch as facilities are not a zero-sum game. Well, sure, but chronology/status quo bias is pretty decisive here (and in most facilities arguments). If North Kehoe were a tabula rasa right now, they probably wouldn't put a soccer field there. But it is there, the decision to put it there was made long ago, and the status quo is much cheaper than any workable alternatives. Same with the MSF and McDonough - their use and location is effectively grandfathered in, and it would take a particularly compelling reason to depart from the status quo. McDonough is also obviously not just used for volleyball and women's basketball - the entire AD is housed there and will continue to be, with the exception of the basketball programs and sports medicine, even after the IAC is built. Long story short: the justification for maintaining an existing, long-standing use is always much easier to make than for creating a new use, particularly when there are many competing demands for a particular space. But the larger problem is how Georgetown could ever get the money to build a new center. Look how long it has taken to build the IAC, and the money is still not there. A new rec center could easily top $80 million given the square footage. If it became an institutional priority, the money would be raised. The issue with the IAC, and even moreso the MSF, is that they have not been top institutional priorities. I think the IAC sort of is now, although it has been lumped in with the larger Campaign and the heavy lifting on it has been largely left to the Athletic Development folks. There's some good reasons for that: even with the IAC, we've seen some pushback regarding allocating so much money and space to an athletic use, when there are so many other needs and priorities around campus. That applies in spades to the MSF; with the IAC you can at least argue that it serves all varsity-athletes, which is over 10% of the student body, and will free up space in Yates for non-athletes. The MSF is basically just for three sports. There's a (good, imo!) argument to be made that the heavy use that the MSF gets by non-varsity athletes merits consideration as being more than just a purely athletics project, but the time for making that argument in earnest was 10 years ago. A new campus rec center, meanwhile, wold serve almost all undergrads, many graduate students, many faculty and staff (you'd be amazed how many professors and staff members there are huffing and puffing on the treadmills in Yates at 6:00 a.m.), and even a fair number of neighbors. It would be much easier to justify putting it front and center in a fundraising pitch and making the ask. Especially if it were paired with a bold, exciting new vision for the Yates space. I very much doubt that a soccer stadium and track would suffice for such a vision. But, then again, who knows what the physical needs of on-campus education will look like by that point. Regardless, I'm sure they'd be able to find $80 million worth of space in the $2 billion For Generations to Keep Coming campaign or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Apr 23, 2014 9:12:54 GMT -5
You can finish all your premed requirements in your first 2 years. Everyone finishes it by your Junior year at the latest. So you have at least your senior year to study abroad or do what I did as a premed and study abroad over the summer.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jun 6, 2014 9:39:47 GMT -5
With the news that Georgetown Day School is buying the Safeway and Marten's car dealership to consolidate its campuses in Tenleytown, GU should go after the GDS lower and middle school properties on MacArthur Blvd.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jun 7, 2014 23:00:17 GMT -5
With the news that Georgetown Day School is buying the Safeway and Marten's car dealership to consolidate its campuses in Tenleytown, GU should go after the GDS lower and middle school properties on MacArthur Blvd. Would make sense. That's not a particularly desirable plot for commercial or residential development, really. Still wouldn't provide the school much square footage.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,572
Member is Online
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 9, 2014 7:58:08 GMT -5
With the news that Georgetown Day School is buying the Safeway and Marten's car dealership to consolidate its campuses in Tenleytown, GU should go after the GDS lower and middle school properties on MacArthur Blvd. Would make sense. That's not a particularly desirable plot for commercial or residential development, really. Still wouldn't provide the school much square footage. The question of "what would you put there?" looms large in any such discussion. It is not a convenient location for commuters, it is not particularly convenient to campus, and neighbors already aggrieved by GDS traffic would surely protest any intensification in use (such as running shuttles, even the small Wisconsin Avenue route ones, on a regular basis). The only realistically beneficial use for the University that I could see coming out of this space would be to massively expand the size of HoyaKids. On the one hand, this would inevitably be met with protests as well. On the other hand, it would be difficult to argue that such a move would somehow represent a radical departure from the status quo. Then again, West Georgetown residents were not unsuccessful in arguing that using the old Wormley School as a school building would be an abomination and would lead to dogs and cats brunching together at Filomena. Final verdict: not worth the fight. The space will probably be turned into some more high-end condos with a view of the Potomac that'll go for $1.8 million each.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Jun 9, 2014 9:06:14 GMT -5
Based on how successful the redevelopment of the old psychiatric hospital just down the road was, I'd wager that the GDS site is a VERY desirable plot for residential development.
|
|