David, All very good alternatives ... except for Lady Bird Johnson Park. That's part of the parkland system encircling the Potomac which has been a planned aspect of Washington for 100 years now. I don't think we'd want to undo this unique aspect to Washington which was so thoughtfully (and expensively) implemented by the feds.

by Lance on Jan 11, 2009 10:25 am • link • report

what about graduate students teaching undergraduate classes, undergraduates taking graduate-level courses, or professors who work with students at both levels? any other major university would have them both in the same place, because there is a lot of interaction between the two. i have often seen law schools at different locations, though (like georgetown law here in DC), but not entire graduate schools. i think that separating the two would just lead to difficulties for everyone who would need to spend a lot of time traveling between two campuses. move them both to st. e's, i say!

by the way, isn't that picture from the east campus (the side that won't be taken over by DHS).

by IMGoph on Jan 11, 2009 10:52 am • link • report

Interesting post, although I really don't see the need for a full-time public university in DC.

UDC is essentially a junior college, and it does a good job at meeting the needs of DC high school graduates (who are generally not at a truly collegiate level academically and are in need of a junior college). For those graduates who excel, the govt offers an in-state tuition plan with many other state universities.

It was clear a few years ago that the community didn't want UDC to move, either.

As much as many of us don't appreciate the DHS, at least something is being done to the campus. Eleanor Holmes-Norton really pushed for this, too -- so at least we did have some local input.

Waiting for someone else to develop it would be like waiting for Godot.

by mike cap hill on Jan 11, 2009 12:04 pm • link • report

mike c.h., UDC's students, faculty, programs and enrichment and service to the city would surprise you if you took the time to find out what really goes on there.

by Bianchi on Jan 11, 2009 12:12 pm • link • report

Bianchi,

I wasn't trying to slam UDC at all.

The post talked about undergraduate campus, so I thought I'd address the realities of District graduates.

I've taken enrichment courses there in nutrition. I've taken the time to find out what really goes on, but thanks for your concern.

by mike cap hill on Jan 11, 2009 1:22 pm • link • report

#1 - this project will not destroy the site. most of the buildings will remain. destroying the site would be to let it rot.

#2 - this has ALWAYS been a fortress. we aren't losing something we never had, which is access to the site. there are plenty of other opportunities for views of downtown DC in River East.

#3 - i thought we were all about infill density? why is this an exception? I, for one, am very happy that River East will be gaining this huge infux.

by DG-rad on Jan 11, 2009 3:22 pm • link • report

David,

It is my understand that WMATA has plans to make use of the Benning Road Power plant property for a future service and inspection facility and yard. After all D&G Junction will be the east end of the Silver line. I will also note that the east ends of the Blue and Orange lines have an imbalance in servicing capacity compared to the west ends of the same lines.

by Sand Box John on Jan 11, 2009 3:47 pm • link • report

Mr. Pedantic Nitpicker here: I think that St. Elizabeth's in located in Southeast, and not in Southwest, since the traditional dividing line is S. Capitol Street. DC Department of Mental Health has the address as Saint Elizabeths Hospital

2700 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20032.

by Glenn on Jan 11, 2009 4:46 pm • link • report

Good idea regarding a UDC Undergraduate Campus. There is nothing wrong with the current investment under which District students can attend state universities for in-state rates, but ultimately in a large increasingly international city such as Washington any effort to create a first class, world class university with a research graduate campus at Van Ness would most likely be greatly rewarded.

There is no reason UDC cannot morph into highly competitive public university like NYU.

by stevek_fairfax on Jan 11, 2009 10:20 pm • link • report

Not sure what warehouses you mention around Van Dorn, you may mean the GSA warehouses around Fran/Spring Metro station. Whatever the case, those warehouses are still in use and would take several years to vacate; but they should face a bulldozer in the future.

by RJ on Jan 11, 2009 11:42 pm • link • report

"There is no reason UDC cannot morph into highly competitive public university like NYU."

Um, NYU is a private University. In fact, it's the largest private educational institution in the US.

by Jason on Jan 12, 2009 4:13 am • link • report

Dave: Look into Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. You can't begin to talk about the consequences at St. Es until you understand the legal framework that Section 106 imposes on the undertakings of the federal government.

by egganddart on Jan 12, 2009 4:51 am • link • report

egganddart, sec. 106 doesn't absolutely mandate that changes can't occur. The reason the issue came up is that the National Park Service/National Register of Historic Places determined that (as part of the review) the changes proposed (and approved by the Nat. Capital Planning Commission) would significantly change the campus in deleterious ways, enough to trigger a delisting of the campus as a National Historic Landmark. (Just as Soldier Field lost its designation due to massive changes by building a new stadium inside of the old one.)

2. The UDC idea is interesting. There probably isn't demand for two campuses though. Just make your proposed campus great. The Van Ness is 1960s construction and not destined to last without a lot of money spent on maintenance and rehabilitation.

3. Another way to deal with the need for a local public university would be to contract with one or more of the local universities, comparable to how the State University of New York contracts with Cornell and Syracuse to provide certain colleges as "public" within the context of their otherwise private university.

by Richard Layman on Jan 12, 2009 5:26 am • link • report

Of the places David listed, either the Power Plant or DC Hospital site would work the best. The park location is a non-starter (improve the highway spaghetti, yes, but don't cut into the park). The warehouses near Van Dorn are not only still in use, but Alexandria has been targeting that area for apartment/townhouse development in recent years (the Reserve at Eisenhower, located next to those warehouses, was one of the potential places I looked at to move into when I transferred here). Bolling is also a non-starter. You'd be better off putting it at Suitland Federal Center than at Bolling, especially since the northeast corner of Suitland is nothing but empty parking lot and half-bulldozed buildings (the E-shaped building in the center is in the process of being bulldozed).

by Froggie on Jan 12, 2009 8:17 am • link • report

As someone who completed the last half of undergraduate school at UDC I see every suggestion to downgrade UDC from it's current status as an accredited (sp?)4 year degree awarding institution as a "slam".-I wasn't an English major-don't blame UDC for my poor spelling-. I believe my experience and that of my classmates in the upper level undergraduate classes was typical. We would have been non-traditional students at any other school because we were on average older than the average undergrad. Most of us worked fulltime. We had lives and roots and obligations in DC making moving out of town a huge barrier to completing our educational goals. Yes the in-state tuition benefit is great and works for a lot of DC's youngsters. But it in no way replaces the need for a four year public (affordable) school right here. Including myself, of 5 people I became closest to at UDC 4 have graduate degrees (1 MD,2 PhD's, 1 masters) and 4 still live in DC, work fulltime, own property here, employ people here, pay taxes here. Currently I have a friend in the RN program at UDC. An RN program requires a 4 year school. She's older (non-traditional undergrad), married to someone who works in DC, has a 7 year old and works fulltime herself. She can't afford GW or GeoTwn, just like I couldn't back then. Nor can she leave town. This situation is typical of UDC students. This is who I'm concerned about. UDC students who do more than take a single class.

by Bianchi on Jan 12, 2009 10:25 am • link • report

What about moving UDC to the Walter Reed campus up on Georgia once they move out the hospital, if that's still hapenning? Of course they'd have to demo the god-awful main administration building of a 1970's vintage. I agree though, St. Elivabeth's should not be homeland Security. Anyway, I thought that's what the CIA, FBI, Army, etc. were for. Homeland security is another one of Bush's potamkin village creations.

by Thayer-D on Jan 12, 2009 10:49 am • link • report

Thanks, Bianchi, for having a long-term view on life here in DC. I appreciate it.

by otavio on Jan 12, 2009 2:28 pm • link • report

I doubt that the DC Hospital site, even most of Res. 13, provides enough space for the Dept. of Homeland Security's needs. The other thing probably going on is that they want a fully secured campus. You'd have to block res. 13 off to meet that requirement.

by Richard Layman on Jan 12, 2009 3:36 pm • link • report

Bianchi,

I'm glad that UDC has been so important to you. I truly am.

I think you took offense to my post and came out swinging for no good reason.

I wish you well.

by mike cap hill on Jan 12, 2009 7:22 pm • link • report

mike c.h., you're right. I misread your comment. I thought you were recommending de-grading UDC. I have read/heard that suggestion so many times, over so many years, by people who have no connection with the school or real knowledge of the niche it fills (beyond the remedial classes offered), it's maddening. A professor (UDC) once told me that all UDC students essentially become activsts and advocates for the school automatically when they enroll - b/c the school is so often beseiged. When I was a student there I (and other students) testified in a city council hearing on why a four year institution was important. The school really was in danger. There were massive budget cuts shortly afterward. Fortunately UDC is more stable now. This entry by D Murphy is refreshing in that he suggests a way to expand and improve the opportunities UDC can offer. And, the comments have been positive regarding the importance of UDC as a 4 year sch.

by Bianchi on Jan 13, 2009 1:25 am • link • report

I don't think moving UDC to St. E's is a better alternative than DHS. UDC is not a traditional university with a bunch of 18 year olds living hundreds of miles away from home. It's a commuter school with older students working full time and living at home. While the Van Ness campus is an eyesore, it serves its purpose well.

by Jon on Jan 13, 2009 4:35 pm • link • report

jon: why do you give UDC no chance for future growth? it's a pretty young university too...

my brother went to SVSU (saginaw valley state university) in michigan. it was strictly a commuter school 15 years ago, but they have spent the last decade building dormitories and other student housing, and now there is a large population there that comes from well outside of commuting distance, and the school is growing in what it offers as well.

