Demolition of Superblock would be costly

Initial analysis has indicated that it may be too expensive to implode the high rise dormitories, University President Judith Rodin said yesterday. An early engineering survey -- charged with examining the structural aspects of the buildings -- has determined that the costs of destroying the high rises combined with the price for new dorms would be "quite high," Rodin said. Speculation regarding the fate of the high rises began in November when Rodin announced at University Council that the consulting firm of Biddison Hier would consider various options for the buildings, including demolition. "Superblock seems, to me, to be a real missed opportunity for this University," Rodin said at the meeting. "I think we can rectify the error." Provost Stanley Chodorow also suggested that demolishing the high rises may prove prohibitively expensive at this week's Trustees Committee on Student Life meeting. "I know there have been times when I have been signed up to be the first one to pull the plunger, but studies done now show that we can't afford to implode them," Chodorow said. Rather, he said, the University will consider repairs to "fix them up and make them more attractive," he said. Chodorow later explained that his statements were not meant to indicate a final decision, since no such decision has been made. He said he merely wanted to indicate to the Trustees that the high rises were not slated for certain destruction. These primary engineering analyses are intended to give the University an idea of the costs of renovating the buildings compared to the cost of destroying them and beginning from scratch, Rodin explained. "The initial engineering analyses are giving us some prices," Rodin said. "There is no decision on whether that is too much or too little, but the prices are quite high." She added that these are standard evaluations which the University requested for all campus buildings. "We asked [Biddison Hier] what it would cost to renovate [Superblock] to really bring them up to 1990s standards and what it would cost to just destroy it," Rodin said. "There is no question the cost of destroying it and building another dorm instead is much higher than just renovating it," she added. But officials are looking for funds to cover a variety of projects -- most notably several academic programs released last week in conjunction with the Agenda for Excellence. This week's meetings of the Board of Trustees saw several donations announced, but Rodin said the University is soliciting more gifts for several other capital projects. Also, administrators said they will seek donations, rather than tuition increases, to cover most of their ongoing initiatives. And price is not the only factor in determining the fate of the three buildings, which serve as the most popular upperclassman dorms, Associate Vice Provost for University Life Larry Moneta said. Moneta explained that University officials are looking at a combination of factors -- including aesthetics and population capacity -- in determining future residential space. Administrators are also trying to coordinate residential plans with changes in dining, retail and safety. But price is still a consideration. "Cost is certainly an important issue," Moneta admitted. "We can't do something we can't afford." He added, however, that the preliminary renovation estimate does not include costs for any changes in the current use of the dorms. If the University maintains the current high rise buildings, but decides that more common space for lounges or faculty apartments is needed, costs could go up, he explained. Moneta emphasized that these analyses are "very preliminary stuff" and that regardless of the financing issues the final decision will be made by Rodin, Chodorow, school deans and the Board of Trustees.