University should think up, not out for building plans
Commentary by: Drew Prindle
Issue date: 11/12/09 Section: Opinion
For the past few weeks, President Lesley Hallick has been jumping from meeting to meeting, asking students and faculty what they do and don't like about Pacific. In a couple more weeks, all of the input she receives will be compiled to form a comprehensive, all-encompassing ten-year plan for the University. This plan will undoubtedly include details on Pacific's growth and prospective construction plans; and although I am not privy to these building plans, I can see from the past that Pacific has a history of short buildings and sprawl. It is my sincerest hope that when university leaders draw up our future building plans, they embrace a plan that builds the campus up rather than out.
Sure, Pacific can keep buying up surrounding properties as the school expands, but that will consume more resources and take up more space than necessary. My freshman year I took a course on environmental politics, and throughout the class we discussed in great detail the problem of urban sprawl - essentially the rapid expansion of human living space and movement away from cities.
This phenomenon has caused vast expanses of land to be ravaged and developed in the interest of building suburban housing outside of cities. And although Pacific's expansion isn't nearly as detrimental on such a wide scale, the University should still be conscious of the consequences of campus expansion.
In my opinion, it should be the University's policy to build campus vertically; and by that I mean adding extra stories. Instead of progressing ever outward and taking up more space, why not aim high and start building skyward? It's not like we're incapable of doing so. Any wayward channel-surfer who's landed on an episode of Modern Marvels can tell you that human engineering has reached the point where we can build just about anything. Texas has plans to build a giant dome over the entire city of Houston, and the United Arab Emirates is currently building a skyscraper that's over half a mile high. If that kind of stuff is possible, why is it so hard for Pacific to build anything with more than four floors?
If our ten-year plan is going to effectively prepare Pacific for an increase in students, doesn't it make sense to build taller buildings that can accommodate more people? I've been to quite a few different schools; and from what I've seen, it isn't uncommon for large universities to feature class halls and dormitories over six, seven, and even eight stories tall.
Not only that - most larger schools have multi-level parking garages too. Why doesn't Pacific follow suit and build a parking complex to remedy to our congested, sprawling, parking lots? The way I see it, building campus upward is an entirely feasible and practical way to accommodate more people while simultaneously avoiding excessive campus expansion. I truly hope that when planning for the future, Pacific's leadership thinks about these arguments, and considers making the ivory tower a little bit taller.
Sure, Pacific can keep buying up surrounding properties as the school expands, but that will consume more resources and take up more space than necessary. My freshman year I took a course on environmental politics, and throughout the class we discussed in great detail the problem of urban sprawl - essentially the rapid expansion of human living space and movement away from cities.
This phenomenon has caused vast expanses of land to be ravaged and developed in the interest of building suburban housing outside of cities. And although Pacific's expansion isn't nearly as detrimental on such a wide scale, the University should still be conscious of the consequences of campus expansion.
In my opinion, it should be the University's policy to build campus vertically; and by that I mean adding extra stories. Instead of progressing ever outward and taking up more space, why not aim high and start building skyward? It's not like we're incapable of doing so. Any wayward channel-surfer who's landed on an episode of Modern Marvels can tell you that human engineering has reached the point where we can build just about anything. Texas has plans to build a giant dome over the entire city of Houston, and the United Arab Emirates is currently building a skyscraper that's over half a mile high. If that kind of stuff is possible, why is it so hard for Pacific to build anything with more than four floors?
If our ten-year plan is going to effectively prepare Pacific for an increase in students, doesn't it make sense to build taller buildings that can accommodate more people? I've been to quite a few different schools; and from what I've seen, it isn't uncommon for large universities to feature class halls and dormitories over six, seven, and even eight stories tall.
Not only that - most larger schools have multi-level parking garages too. Why doesn't Pacific follow suit and build a parking complex to remedy to our congested, sprawling, parking lots? The way I see it, building campus upward is an entirely feasible and practical way to accommodate more people while simultaneously avoiding excessive campus expansion. I truly hope that when planning for the future, Pacific's leadership thinks about these arguments, and considers making the ivory tower a little bit taller.
Be the first to comment on this story