Talking Stick - July/August 2014 - 33

hen 2.2 million United States veterans walked off
the battleﬁelds of World War II and directly into the
classroom under the provisions of the Servicemen's
Readjustment Act of 1944 - more commonly known
as the GI Bill - campus housing felt the impact.
Later, those beneﬁciaries' offspring - the Baby
Boomers - would continue to fuel post-secondary
expansion and change well into the 1980s. The
combined impact was unprecedented, if not all-consuming, within a system
of higher education that was historically selective and exclusive, catering to
enrollees who were chieﬂy white, male, unmarried, and afﬂuent. Post-war college
students had needs and interests that were far more diverse than those of their
predecessors, forcing campuses to overhaul their physical and educational
resources in response.
Student housing departments responded to this growth as they scrambled
to develop facilities that maximized occupancy and affordability, seeing greater
opportunity and cost effectiveness in building upward rather than outward.
Resilient multi-story high-rise residence halls soon became widespread ﬁxtures
on campus landscapes across the country between the 1950s and the 1970s.
Today, many of those same vintage buildings are stalwarts of campus
housing programs: noted for being reliable, built solidly, and able to house large
populations ﬂexibly. However, maintenance problems, changing tastes, shifting
priorities, and the differing needs of on-campus populations have made it
challenging to sustain the effectiveness of older high-rise residence halls in their
original conﬁguration.
Some institutions have addressed those issues by eliminating their aging
towers in favor of constructing more contemporary buildings that add amenities,
maximize individual living space, and incorporate sustainable materials from
the ground up. Other institutions, however, are propelling their on-campus
housing operations by reinventing and reinvigorating pre-existing residence
halls that have already received decades of ﬁnancial investment and physical
maintenance and have proven themselves effective in supporting communities
of staff and students. Infusing elements of modern design and convenience into
an antiquated high-rise building takes vision, creativity, and careful consideration
of the associated ﬁnancial, social, and infrastructural challenges. Campuses are
also eyeing sustainability as a positive outcome of renovation, reducing the costs
and labor associated with demolition and keeping large amounts of construction
waste out of landﬁlls.
One recent example of such renewal can be found at The Ohio State
University. The Columbus campus chose to refurbish its high-rise facilities as
part of a long-term housing construction plan that presently extends through
2016. Molly Ranz Calhoun, associate vice president in OSU's Ofﬁce of Student
Life, was among the leadership who oversaw the renovations to Park-Stradley
Hall. Located on the south end of campus, Park-Stradley is the ﬁnished product
of connecting two previously separate 11-story towers. The new complex now
houses 1,084 students and was completed in the summer of 2012. Two additional
high-rise improvement projects in the same neighborhood (Siebert and SmithSteeb halls) wrapped in the summer of 2013. According to Ranz Calhoun, the
structure of Park-Stradley presented both challenges and advantages as they
considered how to proceed with renovations. "We really do not have deferred
maintenance. We have deferred architecture." One of the ﬁrst issues addressed
during construction was the complex's exterior. "The buildings themselves were
built pretty well, typical 1960s construction with block and brick. Unfortunately,
from an energy perspective, they had no insulation on the exterior of the building.
We went in as part of that project and installed insulation on all exterior walls.
JULY + AUGUST 2014

Talking Stick - July/August 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Talking Stick - July/August 2014