River Dorms History

[Scarlet Pride]

An interesting bit of history on the River Dorms construction. Too bad the Demarest/traditional style did not win out.

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...rs-river-dorms-marked-transition-to-modernity

 

[rufancoe00]

as a former river dorm resident i too wish that the traditional style had won...

 

[DowntownT_Brown]

That is an interesting article. Often times I look at something like the river dorms and mumble what idiot thought that was a good idea.

It is easy to forget that sometimes it is a group of idiots or just someone with more power than the better judging collective that results in a poor decision.

 

[RaySt]

Rutgers lack of a cohesive architectural look or even looks for me takes away from the school. I have alway been bewildered by the lack of vision and planning that I assumed resulted in the hodgepodge of buildings and styles that dot our campuses. Even more disappointing is this article that shows there was consideration, but practicality and style of the day won out over more timeless and harder to do architecture. Short sightedness? Seems so, but also feels like that approach is repeated building to building and still to this day. Just look at Livingston. Great new buildings each of them but just in facade alone we now have red brick, brown brick, stucco and steel all in a corner of campus butting up against one another. In a city that is expected. A college campus should provide more aesthetic value and many do. Wish we thought of that back in the 50s when the river dorms were built and seems even today the lessons of the past are not being applied.

 

[Upstream]

Rutgers lack of a cohesive architectural look or even looks for me takes away from the school. I have alway been bewildered by the lack of vision and planning that I assumed resulted in the hodgepodge of buildings and styles that dot our campuses. Even more disappointing is this article that shows there was consideration, but practicality and style of the day won out over more timeless and harder to do architecture. Short sightedness? Seems so, but also feels like that approach is repeated building to building and still to this day. Just look at Livingston. Great new buildings each of them but just in facade alone we now have red brick, brown brick, stucco and steel all in a corner of campus butting up against one another. In a city that is expected. A college campus should provide more aesthetic value and many do. Wish we thought of that back in the 50s when the river dorms were built and seems even today the lessons of the past are not being applied.

The problem with the River Dorms isn't that it is a different architectural style, it is that it is a bad architectural style.

I don't have an issue with mixing architectural styles and facade colors. Very few college campuses are homogeneous in architecture, and most that are also tend to be aesthetically boring.

No one complains about the mixture of architectural styles on Old Queens campus. Even though each of the buildings is unique, all are interesting.

Van Nest Hall

Geology Hall

Winants Hall

Old Queens

Kirkpatrick Chapel

Schanck Observatory

 

[Scarlet Pride]

Article mentioned architectural trends can be good (Federalist, Gothic, Georgian, Jeffersonian, etc) but they can also be bad such as the one that gave us the River Dorms or the brutalist campus architecture that was popular at many schools during much of Rutgers building expansion.

I'm actually ok with they way Livingston has gone. I don't think anyone would want to continue in the style of the older Livingston buildings so you had to make a break. The new dorms are fairly bland architecturally although updated compared to the rest of campus and they blend ok to me. The RBS building is a stark contrast but that was the intent and I think it adds some personality to campus.

I think a diversity of style isn't a bad thing. The example of Old Queens campus is a good one. In fact, I'd say trying to stick to one homogeneous style with a campus the size of Rutgers would be a mistake (even if $$ was no object). A well thought out blend of good architecture is much different than a hodge podge of buildings (which we seem to have in some cases).

 

[Korbermeister]

As a former Campbell Hall resident, I can't imagine that my 19 yo. Self would've cared. I was and still am a Busch Baby; living on CA itself was a novelty, not what the dorm building looked like.
Of course, if they had built the river dorms to better match the campus, there'd most likely be protests on George street decrying the 'imminent destruction' of said buildings to build a corporatist, soulless new main campus

 

[RaySt]

The problem with the River Dorms isn't that it is a different architectural style, it is that it is a bad architectural style.

I don't have an issue with mixing architectural styles and facade colors. Very few college campuses are homogeneous in architecture, and most that are also tend to be aesthetically boring.

No one complains about the mixture of architectural styles on Old Queens campus. Even though each of the buildings is unique, all are interesting.

