Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Ohio State to open new chemistry building in 2014

tobin.61@osu.edu

Published: Monday, February 8, 2010

Updated: Monday, February 8, 2010 18:02

In 2014, Ohio State will open a sophisticated new chemistry building that administrators say will make the university's science programs more competitive.

The $126 million Chemical Biomolecular and Engineering and Chemistry building will replace a hodgepodge of old and in some cases dangerous science labs and classrooms. The chemical engineering side of the building will be called Koffolt Lab. The Chemistry Department has not chosen a name for its side of the building yet.

The new facility will "make recruiting easier at every level," said Stuart Cooper, chair of the department of chemical and biomolecular engineering. "What we have now can be a disadvantage."

A modern building will attract graduate students, freshmen and faculty. Administrators hope to increase faculty from 18 to 22, he said.

The building will include new laboratories for multiple sciences, instructional spaces and building support, according to a Facilities Operations and Development report in November.

The building project has been in the works since 2002, but will finally be put into motion by June 2011 with the demolition of Boyd Lab, Johnston Lab, the Aviation building and Haskett Hall.

The Chemical Biomolecular and Engineering Department has submitted campus proposals and feasibility reports since 2002, Cooper said. The Chemistry Department had also submitted a proposal for a new building to Facilities Operations and Development and conducted a feasibility study and report about renovating Evans Lab. University officials decided that the best option was to construct a building for both departments.

"We've been putting in requests and getting further and further along in the queue," Cooper said. They also put in requests through the college in 2004, 2006 and 2008, he added.

"When they tore Lord Hall down, we were showing potential donors, ‘This is where we are going to be,'" Cooper said.

Administrators changed their mind on the building location after officials released a master plan study about a long-term vision for the university, he added.

In 2007, it was decided that the best preliminary site for the new science building was between Woodruff and 19th avenues, Cooper said. This was based on the location of the building and the "bad shape" of the buildings being torn down. The site of Haskett Hall was also included in the new plan, which increased the overall space for the new building.

Moving the building's location frees up the Lord Hall site to be used as an English or arts building, Cooper said.

The building's location furthers the university's academic plan.

"The current location aligns with the principals from the Academic Facilities Plan and the One University Framework by reducing the university's deferred maintenances," said project manager Faye Bodyke, in an e-mail. The building "creates alignment with [the] sciences and engineering neighborhood."
 

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

3 comments

Anonymous
Sun Jan 2 2011 19:31
Boyd Lab is horrible to teach in. Seats are bolted to the ground, there are no projectors or computers for people to use, the bathrooms are in horrible condition, there are long, ugly stairwells to get to rooms, etc., etc., etc. The buildings are labyrinths. Buildings that seem to be connected are not. Exits and entrances are hard to find. If there's ever an emergency, I shudder: there's no escape route. NONE. We're not talking about luxury; these classrooms are in significantly worse shape than an average high school classroom. What's worse are that these classrooms were seemingly not designed with learning in mind. I cringe every time I get assigned as a grad. student to teach there because I know that half the class will either not be able to see what I write on the board or will not be able to see what I show on the screen. I've taught 70 person classes in rooms that go ten rows deep with only a regular-sized projector screen or two regular-sized chalkboards. No matter how I teach some students won't be able to see, and they won't be comfortable when learning. I'm only sad that I won't be able to teach in a room adequately equipped to deal with learning in the 21st century (or even 1997).

Good riddance, Boyd Lab.

Anonymous
Wed Feb 10 2010 11:14
WHERE DOES THE BUILDING STOP???? Seriously, how many billions can we spend before this all becomes unsustainable? How many people refuse to come here every year because we have two old buildings and we havent replaced them with a new $130 million building? This is based on the dishonest, ridiculous notion that 18-year old kids will refuse to come to college if they cannot constantly be in the lap of luxury. Honestly, 90% of the students at this state school are not used to luxury, and they cannot afford the luxury current administrators are forcing on them. WHAT MR GEE IS DOING TO THIS UNIVERSITY AND THIS STATE IS CRIMINAL. OHIO HAS SOME OF THE HIGHEST TUITION IN THE COUNTRY (EVEN WITH RELATIVELY LOW COST OF LIVING), ITS ALREADY BEEN UNSUSTAINABLE FOR A LONG TIME, AND PEOPLE ARE GOING INTO RUIN. THE EVENTUAL RECKONING OF ALL OF THIS WILL BE TRAGIC!
Dr. Anthony Newman
Tue Feb 9 2010 03:53
Please use no marble or other very expensive materials. Try to REDUCE TUITION by cutting costs and laying off the obscene number of administrators you have hired: Why do we need 2.67 Administrators for EVERY faculty member? What do they do? Just show each other viewgraphs at endless meetings, while doing no teaching and no research! One desktop computer can hold the records for every person ever associated with OSU in ANY capacity! If you reduced Administration numbers to half those of faculty you could make tuition FREE with current state support! So why don't you do that? Or do you like all the toady yes-men flattering you?






log out