New Fraser: history of controversy, outgrown and the last brick hasn't been laid
By JOHN KIELY
Fraser, the seven story superbuilding isn't finished and won't be occupied for another month or two. But already this modern replacement for the former famed Fraser has compiled a hectic history of its own, and—been outgrown.
What with the excelling numbers of behavioral scientists at this campus, and their equipment and laboratory space requirements, they've only to move in to find themselves overcrowded.
Still, even overcrowded anthropology, sociology, human relations and psychology departments will be less crowded and less separated than before.
But once, more than that was what was hoped for.
EARLIER in the game, between four and five years ago, departmental representatives for the four occupying forces were told to project their needs to 1970 and say how much space they'd need.
-UDK Photo by Bob Parker
And they did. But even then, before the planning stages were completed, it was seen that the building wouldn't hold the representatives projected goals. According to Charles Warriner, professor of sociology, "it was clear they would not fit."
But even if the departments had been guilty of over-planning, they have since grown more rapidly than many imagined they would.
ANTHROPOLOGY didn't get much of a chance to imagine. Robert Squier, associate professor of anthropology, remembers those days of deliberation as a time when the anthro department was a sub-set of sociology.
BRICK BY BRICK One, two, three—back breaking work at New Fraser.
tional Science Foundation (NSF) arrived.
In fact, they'll be leaving the Anthropological Research Facility (yes, ARF), in the old Home Economics building below Blake Hall.
When they came into their own, the anthropologists' space had already been allotted. Squier joined the committee and soon, the Na-
NSF was planning to grant the anthropology department money to help with the building. "An NSF site-committee of four members visited us in early spring of 1964," relates Squier. "They were probing. It was very clear that not sufficient space was given to us."
There they have lab space for Geological and Physical anthropology.
To acquire the NSF grant anthropology got more space. But not enough when considering those 1970 projections. Squier said, "We're not even going to be able to get all in in 1968."
THE SOCIOLOGY department won't be left quite so out in the cold. But Warriner's not bright about future prospects. "The building is not sufficient to support the depth in the coming years."
And the coming years may be fewer than most realize. Right now the sociology department has found it necessary to limit its graduate students to 25, and Warriner says that will probably continue for next year too.
"Even if we had the teachers," he added, "we would still not have the facilities."
When asked why the ceiling he said two problems were influential, "a lack of teachers and a lack of facilities.
ward to moving in" For them it means more space. For him and his colleagues "-adequate space."
THE SAME factor limits the psychology department. But at present they have enough room—but not a lot to spare. Anthony J. Smith, professor of philosophy and department head, like the others, is "certainly looking for-
But, projected to 1970, "we can probably believe there will not be enough space," Smith said. And, he's wondering if the roomy feeling will last even that long.
Currently the socio-psychologists and clinical-psychologists are spread out. Now that there's room in Fraser it is, said Smith, "quite conceivable that we will be pressed for space . . . because they (the socio- and clinical-psychologists) might migrate back."
And even if the return migration doesn't occur, Smith sees possibilities of things getting tight anyway. For instance, if the child psychology sections are enlarged, the growing pains would really hurt.
BUT WITH the knowledge that the two million dollar-plus building won't satisfy the department's rapidly increasing needs it will draw their currently separated people closer together.
How long they'll stay together is another question. Squier calls it a "pipedream" now, but he ultimately hopes to see a building for the anthropologists alone. And, someday, that may be necessary.
But for the present, these behavioral scientists must behave according to the rules of the move. These rules have been bound in a book, a guide to what goes where, when and how.
THE BOOK was produced by Vice Chancellor George B. Smith, institutional planning administrator, and copies went out to the concerned parties.
Among other things this text breaks the moves into times that will pull the most distant groups into the building first, then bring in those closer.
-UDK Photo by Bob Parker
GOING UP!
Workmen are now lining the shell of New Fraser.
The outline is offered to make the change simple and systematic, creating as little confusion and traffic problems as possible. Smith figures the entire job can be done in a week.
The electricians say they're almost finished too. Claud Norris, speaking for his company, said that fixtures and lights needed to be added, but that the building's wiring, with the exception of some in the attic, is finished.
But when he gets to start that week is another matter. When the building plans of Fraser were first announced the scheduled date for completion was January 1. Now it has been shifted.
What delays are resulting are seemingly resulting because the different jobs need to be done in the same places and some have to wait for others. Still one contractor suggests that the job can be finished by February 1, before next second semester even begins.
OCCUPATION is now slated for March 1. And, at January 6, the building isn't quite finished. Green Brothers Construction, awarded the general construction contracts, still has floors, tiling and ceilings to complete. The company's treasurer, E. T. Haas, said that when they finish this they are about through.
It's been about 21 months since Chancellor W. Clarke Wescoe introduced the new building with:
"The plans for new Fraser Hall provide a remarkable combination of the traditional and the functional. New Fraser and nearby Blake Hall have been designed with great care because they will represent for many the physical image of the University."
BUT SOME apparently didn't like the image. The next day 40
copies of a petition, requesting the rejection of the plans, were circulated around campus. Wescoe said, "I like New Fraser. . . It's a lot easier," he cautioned its critics, "to be critical than to come up with a design."
The Chancellor was right about that first part. For the next six or seven weeks the criticism poured in. It ranged from circulating petitions to letters to the Kansan like one that suggested New Fraser was "severely decorative functionalism" found in the style of "a power plant on the Norris Dam."
trooped through the early morning, sunlight to old Fraser and placed a wreath sent to them by the K-State school of architecture —K-State had also expressed condolences.
But the signs that read "Establish a Master Building Plan," and the All Student Council's support of an architecture school fostered symposium on that topic, as well as the wreath, the letters, the petitions and Old Fraser itself have passed mostly into memory. And New Fraser is almost ready to come of age.
EVENTUALLY the building's stormy start with the public started a protest march by local students of architecture. They
Daily Kansan
Friday, January 6, 1967
"The Most Explosive Force In Jazz" COUNT BASIE
and HIS ORCHESTRA
Featuring
Eddie "Lockjaw" DavisMarshall Royal
Al Grey—Freddie Green Extra Added Attraction BILL HENDERSON
Seventeen Members—Including all of above
ONE NIGHT ONLY—Wed., Jan. 11 Two Shows-8:45 & 11:00
LOUNGE 3229 Troost
Lighted Free Patrolled Parking Reservations LOgan 1-8882