hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Jun 8, 2016 18:34:43 GMT -5
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jun 8, 2016 20:35:50 GMT -5
What was thinking behind a 20-year plan, versus 5 and 10 year plans in the past?
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Jun 8, 2016 21:13:29 GMT -5
What was thinking behind a 20-year plan, versus 5 and 10 year plans in the past? Good question -- a couple of things. A 20-year planning horizon provides an opportunity to make commitments and investments that one wouldn't normally do in a ten-year planning horizon. To some degree, the District's default ten-year horizon is misguided -- it makes campus plans a glorified capital improvement plan, rather than a true near- to mid-term vision. GW did a 20-year plan back in 2007 for, in part, similar reasons. A 20-year plan also provides predictability for a longer period of time. Finally, it eliminates the need for a plan in ten years which, given the cost and effort involved, is no small thing. (And yes, I'm well aware that a twenty-year plan is totally against my own self-interest - consider this my alumni donation for the next two decades .) That all said, all parties acknowledge that twenty years is a long time, particularly with the pace of change and transformations in higher education. The plan includes opportunities for flexibility and change when needed.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 9, 2016 10:44:19 GMT -5
What was thinking behind a 20-year plan, versus 5 and 10 year plans in the past? Good question -- a couple of things. A 20-year planning horizon provides an opportunity to make commitments and investments that one wouldn't normally do in a ten-year planning horizon. To some degree, the District's default ten-year horizon is misguided -- it makes campus plans a glorified capital improvement plan, rather than a true near- to mid-term vision. GW did a 20-year plan back in 2007 for, in part, similar reasons. A 20-year plan also provides predictability for a longer period of time. Finally, it eliminates the need for a plan in ten years which, given the cost and effort involved, is no small thing. (And yes, I'm well aware that a twenty-year plan is totally against my own self-interest - consider this my alumni donation for the next two decades .) That all said, all parties acknowledge that twenty years is a long time, particularly with the pace of change and transformations in higher education. The plan includes opportunities for flexibility and change when needed. Good discussion here. From outside the gates, the 20-year plan seems a bit undwerwhelming. A new dorm here, a new road there, Medstar gets their way (again). Not much is offered that is really transforming to the campus but that may be a realization that Georgetown is as much a landlord to 6000 students as it is a place to go to school. We’ve heard a lot over the years about “reimagining” education but like most academic initiatives, it’s heavy on conceptualization and light on implementation. One idea that’s out there could have a major impact on the 20-year plan yet it’s likely to go nowhere as more dorm rooms keep getting built: a three year undergraduate experience. Currently, a student attends (more or less) eight semesters in a four year period. Shifting that to eight semesters in a three year period changes the calculation on the need for housing, on tuition, and of variable costs. Conceptually speaking, do students really need four years of education to be prepared for life after college? Another hot button topic? Where is the “next 100 acres” discussion? It’s all but vanished. There was a cause celebre a couple of years ago that some students would be forced to live off campus (which was an expected occurrence through the 1980’s) but today’s hypersensitive college students would have none of it. The physical plant wasn’t meant to be a home and a classroom for so many people. If that’s the case, why not move some classes (and faculty) off campus to provide more room for other uses of the space? Athletically speaking, the plan does not address McDonough renovation, does not address the MSF (though one of the drawings shows a one sided Cooper Field which would be a huge step backward), and nothing on the boathouse. In a larger sense, what about tennis, what about baseball, what about softball, track, etc.? What about the concept of real recreational space and not just turf on the roof of a building? Maybe that’s not on the 104 acres but shouldn’t that be in a plan, too? And, of course, left unsaid is the idea that Georgetown will pay rent indefinitely on an NBA arena at a significant premium. Another opportunity lost for some real strategic thinking.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,341
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Jun 9, 2016 12:06:32 GMT -5
Yes, what about track?!!!
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Jun 9, 2016 15:15:13 GMT -5
DFW - you raise some good points. I think a lot of these issues have been addressed in presentations that get into a little more detail than the plan.