Van Nest Hall

Geology Hall

Winants Hall

Old Queens

Kirkpatrick Chapel

Schanck Observatory

You prove a good point that total consistency isn't the solution and I think if applied exclusively likely could look very much like a townhouse community or municipal complex. No doubt extending the design of the Livingston quad and towers to the new buildings on Livingston for consistency sake would not have been desirable. Total randomness doesn't quite work for me either.

So I ask this to the board with curiosity and to start a discussion..what make a campus "beautiful"? You point out Old Queens which is no doubt aesthetically pleasing, represents the school well and is a mix of architectural styles. And honestly I didn't realize how mixed until viewing your pictures. Which says something right there. Voorhees Mall also has a mix of styles but yet is a most admired section of campus. I have been to a lot of schools and many suffer to some extent from the "hodge podge" affect. Some more than others. And sometimes you don't even notice.

So why does it work in some examples and not others? Is it the public space?, the trees? how buildings are arranged? Or maybe a common thread or a way in which the buildings compliment rather than contradict?

 

[Upstream]

@RaySt, I think landscaping has a lot to do with it. Most of the open space in Livingston is flat open field, and most of the buildings don't have much landscaping around them. The new retail/apartments sit on concrete plazas, which give it a very urban look. That also makes the grass fields across the street look like vacant lots (which in fact, they are, since the plan is to build new buildings there, to give the area more of a streetscape feel, vs open fields). Also, considering that much of the landscaping is trees, recognize that you have immature trees with new construction. It is hard to plant 30 year old trees.

The other problem with Livingston is that the pre-1990 buildings are incredibly uninteresting. The new buildings are somewhat more interesting. I think the mixed-use retail/apartments are somewhat generic, but they can work in the planned streetscape environment. The additions to the student center are interesting, but surrounded to the south and east by incredibly ugly buildings like the Towers, Lucy Stone, Tillet, the Library, etc. The only truly interesting building on Livingston is the new business school (which I know many dislike, but I think will actually be an iconic landmark once the planned additions to Livingston are complete).

 

[e5fdny]

@RaySt, I think landscaping has a lot to do with it. Most of the open space in Livingston is flat open field, and most of the buildings don't have much landscaping around them. The new retail/apartments sit on concrete plazas, which give it a very urban look. That also makes the grass fields across the street look like vacant lots (which in fact, they are, since the plan is to build new buildings there, to give the area more of a streetscape feel, vs open fields). Also, considering that much of the landscaping is trees, recognize that you have immature trees with new construction. It is hard to plant 30 year old trees.

If only we had a place close by that could use Livingston as their classroom for something like this. Like a school that specializes in something like this. I wonder who might fit that bill?

And the hardest part about planting 30 yr old trees (or at least mature ones) is how heavy the pen is when you write the check.

 

[Upstream]

if only

 

[RaySt]

we are getting to the bottom of it and the solution seems so simple now....landscaping. Better buildings is important but not much can be done now with what we have except be more thoughtful on about what we build in the future and landscape well around everything we have. I have a colleague who is an alum and said if she makes millions she will re-brick face the whole campus. I will try to sway her to dedicating those future dollars to trees and landscape.

 

[e5fdny]

we are getting to the bottom of it and the solution seems so simple now....landscaping. Better buildings is important but not much can be done now with what we have except be more thoughtful on at we child and landscape well around everything. I have a colleague who is an alum and said if she makes millions she will re-brick face the whole campus. I will try to sway her to dedicating those future dollars to trees and landscape.

Maybe somebody will sway the powers that be to see if we can get the Cook LA program kids on some future projects.

 

[RaySt]

Maybe somebody will sway the powers that be to see if we can get the Cook LA program kids on some future projects.

The synergy is so obvious and what a great opportunity to apply what students learn and beautify the campus at the same time. We also have an urban planning program if I recall that could participate in campus beautification. Maybe there is red tape or maybe projects are done today (I admit I have no visibility there) but I think the cook programs should be let loose on the campus to do their work. At minimum it creates an incredible learning environment. And it could lead to something great for the school too.

 

[srru86]

Certainly the River Dorms are not great. But most big campuses have their share of clunky buildings. Even a place as generally beautiful as Michigan at Ann Arbor has some modernistic duds sprinkled among the gems I was actually surprised to find on my first visit this season.

