MidtownCoog Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Agree. Any addition need to be WPA-esqe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo58 Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Sorry, I was actually referring to the Hofheinz Pavilion, I had to finish the post suddenly and forgotten all about the post afterwards.But yeah, they either need to seriously upgrade it or just raze it and start again.Yep, Hofheinz Pav is old and it does look dated. Still recall when we dropped my big sis and friends off to see a live concert of America/Seals & Crofts around 1972. Its stuck in a time warp. Raze, start again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Yep, Hofheinz Pav is old and it does look dated. Still recall when we dropped my big sis and friends off to see a live concert of America/Seals & Crofts around 1972. Its stuck in a time warp. Raze, start again.Problem with either razing or substantial renovations to Hofheinz is ASBESTOS. Apparently that's a multi-multi-million dollar issue.Personally I love Hofheinz as-is. It's a great place to watch a game.I do think the concessions areas could be improved, and there's a lot of wasted space outside of the seating area, but inside the "pit", it's an awesome place. The acoustics make 9,000 people sound like 20,000.And as far as the endzone facility for Robertson Stadium...I understand that the 3rd floor of the facility will be all glass, so supposedly you can still see the downtown skyline either over or through the facility.I agree the exterior of the end zone is a bit bland...it would be very nice if the architect could enhance the existing art-deco facade of the WPA-built stadium. There are hints of art-deco there today, but you could really improve on that...maybe tie it in with the old original limestone buildings on campus (E Cullen, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 Problem with either razing or substantial renovations to Hofheinz is ASBESTOS. Apparently that's a multi-multi-million dollar issue.Personally I love Hofheinz as-is. It's a great place to watch a game.I like Hofheinz as well. only time i didn't like it is when you had to wait in line there to sign up for classes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 I like the Hoff. Not so much on the suites, though. Rip-em-out!As far as that end zone facility, it looks like they took part of the wellness center and attached it to Robertson.How uninspiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I noticed last night that a new development is breaking ground at UH on University Drive near Calhoun, across the street from the Campus Recreation and Wellness Center. They just started stripping the site sometime between Tuesday and Thursday of this week.Anyone know what's coming?This is the same site that's had a "coming soon" sign up for months (maybe a year or so?) It's the site with the Lovett Commercial Realty sign.HCAD shows it's owned by "Calhoun UH Ltd", but the mailing address is Lovett Commercial Realty's. It's about a 1/2-acre site (23,000 sf). There's also undeveloped land between the new Lovett site and the Catholic Student Center, but it's owned by the Houston-Galveston Diocese...obviously part of the Catholic Student Center property. I wonder if the Catholic Church would consider selling or developing that land?It's interesting to me that new retail is breaking ground by a private developer...not just UH. There is retail in the bottom of the new UH parking garage (right now just Sonic and McAlister's Deli), but it seems to me it's easier for UH to subsidize development if necessary. A private developer has to have the project stand on its own merits (it has to be profitable to develop). I think it's a good sign that a private developer is taking the initiative to develop this sign. Maybe we're finally reaching that "critical mass" necessary to attract more development on and around campus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 "Critical mass"? It's the Art Briles affect ;-)A long, long time ago it was supposed to be a Chilis/Bookstore/Cafe strip. But I think that was just one of those "feeler" proposals since that was about three years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternGulf Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 It's interesting to me that new retail is breaking ground by a private developer...not just UH. There is retail in the bottom of the new UH parking garage (right now just Sonic and McAlister's Deli), but it seems to me it's easier for UH to subsidize development if necessary. A private developer has to have the project stand on its own merits (it has to be profitable to develop). I think it's a good sign that a private developer is taking the initiative to develop this sign. Maybe we're finally reaching that "critical mass" necessary to attract more development on and around campus.Well that's nice to know but are you saying the land is not owned by UofH? We know what we get when we don't have regulations in place. I remember that Kinkos/Chili's/Starbucks center coog is talking about but looking at the other developments by Lovett, I was a little uninspired. The drawing looks nice on the surface though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 I remember that Kinkos/Chili's/Starbucks center coog is talking about but