INTRODUCTION

Links to maps, photos, a full description, FAQs, and update at bottom of this page.

The following is the complete text of the memo sent out to the entire campus by President Ryerson announcing the Master Plan, following an all-campus meeting in which she presented the Plan:

________________

TO: The Wells Campus Community
FROM: President Lisa Marsh Ryerson
DATE: October 11, 2000
SUBJECT: Campus Planning Update

I am pleased to share with you that the Board of Trustees unanimously endorsed a resolution to adopt the proposed master plan as the guiding instrument for campus physical planning. Of course, program and academic planning will remain the driving force in our commitment to providing an excellent liberal arts education for women.

Specifically, the Board adopted the recommendation to locate the science building just north of Macmillan in approximately the area that is now the parking lot. I anticipate the possibility of a ground breaking ceremony for this exciting project next year.

This is the plan that was shown at the September 18 all-campus meeting and for which a scale model is on display in the AER Lobby. It presents us with a unique opportunity to continue to enhance our campus to better adapt to the ever-changing needs of our students and faculty. In addition to the science building, this long-range plan calls for the following as important possibilities:
The plan calls for a core academic area on campus that will create a dense "common space" that will allow students and faculty to interface throughout the day. I believe this space will build a better sense of campus community. Moreover, the renovation and expansion will improve essentially all campus buildings and provide better accommodations for all students and improved teaching space for our faculty. Subsequently, students will benefit in the classroom.

Thank you for lively and informative discussions with our Trustees and for sharing candidly your thoughtful reactions and concerns. As we move forward with academic and program planning, your input will remain a critical component of healthy dialogue. There will be ongoing opportunities for discussion of the plan, including the next Faculty Meeting, Staff Forum, and Collegiate Meeting.[ End of Message]

________________

The following is the text of a presentation by Professor of Art William Roberts to the Board of Trustees in October 2001, just before the Board voted unanimously to approve the Master Plan outlined above:

________________

I seriously question the wisdom of a plan that calls for the destruction of the only 'Modern' buildings on campus; beautiful buildings that are sensitively nestled on the incredibly special Wells campus

. I seriously question the wisdom of a plan that calls for the destruction of Long Library, an internationally recognized building by Skidmore Owings and Merrill, one of the most important architectural firms in the world. SOM won a national architectural award for Long Library. SOM architect Walter Netsch is also known for his design of the Air Force Academy chapel in Colorado Springs. Incidentally Mr. Netsch served on the Wells College Board of Trustees.

Does anyone involved in this decision know that the Wells College Library is listed in Great Buildings on Line under Modern Architecture along with the following outstanding buildings:

Modern Neoclassical Neogothic Does anyone making this decision realize and understand the value and prestige that such an acclaimed building adds to our campus and community?

SOM has been an international force in architecture since 1937 with offices in London, San Francisco, New York, Washington DC.,Hong Kong and Chicago. SOM has been responsible for designs such as the Sears Tower, Hancock Tower,Lever House,Kuwait Chancery,Bank of America, Air Force Academy Chapel, Chicago Art Institute Renovation, Ohio University Art Department, etc. We should be so grateful and promote the fact that our campus is blessed with such an important architectural legacy.

This master plan is proposing to tear down an internationally acclaimed and recognized building. And all for what?

We are proposing to tear up and possibly destroy the incredibly lovely Wells landscape and move buildings around - for what end? I have yet to hear any compelling reasons.

One of the arguments calling for the destruction of these buildings is that the cost of maintenence and operation is significant and that the buildings are inefficient in terms of the numbers of students using the building and the hours used.

These are fallacious facts.

One cannot use the same measure of value when comparing a traditional lecture hall or classroom (where the students march in and out every hour on the hour) to the studio and space needs of the art and music students. Space is needed and often dedicated space is needed. Dedicated space for one student. That is the nature of the study of arts and music.

