Pitt expansion to leave gaps

Pitt has recently released an ambitious 12-year construction plan, detailing projects to… Pitt has recently released an ambitious 12-year construction plan, detailing projects to modernize various buildings across campus, add a new building behind Salk Hall and improve athletic facilities. The plan is likely to cost more than $1 billion.

The largest and most expensive new construction, at $45 million, is the addition to be built behind Salk Hall, which will have research laboratories for the pharmacy and health science schools. Construction in the athletic department is slated to cost $34.3 million and will include renovations to Trees Hall and the Fitzgerald Field House, a new track and field facility and new baseball and softball fields. Other projects are intended to modernize many buildings throughout Oakland, including Benedum Hall, which will undergo a $52 million renovation.

Vice provost for academic planning and resources management Robert Pack told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the plan will “ensure that we remain one of the most successful and competitive universities in the country.”

All of this sounds promising. What Pitt student would not like to see his or her school grow and prosper as a competitive national institution? Improvements will be extremely beneficial around campus, where numerous buildings seem as though they are still trapped in 1975.

But Pitt seems to be missing the bigger picture. While a $1 billion modernization and new construction plan will greatly help Pitt progress, it does not address the other problems that are holding our university back.

For one thing, while universities across the nation are making their buildings more environmentally friendly, Pitt does not seem to be taking the environment into account in its plans. Energy efficiency was not specified in the University’s construction projects. We hope that this was just an accidental omission. If not, we encourage Pitt to make sure all the additions and renovations will be environmentally friendly.

Furthermore, part of being a progressive university is the ability to attract low-income students. A portion of that $1 billion could be put to better use in improving Pitt’s financial aid policy and creating more need-based scholarships for students who cannot afford tuition, making our university accessible to more students.

Of course, not all of the blame can be placed on Pitt. Much of this money comes from alumni who seem to be more concerned with seeing their names on newly constructed buildings as opposed to helping Pitt students with their tuition. But there is also money coming straight from the University’s Educational and General budget that could be more efficiently used.

We would like to see Pitt compete on a national level, but these improvements should be extended to other areas as well. This is a good start, but there’s a lot more to modernization than sleek, new buildings.