Good grief that's even worse. 

^That's been cancelled due to the costs involved. That's what was supposed to happen years ago when they started to gut the third tower then decided to tear it down (for whatever reasons I can't specifically remember). After that there was a much less costly renovation that I saw rendered in some office but I have never seen those images online and am unsure if that's even still relevant at all. I know there was talk of definitely taking the balconies off and replacing the doors with windows, but I am also unsure if that's still part of the plan or if they will just permanently close off the balconies and deal with them later.

Renderings via the architect's website: http://www.studiorfa.com/education/ucmorgens/index.htm

Thanks for those, I hadn't seen those before. Overall it's an improvement, but it's still kind of goofy. I'm glad to see that the balconies aren't being removed but rather enclosed for more interior space. I wonder when this is all going to start happening on the exterior if they want to be open by next year. Not sure how possible that is.

I used to stare at those things during smoke breaks. Even just a different paint job would help; all that dingy aluminum and those black '60s motel panels are really harsh.

The advantage of the Law School moving to The Banks is that UC could reclaim that prime corner space for other purposes. It could be used for an new building for A&S, or for new dorms allowing UC to shut down some of the older ones*.  It could be also be used for another University Park/USquare type of development, although it would be terrible timing to build that right now.

 

 

*It's been several years since UC shut down Morgens & Scioto for renovation, and I haven't heard anything about whether they'll ever be able to reopen them.  UC was planning to shut down Calhoun and Siddall for renovation after Morgens & Scioto opened back up, but obviously that hasn't happened yet. Has anyone heard any actual updates?

 

Good news is that State entities are now allowed to use a variety of real estate delivery options, "ohio construction reform". http://ocr.ohio.gov/Rules.aspx

The new rules and option not only allow for a variety of delivery options the tax payers - state saves $$$.

I don't have any pictures, but as an update the reclad of DAAP is underway. They've built a temporary road that runs along the MLK side of the building, up around to the courtyard on the west side of the building, and down to Clifton Court. The courtyard is the staging area and where they have begun to remove the old cladding. They have torn off the old cladding and have gypsum board up in the courtyard and are currently working their way east. I haven't checked out the MLK side of the building, but they are currently doing quite a bit of work on the roof area above the cafe outside of the 7000 level architecture studios for those of you familiar with the building. It seems to be progressing quite quickly which is nice to see. I'm excited to see the new cladding on the building rather than just on the mockup. Seeing DAAP not covered in mold will certainly be interesting :)

 

As an aside, I have also realized that although I loath the color selection used on the addition, I now realize it could have been much worse since the gypsum board is purple and is quite a bit worse looking color than those which were actually used on the building. I still wish they would have just gone with the non-colored metal, but it's too late for that anyway. The painted metal is just so dang flat looking. There is basically zero character to it and will have quite a bit less depth to it than the current cladding which in itself is pretty flat already. I guess I will just have to wait and see how it looks once a decent portion is actually reclad, but I'm not holding my breath for it to look any better really other than being clean.

At least the metal panel system looks like it will have pretty deep reveals, which will add some nice depth to the grid patterns.  I'm sort of hoping that the colors are not quite as bright as the ones shown in the mock-up, because from what I can tell from the original "magazine shots" of the building, the colors were never that intense, even before all of the mold/mildew/dirt started to accumulate.  The coral tones of the photographs are so much better than the barbie pink of the mock-up.

 

Looking forward to photos, as I will be out of Cincinnati probably for the whole duration of the construction process.

The reveal is nice, hopefully it proves my worries wrong. As for the colors, I definitely agree. The mock up is obnoxious to say the least. Hopefully the colors were just tests and weren't final because it definitely looks ridiculous. Granted the colors have always been ridiculous, so it's not like it would be a departure in that respect.

 

Maybe it's just jealousy, but it bugs me that on a campus with such a widely acclaimed architecture program and one that features countless world class buildings, landscape designs, etc. that we architects are stuck in by far the worst of the buildings built since the redesign of campus. This reclad will hopefully improve the building quality, but the interior is utter garbage as well and that's obviously not being addressed. Does anyone know what their plans (if any) are for the roof of the rest of the building? I've had water find its way onto my studio desk, ruining my stuff on multiple occasions over the last 5 years and really hope they're taking this opportunity to fix the older parts of the building and not just the Eisenmann addition. That and the massive windows of the older portions which are so loose that whenever the wind blows even in the slightest you can watch them bounce around in their frames. Watching a 12' sheet of glass noticeably deflect at even the hint air particle movement just doesn't give a great impression. Okay I'm done ranting now.