looking at the other developments by Lovett, I was a little uninspired. The drawing looks nice on the surface though.The drawing does look nice...but I just don't see that happening. I'm curious if they'll be required to build on-site parking, since this is right next to an immense parking lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Enrollment fall worries University of Houston leadersNumbers raise questions about the effectiveness of recruitment effortsFewer students are attending UH than three years ago. The enrollment slump is a growing concern among campus leaders, and the numbers raise questions about the effectiveness of efforts by the aspiring research institution to recruit and retain more students. After peaking at 35,180 students in fall 2004, the university's enrollment has slipped by 2.4 percent. The 846-student decrease contrasts with 2 percent growth in enrollment statewide over the same period.http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolit...ckCurrentPage=1Not the greatest news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Not the greatest news, but it could be worse. I wouldn't be to worried. I'll probably go to UH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I don't think the sky is falling just yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 i agree, but to the provosts, even an 846 decrease in enrollment could be the start of financial issues.i was surprised to read this, though:UH began as a place for the children of the city's blue-collar workers to get an education, but too many students now leave for jobs before earning a degree. About one-fourth of the university's freshmen don't return for their sophomore year. And six years after entering UH, only 42 percent of freshmen will have earned degrees Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethanra Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Do you think schools, such as UHCL and UHD effect the numbers at UH Main Campus? I've heard from several people that they got their first two years at HCC (cheaper) and the finished at UHCL. Several people would drive farther to get to UHCL just because the campus is two buildings and the parking is easier. Also a small drop in enrollment could be because of a spike in enrollment in the previous semesters. As far as Graduation rates, I don't know a good reason the number is so low... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Enrollment fall worries University of Houston leadersNumbers raise questions about the effectiveness of recruitment effortshttp://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolit...ckCurrentPage=1Not the greatest news.It isn't really as bad as it looks. A lot of college students, particularly at UH and other second-tier urban universities, don't fit the traditional mold of a well-adjusted middle-class kid whose pre-determined destiny was to go to college and get a degree without having to work in anything more than a part-time job (if that). Many are first-generation college students and are very cognizant of the labor market. When times are good, they drop out and participate in a lucrative economy. When times are bad, they go to school. It also has a lot to do with interest rates, which correlate to the national economy.It is interesting, actually, because the 2001-2002 national recession affected Houston the worst in 2003, and the local effect only caused enrollment to peak in 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrfootball Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 (edited) If UH manages to open a campus in Northwest Harris County they'll have no problem with enrollment. Huge untapped market. Edited July 16, 2007 by mrfootball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millennica Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 As far as Graduation rates, I don't know a good reason the number is so low...A recent publication of the National Center for Education Statistics examines the effect of part-time enrollment on degree attainment. The complete report, approximately 111 pages, can be ordered by writing to:U.S. Department of EducationED PubsP.O. Box 1398Jessup, MD 20794-1398or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.org. The citation, executive summary, and one of the main findings follow below:Chen, X. (2007). Part-Time Undergraduates in Postsecondary Education: 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I don't think the NW campus would help UH's enrollment. The entire UH system has 50K plus as it is. This article is about the main campus.The part-time equation will alwasys work against UH. USNWR uses that against UH in rankings.I'd like to see part-timers at UHD/UH Sugar Land/UHCL and traditional students at the main camups. I actually think that is where UH is headed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 This may not be a huge problem, but the article shows why the trend is not a good thing..."But size matters, campus leaders say, because Texas funds colleges and universities using a formula based primarily on enrollment growth." