Why was I not contacted about making this presentation?! It’s packed with the vague buzzwords that I thrive on!

Student Consumer: “24/7 / Grab n Go / Choices / Variety / Entertainment / One Stop Student Services”
Community: “Ownership / Active pathways / Connectivity / Visibility / Breaking down walls / Decompartmentalizing”
Mobility: “Pervasive technology / multi-tasking / access”
Iconic: “Identity / Representative / Symbol”

So you’ve just been accepted by Georgetown. You’ve probably got a lot of questions. Hi, I’m Christian Slater. What’s it like to study at Georgetown? Let’s find out together. Studying at Georgetown means taking on the challenge of the road that rises to meet you. Georgetown, respecting the past. And opening the window to the future. Have you ever tasted a rainbow? At Georgetown, you will.

The next student forum is scheduled for Wednesday, July 27 at 6pm in Leavey (exact room to be confirmed, but probably the Club Room on the 3rd floor). Any student is welcome to attend.

Just to preempt some questions, the modern look of some of the pictures aren’t necessarily representative of what the interior will look like.

Ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew, ew.

Ew.

How is this iconic? What about this screams ‘Georgetown’? What about this even whimpers ‘Georgetown’?

When I walk into most buildings at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, BC, or MIT, I immediately get the feeling that these are buildings and interiors that befit that campus. When I see <a href="http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/ADT8554.jpg"Massachusetts Hall, I think Harvard. When I see Harkness Tower, I think Yale.

When I see Healy, Copley and White-Gravenor, I think Georgetown. Pretty much anything built thereafter, not so much. The Leavey Center screams airport waiting lounge. Southwest Quad could be plopped down at virtually any school in the country and blend right in (presuming, of course, that that school is filled with other undistinguished buildings from the last two decades).

So the exterior of New South is a wash. Granted. But now they’re proposing to make the interior a lovechild between the Leavey Center and SWQ?! Mary, Mother of God. Look at those designs. Does anything scream “Georgetown” about them? Does anything even whimper “Georgetown” about them?

Do me a favor. Go ahead and do a Google image search for “Student Center”. Most of the results will look exactly like the NSSC plans. Like this, the result from the first page, from St. Louis University. Or this, from Marshall University. Or this from Cleveland State. I could go on.

And the plans for the Pub are a monstrosity. Do they think just because they have some brick walls, it’s the same as the Queen’s Head Pub at Harvard? Ugh.

Architects — if you’re reading this, do us a favor.

Go visit Healy Hall. Visit the entrance. Visit Carroll Parlor. Visit the President’s Office. Visit the Philodemic Room. Visit Gaston.

Visit the Georgetown Alumni Facebook page. Notice their welcome tab, which cleverly has four ‘doors’ of Georgetown as links to their different social pages. Notice what doors they have up there, and what that says about how Georgetown displays itself to the world. It’s not New South. It’s not Leo’s. It’s Copley, White-Gravenor, Copley Crypt and the Gonda Theater. And not the “new” Gonda Theater dors, but the original ones from when it used to be the Ryan Administration Building. Seeing a trend here?

Come on, guys. You’re building something which is going to be used 30+ years and last for many years more. Can’t we aim for Georgetown iconic?

Am I the only person who thinks the “modern” look sucks? It doesn’t represent Georgetown at all. This place should feel uniquely like Georgetown – not just some “sleek and modern” student center at University X. Georgetown is not “sleek and modern,” and I – for one – like that.

Ryan, thanks for clarifying that. The modern/bland office look is completely unappealing.
It’s strange to me that my new grad school, a Big10 state university, is better able to evoke grandeur, elegance and class in new buildings and student spaces than my beloved alma mater (as much as I generally like the Hariri building, the coldness of the interiors leaves quite a bit to be desired.)

Aesthetics aside, I am a little concerned that too much is trying to be accomplished in too small of a space. I’m not entirely clear on the purpose of an internet lounge, for instance. The pub/bar/dining space seems like a promising idea, but SO much depends on execution. An Epicurean style cold, industrial place with nausea-inducing smells isn’t very desirable (read: can that dining space not be Aramark’s responsibility?). Is another gaming space necessary here? Couldn’t the Village C alumni lounge be redone to make it a more desirable space, and then use that space in NSSC for other purposes not already met elsewhere on campus? (On that point, how about the McCarthy and Reynolds, and the Reynolds/Kennedy multipurpose room, none of which seem to be used for any great purposes currently?)

So many questions!

For reference, this is what my new StateU law school dorm lounge looks like:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/lawyers%20club%20lounge/thelaststraw05/DSCN0467.jpg
http://media.photobucket.com/image/lawyers%20club%20lounge/thelaststraw05/DSCN0469.jpg
http://fineartamerica.com/images-medium/lawyers-club-sitting-room-chris-fleming.jpg

Are you SERIOUSLY telling me Georgetown can’t even at least match THAT for new student spaces? That’s sad indeed.

This looks like something you’d see at Rutgers.

All I ask for is some good looking stones and some sexy wood. But good God do not give me this modern bullshit.

say no. give us space in a building we love. It will pay for itself in alumni donations.
No more of this commuter state school nonsense. I am embarrassed for people to see VC, NS, and SWQ. See whitman college@ princeton, plus the new wing they built at national cathedral. im sure its expensive, but we can’t keep doing this. It is also expensive.

why are they having these ‘town hall’ type meetings during the summer. The only students on campus are in high school. makes a lot of sense.

Best comment from an older alumnus, when shown:

“My four year-old daughter, Isabel, looked at the slides with me tonight. At virtually every slide, she asked: “Daddy, is that an airport?”

Not a good sign.”

I actually think the designs look great. Not too stuffy. I like the idea of a more traditional, Healy-esque space, but what you risk there is a designer messing up and creating a space that’s either too formal or cheesy and inelegant. Additionally, re-creating Healy in a space the size of the proposed student center would likely be prohibitively expensive.

The main issue I have with the plans is that at Georgetown’s current pace, WE WON’T SEE ANY PROGRESS UNTIL THE NEXT DECADE’S campus plan comes up for discussion. As a current undergrad, I’m constantly frustrated to see the hundreds of millions being pumped into the new science center while student spaces in high demand are repeatedly delayed, and dorms (read: New South, Henle) continue to decay and lag far behind comparable student housing at less expensive universities and state schools. Georgetown’s priorities don’t seem to align with the interests of current undergrads and those of the near future, and many students are frustrated because of it. FYI Georgetown, giving students the perception that university funds are misallocated is NOT the way to build a strong donor base.

@Gtown13:

Right now, I intend to give $0 to this monstrosity of a student center. If you class it up, I would consider giving a decently substantial donation (on condition it go to the NSSC only).

I’m sure the same could be said of many alumni. I mean, it needs hardly be said, but I’ll go ahead and say it: the additional costs of making a student center actually look nice are balanced out by the number of people who would donate to see such a center.

As to the concerns about a designer messing up and creating a ‘cheesy’ space — like a Disneyfied Healy — I think that can be remedied by giving students and alumni control over how the plans will look, beyond mere ‘input’ or ‘feedback’. I would trust pretty much any random student picked off campus to design a better looking student center than these administrators. Over the last sixty years, we’ve gotten Harbin, Darnall, VCW, SWQ, the Leavey Center, Lauinger . . . etc. etc. ad nauseum from administrators, and no one likes them. Perhaps it’s time to give design control over student space to actual students?

And as to the completion date, I heard that Fall of 2013 is the earliest it could open if they hit their fundraising target. Of course, I take that with a boulder of salt, but still, 2015 is not an unreasonable expectation for its opening. And a nice-looking student center? Well, that’s priceless.

Agreed with everything Matt said. I think we feel invested in Georgetown becoming better, for the longterm, as alumni. I would also be much more inclined to give money to a space that seems to really embody Georgetown, rather than random community college-like student space or an airport lounge (I was actually literally just thinking — show me a plan I like, and I will donate, specifically to that, even as a member of the Class of 2011).

