The Journal

Issue date: 4/14/05 Section: Opinion/Editorial

Jonathan Kleinow

At a recent press conference, Webster University President Richard Meyers revealed that the university is considering purchasing the Luhr Library, across the street on the campus of Eden Theological Seminary, for use as a new science building. Certainly, additional classroom buildings should be a priority for the university, and our existing science facilities on the ground level of Webster Hall are anything but impressive. But purchasing and renovating the Luhr Library wastes an opportunity to let Webster shine as a university that cares about its science program.

The existing labs are 75 years old, and students crowd into the classrooms to conduct labs. With about 40 students majoring in science, professors in the department dread further growth of the program without additional space.

If the university is going to raise money for this building, administrators ought to take the opportunity to design a building for the future. We have the chance to design a building that can serve as an example for other universities. A "green" building, as defined by the U.S. Green Building Council, includes features for water conservation and waste management, is made with recycled or reused materials and is energy efficient.

As St. Louis tries to become a center for growth in biotechnology sciences and Saint Louis University and Washington University improve their science facilities, we can take our place among the local science giants with a building that applies the principles being taught to the students inside.

Spending the money for a green building may feel like an unnecessary expense at a time when the university is facing severe budget problems. But Meyers himself admitted purchasing and renovating the Luhr Library for use as a science building may cost just as much as constructing a new building.

Moreover, the money for a new building is raised through capital campaigns, which don't bring in money for operating expenses. The building could even save money, said Don Conway-Long, chairman of the environmental studies committee, in an interview last year.

"Initially, it will cost more, but if you are using less resources, you will save tremendous amounts of money," Conway-Long said. "We didn't think just in terms of four or five years down the road. We want to be a model to the community."

Certainly there are other uses for the Luhr Library that don't require the same extensive renovation needed for new science laboratories. Classrooms with desks and whiteboards are easier to install than vent hoods and other science equipment, and retrofitting the building to accommodate those needs would make the project cost-prohibitive. Perhaps the visual arts program, which feared the loss of its studio space with the proposed dorms two years ago, could make good use of the interior space of the Luhr Library as studios.

There's no word on when the campus will get new buildings. A campaign is now under way to raise money for a new business building, but construction is probably five years away.

While physical science majors may not be the biggest contingent of students on-campus, they deserve the same consideration for a positive educational experience as any other student.








Jonathan Kleinow, a junior journalism major, is the editor-in-chief for The Journal.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools