RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Nov 26, 2014 13:41:27 GMT -5
After two years’ worth of data collection, consultations, visioning sessions, etc. etc., the University provided an initial, high-level glance at what will eventually become its submission for the 2018-2038 Campus Plan. Blog post and slides available here. Highlights: - A new residential building atop Harbin Patio. The patio ‘pedestal’ itself would be transformed from its current purely utilitarian use by Facilities into a mixed-use space with academic and commercial/interactive programming
- An ‘Interdisciplinary Research Building’ immediately south of Regents Hall. This space would provide flexible research facilities for projects and would expand the sciences’ footprint with a modern facility in a way that even a refurbished Reiss likely could not
- An academic space addition atop the southeast section of the Leavey Center (i.e. above where Sellinger and surrounding areas are), with additional café/gathering space included
- A residential space addition atop the northeastern section of the Leavey Center (i.e. where the second flood of the bookstore and surrounding areas are)
- Buildout of the St. Mary’s parking lot space – unclear what is intended to go there
- Conversion of Copley Hall from residential to… something non-residential
- Expansion of MedStar’s footprint over half of Lot A, with the remainder to become greenspace. The helipad would be relocated to this new building
- The status and future of Kober-Cogan remains to be resolved between the University and MedStar
Last major item of note: a detailed study of the Yates roof will be undertaken to see whether a comprehensive solution to flooding and field quality issues is possible with today’s technology. If it is deemed impractical, one proposed solution is to construct a new, much more space-efficient student recreation center atop what is now Shaw Field. The soccer field would be rebuild within the current Yates footprint. I asked whether such a soccer field could also include a regulation track; that’s where the track was before, after all. The idea appears to be on the table, to the extent that a table even exists yet. These are just the Main Campus parts, of course – although the Campus Plan does not necessarily cover areas like Georgetown Downtown or the Law Center, one can expect significant happenings there, as well as any potential “Consolidated Athletics Campus.” Most concretely, it sounds like the future home of the McCourt School will be closely integrated with the Law Center, whether at the Capitol Crossing development or through other means. Initial coverage in Vox Populi here.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 27, 2014 13:33:43 GMT -5
Was there anything about renovating Lauinger. I remember some plans 10 years or so ago that looked interesting, but obviously were never implemented.
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Nov 27, 2014 23:44:40 GMT -5
Well most everything mentioned seems like good, practical ideas.
But Im not too sure about making copley non-residential. I guess i would have to see what they want to do with it. Any idea where this idea came from? When I lived there about 6 years ago it didnt seem like the building was getting run down or unfit for students. I really enjoyed my year there (big rooms, quiet, good location).
So if the soccer field is relocated to Yates would that entail leveling off some of the land up there or filling in the "hole" that is Yates? I will be skeptical that this is the best solution for the Yates roof problems until is see more concrete plans.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Nov 28, 2014 15:27:27 GMT -5
Was there anything about renovating Lauinger. I remember some plans 10 years or so ago that looked interesting, but obviously were never implemented. You know, I'm embarrassed to say I didn't think about this at the time. The slides don't appear to show the expected expansion of Lauinger over the adjoining parking lot. I'll ask around. Well most everything mentioned seems like good, practical ideas. But Im not too sure about making copley non-residential. I guess i would have to see what they want to do with it. Any idea where this idea came from? When I lived there about 6 years ago it didnt seem like the building was getting run down or unfit for students. I really enjoyed my year there (big rooms, quiet, good location). So if the soccer field is relocated to Yates would that entail leveling off some of the land up there or filling in the "hole" that is Yates? I will be skeptical that this is the best solution for the Yates roof problems until is see more concrete plans. Yea, the Copley thing wasn't touched on at all while I was there. I look forward to hearing more about what the rationale is there. Presumably, the grade of any new facility on the Yates foot print has to accommodate both the observatory and vertical access issues. I would think that they would want to rebuild the soccer field with lights, which might then dictate the height considerations.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Dec 6, 2014 1:47:57 GMT -5
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,240
|
Post by prhoya on Dec 6, 2014 2:22:48 GMT -5
It's starting to feel like Manhattan, and not in a good way.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Dec 7, 2014 23:55:48 GMT -5
It's starting to feel like Manhattan, and not in a good way. Let me know where exactly you'd like to build out instead of up.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,240
|
Post by prhoya on Dec 8, 2014 7:26:57 GMT -5
It's starting to feel like Manhattan, and not in a good way. Let me know where exactly you'd like to build out instead of up. Is HoyaTalk starting a Fire the Committee campaign and will the University listen to us?