It’s honestly embarrassing to show non-Georgetown friends around campus beyond the Healy and Dahlgren quads. It’s so unfortunate that a school as wonderful, and as grand on the outset, as Georgetown is such an architectural eyesore beyond the front lawn or so.
Mere functionality should not be the end all and be all of all new spaces on campus. These buildings and spaces are going to be around for a long time, the point is not to just satisfy the classes of 2012-2015, or whatever the current classes happen to be. Most projects won’t be completed while the classes that were there to see them started are still around anyway, but that’s ok. Georgetown needs to consider how each space will work out in the long term.
If it’s not an absolute pressing immediate necessity, it might be better to wait on building new buildings and spaces until adequate funds are available to really do them well.

Also, @gtown 2013, I am actually REALLY glad to see Georgetown pump tens of millions into the new science center because that is something the university needs in the long term. Yes, we all complained about the lack of student space, but frankly, we also all worked around it. On the other hand, there are literally thousands of bright young students every year that don’t apply to/don’t choose to attend Georgetown because we are sorely lacking solid science programs.
There are entire new demographics of both undergrad and grad students, researchers, professors, research grants that we could attract if we strengthen our science programs. And frankly, that is not going to happen out of decrepit old Reiss labs.
So, yes, I wholly support the university pursuing long-term goals over short-term goals that yield immediate gratification to current students (though, granted, those should not come at the expense of the current students).

Oh, and on another non-design related note, gahhh, another “multipurpose room”? Righttttt, because we get so much good use out of Leavey Club Room, and Bulldog Alley, and Copley Multipurpose room and other similar hideous spaces.
WHY???!!!???

(And if there must be such a space, can it PLEASE not be controlled by OCAF?)

I like the renderings. Students on campus now love the interior look and feel of Hariri. Healy, Copley, W-G look and feel the way they do because they ARE old and authentic. New South isn’t like those buildings and I don’t think the student center in it should be either. I like the fresh look they’ve come up with.

Fire everyone responsible for this and start over.

Nothing this mediocre can rescue itself.

Worth noting guys:

None of these pictures are simulated renders of the space, as far as was stated in the meeting. They are composite pictures of a bunch of other similar spaces that the firm has designed for other universities.

That being said, I do think there are pretty fundamental problems with the current designs. It was stated at the first meeting that there is still time for these to be addressed. Those who were at the first meeting were not sparing with our criticisms; I would encourage even more people with constructive things to say to come to the second thing at the time listed above.

Try to pay particular attention to the blueprint slides, as these represent the real red meat of the designs. Thoughts on the use of space? Types of spaces offered?

@ATalbot:

How were these architects chosen? If the pictures included are past designs they’ve done, it seems like these architects specialize in modern designs. The architects are the Smith Group. Looking at their portfolio, it seems all the work they’ve done skews modern.

Check out their educational examples. I can’t find a single example of anything close to traditional designs. I’m sorry, but this firm would be great if we went to Cal Tech, but they are not the right fit for Georgetown.

We have a saying in the computer world – GIGO. Google it.

Trying to cram a huge variety of different types of space into one area? What a perfect way to underserve each and every one of those space needs! Absolutely agreed with sd352- multipurpose rooms rapidly turn into purposeless and unused rooms because they aren’t good for anything. Exhibit A- Bulldog Alley. Looks like a storage room, which is convenient because that’s what it is generally used for.

Also, very sneaky on the administration’s part to try and plop a “pub” into the NSSC. If they manage to slide some sort of food/social space into New South they’ll point to that as reason for why students can’t have Healy basement back, to put the Pub where it once was and ought to be.

Further, who the heck decided to hold town halls when there are like 20 students on campus?! Don’t pretend that you want student input when you don’t allow student input until AFTER you’ve decided what the NSSC is going to look like, and then only offer the chance to voice opinions to a handful of students while the overwhelming majority are off campus. Holding a town hall over Christmas vacation would make about as much sense.