And there are certainly examples of stuff as bad as, if not worse, than the River Dorms out there. To wit...

UMass Amherst

At least this one they don't inflict on students, it is actually a hotel.

SUNY Albany has some homogeneity going on here. Unfortunately it looks like something Albert Speer put together for the Fuhrer.

Both U-Mass and SUNY-Albany have some very nice buildings also.

 

[Korbermeister]

Certainly the River Dorms are not great. But most big campuses have their share of clunky buildings. Even a place as generally beautiful as Michigan at Ann Arbor has some modernistic duds sprinkled among the gems I was actually surprised to find on my first visit this season.

And there are certainly examples of stuff as bad as, if not worse, than the River Dorms out there. To wit...

UMass Amherst

At least this one they don't inflict this one on students, it is actually a hotel.

SUNY Albany has some homogeneity going on here. Unfortunately it looks like something Adolph Speer put together for the Fuhrer.

Both U-Mass and SUNY-Albany have some very nice buildings also.

There's nothing wrong with the river dorms, they're just boring to look at and they could use an 'R' on their side since they're so visible. The parties in those UMass-Amherst towers must be amazing

 

[srru86]

they could use an 'R' on their side since they're so visible.

I like that idea.

Adding a "R" like this

And put it on the service shelter on top here

I like the Jersey Roots/Reach tag line but a banner down the other side with a big "R" would be nice also.

 

[RUJohnny99]

I love the river dorms. I spent the best two years of my life in Campbell, and met my wife there. I hope they never go away.

I'd love to see easy cosmetic changes to them. Put some faux brickface on them to make them look older. You don't even need to change the color, just put white lines to make it look like they're made of brick,

Next, put some sort of pitch on the roof. Put a gambreled roof on the river dorms to cover the heater & washing machines. That makes it look less like a housing project & more like college housing.

Finally, remove the balconies and put columns on both sides. I know the river side balconies haven't been open since 1990 & I don't think the preceptor balconies open either. So they are just wasted metal hiding a beautiful building.

Put these improvements in place, and the river dorms would fit perfectly with the other dorms on college ave.

 

[Korbermeister]

I love the river dorms. I spent the best two years of my life in Campbell, and met my wife there. I hope they never go away.

I'd love to see easy cosmetic changes to them. Put some faux brickface on them to make them look older. You don't even need to change the color, just put white lines to make it look like they're made of brick,

Next, put some sort of pitch on the roof. Put a gambreled roof on the river dorms to cover the heater & washing machines. That makes it look less like a housing project & more like college housing.

Finally, remove the balconies and put columns on both sides. I know the river side balconies haven't been open since 1990 & I don't think the preceptor balconies open either. So they are just wasted metal hiding a beautiful building.

Put these improvements in place, and the river dorms would fit perfectly with the other dorms on college ave.

EEEK! Brickface, as I've seen done in Jersey is one of the worst things to happen to buildings.. It looks artificial and doesn't hold up to weather well long-term. A fake roof would look awkward in the buildings and wouldn't fool anyone also. Maybe single labeled windows in the rooms but I don't see the need to change anything about them now; they look fine. Although when the center one is demolished it'd be near to see RUTGERS and UNIVERSITY spelled out on the roofs of Frelinghuysen and Campbell halls respectively, Davin the river Luke the Hollywood sign

 

[RaySt]

I just got back from a week of corporate leadership training at Duke and I was astounded at what I saw given this discussion. While a beautiful campus, very spread out, with buildings nestled behind trees, the architecture and facades varied. I hadn't been there since '94 and remembered only their iconic gothic chapel and surrounding buildings. But right next to those is a concrete looking student center, across the street is a red brick face building. But there was space between the buildings, trees, even the concrete student center next to the chapel was sufficiently obscured so as not to distract from the beauty of its neighbors. So to the earlier point, it's not necessarily the buildings but the environment. Landscaping is easier and cheaper than new buildings!