Per student studio classroom hours do not reflect accurately the hours of use for another reason. Students are expected and required to spend an additional minimum number of hours equaling the actual classroom hours. If a student is in a three credit course she has six contact hours and must do an additional six hours of work independently . Because of the nature of the painting, ceramics, lithography, photography, design (traditional & digital) students must do assignments in the building.

Art students have for years burned the 'midnight oil' in Campbell and the building is often most lively during the evening hours. When measuring the traditional classroom per student use, this after-hours variable of the use of studios and rehearsal rooms must also be factored in.

If the cost of maintenence is one of the issues of why these outstanding buildings must be torn down, then let's address the REAL issue. Why doesn't the College have a maintenance endowment to address ongoing maintenance needs? If Wells does have a maintenance endowment, perhaps it is not a sufficiently adequate one. This is the real issue: Is Wells' maintenance endowment adequate?

I have heard the proponents of this plan say that the cost of the demolition would be recouped in so many years by the savings in the cost of maintenance. I have not seen any figures to support this very negative approach. I would rather see the College invest the cost of the demolition into an endowment that would take care of Wells' buildings forever.

We could also reinstitute the defunct energy plan which attempted to address environmental concerns and lower expenses by imploring the community to save on energy by turning lights out, keeping windows closed during heating hours, etc.

I shudder to think that we could actually even consider a plan to destroy these buildings,especially the Wells College Library. I fear what this message would send to not only the members of our own community, especially the students, but also the national and international communities. Wells is going to look incredibly foolish.

Everyone who visits the campus is proudly shown the Long Library and I have often talked with prospective students and their families and I have yet to meet anyone who was not in awe of the Library or not impressed by the campus as well as the music and art buildings.

The message that I fear will be sent is that we are part of this consumer society which is willing and eager to destroy what it has produced rather than vigilantly protect, conserve and respect its history.

I am completely supportive of the plan to build a long overdue and much needed science building. This will send a very positive message in terms of how important science, and especially the study of science by women, is to the Administration and the Board of Trustees.

Tearing down the art and music buildings as well as the Library sends a negative message and ultimately says that these activities, art and music, are not important. This would be unfortunate especially when the rest of the academy is saying just the opposite.

We are experiencing one of the most lucrative periods in the history of the arts in the US and there are more opportunities in the arts than ever before. Women are finally enjoying opportunities as artists, art gallery ownership,art therapists, arts managers,designers,art directors, etc. in all areas of the arts which were historically closed to women.

This is a period when a young woman can choose to pursue a career in the arts and will very likely be able to fullfill that dream and attain her goals if she has the skills, talent, creativity, perseverence as well as the support and training that is requisite.

Wells is enjoying a rebirth and for the first time in a very long time there is a sense of optimism in the community. This is the time to be constructive and plan our future based on positive and uplifting ideas thatwill inspire and motivate the student community.

Please reconsider the mandate and please listen carefully to the membersof this community who have dedicated their professional lives to this College. We know this community and the welfare of the College is more important to us than our own personal professional welfare. There are other options to explore and I implore the members of the Board and the Administration to re-evaluate the course of action which I am concerned has already gone too far." [ End of Presentation by Prof. Roberts]

________________

Full Description of the Master Plan. Map of the Master Plan Campus. Layout of the current campus.

The Faculty was denied a role in the development of the Plan. Docomomo, an international non-profit organization of architects, defended the integrity of the campus.

FAQs and photos of buildings slated for destruction or possible relocation: the award-winning Library, the companion Art and Music buildings, as well as Smith and Cleveland.

________________

UPDATE: The Master Plan is not dead. A new campus committee, SWAT (Sustainable Wells Action Team) is discussing "aspects of tabled master plan that should be pursued," as well as other interesting ideas, such as the need to "identify for implementation one or more radical enhancements to program targeted to consumers outside the Wells student body" and the notion that "Wells College can no longer subsist as an independent liberal arts institution, without a dependable outside stream of revenue."

Return HOME

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1