Another colossal disappointment from the Georgetown administration.

the pub made me laugh and cringe. there is no such thing as a pub in new south. There is such a thing as epicurean lite. And lord knows we dont need to do that again, I can go to benihanas and potbellys off campus. ( read not at all)

[...] of GU, Vox Populi got its hands on some draft renderings of the proposed New South [...]

Everyone commenting is so angry. Can we please place this into perspective? Two years ago, a new student center wasn’t a priority for the university, it had no fund raising commitment to it. Everything has changed since then — they are going to build a student center! Now they’ve begun the first steps of consulting with students about the designs to make sure that the final space represent student needs, and all everyone can do is flame the stock photos they are using? Who said this is going to be the last meeting? They’re trying to get some work done in the summer with the students who are here, many of whom are student leaders.

If all you can do is complain and whine about this enormous step in improving student space, rather than sitting down at the table like mature adults, then you shouldn’t be involved in the conversation.

@Please: Are you an administrator? We should be satisfied with this crap? And if you want us to sit down at the table, I’d like to know where that table is. A “town hall” meeting where there are no promises made and where only a handful of students have the ability to show up is not a table. It’s a sham.

These designs are junk. Multipurpose spaces do not work. Something that works somewhat well for many things works very well for nothing. Haven’t we learned from the Leavey Center debacle? You can’t design a space that does everything. Let’s have something that picks a few key things and does them really well. Let’s then have a design that complements or historical spaces (Healy, Copley [EXTERIOR ONLY], White Gravenor) but still offers something modern and functional.

And please, that pub is a joke. Nice way to try to nip in the bud the Healy proposal.

This entire situation is shortsighted. If Georgetown makes a truly unique, inspiring, and functional space in New South and complements it with a revived presence in Healy or Maguire basement, the university will reap dividends far greater than its expenses in the form of engaged and contributing alumni (and increased ranking, since that’s all the administration really cares about).

I’m extremely disappointed.

@Please

These designs are awful, so of course we’re angry. What’s more, someone decided what should be in these designs before consulting students which, while unsurprising, is upsetting. How about rather than independently deciding what the NSSC is going to look like and then holding meaningless town halls about decisions that have already been made, the administration asks the student body what they want their student center to be and then goes out and does that?

@Please But that’s exactly it.
1. If they’re going to make student space a priority finally, it would make sense to at least do it well, not some sort of makeshift proposal that doesn’t seem to have as much thought and foresight put into it as future generations of students deserve.
2. I can’t speak for myself because I’m no longer a Georgetown student, but yes, administrators had general meetings with designers/consultants etc. and groups of students about student space at Georgetown but those meetings never included any sort of concrete proposals on the university’s part. Frankly, if we had a better idea about what those meetings were leading to, the students themselves might have directed the conversations accordingly, but as far as I know, that was not the case.
(Also, these meetings were by invitation only, and of course, administrators were the ones to invite students. For all I know, that meant entire large demographics of invested students missed out on participating in the initial stages due to selection bias. Point being, not everyone can be “at the table” to discuss this anyway, but it affects everyone, not just current student leaders.)

Frankly, I really hope members of the Georgetown community have enough foresight to know not to settle for something crappy/poorly thought out just because the university is finally offering something, and oh, we’ll take whatever we can get. Nope.

Also, @Omar, there are several differences between the Hariri building and most other campus spaces.
1. The business school is the business school. You won’t see me complaining about science buildings, for instance, being bright, functional, practical and modern (though hopefully still without being aesthetic eyesores) because honestly that is probably what is likely to serve the purpose best. The same case cannot be made for a student center.
2. We like Hariri because while it’s not spectacular, it is a helluva lot better than any other academic building (with the exception of Healy) that actually feels like a welcoming, well-conceived space at all, with the bright light and comfortable (albeit cheap) seating and thoughtful breakout rooms. But it really is a sorry commentary on the school’s state when a building that could be just about anywhere is the best option on campus i.e. we just like Hariri by default. We can do better than that.

