06-10-2016, 06:20 PM
06-11-2016, 12:56 PM
Dear steve,
Strong Hall was where I took my entrance examination in the summer of 1960. It was in the auditorium that held about two hundred students, and was full. I passed the exam and the rest is history. Strong at the time was home to the chemistry, geology, and geography departments. As a freshman, I lived right across the street, in Munson Hall.
Strong Hall was where I took my entrance examination in the summer of 1960. It was in the auditorium that held about two hundred students, and was full. I passed the exam and the rest is history. Strong at the time was home to the chemistry, geology, and geography departments. As a freshman, I lived right across the street, in Munson Hall.
06-11-2016, 01:05 PM
Just curious:
Should EMU have tried to build a new building? Where? How much?
Is renovating Strong the best, most cost effective option? Think the price tag is 40M.
Should EMU have tried to build a new building? Where? How much?
Is renovating Strong the best, most cost effective option? Think the price tag is 40M.
06-11-2016, 01:17 PM
Dear steve,
In answering your question, I think where is the most important point. Not that there is no land available, or do you mean tear down Strong, and build new on that site? I'm sure the cost of new was considered, and that's why renovation was considered best.
In answering your question, I think where is the most important point. Not that there is no land available, or do you mean tear down Strong, and build new on that site? I'm sure the cost of new was considered, and that's why renovation was considered best.
06-11-2016, 01:24 PM
(06-11-2016 01:17 PM)Ken Barna Wrote: [ -> ]Dear steve,
In answering your question, I think where is the most important point. Not that there is no land available, or do you mean tear down Strong, and build new on that site? I'm sure the cost of new was considered, and that's why renovation was considered best.
I would be disappointed if Strong were to be torn down. I was a geology major and earned a MS in physical geography. I spent most of my academic career, between geology and physics courses, in Strong Hall. A majority of my other course work, chemistry, was in Mark Jefferson.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
06-11-2016, 01:40 PM
(06-11-2016 01:24 PM)HuronRob Wrote: [ -> ](06-11-2016 01:17 PM)Ken Barna Wrote: [ -> ]Dear steve,
In answering your question, I think where is the most important point. Not that there is no land available, or do you mean tear down Strong, and build new on that site? I'm sure the cost of new was considered, and that's why renovation was considered best.
I would be disappointed if Strong were to be torn down. I was a geology major and earned a MS in physical geography. I spent most of my academic career, between geology and physics courses, in Strong Hall. A majority of my other course work, chemistry, was in Mark Jefferson.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was not suggesting, for example, tearing down Strong, but rather, asking if a building as old as Strong is suitable for say the next 50 years given the nature of STEM and how it may evolve in the future?
06-16-2016, 08:25 AM
07-27-2016, 03:43 AM