New Science Building Location: Foss Hill?


See that? That’s an official plan to put the brand new Molecular and Life Science Building at the Base of Foss Hill. Take another look in 3-D.

That’s Wyllys Ave. in the foreground and that’s the base of Foss Hill on the right. Among the many locations being currently considered, some of which call for the demolition of the stately Shanklin, this plan, known as Option G, is apparently the idea of one faculty member who wants to bring the sciences closer to the center of campus.

In all likelihood the plan will not pass. “It’s not going to happen,” said Matt Ball ’08, current WSA member and unopposed candidate for WSA President (his only competition is the write in candidate “Giant Joint,” who in past years has pulled quite a few votes). “The talk about it sounds like it’s pretty much doomed,” he said.

At Sunday night’s WSA meeting, most people signalled their displeasure with the idea–though some did try to compromise.

“What if they constructed it in a way so people could sled under the building?” one WSA member quipped.

If you’d like to see the options that are actually being considered, go to Blackboard and you can see all the plans. The planning has only been going on for 12 weeks and there’s still time to influence the direction of the project. Consider checking it out.

10 thoughts on “New Science Building Location: Foss Hill?

  1. Anonymous

    Matt Ball is the chair of FiFac (Financial Facilities Committee).Great job Ezra, you’re creating quite a solid record for yourself in reporting – first the housing fines debacle, next this, its all good stuff.For everyone reading this, there are 3 plans that are all considered viable possibilities, one of which involves tearing down Shanklin, none of which involve building it on Foss Hill. Additionally, construction on this project wouldn’t begin until we are all long gone from this institution – that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care though.

  2. Anonymous

    Matt Ball is the chair of FiFac (Financial Facilities Committee).

    Great job Ezra, you’re creating quite a solid record for yourself in reporting – first the housing fines debacle, next this, its all good stuff.

    For everyone reading this, there are 3 plans that are all considered viable possibilities, one of which involves tearing down Shanklin, none of which involve building it on Foss Hill. Additionally, construction on this project wouldn’t begin until we are all long gone from this institution – that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care though.

  3. Anonymous

    Matt Ball isn’t current head of the SBC, Nicole Ippoliti is. I believe he used to be on the SBC though…

  4. Anonymous

    Matt Ball isn’t current head of the SBC, Nicole Ippoliti is. I believe he used to be on the SBC though…

Comments are closed.