(And to whoever made the point about Healy/Copley/WGR etc. being in that style because they are old, the Flemish revival/collegiate English gothic styles or whatever are really representative of their time, and are made to echo the fine halls of Cambridge and Oxford and University of Paris and other old European universities. Doesn’t mean they don’t work anyway — there is a reason some styles of architecture persist for hundreds of years, seeing greater interest and revivals in some periods, whereas other styles begin to look dated in just a few years.)

resume padders who care must get students and alum involved in giving us space we want. Give us space in a place we want to be (read healy, maguire, old north etc.) and it will pay for itself many times over. Honestly does someone in the admin have a stake in aramark or quickanddirty construction co.? leavey, VC…enough is enough.

Also, we should build out the jes res lawn in the style of whitman college at princeton. Also, please when can we start demolishing VC and build something that looks like it give a damn. For students and alum who take georgetown seriously, its tough to see spaces that don’t.

Another possibly substantive comment: I’m not sure what the point of an information desk even is. Honestly, I don’t see anyone using that.
1. There’s this little thing known as the internet. Hola!
2. There’re upperclassmen, RAs, friends, Facebook, text messages, whatever, to get worthwhile, tailored Georgetown-related information quickly.
I don’t see anyone using an information desk, especially not in a place frequented primarily by students.

Why do living room/open study have to be two different disconnected spaces?
How about a generally connected reading room space, one of which is quiet study and other is not necessarily?
(And frankly, I think proportionally too little has been set aside for the “living room” — I would hope it has 1. plenty of seating in different clusters; 2. beautiful high quality furniture; 3. reading lamps, rugs, possibly a fireplace)

Also, a nicer coffee shop with a good amount of seating, and possibly a nicer selection of foods, would be a great addition.

The “pub” belongs in Healy/Maguire basement, not under New South for goodness’ sake. This pub/eatery needs to be our own equivalent of the Tombs, if not even better. Nothing less than that is worth anything — we can just go to the Tombs (and that’s where we take out of out town friends anyway, administrators, not Epicurean; Epicurean where all you administrators go for your happy hours).

This is truly a typical DC debate. All bitching and moaning, but no substantive suggestions communicated in a mature way. If everyone on here stopped writing comments on the Voice blog and took some time to draft a well thought out note and sent it to an administrator (like Erika Cohen Derr or Dr. Olson) I am sure that would be a more productive root of voicing your feelings. I hope to attend the next student Townhall, but from what I heard and from the presentation that I looked at, it really sounds like most of the people making comments have no idea what they are talking about. Not sure if you are current students or Alums, but some of you are making yourselves sound like real asses.

These are not designs, they are “possible designs”. Nothing in this presentation has been committed to being implemented to any degree. Some initial plans have to be rendered so something can be shown to students and comments can be made. People obviously do not agree with everything that was thought of for this building as of now but there is plenty of time for input by students. Let’s get a little more mature and find the best way and most productive way to make our voice heard.

There is a lot of anger on this blog, but if we turned that energy we are using to express our anger into energy used to productively express our feelings then this building may actually turn out to be something we can all appreciate.

@DC:

I beg to differ. I apologize if the commentators here weren’t one of the dozen or so students who got the non-publicized invite to attend a town hall over the summer, where they found that Georgetown had already hired an architectural firm and it had done some preliminary plans.

The slideshow didn’t initially note that these plans were not the actual renderings, but only examples of the firms’ previous work. However, regardless of how you’d like to split hairs, it’s clear that the design portfolio of the Smith Group skews toward ‘modern, cutting-edge design’. As I noted above, I’ve gone through every project they have up on their website, and none even approach traditional designs. Feel free to confirm here: http://www.smithgroup.com/?id=38

In that case, I think it’s fair to voice frustration at both the process and the proposed firm. It seems from the comments and elsewhere that students and alumni overwhelmingly desire a look more in tune with Georgetown’s traditional roots of Healy, White-Gravenor, etc., and that this firm does not specialize in that look. If this were UC San Diego or a New York advertising firm, these architects would be great. We are not, however.

