|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 6, 2016 13:17:48 GMT -6
Is the new building going in the same place as Cooper? Or is it going somewhere else? The original plan was to renovate Cooper and add to it, at $65 million. Then I saw a plan that has a totally new building east of Sursa and the McKinley garage, so I don't know the details of what the final tally is.
BTW, I won't even get into the whole geothermal boondoggle. That has been a tremendous waste of money, all so we can satisfy the campus greenies. Plus the proposed new "east mall" concept may be a huge money-suck, if it goes through.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Oct 6, 2016 13:24:30 GMT -6
New building east of Sursa is what we're getting.
The geothermal thing is a Gora joke.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2016 14:10:06 GMT -6
The Cooper replacement is unnecessary. Cooper could be rehabbed to house the new College of Health. In the way that Cooper Science Building was structured and built, it cannot be brought up to current building standards for labs and healthcare facilities. It would require renovation costs more expensive than tearing it down, and starting from scratch. Cooper Science was poorly planned and designed. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Oct 6, 2016 14:20:22 GMT -6
"Cooper Science was poorly planned and designed."
Absolutely agree. BSU has struggled with maintenance and lack of good functionality with that building for a long time. Cramped, dark, extremely outdated, and bad layout.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 6, 2016 14:20:49 GMT -6
So will Cooper be razed or turned into "regular" classrooms? With the planetarium attached, I don't know how they could just tear it down...
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 6, 2016 14:21:30 GMT -6
"Cooper Science was poorly planned and designed." Absolutely agree. BSU has struggled with maintenance and lack of good functionality with that building for a long time. Cramped, dark, extremely outdated, and bad layout. Which is not a good sign for a university that touts its Architecture program... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2016 14:30:58 GMT -6
A severe right angle turn from president to Cooper Science.....that's how we roll 😎
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Oct 6, 2016 14:39:15 GMT -6
Cooper definitely needs replacing. Cannot be renovated, no room for required venting for Chemistry. Desperately need new building to continue being good department.
Current plan is to save Planetarium and some CN classrooms if a replacement done. All reports from Provost and acting Pres, both chemists pis that this is not on cards this budget. They were surprised at the mention in the SP which referred to Cooper.
The new building East campus is health science not a place for Chemistry and Physics, maybe not even all of Bio.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Oct 6, 2016 14:39:44 GMT -6
So how about those Cubs?  |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Oct 6, 2016 14:40:07 GMT -6
So will Cooper be razed or turned into "regular" classrooms? With the planetarium attached, I don't know how they could just tear it down... Not all of it...Probably need new location. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Oct 6, 2016 14:43:27 GMT -6
So how about those Cubs? They're gonna choke! |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Oct 6, 2016 14:44:02 GMT -6
A severe right angle turn from president to Cooper Science.....that's how we roll 😎 We are versatile, man. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2016 15:20:50 GMT -6
"Cooper Science was poorly planned and designed." Absolutely agree. BSU has struggled with maintenance and lack of good functionality with that building for a long time. Cramped, dark, extremely outdated, and bad layout. Which is not a good sign for a university that touts its Architecture program... The College of Architecture and Planning did not design the original building. Nor did any of its professors and instructors. It speaks poorly of the architecture firm that did the original design. The design hinders renovation and retrofitting it, and that why it is too expensive to overhaul and keep the original structure. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2016 15:23:38 GMT -6
A severe right angle turn from president to Cooper Science.....that's how we roll 😎 Shit. We spent 58 pages talking about some kid going to a Texas school. This is peanuts. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Oct 6, 2016 16:44:33 GMT -6
"Cooper Science was poorly planned and designed." Absolutely agree. BSU has struggled with maintenance and lack of good functionality with that building for a long time. Cramped, dark, extremely outdated, and bad layout. Which is not a good sign for a university that touts its Architecture program... Cooper an old building, predates Architecture Program here. That funny looking monstrosity for Architecture reflects the energy crisis which briefly dominated our thoughts, as does the Whitinger Building, both in today's world poor design. We'll never worry about that again. After all now we have geothermal to save the day! |
|