I'd highlight these as the key changes that come with this plan: - A true north entrance to campus, with two new significant green spaces that provide informal recreational opportunities and get rid of surface parking. (And that's a big part of what GU gets from MedStar's development.) - A new north-south student life corridor, anchored by a revitalized Leavey on the north and the New South Student Center and Leo's on the south. - Improved academic buildings for the sciences -- a new interdisciplinary building south of Regents that would allow for Reiss activities to be moved, and then renovation or more likely replacing Reiss with new science building(s). - A Yates replacement on the west side of campus, with two new fields for soccer and intramurals and other features. In an ideal world, the new fields are lowered so that they knit together better with the rest of campus.
One of the most important features of the plan is that it continues to rely on the Georgetown Community Partnership. I think it is hard to appreciate the value of the GCP from far away, but it really is remarkable. It is a totally consensus-based approach to resolving issues, and it has been successful in resolving small and big issues alike. The ability of the GCP to produce a consensus plan is pretty amazing. The GCP has pushed all parties -- the administration, the students, and the community groups -- to move past posturing and politics, and instead focus on common interests, shared goals, and achieving results.
But perhaps the most important aspect of this plan is that it does NOT require the university to construct any more new housing. Rather, the university can focus on investing in and renovating existing housing infrastructure to make it competitive. This was the big "win-win-win" of the plan -- the students are happy because the quality of housing is improved, the neighbors are happy because the better housing will pull students to live on rather than off campus, and the university is happy because empty beds don't generate revenue.
As for the next 100 acres, there was also definitely talk in the presentations about the University also continuing to look at opportunities downtown. One of the important things to note is that the Campus Plan really doesn't encompass the entirety of the University's master planning or academic planning -- it's just a snapshot in time of the current planning thinking at the Hilltop. So the master planning goes on at all locations, and academic planning also continues to go on. This (campus) plan also allow the university to come back and make changes if (master and academic) planning dictate a need for it. So things aren't frozen in amber for 20 years.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jun 10, 2016 12:37:44 GMT -5
- Improved academic buildings for the sciences -- a new interdisciplinary building south of Regents that would allow for Reiss activities to be moved, and then renovation or more likely replacing Reiss with new science building(s). So they're going to stuff a building in between the cemetery and the football field. Is there going to be any open space left on campus?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jun 10, 2016 12:39:11 GMT -5
DFW - you raise some good points. I think a lot of these issues have been addressed in presentations that get into a little more detail than the plan. I'd highlight these as the key changes that come with this plan: - A true north entrance to campus, with two new significant green spaces that provide informal recreational opportunities and get rid of surface parking. (And that's a big part of what GU gets from MedStar's development.) - A new north-south student life corridor, anchored by a revitalized Leavey on the north and the New South Student Center and Leo's on the south. - Improved academic buildings for the sciences -- a new interdisciplinary building south of Regents that would allow for Reiss activities to be moved, and then renovation or more likely replacing Reiss with new science building(s). - A Yates replacement on the west side of campus, with two new fields for soccer and intramurals and other features. In an ideal world, the new fields are lowered so that they knit together better with the rest of campus. One of the most important features of the plan is that it continues to rely on the Georgetown Community Partnership. I think it is hard to appreciate the value of the GCP from far away, but it really is remarkable. It is a totally consensus-based approach to resolving issues, and it has been successful in resolving small and big issues alike. The ability of the GCP to produce a consensus plan is pretty amazing. The GCP has pushed all parties -- the administration, the students, and the community groups -- to move past posturing and politics, and instead focus on common interests, shared goals, and achieving results. But perhaps the most important aspect of this plan is that it does NOT require the university to construct any more new housing. Rather, the university can focus on investing in and renovating existing housing infrastructure to make it competitive. This was the big "win-win-win" of the plan -- the students are happy because the quality of housing is improved, the neighbors are happy because the better housing will pull students to live on rather than off campus, and the university is happy because empty beds don't generate revenue. As for the next 100 acres, there was also definitely talk in the presentations about the University also continuing to look at opportunities downtown. One of the important things to note is that the Campus Plan really doesn't encompass the entirety of the University's master planning or academic planning -- it's just a snapshot in time of the current planning thinking at the Hilltop. So the master planning goes on at all locations, and academic planning also continues to go on. This (campus) plan also allow the university to come back and make changes if (master and academic) planning dictate a need for it. So things aren't frozen in amber for 20 years. Frozen in amber you say?