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Mar 25, 2015 22:14:19 GMT -5
Was there anything about renovating Lauinger. I remember some plans 10 years or so ago that looked interesting, but obviously were never implemented. I did end up getting a quasi-answer about Lauinger: the study the Library commissioned was an ad hoc/go-it-alone effort, outside of any sort of concerted University planning process. As a result, there is neither a design nor a timeline for Lauinger expansion/renovation. Having said that, it's clear that something has to happen with the library. They've been moving ahead with piecemeal renovations to improve the special collections, electrical grid, and other facets of the existing facility. There may be a longer conversation that has to take place regarding what a "college library of the future" looks like. One way or another, though, the current Lauinger parking lot space is committed to an eventual library expansion of its footprint. Meanwhile... it is the students that have fired the first shot over the next campus plan: Seriously, though, the report that GUSA has put together about the last campus plan is pretty good, and students positioning themselves to be an independent player in the next round of negotiations can only be seen as a savvy strategic move. Personally, I don't foresee too much acrimony during this next go-round, but I've been wrong plenty of times before...
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Mar 26, 2015 8:22:21 GMT -5
Now that the neighbors have bullied the University into committing to significantly more on-campus housing, I look forward to seeing what new and obnoxious grievances they drum up next time around.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Mar 26, 2015 17:22:10 GMT -5
Now that the neighbors have bullied the University into committing to significantly more on-campus housing, I look forward to seeing what new and obnoxious grievances they drum up next time around. Given the content of the GUSA student petition on the matter, they seem to believe that the neighbors will once again push for a higher % of undergraduates housed on campus - over 90% and perhaps even 100%. It's not stated there, but I know that graduate students are also considered a source of annoyance for neighbors, so I could imagine them trying to make some sort of play there as well, either insisting on the University providing graduate housing or demanding that the University place restrictions on graduate students' ability to live and/or park in the surrounding neighborhoods. A graduate enrollment freeze is also a demand I could imagine being made. For the most part, though, I actually think that their more strident objections/demands will have more to do with MedStar than with the University proper.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Mar 26, 2015 22:23:58 GMT -5
Now that the neighbors have bullied the University into committing to significantly more on-campus housing, I look forward to seeing what new and obnoxious grievances they drum up next time around. Given the content of the GUSA student petition on the matter, they seem to believe that the neighbors will once again push for a higher % of undergraduates housed on campus - over 90% and perhaps even 100%. It's not stated there, but I know that graduate students are also considered a source of annoyance for neighbors, so I could imagine them trying to make some sort of play there as well, either insisting on the University providing graduate housing or demanding that the University place restrictions on graduate students' ability to live and/or park in the surrounding neighborhoods. A graduate enrollment freeze is also a demand I could imagine being made. For the most part, though, I actually think that their more strident objections/demands will have more to do with MedStar than with the University proper. You're probably right. It does seem like the Hospital takes on a somewhat outsized importance in these talks. As for graduate students, I would love to hear neighbors proposals for how the University could stop graduate students—free, adult citizens of the District of Columbia, protected by all federal and district discrimination laws—from living in a particular neighborhood. If I recall correctly, DC law actually protects students as a class or at least prohibits housing discrimination based on student status. As preposterous as it is to force undergrads to live on campus, at least with 18-21 year old undergraduate students, you're usually not dealing with full-fledged working adults yet. But how in the hell is the University going to impose housing restrictions on a 30-year-old professional who is getting a Masters degree? It's downright laughable.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Mar 29, 2015 11:06:18 GMT -5
You're probably right. It does seem like the Hospital takes on a somewhat outsized importance in these talks. As for graduate students, I would love to hear neighbors proposals for how the University could stop graduate students—free, adult citizens of the District of Columbia, protected by all federal and district discrimination laws—from living in a particular neighborhood. If I recall correctly, DC law actually protects students as a class or at least prohibits housing discrimination based on student status. As preposterous as it is to force undergrads to live on campus, at least with 18-21 year old undergraduate students, you're usually not dealing with full-fledged working adults yet. But how in the hell is the University going to impose housing restrictions on a 30-year-old professional who is getting a Masters degree? It's downright laughable. The neighbors, of course, do not view it as outsized - their #1 obsession is parking and traffic, and the Hospital is a major generator of both. Unfortunately, from what I've been told, MedStar is not especially committed to making transit work effectively. If they were, they would've raised much more of a fight about the re-routing of the Dupont GUTS route. But, from their perspective, their key demographics (high-value physicians and choice/high-paying patients) are going to be driving regardless. Anyway, the answer to your question about grad students is pretty simple: require the University to write it into the code of conduct. Traditionally, the courts have given extreme deference to universities in terms of what they can require of students as a condition of their enrollment. One needs only to think of the infamous Bob Jones University prohibition on interracial dating to understand that Universities are