 

As for other projects around campus, the Lacrosse (...that's what it is right?) stands/structure is coming along nicely. That part of campus has changed so much in the time I've been here it doesn't even look the same. I believe I heard rumors of a reclad of Sander which would be fantastic but I have no clue if there's any truth to that or not.

I met the guy who designed UC's College of Law once when I was a young kid.  He talked to me about architecture for a few solid hours.  He also designed the Geo-Phys Building, and you can see a lot of similarities between the two.

 

It's a shame the Law Building is only going to last 30-40 some years.  What's a bigger shame is Wilson Auditorium, further down on Clifton.  UC has had their eye on tearing that down for awhile, in order to build a new consolidated building for Arts & Sciences.  I'd imagine it goes before Law does.

 

Michael McInturf's office is working on plans for Wilson Auditorium and DAAP/SAID just received an endowment for $12,000,000... I wouldn't be too quick to write its eulogy.

^The endowment doesn't kick in until the guy dies though which is the kicker.

 

As for Wilson, I think tearing it down has been removed from the table as a possibility if my studio professors are to  be believed. Which is great.

^ The situation with Wilson has had a complete 360 over the past year or two.  Every master plan update that has been done since the original in the early 90's has called for tearing down Wilson.  I'm fairly certain now that the preference to reuse it for DAAP instead has made its way up through the ranks of the administration at DAAP.  That, combined with the fact that Arts and Sciences won't be able to find enough funding any time soon, thanks to our Governor, whose budget cuts seem to have inadvertently helped save Wilson.

^Thanks for the info. And hey, that brings Kasich's successes (in my opinion of course) up from 0 to an unintentional 1 haha.

Mary Beth McGrew insisted, the last time I spoke with her (or rather... she spoke to me... and many others... in a large gathering) that the University's new policy was to retain as many of the buildings on UC's campus and focus primarily on renovating them, ex. Rhodes Hall has a new student lounge and laboratory, DAAP's recadding, Proctor Hall's recladding and rooftop garden, CCM's new white roof, etc.

^That's always a good thing to hear. With a  little creativity, really no building on campus needs to be torn down. Several need some help still, but putting the effort into reworking them could do wonders. Except for Rieveschl. That building can be imploded and I will gladly take a front seat to the destruction.

 

Speaking of Proctor Hall, I'm actually quite happy with how it came out. I never really go over to that campus, but when I saw it finished I was quite pleased. Especially considering how bad it was before the reclad. I'm a fan.

 

Morgens Hall is changing quite quickly. The cladding is basically entirely gone from the west and north sides. Didn't get a look at the other sides recently. It's interesting seeing it with the structure all exposed. I'm excited to see it in its final form. We were joking yesterday when walking by that the building is already improved in its bare concrete and plywood state at the moment. I'll be curious to see the quality of the glass when it starts being put up.

My problem with Proctor are 1: the unfortunate shade of brown that was chosen for the cladding.  Thankfully it turns to more of a grey/toupe at night; and 2: the original Proctor cladding was an extremely early example of passive/active solar design.  Those fins were originally designed to follow the path of the sun and shade the interior throughout the day.  Sure they stopped working soon after construction, and the whole facade system was in poor condition, but it would have been nice if the new facade had at least acknowledged the the original innovative design scheme in some way.  Supposedly the budget was extremely limited for this renovation, that is why the cladding had to be completely flat and the overhangs had to be nixed.

 

At the very least DAAP saved one complete section of the original facade system, stored in some warehouse off campus.

The thing about DAAP is that the EIFS was never intended to be the original cladding in the first place.  I believe it was supposed to be some sort of stone/porcelain/ceramic material.  Now if that was going to be large slabs or smaller tiles (and by smaller I would think 12" or 24" square at minimum) I don't really know, but it wasn't supposed to be muted pastel stucco.  If it was the more slick and colorful material then the building would certainly be much more striking.  That doesn't mean it wouldn't still have problems.  Just look at the streaking and grime on the Vontz Center, or even CCM.  The unbroken planes of walls with no overhangs or drip edges, not to mention tilted walls, just invite dirt and grime and water intrusion.  I can imagine failed joints between tiles, falling tiles, cracking, and any number of other problems.  I haven't seen what the new cladding looks like but I suspect/hope it's a bit more of a middle ground between what was built and what was originally intended. 

^If I am remembering correctly, it was supposed to be 24" ceramic tiling for the exterior as well as the floor on the interior (not sure of the scale of the interior tiling though). Like you are saying though, I feel like we would be in a very similar position right now even if the original cladding had been used. It would even seem that tiling would introduce more problems even sooner due to the massive number of joints there would have been in comparison to the EIFS. Overall I feel that the material selection for the reclad is definitely the correct one to keep a decent amount of the intended character of the building while (hopefully) solving the issues the building has been having. The colors are still an issue in my mind, but nowhere near a big enough one for me to dislike the recladding. I still wish there was a little more depth to it based on the mockup, but that's an issue that may resolve itself once it begins to be put up in large amounts. I think I'm actually most excited to just see the building clean for the first time ever. The firs time I ever saw DAAP in person was in 2006 and it was already covered in dirt/mold/etc. That's the only way I've known it so seeing a shiny, clean building is certainly going to be entertaining.

Likewise. I'm very excited to see a clean DAAP building. I was back in Clifton for the first time since the re-cladding had begun and the entire building on the west side had the blue under layer up. Very excited.

 

As for the colors, I heard a Robert Probst argument for maintaining the original color that in such a historic, deconstructionist example of work historians would lament the decision to alter the original intent of the building. I can't disagree.

Does anyone know whether the  Columbus Convention Center is clad in EIFS or precast concrete (the parts that are not brick or corrugated metal)?  It seems to be holding up fine. 

 

Based on accounts from professors and staff at the school, while the chosen material system is certainly to blame for the facade failure, the problem stems from Eisenman's design process.  When he handed the project off to the local firm to develop, there was absolutely no indication in the drawings for how the building would be clad or detailed (and supposedly minimal information on how it could even be built).  Saying the building should be tile is one thing; actually making it work is another.  Because constructability where never part of the original design process, this failure was probably inevitable.

 

Ironically, this disregard for materiality and practical considerations of construction as drivers for the design, are a big part of what make this such an important work of architecture.

Ironically, this disregard for materiality and practical considerations of construction as drivers for the design, are a big part of what make this such an important work of architecture.

 

Indeed, a very important example of the folly of starchitecture, and the danger of throwing away thousands of years of accumulated knowledge on building science and design. 

Appropriately, this disregard for materiality and practical considerations of construction as drivers for the design, are a big part of what make this such a pretentious work of architecture.

 

FTFY

^One opens next year, the other the year after. They are on the list of available dorms for incoming freshman this upcoming school year.

Wow, if I hadn't checked this thread,  I'd still think that Morgens Hall was coming down.  I saw it last week, and it's got the look...

 

I tried to look a little closer yesterday as I drove past, and saw that the bases of the balconies were still there, on the East side of the building.

The south side of Morgen's Hall is quickly being covered with glass (taken on Tuesday). I believe they just started putting this up on Monday. FYI That is the reflection of Scioto Hall that you can see in Morgen's Hall's new glass facade. It does not change color. Here are some pictures I took with my cell phone camera:

 

 

 

Also, a picture of the Bearcat Statue just because:

 

Wow, these are gonna look quite different that what they were before (UGLY!). But, no balconies?  The college parties on those balconies were great.

^I think that's the reason there will be no balconies. Balconies = liability.

 

The balcony slabs will remain and it will still be usable space, but it will be completely enclosed by a window. Essentially just a bump-out in the room. A link to some images of the building posted above show the bump-out in the rooms.

The parties may have been great, but I shudder to think how much extra insurance UC had to pay because of those balconies.  Can't fault them for taking them out.

