This will be much needed improvement and will benefit all students and the community 365 days a year. It will enhance football games and make 99% of Aggies happy. This change will be make us proud and in a few years , this will be seen as another positive move by President Young.

Spence Park is in need of a renovation. To be fair, plans have been in the works at the very least since 2014. However, I am confused by this part of your comment, "in a few years , this will be seen as another positive move by President Young." What are the other positive moves that have taken place during his tenure? Thanks in advance!

Note: I didn't mean to hit the Laughing Clown emoticon and I don't know how to correct the error on TexAgs.

GeographyAg said:

---

Mr. GeographyAg and I are very glad to see them finally making improvements to the old Spence Park area. We're not wild about the name change but we like the looks of the plan, and imho, anything is better than the old eye-sore it's been.

We think it's going to be a vast improvement:

http://cbe.tamu.edu/Data/Sites/1/allouruploads/presidentialactions/2017actions/071917aggiepark.pdf

---

A) That water will be brown
B) Mosquitoes

agdoc84 said:

---

... this will be seen as another positive move by President Young.

---

You serious Clark?

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

GeographyAg said:

---

Mr. GeographyAg and I are very glad to see them finally making improvements to the old Spence Park area. We're not wild about the name change but we like the looks of the plan, and imho, anything is better than the old eye-sore it's been.

We think it's going to be a vast improvement:

http://cbe.tamu.edu/Data/Sites/1/allouruploads/presidentialactions/2017actions/071917aggiepark.pdf

---

A) That water will be brown
B) Mosquitoes

---

A) You didn't read the plan.
B) filtering system and flowing waterfall.

I would also like to take a minute to correct one more misconception on this thread. This was not Young's idea originally. It was a grass roots effort by an Aggie and fellow TexAgs subscriber known here as Fitch. There was a petition signed by many of us to bring it to the attention of TPTB.

Here are some links (some may only work for premium subscribers) to give you a bit of history:

https://texags.com/s/17146/texags-user-fitch-introduces-a-new-spence-park-vision

https://texags.com/forums/25/topics/2624545 - original thread

https://www.myaggienation.com/am_news/aggie-floats-ideas-for-lake-on-texas-a-m-campus/article_6359ddb6-a53c-5272-91ea-942015ebed09.html

https://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/Group-Working-to-Add-Amenities-Renovations-to-Spence-Park-314679161.html

Fonzie Scheme said:

---

Wonder how many "free speech zones" and "safe spaces" he envisions there?

---

GeographyAg said:

---

I would also like to take a minute to correct one more misconception on this thread. This was not Young's idea originally. It was a grass roots effort by an Aggie and fellow TexAgs subscriber known here as Fitch. There was a petition signed by many of us to bring it to the attention of TPTB.

---

Grass roots effort? LOL!

This has always smelled like a bid to make money for a RE developer and A&M.

My guess is Midway developing Century Square was a bigger prize than Spence Park, so Spence Park got put on the back burner til a more creative way to fund the park reno and make money off it is concocted.

Shife said:

---

GeographyAg said:

---

I would also like to take a minute to correct one more misconception on this thread. This was not Young's idea originally. It was a grass roots effort by an Aggie and fellow TexAgs subscriber known here as Fitch. There was a petition signed by many of us to bring it to the attention of TPTB.

---

Grass roots effort? LOL!

This has always smelled like a bid to make money for a RE developer and A&M.

My guess is Midway developing Century Square was a bigger prize than Spence Park, so Spence Park got put on the back burner til a more creative way to fund the park reno and make money off it is concocted.

---

Did you read the links? Do you know the history?

You might be right, but I remember the beginning of this effort and we signed the petition.

Of course someone will make money. The capitalist in me thinks that's great ! As long as there's improvement to the space I'm just fine with that.

Spence looked (looks) HORRIBLE. Anyone that says otherwise is blind.

A lot of us felt it was very strange to spend millions on a new stadium and have this next door:



If you honestly can't see that the proposed plan is MUCH better than what is there now then I just don't know what to say. I find it sad that you want it to stay a neglected, sad, pitiful representation of our fine university when it could be so much better.

Just please save the trees and don't do what happened in the Quad.

The proposed plan will vastly improve a major green space next to a multi-million dollar investment for our great university for game days and the renaming 350+ days a year. If you don't think that the hundreds of organizations on campus will utilize the amphitheater, or better grounds and landscaping on a weekly basis then I don't know what else can be said.

It is my opinion that the only ones who don't want the changes are the 20-30 groups who have front row tailgating spots and feel obligated, or better yet entitled to have those spots for the rest of time. While the changes might move them back a few rows if they don't feel like paying, they will still have access to even more green space and better set up opportunities with these changes.

*I have tailgated in Spence for 20 years and welcome the changes.