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethanra Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 If UH manages to open a campus in Northwest Harris County they'll have no problem with enrollment. Huge untapped market.UH Main enrollment numbers are completely seperate from UHCL, UHD. They are seperate schools with different standards. Even the degree plans vary a little. The different UH schools actually are competetors to one another. The only thing they have is in common is the computer e-services are connected. For example, if you owe money to one school you can't take classes at another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kw_uh97 Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 This may not be a huge problem, but the article shows why the trend is not a good thing..."But size matters, campus leaders say, because Texas funds colleges and universities using a formula based primarily on enrollment growth."or better yet have an alumnus as the Governor of Texas.Perry awards Texas A&M $5 million grant for biofuels initiative...... just the most recent favor I've heard about.http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stor.../09/daily9.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 or better yet have an alumnus as the Governor of Texas.Perry awards Texas A&M $5 million grant for biofuels initiative...... just the most recent favor I've heard about.http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stor.../09/daily9.htmlUnless I see a complete list of funds given to different Texas schools, I think it's a little unfair to point that out and come to that conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 (edited) Unless I see a complete list of funds given to different Texas schools, I think it's a little unfair to point that out and come to that conclusion.Here's a start...the PUF. Most UT and A&M System schools share in this fund, which is given over and above the equal "per-student" allotment from the state that each school gets. The University of Houston and Texas Tech Systems are prohibited by law from recieving funds from the PUF. According to the article below, UT and A&M now get something less than 10% of their budgets from the PUF. Increase UH's and TT's budgets by 10% a year like UT and A&M get, and you'll see a reduction the tuition increases and an increase in the quality of the schools, both in bricks and mortar and in the academic output.I think UH and TT do a hell of a job without the tremendous subsidies that UT and A&M get. As I understand it, the PUF give each system something on the order of an extra $100 million per year that UH and TT don't get.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_University_FundThe Permanent University Fund (PUF) is one of the methods the State of Texas funds its universities.In 1876, the Texas Constitution formed the PUF, into which proceeds from leases and royalties on state land would be deposited. The discovery of huge oil reserves in the early 1900's dramatically increased the size of the PUF.The PUF principal in fall 2005 was approximately $15 billion, second only to Harvard University's endowment. The PUF primarily serves The University of Texas System, which receives two thirds of its proceeds. The remaining third goes to the The Texas A&M University System. As of 2006, the University of Texas System received the fourth largest endowment in the nation, and the Texas A&M System received the tenth largest.Other Texas public universities outside these two systems, notably University of Houston and Texas Tech University, are prohibited by law from sharing the income from this endowment. At one time, the PUF was the chief source of income for Texas A&M University and The University of Texas at Austin, but today its revenues account for less than ten percent of the universities' annual budgets. This has challenged both schools to increase sponsored research and private donations.In 1984 voters amended the state constitution to expand the number of UT- and A&M-system schools benefiting from the proceeds of the PUF bonding program. The schools receiving help from the PUF thereafter included the University of Texas at Arlington, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Texas at Dallas, the University of Texas at El Paso, the University of Texas of the Permian Basin, the University of Texas at San Antonio, the University of Texas at Tyler, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, the University of Texas System Cancer Center, the University of Texas Health Center at Tyler, Texas A&M University, Prairie View A&M University, Tarleton State University, and Texas A&M University at Galveston. Edited July 17, 2007 by Original Timmy Chan's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 It's sad really. A&M and UT get all that PUF money, yet A&M rank #60 and UT #47. That's a poor return on investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 (edited) Oops, I guess I misspoke earlier. I said that each system gets somewhere around $100 million per year from the PUF. Funds from the PUF are actually put into the AUF (Available Universities Fund), and then distributed to UT and A&M Systems. In any case, the $100 million per year was a little underestimated. http://www.utsystem.edu/CONT/Reports_Publi...AUF/2006AUF.pdf In FY 2007, the UT is budgeted to recieved over $281 MILLION from the AUF, and A&M will get over $136 MILLION. In FY 2006, the UT system recieved over $255 MILLION and A&M recieved almost $123 MILLION. Those are ACTUAL figures, not budgeted. Contrast that to UH