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Jun 10, 2016 16:03:24 GMT -5
- Improved academic buildings for the sciences -- a new interdisciplinary building south of Regents that would allow for Reiss activities to be moved, and then renovation or more likely replacing Reiss with new science building(s). So they're going to stuff a building in between the cemetery and the football field. Is there going to be any open space left on campus? Right now that space is basically a road, so it isn't exactly quality open space. The campus will get new open space at Lot A and Lot B on the north side of campus.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Jun 10, 2016 16:45:02 GMT -5
So they're going to stuff a building in between the cemetery and the football field. Is there going to be any open space left on campus? Right now that space is basically a road, so it isn't exactly quality open space. The campus will get new open space at Lot A and Lot B on the north side of campus. But it could be quality open space that's actually near the center of campus. Maybe things have changed in the past 15 years, but do undergrads ever spend time in the area of Lot B unless they're living north of campus? An "open space" along Reservoir on the edge of campus doesn't seem like it would get much use, nor would it help alleviate the feeling of a concrete jungle developing.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,568
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 12, 2016 23:20:00 GMT -5
From outside the gates, the 20-year plan seems a bit undwerwhelming. A new dorm here, a new road there, Medstar gets their way (again). Not much is offered that is really transforming to the campus but that may be a realization that Georgetown is as much a landlord to 6000 students as it is a place to go to school. I'm not sure what this means; the University is indeed many things to many people, including being a landlord to almost 6,800 students (and a smattering of faculty, staff, and Jesuits). Care to elaborate? We’ve heard a lot over the years about “reimagining” education but like most academic initiatives, it’s heavy on conceptualization and light on implementation. One idea that’s out there could have a major impact on the 20-year plan yet it’s likely to go nowhere as more dorm rooms keep getting built: a three year undergraduate experience. Currently, a student attends (more or less) eight semesters in a four year period. Shifting that to eight semesters in a three year period changes the calculation on the need for housing, on tuition, and of variable costs. Conceptually speaking, do students really need four years of education to be prepared for life after college? From a purely knowledge transfer perspective, probably not. As Good Will Hunting reminded us, the entirety of a Harvard education - many times over - is available in your nearest public library. What is supposed to be truly transformational is not the mere knowledge conveyed and recited, but the formation (to borrow a favorite Jesuit phrase) of character, the growth into adulthood as a woman or man for others, the development of a distinctively Georgetown persona. That is the sort of thing that likely does not lend itself so readily to temporal compression for the sake of efficiency. Another hot button topic? Where is the “next 100 acres” discussion? It’s all but vanished. There was a cause celebre a couple of years ago that some students would be forced to live off campus (which was an expected occurrence through the 1980’s) but today’s hypersensitive college students would have none of it. The Campus Plan is a required document for the area within the formally defined borders of Main Campus. Any reference to other areas (the Wisconsin Avenue office building, Georgetown Downtown, Law Center, etc.) is purely contextual; they are not subject to the Campus Plan. Nothing about the Campus Plan precludes forward movement on the next 100 acres or any other form of expansion, such as the Franklin School. The physical plant wasn’t meant to be a home and a classroom for so many people. If that’s the case, why not move some classes (and faculty) off campus to provide more room for other uses of the space? I mean... first and foremost, main campus is meant to be a home and classroom. What other, better uses of the space would you propose? If there's not enough room (and let's keep in mind that the University is far below its enrollment cap, thanks to Georgetown Downtown), I would think that living and learning uses would be prioritized, while administrative and other ancillary uses receive closer scrutiny for relocation. Athletically speaking, the plan does not address McDonough renovation, does not address the MSF (though one of the drawings shows a one sided Cooper Field which would be a huge step backward), and nothing on the boathouse. Internal renovations