UpDate - Vol. 13, No. 34, Page 12
June 9, 1994
Student center project involved many constituencies

     The University of Delaware has acted responsibly over the years
to protect and enhance the historic integrity of its buildings and
campus through an active program of restoration and reuse, with such
notable examples as the Curtis Mansion, Belmont Hall, Elliott Hall,
the George Evans House and the campus Visitors Center-facilities that
are important reflections of Newark and University traditions. Several
of these projects have won awards for outstanding restoration.
     The University approached the student center project with that
same overriding objective-in this instance, a clear interest in
preserving the architecture and history of its Main Street buildings.
Involvement of two major architectural firms and several other experts
in historical architecture on the student center p roject led to a
carefully considered conclusion to restore, reuse and feature the 1868
original Presbyterian Church section of Daughterty Hall as a major
architectural element in the design of the new student center while
removing the 1927 Sunday school addition to the building.
     Efforts leading to the current student center plan began on March
20, 1989, when the Trustee Committee on Grounds and Buildings
authorized the University administration to "proceed with program
development and schematic design" of a new facility.
     The architectural firm of H2L2 from Philadelphia was engaged to
assist in evaluating the need for additional space and how to meet
that need. The latter assignment was to study the potential of adding
to the Perkins Center or to determine possible locations for a second
student center and propose how the two resulting student centers would
work together.
     A program statement was developed over the next two years, based
on many meetings and interviews with student life staff, students and
other administrative representatives. Simultaneously, options for
funding such a project were developed.
     At the spring 1991 meeting of the Trustee Committee on Student
Life, a student center fee was approved to provide the funding for
potential renovations/additions/new construction of student center
space. In the summer of 1991, based on its earlier programming
studies, H2L2 was asked to focus attention on developing a feasibility
study and cost estimate to renovate the existing Perkins Student
Center and to build a second student center proposed for the block
located to the south and west of Main Street and South College Avenue.
     In a meeting held July 10, 1991, between representatives from the
University and H2L2, the architects were specifically instructed that:
"Daugherty Hall should be preserved, unless there is compelling
evidence suggesting otherwise."
     Between July 1991 and March 1992, the architects developed
schematic plans for a new student center and preliminary renovation
plans for the Perkins Student Center. Again, regular meetings were
held with student life staff, students and other administrative
representatives. Some of the design considerations included were:

     * the new building should be oriented principally on South
       College Avenue, toward the University campus;
     * the new building should be set back, giving respect to Old
       College Hall;
     * the new building should be oriented on an axis with Daugherty
       Hall to reflect the north/south orientation of South College
       Avenue pedestrian traffic and the central mall area of the
       campus.

     Initial drawings from the architect attempted to incorporate the
entire structure of Daugherty Hall. However, it became obvious to the
architects and the University staff involved that including the whole
structure caused the new building not to function well. Because of its
length, much of Daugherty Hall ended up being engulfed by the new
structure. The meeting minutes of January and February 1992 and the
feasibility report of March 5, 1992, include such comments as:

     * "The Abbey should be featured by the new structure rather than
       enveloped by it."
     * "Daugherty Hall is treated in the building as a 'found
       object.'"
     * "Daugherty Hall is a desirable structure with character on
       campus. The historic portion of the old church is saved in the
       project as almost a museum piece incorporated into the design."

     The H2L2 feasibility study was presented to the Trustee
Committees on Student Life and Grounds and Buildings in the spring of
1992. The consensus was that constructing a second student center at
the Main Street site made sense. In addition, given the prominence of
the site and the architectural challenges presented, the trustees felt
that further consideration should be given to the selection of the
design architect and the building design process.
     In the summer of 1992, a board-appointed Committee on
Architecture was created, with one of its first responsibilities to
assist the University in the selection of a design architect for the
new student center. In August 1992, the Architecture Committee met for
the first time, reviewed the H2L2 study and visited the proposed site.
While the committee members felt that keeping the entirety of
Daugherty Hall had some merit, they recognized the challenge of that
option, given its depth into the site.
     Members of the Architecture Committee are William C. Allen,
architectural historian of the U.S. Capitol, chair; David E.
Hollowell, senior vice president; Nancy Bradford duPont Reynolds,
professional sculptor; Robert F. Rider, chair, trustee Committee on
Grounds and Buildings; William M. W. Sharp, chair, trustee Committee
on Landscaping; and Damie Stillman, chair, Department of Art History,
with a specialty in historic architecture.
     A letter sent by the University to architectural firms invited
for interviews stated: "There is interest by the University in
preserving the 19th-century house known as Rees Hall [now the George
Evans House] and all or most of the neo-gothic former church known as
Daugherty Hall." On Nov. 2, 1992, the Architecture Committee
recommended selection of the firm of Venturi, Scott Brown and
Associates (VSBA) from Philadelphia to design the new student center.
VSBA, which has an international reputation as one of the world's
leading architectural design and planning firms, has completed more
than 40 projects on 19 campuses, including several buildings at
Princeton University and the University of Pennsylvania. Several of
these projects have involved historical preservation and adaptive
reuse. Robert Venturi and his wife, Denise Scott Brown, have received
many design awards, including the National Medal of Arts in 1992.
     After the firm's selection, the Architecture Committee met with
VSBA on three occasions to review and approve the progress of its
design. At a meeting March 5, 1993, VSBA shared schematic plans that
confirmed the H2L2 proposal to preserve, restore and feature as a
major architectural element the original portion of the building and
to remove the 1927 addition. The Architecture Committee endorsed the
plans submitted by VSBA and has enthusiastically supported the design
as it has developed in more detail.
     At several meetings of Board of Trustee committees between March
1993 and March 1994, plans and working models of the student center
project were presented. Student representatives were present at these
meetings, and the model and plans clearly showed that the front
portion of Daugherty Hall would be preserved. The result of all the
meetings and reviews was approval for construction of the student
center project by the Committee on Grounds and Buildings on April 13,
1994; by the Executive Committee on May 3, 1994; and by the full Board
of Trustees on May 18, 1994.
     During the planning process, in addition to the involvement of
trustee committees, architects, students and staff, close
communication has been maintained with the city of Newark and state
agencies such as DelDOT; meetings were held with local neighborhood
and business groups; and on two occasions, public meetings were held.
     Also, as part of the planning process, a detailed traffic impact
study was commissioned by the University as well as an economic impact
study of the student center on nearby Newark businesses. These studies
were shared with the city and other appropriate agencies.