empowered in our system to sign away all manner of students' rights, constitutional and otherwise. The DC Human Rights Act does enumerate students as a protected class, but that has not had any real bearing on what a school may require of its students in order to maintain student status. In the last Campus Plan, for instance, the University agreed to place in its Code of Conduct a provision effectively saying that undergraduates may not park on the streets of Georgetown/Burleith/Foxhall, anywhere, ever: Now, enforcement of this falls solely on the University, and it is effectively unenforceable unless the University devoted absurd resources to it. The problem - and one of the reasons why I consider it to be a terrible, disgusting precedent - is that it allows neighbors to wield any 'violations' against the University, portraying it as the University being derelict in enforcing its own Code of Conduct. So, yea, I can easily see some neighbors (I'm hoping not an influential or controlling majority) demanding that the University make "don't live in Georgetown, Burleith, or Foxhall" a pre-condition of matriculation or enrollment as a graduate student. I don't think it'll go anywhere; my fear is that fighting it off will require the University to make concessions elsewhere, when this sort of garbage should just be dismissed prima facie.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Mar 30, 2015 0:10:43 GMT -5
You're probably right. It does seem like the Hospital takes on a somewhat outsized importance in these talks. As for graduate students, I would love to hear neighbors proposals for how the University could stop graduate students—free, adult citizens of the District of Columbia, protected by all federal and district discrimination laws—from living in a particular neighborhood. If I recall correctly, DC law actually protects students as a class or at least prohibits housing discrimination based on student status. As preposterous as it is to force undergrads to live on campus, at least with 18-21 year old undergraduate students, you're usually not dealing with full-fledged working adults yet. But how in the hell is the University going to impose housing restrictions on a 30-year-old professional who is getting a Masters degree? It's downright laughable. The neighbors, of course, do not view it as outsized - their #1 obsession is parking and traffic, and the Hospital is a major generator of both. Unfortunately, from what I've been told, MedStar is not especially committed to making transit work effectively. If they were, they would've raised much more of a fight about the re-routing of the Dupont GUTS route. But, from their perspective, their key demographics (high-value physicians and choice/high-paying patients) are going to be driving regardless. Anyway, the answer to your question about grad students is pretty simple: require the University to write it into the code of conduct. Traditionally, the courts have given extreme deference to universities in terms of what they can require of students as a condition of their enrollment. One needs only to think of the infamous Bob Jones University prohibition on interracial dating to understand that Universities are empowered in our system to sign away all manner of students' rights, constitutional and otherwise. The DC Human Rights Act does enumerate students as a protected class, but that has not had any real bearing on what a school may require of its students in order to maintain student status. In the last Campus Plan, for instance, the University agreed to place in its Code of Conduct a provision effectively saying that undergraduates may not park on the streets of Georgetown/Burleith/Foxhall, anywhere, ever: Now, enforcement of this falls solely on the University, and it is effectively unenforceable unless the University devoted absurd resources to it. The problem - and one of the reasons why I consider it to be a terrible, disgusting precedent - is that it allows neighbors to wield any 'violations' against the University, portraying it as the University being derelict in enforcing its own Code of Conduct. So, yea, I can easily see some neighbors (I'm hoping not an influential or controlling majority) demanding that the University make "don't live in Georgetown, Burleith, or Foxhall" a pre-condition of matriculation or enrollment as a graduate student. I don't think it'll go anywhere; my fear is that fighting it off will require the University to make concessions elsewhere, when this sort of garbage should just be dismissed prima facie. Big difference in telling an undergrad where they can or can't live, and telling a graduate student the same thing. Many of the latter are married, may have kids, etc., and have totally different housing needs. Going down that road, why technically/legally permissible, would have a much bigger impact on a potential grad student looking at GU.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 13, 2015 17:35:49 GMT -5
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,728
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 13, 2015 19:20:30 GMT -5
Great link--thanks. See the things we learn here at HoyaTalk... As to Yates, the analysis is apparent--stop throwing money at this decaying structure. It cost $8 million in 1979 and over $11 million has been spend to repair what is an untenable roof structure. Even with that $11 million, it is arguably as unsafe as it has ever been. A new facility is a costly but appropriate option for a number of reasons: 1. Recreational needs have changed since the 1970's. More can be done in proportionally less space. 2. The interior Yates footprint is awkward and wasn't designed for the kind of use it gets today. 3. The cost of renovation is estimated at $30 million and could easily double, because it's more than the roof which needs tn overhaul (e.g., HVAC, lockers, offices, etc.) Opening up that space creates a great opportunity not only for a natural turf field, but the long needed track that has been absent since the mid-1990's. If anything could rally the beaten-down track alumni, raising money for a outdoor track on campus would be the answer, assuming the new center's location could accommodate the oval. Other thoughts: 1. Does anyone notice how these drawings always feature the MSF as completed, with permanent stands on three sides? Wishful thinking or inside knowledge? 2. Conversely, does anyone notice how these drawings do not include the Lauinger annex into the Prospect Street parking lot? With the paradigm shift away from the printed word, has Georgetown given up on library expansion?