seems like a lot of people want to have really low expectations for what we can achieve in this city...

by IMGoph on Jan 13, 2009 5:00 pm • link • report

Dave Murphy's Clairvoyant! UDC plans to operate two campuses-from todays' Wash Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011302691.html

by Bianchi on Jan 14, 2009 10:37 am • link • report

As a current UDC student i am very passionate about conversations like this. What has been said is true, many people speak negative of UDC and want to get rid of the Van Ness campus. I personally think it is a form of gentrification to move the Van Ness Campus. I agree more with the idea of moving to St. E's and keeping the Van Ness campus. The Law School is already there and many of the graduate programs should expand, especially the Engineering dept. I have high hopes for UDC's future.Upon hearing that they werent downgrading UDC but merely adding a community college in the mix i was skeptical. Then i researched it and found that they are trying to merge us with southeastern university to form the CC campus. it would provide the remedial and workforce training that many community colleges offer like NOVA. I agree that UDC needs a better campus and St. E's would be a great place. I also agree with the dorms and activity facilities that UDC has the potential of fostering with St. E's campus is a good idea. However until the people who dont even know what is going on at the school sit on the board of trustees nothing will ever get done. I also agree with the severence pay for professors who have been there longer than 30 years. UDC needs a breath of fresh air and a younger spirit.

Just imagine if UDC had a campus to its own with grad school and a community college behind it, it could rival the other HBCU in the district as well as AU, GWU, and GTU. Not to mention it would clean up a much need part of SE DC.

These are just my thoughts as a UDC student. I would love to come back one day and teach. I love my school.

by Ian G on Jan 14, 2009 2:51 pm • link • report

Bianchi Really?

A college graduate defending the school making a post on-line that can't be bothered to check the spelling? You should have learned that in your primary education, the college should have honed your research methods regardless of the degree. The school should develop well rounded graduates or not grant the degree.

Bob

"As someone who completed the last half of undergraduate school at UDC I see every suggestion to downgrade UDC from it's current status as an accredited (sp?)4 year degree awarding institution as a "slam".-I wasn't an English major-don't blame UDC for my poor spelling-."

by Bob on Apr 7, 2010 10:09 am • link • report

@ Bob, Maybe you didn't see that this forum is not a peer reviewed publication of original research. Yes I'm a poor speller. So what? I can correct my spelling but you're still a putz.

by Bianchi on Apr 7, 2010 10:58 am • link • report

@ Bianchi... name calling? very mature and educated response.

by Bob on Apr 7, 2010 12:37 pm • link • report

@Bob,

In all fairness, you were being a a bit of a douchebag.

by oboe on Apr 7, 2010 12:44 pm • link • report

@ Bob, what's your point? That UDC is a bad school because I make spelling errors in an informal setting? I can attack you and your background in the same way you did me and mine: Your mother should have honed your ability to recognize and correct in apropos and schmucky comments on your part before she allowed you to use the internet. Frozen banana. UDC! UDC! UDC!

by Bianchi on Apr 7, 2010 1:00 pm • link • report

aww oboe. My favorite imp.

by Bianchi on Apr 7, 2010 1:06 pm • link • report

@ Bianchi / oboe

I take education seriously, understand this is an informal setting and if the comment was in slang or on another topic then no problem... and the word was even spelled correctly... but really? educated people should at least appear educated, then to resort to name calling while promoting higher education. what gives?

by Bob on Apr 7, 2010 2:09 pm • link • report

Educated people should at least appear educated, then to resort to name calling while promoting higher education. what gives?

I think you meant to write, "Educated people should at least appear educated, than to resort to name calling while promoting higher education," but I in general I agree with your sentiment.

by oboe on Apr 7, 2010 2:49 pm • link • report

Ok, must...stop...posting....

:)

by oboe on Apr 7, 2010 2:50 pm • link • report

"rather than resort to name calling" that is. Now you've got me writing imprecisely.

Doh! Ok, really done this time...

by oboe on Apr 7, 2010 2:52 pm • link • report

@bob,...but really? I expressed uncertainty of the spelling of a single word and you conclude I appear uneducated? You judge me as appearing uneducated? You, who made a personal comment denigrating someone elses education, a comment that was neither constructive in its criticism nor did it contribute to the discussion topic? THAT my douchy friend is a far greater exhibition of a lack of education then a misspelled word and a much meaner kind of name calling than the silliness I returned. I'm not such a bad speller while you still have not added anything meaningful to the discussion. UDC Forever! (and oh, Bob, here's another frozen banana.)

by Bianchi on Apr 7, 2010 3:39 pm • link • report

OK, everyone, let's drop this. There's no benefit to debating how douchy someone is or how bad someone's spelling is. This thread would have been better off without this new spurt of comments. I'm closing the thread now.

by David Alpert on Apr 7, 2010 3:45 pm • link • report