The Spire

Colette Potter ‘26

Opinions Editor

I’ve heard buzzing about Easy Street Renovations lately, and while I wholeheartedly agree the dorms need a refresh, I also fundamentally disagree that they should be torn down. The dorms certainly need a gut renovation, but demolishing such a large part of the campus would be equivalent to destroying the tangible location of many memories on the Hill. Additionally, poorly renovating or tearing down the Easy Street buildings would remove a large chunk of the College’s physical history.

Firstly, it is equally important to mention how incredibly wasteful tearing down the Easy Street dorms would be. I would say our “Purple Goes Green” card should be revoked if we did so. Think of the sheer amount of bricks, windows, and concrete wasted! There will always be waste with renovations, but to tear down huge buildings (they have space to house around 1,000 students) seems unnecessarily wasteful. 

I suppose the general sentiment is that the Easy Street dorms are awful, outdated, pest-infested buildings. However, I would counter that there are many positive memories that also fill the halls of Brooks, Clark, Hanselman, Lehy, and Healy. I would be deeply saddened to come back for a reunion and not be able to visit my freshman year dorm, to remember the trudge down the stairs to Kimball, or saying hello to hallmates in the common areas. Additionally, those of us with family connections to Holy Cross, or future generations, would miss out on the ability to live in the same halls as our parents, grandparents, siblings, or other relatives. The families who truly “bleed purple” with several family members attending the College are not uncommon, but that experience would be diminished if the Easy Street buildings were fully torn down. Furthermore, the buildings themselves are a piece of history. They are a product of the Baby Boom, and their not-ideal construction is itself a piece of the College’s (and our nation’s) history. While some may find the dorms unattractive, I don’t mind the distinctly late ‘60s style. They don’t have bad bones. There are big windows, built-ins that most people liked, and large common spaces. Renovating these buildings can be done. Any older building will have challenges, but we would never dare touch Fenwick or the St. Joseph Memorial Chapel. While the Easy Street buildings don’t have the same grandeur, they are still part of the College’s history.

This “Baby Boom” architecture is also being torn down around the country. In my hometown, multiple elementary schools were replaced. They were not tearing down the hundred year old truly “historical” buildings, but rather the schools put up in the ‘50s and ‘60s. Yet, I think there is a great loss of history as we remove the expansive collection of educational buildings made to house and educate the Baby Boomers. I think these buildings can also look good – there’s an old photo of Hogan Campus Center at the top of the main Dinand stairwell, by the entrance to the archives. In the photo, Hogan has the original lines and facade. Hogan, in my opinion, looked much better pre-renovation. In the event that the Easy Street buildings are renovated instead of replaced, I would hope the College sticks to the modern, simple lines and the positive characteristics of these buildings, including the large windows and build-ins. 1960s and ‘70s buildings can be interesting, and also tell a story of the era. We should respect that and renovate our campus accordingly.

The architecture is our window to past students’ experiences, including the transformation of Holy Cross to become integrated, first racially, and followed by the inclusion of women. Our instinct may be to abandon these buildings and their Baby Boomer-era architecture, yet we must resist. By tearing down or excessively renovating the Easy Street buildings, we would also lose a large part of Holy Cross’s physical history, as well as the tangible location of many memories on the Hill.

Featured image courtesy of College of the Holy Cross