another oval?
South Campus Plan Receives Little Opposition
By Yogesh Simpson, 7-19-07
There was a modest turn out and little fanfare Wednesday evening for the unveiling of the University of Montana’s South Campus Master Plan. About 30 people attended the PowerPoint presentation in the University Center Theater to hear about the UM’s plan to develop a satellite campus in a space currently occupied by the university golf course.
This was one of the last opportunities for public comment on the plan, which is expected to be finalized and sent to the UM president, George Dennison, and Board of Regents by September.
The plan is the work of a committee that began in December of 2006 to hear presentations from people who currently use the land, such as golfers, gardeners and hang gliders. And those who hope to stake claim to any future expansion, like the College of Forestry with its $30 million in research money and inadequate facilities.
The committee then prioritized the potential land uses to come up with an outline for what the south campus might look like. Not surprisingly, academics won out, with student housing, campus recreation, and athletics rounding out the top four priorities.
The resulting plan leaves much of the area, from the base of Mt. Sentinel to S. Higgings Avenue, and from South Avenue to Pattee Canyon Drive, in tact and in the service of its current uses. That is, except for the golf course.
Where there are now fairways bunkers and greens the committee envisions a facsimile of the oval on the main campus, now referred to as the “mountain campus,” with academic buildings on the periphery. Student housing would buffer the central academic zone to the north and to the west. And near Dornblazer Stadium the plan proposes a massive indoor practice facility for the athletics department.
About half of those in attendance, mainly residents of the surrounding neighborhoods and university staff or faculty, voiced their opinions on the plan. A few people expressed their outright opposition, but in general the comments took the form of constructive criticism.
“It’s kind of cute to see another oval,” said Vicki Watson, a professor of environmental studies. “But do we really need another oval, or should we consolidate the buildings and leave as much unbroken open space as possible?”
“Lets look at multi-level parking, lets look at closing the campus to parking. Park-and-Ride is working,” said Wayne Vanderberg, who lives between the two campuses.
Many area residents, reluctant to lose the open space and concerned about traffic, wondered why the university couldn’t further develop its other properties first. Committee member Rosi Keller did her best to convince the crowd that all the other options had been explored and there were good reasons to develop the south campus.
Though the plan is close to being finalized, Keller was clear that it will be quite some time before the master plan is realized.
“A lot of what happens is going to be driven by availability of funding,” she said. “You’re looking at a very long time. We’re talking 50 years.”
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Be the first to comment on this article. Please complete the form below.