that do not materially alter the use of a facility are generally matter-of-right, so a renovation of McDonough as an athletic facility would not require Campus Planning or zoning approval. Cooper Field is covered under the 2012-2017 Campus Plan. The drawing you refer to could be interpreted as indicating that the home side stands are expected to undergo enhancement during the life of the 2017-2036 Campus Plan (highly likely, I would think), rather than defining the build-out of the Cooper Field facility. The boathouse falls outside of Main Campus boundaries and is therefore outside the scope of the Campus Plan. As contentious as it has been, it is probably best to leave it out and remove a possible pretext for neighbor objection. In a larger sense, what about tennis, what about baseball, what about softball, track, etc.? What about the concept of real recreational space and not just turf on the roof of a building? Maybe that’s not on the 104 acres but shouldn’t that be in a plan, too? And, of course, left unsaid is the idea that Georgetown will pay rent indefinitely on an NBA arena at a significant premium. Another opportunity lost for some real strategic thinking. It is mentioned in the plan that New Yates could have tennis courts on the roof. More broadly: as hoyatables noted, while the Campus Plan has come a long way toward being a truly strategic, forward-looking document, it remains first and foremost a regulatory requirement with a defined obligatory scope. Almost anything can be in the plan, but there are things that must be in the Plan in order for them to happen. There are real risks to including things in the Plan that don't need to be in there, as they would risk garnering opposition and blocking the advancement of the things that do require Plan approval. What you've hit upon is the need for a broader, more comprehensive strategic document that goes beyond the confines of the Campus Plan at lays out a truly master vision for the future of the University. That would indeed be nice...
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Sept 2, 2016 9:02:42 GMT -5
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,568
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Sept 30, 2016 22:37:21 GMT -5
Example of how the world has turned upside down: the president of CAG arguing that NPS was not holistic and broad enough in its assessment of the boathouse zone, given that university boathouses would not (!!!!!!) bring more traffic and issues, whereas private facilities would. I mean, it won't lead anywhere, but still, quite remarkable: currentnewspapers.com/admin/uploadfiles/GT%2009-21-2016.pdf
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Dec 1, 2016 23:50:28 GMT -5
The Campus Plan received unanimous approval tonight.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,568
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Dec 3, 2016 11:07:49 GMT -5
The Campus Plan received unanimous approval tonight. Has MedStar managed to satisfy the neighbors yet? From the perspective of changes to campus look and feel, it's the transformation of the north entrance and surrounding areas that will have the biggest impact, but MedStar is mostly driving that boat.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Dec 4, 2016 22:54:44 GMT -5
Yes. The north campus transformations were part of the plan and approved enthusiastically by the neighbors.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,568
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Dec 5, 2016 21:45:21 GMT -5
Yes. The north campus transformations were part of the plan and approved enthusiastically by the neighbors. Ah ok - great! I look forward to the transformation of this surface parking lot wasteland. Here's the letter from JJD:
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Dec 5, 2016 22:41:17 GMT -5
To be clear, the Surgical Pavilion still needs to come back for further processing approval of the actual building. But the campus plan approval was in part a preliminary approval of those changes.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,568
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Dec 10, 2016 11:13:46 GMT -5
To be clear, the Surgical Pavilion still needs to come back for further processing approval of the actual building. But the campus plan approval was in part a preliminary approval of those changes. The Current seems to think the further processing approvals will be granted without a hitch:
|
|
|
Post by jhoya23 on Apr 26, 2021 2:12:57 GMT -5
Current Freshman at GU. One of the main parts of the campus plan is the student life corridor along Tondorf. Now that Cooper Field is finished does anyone have any idea/estimation of when the work on that will start and a possible end date. That whole passage way is such an ugly mess a nice pedestrian corridor through the heart of campus is much needed.
|
|