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 13, 2015 21:17:18 GMT -5
Yea, from my perspective, the path forward on Yates is clear:
Step 1: Temporarily relocate the soccer teams to DC United's new stadium for ~3 seasons Step 2: Concurrent with Step 1, build a new, state-of-the-art, spatially efficient student recreational center on the current footprint of North Kehoe/Shaw Field. The center should, ideally, include sufficient tennis courts to hold intercollegiate competitions. Step 3: Once the new center is operational, demolish Yates and replace that footprint with a soccer stadium that includes a regulation track and field event facilities.
If done right, this could also solve the "Kehoe Canyon" effect that exists today, with the long austere concrete retaining wall facing Hariri and Leavey.
On your other two points:
1. I've never gotten the sense that there's much in the way of inside knowledge involved in the creation of the renderings. If there is, they're awfully good at hiding it. I think they're simply told "the MSF will be finished eventually" and just mock up something that looks more finished. If one look at the 'Student Life Corridor' rendering, it looks like there are no stands at all on the east side of the field (more likely they're just omitted/made transparent for the sake of the rendering).
2. I've asked about this before and haven't gotten an answer beyond "that plot of land is set aside for some sort of future library expansion."
I would say that it's not that Georgetown has given up on library expansion, but rather that there needs to be a "Designing the Future(s) of the College Library" effort to mirror the ongoing Designing the Future(s) of the University initiative. Only once there is an agreed-upon vision of what the library should be can that vision be solidified into requirements for a renovated and expanded facility.
The only wildcard that I see is the possibility, however remote, that the Georgetown gondola actually happens, and that they would put its terminus where the Lauinger parking lot now sits. Were that to happen, that would obviously impact the size and design of any expansion.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,728
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 13, 2015 22:38:19 GMT -5
The only wildcard that I see is the possibility, however remote, that the Georgetown gondola actually happens, and that they would put its terminus where the Lauinger parking lot now sits. Were that to happen, that would obviously impact the size and design of any expansion. One of the chief drawbacks to the gondola idea is scale and location--the downtown Portland gondola draws almost 4,000 riders a day and I doubt that any of the NIMBYs want that many people dropped off at 37th and Prospect. For one thing, it doesn't drive business into the main Georgetown area, and could be seen as an overhead version of the GUTS bus. A more expensive solution would be DC's version of the "Dinky" train - a Metro spur that would be placed on a rail bridge across the Potomac similar to what the Yellow Line uses along the 14th Street bridge. This would be a one car setup which would depart Rosslyn and terminate either at Wisconsin Avenue and M, or offer passengers on a western leg towards 34th and K and an eastern leg towards 29th and K. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_Branch
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 13, 2015 23:44:11 GMT -5
One of the chief drawbacks to the gondola idea is scale and location--the downtown Portland gondola draws almost 4,000 riders a day and I doubt that any of the NIMBYs want that many people dropped off at 37th and Prospect. For one thing, it doesn't drive business into the main Georgetown area, and could be seen as an overhead version of the GUTS bus. A more expensive solution would be DC's version of the "Dinky" train - a Metro spur that would be placed on a rail bridge across the Potomac similar to what the Yellow Line uses along the 14th Street bridge. This would be a one car setup which would depart Rosslyn and terminate either at Wisconsin Avenue and M, or offer passengers on a western leg towards 34th and K and an eastern leg towards 29th and K. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_BranchPortland gondola is not downtown; it's also not a gondola, it's an 'aerial tram' more or less akin to the Roosevelt Island tram, which you may remember from such films as today's Hillary for President launch. In that setup, there are two larger cabs that go back and forth between endpoints. A gondola is something you usually see at ski resorts - the Heavenly gondola at Tahoe is a great example. It has small, continuously arriving cabs, and can also have intermediate stops. The Georgetown gondola could, for instance, have a stop at the base of the Key Bridge (say, where the Exxon will soon be replaced with development), and then a final one up the hill at Lauinger. There would definitely be some neighborhood opposition, but so many more neighbors despise the GUTS buses that on balance they would probably be in favor of it of it meant taking GUTS off the streets. Given the exorbitant price of rail, there will be no rail connection to Georgetown unless and until it is part of a sufficiently massive project that economies of scale deliver correspondingly massive benefits. It's pretty much Separated Blue Line or bust.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Aug 9, 2015 16:04:22 GMT -5
|
|