Classroom and Faculty Office Building site selection Town Halls

The informational CPFM website is here, meetings are

September 27,  12:00pm-1pm, EMU Lobby

September 27, 4:30pm-6pm, Ford Alumni Center Lobby

Campus Planning Committee (CPC), October 2

The three likely site are the PLC parking lot, Mac Court, and, my personal favorite, the hopefully soon to be empty lot formerly known as Collier House.

Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Classroom and Faculty Office Building site selection Town Halls

  1. planningduck says:

    Given that many of its spots are either striped too narrowly to be used, or reserved so that plebes like me cannot use them, I wouldn’t miss the PLC parking lot at all.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +7 (from 11 votes)
    • CSN says:

      What are you driving to work? A Ford F-350? My mid-size SUV fits in just fine.

      And, more broadly, are you suggesting that if you can’t have a certain thing, no one should be able to have it?

      Hrm.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)
      • planningduck says:

        My car is smaller than yours. Perhaps you’re just a better contortionist.

        My preference would be that usable parking be made available for all. I won’t deny my self-interest in that, but in any case, you may console yourself with the knowledge that no one with any pull cares one whit for my opinion on the topic.

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
      • New Year Cat says:

        I drive a compact and can park in the outer north row just fine — if I don’t need to open the car doors. So yeah, take the PLC plot. Or better yet, PLC. Or both — we could have another building with an air walk and a drive-through tunnel. Space age….

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
  2. Dog says:

    This new classroom building, of course, just for College of Science Personnel so that we have both a Science Box and a Jock Box

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +6 (from 8 votes)
    • Sophey says:

      Will the upper floors be closed like the Jock Box? Probably not.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
    • honest Uncle Bernie says:

      Ah, but the new “Knight Campus” already should count as some kind of Science Box. Do you really need another in the “Old Campus”?

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)
  3. Pollyanna says:

    Collier House? Seriously? More endless construction in the middle of campus, losing the lovely home of the musicology faculty, and doubtless covering every square inch of grass on that lot? The PLC lot would be infinitely better. Put parking under it, like HEDCO, and we wouldn’t even lose the parking permanently.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +6 (from 10 votes)
    • Environmental necessity says:

      Agree completely.

      The notion that Collier House and environs is the best location is deeply flawed and expresses profound disrespect for the history of this institution, the Eugene community, and the very principle of historic preservation. The idea is that in the near term people (like many faculty I have talked to) have incentives that if uniformly followed would leave no historic structures or places at all; so we agree to create countervailing incentives so that in future years people have some palpable connection to the past and not just the latest campus bling-bling.

      Collier House was for decades was the home of the President of the UO, a faculty club (twice), is the third oldest building on campus, and the last remaining architectural link to a professor known to the first generation of students. It is architecturally interesting against the rise of steel and brick, if far from unique, but much more it is culturally and historically interesting and unique.

      Calling for the destruction of Collier House is declaring to the world: ‘I love the PLC parking lot more than historic structures and places, asphalt more than history.’

      Wouldn’t a new building with underground parking and some retained surface parking on the PLC lot be vastly better? How could that be worse than destroying Collier House? More challenging I am sure, but retrofitting Mac Court would be better too.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +4 (from 8 votes)
      • ODAr says:

        I always envisioned a giant building in PLC lot that would leave 13th street businesses and frontage mostly unchanged then have a promenade above them with more student services and retail; yes burying the rear of the main street businesses underneath along with a parking garage and uniform rear entrances; Then straight up and across to a new PLC… Lets face it PLC is an underutilized waste of space (in terms of design not how many unlucky people are assigned there). I also thought that a Museum/ visitors center out in this area (perhaps on the promenade) would also be a great addition.

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)
      • XDH says:

        I know this response will be unpopular, but I think a hard reality check is needed here. I was DH long enough to know how important it is to have centrally located teaching facilities on campus. The PLC lot is too far from the “heart of campus” to be a workable solution. I have participated in a few of the classroom building meetings and it was stated that Collier House could be MOVED to a new location with a smaller geographical footprint. Nothing wrong with that, and far better an outcome than total destruction as happened to Hayward Field (go to the Rec and look out the east windows while getting some exercise should you doubt the veracity of this statement). I for one welcome a useful, dreadfully overdue teaching facility to educate the additional masses we have admitted over this past decade without consideration WHERE and/or HOW to educate them. Something being discussed are multiple circular classrooms where no student is more than 5-6 rows away from the professor. I’ll gladly teach my 200+ person course in there!

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)
        • UO Matters says:

          Thanks for this comment XDH. I agree. UO’s campus should be high density, for all the reasons you mention. Students and faculty can skateboard or stroll to the riverfront for their nature fix (At least until it gets turned into astroturf for the jocks). How many people actually enjoy the lawn around Collier House? It’s just an obstacle. The thing is a misplaced generic remnant of suburban victorianism, dropped into the middle of Ellis Lawrence’s campus as if to purposely annoy us. Burn it down, or at least drag it off to the cemetery.

          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +7 (from 9 votes)
        • Dog says:

          I mostly agree with this except for one caveat. I think you could make a very high density classroom building on the PLC parking lot as there is more room.

          Now to retro fit the past – what should have been the decision
          many years ago is that the current LLC Dorm should have been
          made as a modern classroom building. I do remember making
          this argument back then and I believe the LLC increased our
          bed dormitory space by only 8% – that was a direct indication to me that UO does not care about classrooms.

          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.