Darby, PEC to be replaced

by David Archer

Staff Writer

Last week President Osgood, trustees and faculty members traveled to New York and St. Louis to interview architects about designing new athletic facilities to replace facilities now housed in Darby and the Physical Education Complex (PEC).

Currently, athletic facility users suffer from lack of space. When the PEC opened in the early 1970s, Grinnell had no women’s sports teams. Now eight women’s teams share one locker room in the PEC, compared with nine men’s teams that share three locker rooms.

In addition to varsity sports, P.E. classes, intramurals, club sports and the general community all congest the PEC. “In this era of fitness,” said Athletic Director Dee Fairchild, “we just don’t have enough space.”

The architects will first design a new gym for basketball and volleyball.

In recent months many have speculated about alternative spaces for the two sports once Darby is demolished after spring 2004. Fairchild proposed using space in town, or erecting a temporary inflated bubble.

Osgood, however, said the college will build a new gymnasium by fall 2004, before volleyball season. “I don’t see any other option,” he said. A construction site has not yet been selected, but somewhere north of Tenth Avenue is most probable, according to Osgood.

The interview team met with five architecture firms which each gave 90-minute presentations in response to a list of questions from the college.

The team will recommend an architect to the trustees at their Feb. 21-22 meeting. This past Tuesday the interview committee discussed the proposals over a conference call, but they have yet to make a decision. They had no consensus but did agree on a candidate or two, said Osgood.

No students participated in the interview process. But none of the members of the committee expressed reservations about this absence, as long as students become involved in the design process after the board approves the architect.

“Clearly, students need to have a voice,” said Judy Hunter, faculty representative on the interview team.

All the architecture firms have visited the potential building sites on campus. Each firm has experience working with two of the following three—Grinnell College, college campuses, and athletic facilities. Jonathan Brand, vice president for institutional and budget planning, said the committee looked for three elements in each firm: experience with athletic spaces, ability to design aesthetically appealing exteriors, and an attention to detail on the final product as well as the building process.

The trustees initiated this process in October 2002, asking Osgood to find an architect to replace Darby because the new Campus Center will be built where it now stands.

The architects will also design new facilities to replace the PEC. Over the next 15 years, as much as 35 million dollars will be spent on new athletic facilities. A new gym alone will likely cost around 6 million dollars.

Many of Grinnell’s peer schools have constructed new athletic facilities in the last ten years, and Grinnell will continue to follow their lead. “Facilities are great for recruiting,” said Fairchild.

Some students said they see no reason to replace the PEC, describing the facilities as “adequate.” Anh Trinh ’05 said facilities north of Tenth Avenue would be too far a walk from south campus. “It’s already far enough,” she said.

Recreational uses aside, the building itself is liable to hamper team practice and performance. “It is not a high quality building,” said Osgood.

NCAA requirements also present a problem for the future of Grinnell sports. The college pool has six 25-meter lanes, but the NCAA requires eight lanes for competition. “After this spring,” said Fairchild, “we may not be able to host another conference championship.”

The pool’s lack of length prevents the team from performing certain training methods that require 50-meter pools, said Michael Miller ’04, a member of the cross-country and swim teams.

In addition to an indoor track too narrow to host events, the weight room is too small, said Fairchild. The current room has roughly 5000 square feet of fitness space; Fairchild expressed need for a minimum of 8000 to meet the college’s needs.

The PEC will not necessarily be demolished immediately after construction of new facilities. The college asked the prospective architects to address possible uses for the space for the next few years, but the college will plan to tear it down within 10 years, said Osgood.

Osgood would not disclose the names of the architecture firm candidates in order to prevent public embarrassment for candidates not selected.

If the trustees approve Osgood’s recommendation, they will immediately create a committee to see the project to completion. The committee would include students, faculty, staff, and Grinnell residents who use the facilities but have no affiliation with the college. The architects woulld then present a design to the committee and the campus that would open a dialogue not to end until the project’s completion.

“I’ve been looking forward to improving our athletic facilities for 15 years,” said Fairchild.