I had a friend that lived in one of the Ugly Sisters in the mid-2000s and it seemed really square at that time as far as partying goes. Maybe I just didn't visit on the right nights.

I believe the dorms were originally set up for families, international students, and graduate students. That could explain why it wasn't a heavy party dorm. Though I believe it was a "wet" dorm (similar to CRC and possibly Turner/Schneider). Dabney, Daniels, Calhoun, and Siddal are all dry, I believe.

 

The original plan was to make these international student dorms, but that fell through when the university incurred more costs beause of asbestos abatement and eliminating black mold. Now they are going to rent it out to freshmen undergrads again.

I believe the dorms were originally set up for families, international students, and graduate students.

 

Pretty sure that's correct. When I was considering UC for undergrad back in the early 90's, I think these buildings were still set up as university-owned apartments for families and grad students.

^Definitely true. I had a buddy in elementary school who lived there with his family - at the time his dad was a grad student at UC.

I believe the dorms were originally set up for families, international students, and graduate students.

 

Pretty sure that's correct. When I was considering UC for undergrad back in the early 90's, I think these buildings were still set up as university-owned apartments for families and grad students.

 

Yes, there was an uproar when UC closed these 2 dorms for renovations, forcing grad & international students to find apartments in the surrounding neighborhoods.

Here are a few photos I just took to show off the construction of DAAP.

 

This shows the panel testing they did a few months ago in the courtyard. It contains all of the colors that will be used on the building. Although I was not a fan at first, seeing it for several months in passing it has grown on me.

 

The entire building has received white roofs in the same manner as several other buildings around campus.

 

It's a little hard to see, but this is the new green roof over the SAID offices. Jennie Russel pushed for more than this but this was all that got budgeted for. I hope they realize it's a good idea over time and take advantage of the building's roofs for more greenery.

Got out to photograph some random projects today when leaving DAAP. Got some photos of the Morgens Hall renovation and the new seating area for the practice field for when it's being used for events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think this turned out pretty well. It fits in well and really makes that area feel more like a complete sporting area, if that makes sense.

 

Now for Morgens Hall

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm liking the way this renovation is going. Not only does the building look much better, but it really has done a lot to make that corner of campus feel more modern. I'm excited to see both finished and occupied.

It will be interesting to see if UC does the same style of renovation to Calhoun and Siddall Halls once those two reopen.

I'm liking the way this renovation is going. Not only does the building look much better, but it really has done a lot to make that corner of campus feel more modern. I'm excited to see both finished and occupied.

 

Morgens Hall looks gorgeous.

^^I've been wondering that myself. I kind of hope they don't. There are aspects of Calhoun and Siddall that need some work, such as the brickwork and the awkward metal...things...around the lower level. Sun shades maybe? I don't even know what their purpose is, but they're just cluttered and messy looking. But the buildings themselves are better than Morgens and Scioto are in my opinion. A simple reclad of the brick and new, modern windows would do wonders for Calhoun and Siddall. I'm kind of also hoping we can get some color in the renovation. I love campus, but its pallet leaves a little to be desired at any point in the year where flowers, trees, and grass aren't growing. Recladding the brick in some sort of metal paneling in a bright color would be glorious. Not sure that's the vision for campus though.

 

If they weren't willing to get really bold with color choice, using the red metal paneling used outside Market on Main on the old arena would look great. Same overall color as the brick, but much more modern feeling. The brick has always just felt like a cop out attempt at making these modernist towers-in-a-park style buildings fit in to the context of UC. Why not embrace the modernism? Play it up. Maybe even reclad the brick in black metal and put in some windows a la the Seagram Building in Manhattan. Now that would make for a sexy cluster of buildings.

 

Okay, enough dreaming now haha. I'm excited to see how future renovations of some of the only remaining un-renovated building on campus work within the overall context of UC.

I'm liking the way this renovation is going. Not only does the building look much better, but it really has done a lot to make that corner of campus feel more modern. I'm excited to see both finished and occupied.

 

Morgens Hall looks gorgeous.

looks like a completely different building. Heck of an upgrade.

The dorm next door really looks like a prison now.

Wow!  That's a big improvement!