and TT. Remember the "Excellence Funding" that both schools worked hard to get funded through the state legislature back in 2001? UH and TT lobbied for several years to get some additional "excellence funding" to try to catch up to UT and A&M. In the end, the state legislature did give UH all of about $13 million over 2 years, and TT about half of that, I believe. UH and TT were thrilled to get that paltry sum. Of course, Rick Perry immediately line-item vetoed that funding, claiming budget problems...so no excellence funding for UH or TT. Then he immediately turned around and found $50 million from a discretionary "economic development fund" and gave it to UT-Dallas. But I'm not bitter....nah... Edited July 17, 2007 by Original Timmy Chan's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 You speak the truth, Timmy.The UT-D/Texas Instruments deal was a joke. Hard to imagine we have to bribe TI to keep research in Texas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 (edited) I am bitter too. It makes absolutely NO SENSE that we continue to fund schools after archaic guidelines established around 100 years ago back when there were no other public schools in Texas. It's a disgrace. AND, it affects Longhorns and Aggies too by creating overcrowded conditions because there is a mindset that there are really only two options for top-quality public higher education. That's the main reason why UT and ATM continue to drop in the rankings. 34,000 full-time undergraduates is simply too many no matter how much money you have.Texas needs to adopt the California system NOW. With top 50 schools at UC-Berkeley, UC-Los Angeles, UC-San Diego, UC-Irvine, UC-Davis, and UC-Santa Barbara with UC-Santa Cruz and UC-Riverside climbing towards the top 50 every year, they have an incredible system that makes multiple schools highly desireable to quality students. Full-time undergrad populations range from 12,000 to 23,000. My ideal would have the following;UT-Austin, UT-Dallas, UT-El Paso, UT-San Antonio, and UT-Pan Am would join Texas ATM, Texas Tech, and Houston as tier-one schools.You'd have every major city/region covered with highly regarded public universities from Houston to El Paso and DFW to the Rio Grande Valley.I'd cap undergrad enrollment at Texas and ATM at 30,000.Houston and Tech could be capped around 25,000 to 28,000.All the others should have undergrad numbers around 20,000.It would be incredible for the state and for the state's most important feature; the cities. It would also be great for increasing opportunities in heavily Hispanic areas like El Paso and the RGV. With the demographics changing quite quickly, Texas simply needs to do a better job with educating Hispanics. Edited July 17, 2007 by KinkaidAlum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Here's a start...the PUF.While that's very unfair, it doesn't validate his point that the Governor gives more money to A&M just because he's an alumni. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyc_tex Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 (edited) While that's very unfair, it doesn't validate his point that the Governor gives more money to A&M just because he's an alumni.If you require an overt confession from Captain Hairdo that his motivation for vetoing legislation that would provide UH and TT extra funding and turning around and giving 2x the amount to a PUF school is motivated by political or personal prejudices then continue to hold firmly to your skepticism. He's not be very bright, but he's isn't that dumb. Their myopic focus on keeping A&M and UT #1 and #2 in the state academically and athletically for public institutions, is ultimately hurting the vast majority of Texans. It's really quite childishly selfish. Let us not displace any piece of this socio-historical narrative.....UH has been viewed with extreme prejudice and disdain by alumni from A&M and UT for decades now, much of which has been due to the ethnic and racial diversity at UH and its more working class orientation. I couldn't tell you how many times I have heard "coogro high" coming from the mouths of the aforementioned alumni. Edited July 18, 2007 by nyc_tex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 If you require an overt confession from Captain Hairdo that his motivation for vetoing legislation that would provide UH and TT extra funding and turning around and giving 2x the amount to a PUF school is motivated by political or personal prejudices then continue to hold firmly to your skepticism. He's not be very bright, but he's isn't that dumb. Their myopic focus on keeping A&M and UT #1 and #2 in the state academically and athletically for public institutions, is ultimately hurting the vast majority of Texans. It's really quite childishly selfish. Let us not displace any piece of this socio-historical narrative.....UH has been viewed with extreme prejudice and disdain by alumni from A&M and UT for decades now, much of which has been due to the ethnic and racial diversity at UH and its more working class orientation. I couldn't tell you how many times I have heard "coogro high" coming from the mouths of the aforementioned alumni.That PUF was created in 1876. How come all the governors before him aren't being held accountalbe for not changing the system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.