Compare, for example, the firm of Robert A.M. Stern. Stern did Georgetown’s Master Plan in 2000, and helped with SWQ and Wolfington Hall. Stern is the Dean of Yale Architecture School. You can check out his portfolio here: http://www.ramsa.com/

We should be getting his firm to design the plans, not the Smith Group. While the SG is undoubtedly talented in what they do, what students want is not what they do. You wouldn’t ask Van Gogh to paint a Rembrandt, and similarly you shouldn’t expect a firm that specializes in avant-garde, modern designs to build a classic, refined interior.

Students are also complaining about the process — how students were not involved from the ‘ideation’ stage, but instead presented with both an architectural firm apparently already selected with its own idea of how to make the space look. Rather than having to beg an administrator to change these rules, I would hope that students have the majority of control in how the space looks. That means more than just the occasional townhall where students give ‘feedback’, but actually placing students in control of creating the space with the architects at every step of the process.

For a building that’s going to be the student center for 30+ years, I think it’s quite the worthy debate.

@ Matt,

First of all, I heard that there were almost 30 students there so you may want to fact check yourself slightly. For some reason you seem to think that this process is a lot further then it may actually be. When you say that students were not involved in the ideation stage, that may be true, but none of the current renderings are close to being implemented. If people make their voices heard in a productive manner and in a forum for which they will actually be heard and taken seriously, then I am sure that the architects are going to have to redo their drawings. There is no way that the university is going to build a new building that has no support and is not acceptable to students.

Instead of taking time out of your day searching through the Smith Group’s website, take 25 min. and draft a note and send it to someone who can actually do something about it. You seem like a smart kid but everything you’re saying right now is really unproductive.

By no means am I disagreeing that there should be an open discussion and debate about the process, aesteitic look, and the true function of this building, I am simply arguing that writing long responses on the Voice website is not the correct forum to do this. You seem like a smart kid and someone who has a fair depth of knowledge, but you are sadly undermining the process and making yourself look silly by writing page long responses for the Voice.

Sign off of this blog, take a deep breath, and write out a true response. Don’t just bitch and complain about this, do something productive about it.

Thanks for your suggestion, DCDebate, but honestly you don’t know if we’re doing both.
The value of sharing comments on a blog is that we can get a feel of what others are thinking, and perhaps if we are brainstorming together here, those of us who choose to write to the administrators would have a diversity of perspectives on which to base their letter.

P.S. Matt, Herman-Cox http://www.hartmancox.com/projects/academic has also done some fairly good academic work though it seems Robert A.M. Stern has designed most of my favorite new campus buildings, at least on campuses I’m familiar with — Georgetown, UofM (both Georgetown and Michigan’s buildings are a little on the blah side, but still classic enough to stand the test of time and not incongruous with the rest of the school’s architectural style), Harvard, UVa).

i wonder if there is a possibility at this point of changing architects. It doesn’t seem like the smith group does the type of work georgetown students want. Then again, the type of work georgetown students want really cant be done in NS in the first place. So,sigh, as much as I dont like smith groups work at all, it seems appropriate for NS.

New architect… new location…. we can dream right?

You’re right it’s New South, but that’s already one strike against it. Might as well work up from there, rather than meet it at its level.

Are there any other Hoya musicians who want to see more practice rooms on campus? Not necessarily in the NSSC (the space doesn’t even seem big enough for all the things they’re trying to fit in), but it seems that the new plan for New South would get rid of the two practice rooms near the film screening room (as crappy as they are). I’m not sure how many practice rooms that would leave, but definitely fewer than 10.

I’d love to see a little more emphasis on visual art/music spaces in some of these new campus plans, though it seems that the arts are always at the low end of the totem pole in terms of priorities…

[...] architects that attempting to do too much with too little, which is a major criticism of the original NSSC layout, would doom both centers. Still, we will have to wait until the redesigned NSSC floorplans are [...]

[...] Here’s our analysis of the notable changes from the last renderings. [...]