 

Took this picture of Morgens Hall yesterday while I was on campus enjoying the weather.  IMO, it really does look great.  And when you're looking at Morgens from over near the Sheakley Athletic Center, you can see the Views on Vine slowly climbing to full height.  Can't wait to see what both projects will look like together when they are completed.

 

My little brother will be a freshman at UC this coming fall and I'm trying to talk him into getting one of those 8 person rooms in Morgens.  He says he wants the "college experience" of Daniels (also where I lived in 2010). Whatever....

 

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone knew if UC has any plans to renovate Scioto Hall as well?  I think I read somewhere that the Morgens Hall project cost something like $30 million so I'm not sure if Scioto is in line for the same treatment or not.  It almost sounds like the university bit off more than they could chew when they found the asbestos in Morgens and had to tear it down to its skeleton.  Does anyone know if they same procedure would need to be done at Scioto?

^Well the plan was always pretty extensive, but these things happen with older buildings. There were several iterations of this type of scheme throughout the years. Scioto will be done in the same manner and from what I've heard around campus they will start stripping it once Morgens opens next year.

I can't get over how great this building looks! That angular glass facade reminds me of buildings in Europe and in particular the Scandanavian countries. Lots of natural light in those dorm rooms, which is awesome.

The main issue with Morgens Hall was that they found black mold. I think they knew that there was asbestos containing materials (ACM), but until the mold was discovered they weren't going to disturb a lot of it from what I understand, and as long as ACM isn't being disturbed you can leave it in a lot of parts of a building. After the mold was discovered they had to do a complete gut of the building. The original plan in 2008 was just to perform life-safety upgrades and some new amenities if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I am wrong here, people.

 

I would like to see Scioto renovated similarly, but I don't know if it will be the same cost if they don't find mold.

The main issue with Morgens Hall was that they found black mold. I think they knew that there was asbestos containing materials (ACM), but until the mold was discovered they weren't going to disturb a lot of it from what I understand, and as long as ACM isn't being disturbed you can leave it in a lot of parts of a building. After the mold was discovered they had to do a complete gut of the building. The original plan in 2008 was just to perform life-safety upgrades and some new amenities if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I am wrong here, people.

 

I would like to see Scioto renovated similarly, but I don't know if it will be the same cost if they don't find mold.

 

Correct.  They were more or less just planning on giving it a face lift until they found mold EVERYWHERE.  It was turned into a total gut job.

The main issue with Morgens Hall was that they found black mold. I think they knew that there was asbestos containing materials (ACM), but until the mold was discovered they weren't going to disturb a lot of it from what I understand, and as long as ACM isn't being disturbed you can leave it in a lot of parts of a building. After the mold was discovered they had to do a complete gut of the building. The original plan in 2008 was just to perform life-safety upgrades and some new amenities if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I am wrong here, people.

 

I would like to see Scioto renovated similarly, but I don't know if it will be the same cost if they don't find mold.

 

Correct.  They were more or less just planning on giving it a face lift until they found mold EVERYWHERE.  It was turned into a total gut job.

 

Ok so let's say they find no mold in Scioto (which I'm assuming there isn't because there is occupied offices on the first few floors), wouldn't UC still want to gut Scioto as well?  I mean, if Morgens turns out really great and totally redone, it doesn't really make sense to not match the quality in the building right next door. 

I wouldn't be surprised if Scioto is moldy. It's got "That '60s Smell". Linder's probably moldy, too. Always had to take a dump within 30 minuets of setting foot in the latter.

So what do people think about UC spending millions for more dorms (I'm talking about after Morgens is open, not criticizing it) when the city is spending so much subsidizing all these apartment complexes around UC. UC is growing, but damn they are adding thousands of new apartments around UC and developers are still proposing more. Anyone think UC can stop adding more dorms now? Or is there really still a huge demand. I suppose it all comes down to convincing more kids to stop living at home & to live on campus.

I think the goal is to get them away from the small landlords in the neighborhoods around campus. Having 'suburban' friendly housing tight to campus should make it easier to sell the school and provide security. The crappy housing around UC is really bad and will only get worse and parents aren't too keen to see their kids jumped or die in a fire.

I wish the city could incentivize converting the chopped up single family apartment product back to a decent single family ownership product. Would help the neighborhoods.