Vedder and Swank spotted at the Donkey discussing this over a cappucino.

I think if you were to see those buildings you would agree with the plan.

Yeah. New South's in bad shape. Falling apart in places.

Should the New South be razed, it would be interesting to see if the "mod" concept survives the transition.  I never lived there but those dorms were in great demand when it opened.  How's that arrangmenet viewed today?
When I was in the buildings last a few years ago, it seemed unduly cramped in the singles, at least.

I think the mod concept is a decent one, but the rooms were old enough and cramped enough, and South is far enough away from the heart of campus that I didn't seem to know as many people who were clamoring to get there as were trying to get onto East or West.  The single bedrooms did seem a bit cramped to me when I was in them, and the common room of my friend's mod was pretty poorly furnished.  I think the concept has a lot of potential if it is executed a bit better, like the renovations that have gone on in the last decade on East.

@Putnam: Most of East is even older, and even the buildings like Washington & Gam that haven't been recently updated seem to be in better shape.  I wish I could explain it.

Explanation:  "built by the lowest bidder"

Didn't our University fight a recent court battle to continue this mode of business?

Doubtful, but I don't think Pickering is going anywhere according to the info I've seen about the proposed projects on South, and I know Gam and the rest of East that hasn't already been renovated are planning on being renovated.  No demolition is on the table there.

I'm wondering the same thing here as PF. I lived in New South dorms, granted ~15 years ago, and while they're nothing at all impressive, they seemed sturdy. They had cat-5 ran everywhere by 1997, cable hookups, and seemed so simple, I don't know how much could go wrong that would require demolition.

The catwalks did look terrible back then though. I've got no idea if they're unsafe or not, however if looks determined safety, we wouldn't want to drive over half the bridges we do in today's world.

Gotta trust the trustee on this one.

I liked the mod concept. It was cramped but preferable to me.

And I have to wonder if with the influx of students in the late 1960s  and early 1970s didn't force the university to get up dorms as fast and as cheaply as possible, longevity be damned.

Counterpoint: I lived in a mod my first year and the people in it were not so good. It wasn't a fun year.

I truly believe that only in America do institutions construct buildings that become victims of wreckers' balls after 40 or 50 years. 

Other countries build buildings to really last.  A couple examples with which I am familiar.

* I've had the privilege of visiting the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst.  As I recall the main admin building was built in1812.  It is the length of 2 or 3 football fields.  The main hallway that runs the length of the building was paved in stone.  So many cadet boots have trod that hallway for 200 years that they've worn a shallow channel in the stone.  You think any serious thought would be given to razing that building? 

* I've also visited Christ Hospital School.  The word hospital has nothing to do with medical care.  Rather, when the school was established some 450 years ago, it was founded as a school for disadvantaged children - thus use of the word hospital.  The school's "new campus" was built in the 1890s.  Many of the buildings have undergone internal updating but raze the buildings?  Be serious. 

My old HS was dedicatred in 1924. It is scheduled to feel the bite of the wrecker's ball in 2014. We alums joke that the ball might shatter when trying to batter down the walls of that sturdily built school.  Why raze it?  Because an analysis showed it too expensive to maintain. 

Funny how other nations that seem to hold their buildings in greater respect do their analyses and reach different conclusions.