News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

'“For us to be able to sustain them financially to the standards that we want for our students, we’re unable to do that because of the age and the condition of the buildings,” '

So a landlord does not find a middle ground of maintaining these places and up rents a bit to bring them closer to market to ensure that a part of post-secondary tradition remains??!?!?!
 
IanO said:
'“For us to be able to sustain them financially to the standards that we want for our students, we’re unable to do that because of the age and the condition of the buildings,” '

So a landlord does not find a middle ground of maintaining these places and up rents a bit to bring them closer to market to ensure that a part of post-secondary tradition remains??!?!?!
Click to expand...
This is to be expected from Bill Flanagan - not surprised. If the NDP didn't provide funding for the Dental-Phamacy rehabilitation/expansion, Flanagan would've likely demolished the entire thing based on the premise that it was 'at the end of it's useful life'.
 
An interesting read.

Highlights - not much. Honestly, the next 10 years seems pretty much status quo other than increasing the bottom line with more students. Maybe an expanded school of business on the north campus working to connect it to hub in an expanded way.




Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 7.35.13 AM.png
Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 7.31.41 AM.png
Screenshot 2025-07-27 at 7.33.29 AM.png
 
Odd that's there is very little for South Campus in the next 10 and little mention of Clare Drake.
 
IanO said:
View attachment 669185
Click to expand...
So if I understand correctly, the buildings to be torn down on North Campus include Administration, Human Ecology and the small building to its north, the Industrial Design Studio, the Project Management Office, the Headhouse Pearson Lab, the house that currently houses Student Legal Services, the older building just west of the Health Sciences/Jubilee station, the tall Clinical Sciences Building, and the University Terrace building.

Architecturally, I think Administration and the building west of Health Sciences/Jubilee would be the greatest losses, although we knew that the demolition of Administration in favor of a more open quad was in the works for a long time, and I also understand why they might want to put a more 'important' hospital building right next to the LRT station. University Terrace is sort of worrying—it wouldn't be great to have a hole in the streetscape there. Do we know what the intention is?

I hope that the result of all this won't be a reduction in capacity for certain kinds of research/teaching; like Human Ecology is a terrible building, but there are offices and labs and collections there that need to be moved somewhere, and I hope that admin's plan isn't just "do more with less."
 
Last edited:
On that building near the LRT, from a Keith Gerein column:
Hidden behind the Health Sciences LRT station, the Research Transition Facility — originally built as a nurses’ residence in 1946 — is also an expensive building to maintain that has been rumoured for closure for years.
Click to expand...
 
constance_chlore said:
So if I understand correctly, the buildings to be torn down on North Campus include Administration, Human Ecology and the small building to its north, the Industrial Design Studio, the Project Management Office, the Headhouse Pearson Lab, the house that currently houses Student Legal Services, the older building just west of the Health Sciences/Jubilee station, the tall Clinical Sciences Building, and the University Terrace building.
Click to expand...
The main intent along the 89th Avenue corridor is to develop an east/west spine in the form of an intensely landscaped/hardscaped boulevard. All of the buildings scheduled for demolition have also been deemed too expensive to maintain from an operational standpoint (I can't offer an opinion on whether there is some political expediency in there as well, although it wouldn't surprise me if there was)
 
archited said:
The main intent along the 89th Avenue corridor is to develop an east/west spine in the form of an intensely landscaped/hardscaped boulevard. All of the buildings scheduled for demolition have also been deemed too expensive to maintain from an operational standpoint (I can't offer an opinion on whether there is some political expediency in there as well, although it wouldn't surprise me if there was)
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately our administration has been known to talk out of both sides of its mouth before. It also hasn't been the best steward of its own (or the neighborhood's) history, as shown by the ring houses debacle among other events. (Still hoping Ken can work his magic there somehow...) So I would like to think that these changes will all turn out for the best, but we won't know for a while.

Of course, this is all occurring along a background of unprecedented budget cuts from our provincial government. I can't blame our administration entirely, but I do wish they'd be straight with us.
 
I feel hasn't been the best steward is a huge understatement.

Yes and to make it worse, the only reason the current U of A administration is there is because they will not say anything critical of the provincial government.

They will not be straight with us, they are political enablers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top