 

[Korbermeister]

I just got back from a week of corporate leadership training at Duke and I was astounded at what I saw given this discussion. While a beautiful campus, very spread out, with buildings nestled behind trees, the architecture and facades varied. I hadn't been there since '94 and remembered only their iconic gothic chapel and surrounding buildings. But right next to those is a concrete looking student center, across the street is a red brick face building. But there was space between the buildings, trees, even the concrete student center next to the chapel was sufficiently obscured so as not to distract from the beauty of its neighbors. So to the earlier point, it's not necessarily the buildings but the environment. Landscaping is easier and cheaper than new buildings!

Makes sense; Ugly can be obscured, gussied up with nature and such. Let's say we surround Scott Hall with a bunch of Redwoods and call it a day

 

[sct1111]

Makes sense; Ugly can be obscured, gussied up with nature and such. Let's say we surround Scott Hall with a bunch of Redwoods and call it a day

Hell why don't they put ivy on the ugly buildings? Scott Hall could use it. NJ Hall could use it too since it's been so neglected. We're a colonial college and should look like it.

If you look at the 2030 plan, they are putting up more modern looking rectangle dorms around the transportation hub on college ave where the middle river dorm stands today. I think it's just repeating the same mistake made with the river dorms. They also clash with the architecture on the campus.

I say put a big beautiful Federalist style student union where the middle river dorm now stands. The wings of the student union can be the new dorms. A land bridge leading from the new quad to the new student union would be perfect. You'll have the college ave gym and the new student union facing each other from each side if the quad. Behind the student union should be another entrance that leads to the proposed pedestrian bridge to Livingston. This way you literally have the student union 'on the banks of the old raritan' and we finally get to take advantage of the river.

It just makes sense and an iconic student union is something Rutgers lacks and needs.

 

[Korbermeister]

The 2030 plan is a cohesive vision for the core of college ave,, and and seem to follow a well thought out aesthetic. The architects allowed the classic themes to continue transformed as they climb seminary hill to Bishop road the new buildings contain new elements while they pay homage to the past with the clock tower. This allows the architects to introduce new themes for the up and coming quad

 

[e5fdny]

I just got back from a week of corporate leadership training at Duke and I was astounded at what I saw given this discussion. While a beautiful campus, very spread out, with buildings nestled behind trees, the architecture and facades varied. I hadn't been there since '94 and remembered only their iconic Gothic chapel and surrounding buildings. But right next to those is a concrete looking student center, across the street is a red brick face building. But there was space between the buildings, trees, even the concrete student center next to the chapel was sufficiently obscured so as not to distract from the beauty of its neighbors. So to the earlier point, it's not necessarily the buildings but the environment. Landscaping is easier and cheaper than new buildings!

And we already have people/students here to do it.

 

[derleider]

EEEK! Brickface, as I've seen done in Jersey is one of the worst things to happen to buildings.. It looks artificial and doesn't hold up to weather well long-term. A fake roof would look awkward in the buildings and wouldn't fool anyone also. Maybe single labeled windows in the rooms but I don't see the need to change anything about them now; they look fine. Although when the center one is demolished it'd be near to see RUTGERS and UNIVERSITY spelled out on the roofs of Frelinghuysen and Campbell halls respectively, Davin the river Luke the Hollywood sign

Whats the difference between a fake roof and a real roof? I think you could put some kind of fancier roof on top of those buildings and it wouldnt look bad.

 

[Korbermeister]

Hoboken Affordable housing as seen from Paterson Plank rd.

Jersey City affordable housing as seen from Palisade ave. (the roofs on the brick building were added decades after the original structures were built.)
as you can see, the added roofs to the buildings don't complement the original structure and neither do they make the buildings blend in with the surrounding neighborhood.
l

Whats the difference between a fake roof and a real roof? I think you could put some kind of fancier roof on top of those buildings and it wouldn't look bad.

similar to the difference between the difference between brickface and a real brick wall

 

[e5fdny]

But they do, even if just a little bit, make them look less project-like.

Which IMO is what the River Dorms always looked like to me.

 

[Korbermeister]

But they do, even if just a little bit, make them look less project-like.

Which IMO is what the River Dorms always looked like to me.

Someone once said "....lipstick on a pig just makes him stand out from the litter"
No. There are better ways to update the buildings than slapping a pitched roof on them that has no relation to the original structures and makes them look malformed