How about that wonderful spot that was created for football parking directly across from the Bush Library.

Another part of campus we can all be proud of ...

salloh_tamu said:

---

The proposed plan will vastly improve a major green space next to a multi-million dollar investment for our great university for game days and the renaming 350+ days a year. If you don't think that the hundreds of organizations on campus will utilize the amphitheater, or better grounds and landscaping on a weekly basis then I don't know what else can be said.

It is my opinion that the only ones who don't want the changes are the 20-30 groups who have front row tailgating spots and feel obligated, or better yet entitled to have those spots for the rest of time. While the changes might move them back a few rows if they don't feel like paying, they will still have access to even more green space and better set up opportunities with these changes.

*I have tailgated in Spence for 20 years and welcome the changes.

---

I'm glad I started this conversation - lot's more info to think about. My initial reaction was due to Young's use of the term "wasteland" to the faculty senate to justify this project - no need for that type of derogatory language. It's a fine, natural space and would be less barren if they just took time to maintain it with irrigation during the very hot stretches of the Texas summer.

I do not tailgate in that area, so that doesn't impact me. The university always finds a way to take over good tailgating spots as soon as they can so that they can make a little $$, so nothing unexpected there. And I'm not so sure the additional greenspace behind the pay spots will be available for tailgating. They have beautiful green spaces outside the new ag buildings and signs/roping go up every home game week indicating that tailgating is those green spaces is prohibited. We'll see if it's different after the Aggie Park rehab.

Cholula Verde said:

---

GeographyAg said:

---

Cholula Verde said:

---

GeographyAg said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

GeographyAg said:

---

Cholula Mr. GeographyAg and I are very glad to see them finally making improvements to the old Spence Park area. We're not wild about the name change but we like the looks of the plan, and imho, anything is better than the old eye-sore it's been.

We think it's going to be a vast improvement:

http://cbe.tamu.edu/Data/Sites/1/allouruploads/presidentialactions/2017actions/071917aggiepark.pdf

---

A) That water will be brown
B) Mosquitoes

---

A) You didn't read the plan.
B) filtering system and flowing waterfall.

---

Upon reviewing the plan I was unable to find provisions for post construction/extended maintenance of the landscaping. Given this project is being touted as the campus destination "crown jewel" I hope they have raised funds to hire a third party landscape maintenance company. If it isn't kept up any better than the current version of Spence Park why bother?

---

This thing has been in the planning for several years. There's been a thread about it on the premium forum since 2015. It seems to me to be pretty well thought out and planned, and I'm sure they want to keep it maintained just like they do the rest of campus.

Personally I think it can't possibly look any worse than it has the last several years. I'm thrilled they're fixing what has been an embarrassing eyesore for years.

If you have questions about it, you might consider asking them on the twitter account:
https://twitter.com/ANewAggiePark

---

Sorry, but I don't and won't twitter! Also, thank you for answering my question as you have confirmed that the Grass Rooters apparently failed to consider and thus raise endowment funds to provide upgraded grounds maintenance services for the project after its completion. Establishment of such a beautiful area is a small part of any project, lifetime maintenance requires dedication, love, and resources. So, please forgive my pessimism as your photo of Spence Park proves my point that all have been missing for a long, long time. FYI, embarrassing eyesores don't happen overnight. Maybe leadership should designate Spence Park as THE annual Big Event Project so current Aggies can be taught about Ranger's Grave!

---

Now you're just being ridiculous.

If you don't twitter, then do a little research and email someone or contact them some other way. I've linked several ways. It's very unfair for you to make assumptions and derogatory remarks about people and situations you obviously haven't researched at all.

Your assumption is ridiculous. I haven't "confirmed" anything of the kind. It's an assumption you're making based on nothing but your own prejudices toward the project. You obviously don't want to find out a real answer. It makes you happier to be mad about something you *think* will happen.

Of course it requires maintenance. Duh. It's an eyesore now and will continue to be so unless and until something major changes. The proposed changes will make it a destination place and will require maintenance.

Making it better will push the university to provide the maintenance, not excuse them for not maintaining it as is.

If you're really happy with it as is or with just a little more grass growing with some watering of the existing areas, then we're just going to have agree to disagree. I think it looks terrible and needs radical improvement.

The proposed plan is a multi-use space with all kinds of vast improvements. There are many of us very happy about it.

Quote:

---

FYI, embarrassing eyesores don't happen overnight.

---

The eyesore has been there for a long time. In the 80s it was the same, mostly dirt drainage ditch with very little usable space (I suspect it looked like that well before then). The only nice part was the tree lined area with picnic tables on the Throckmorton St. side.

Seems like the nostalgia for the dirt hole is misguided. I am glad they are planning to beautify the area and make it usable space. The campus has some beautiful areas here and there but could definitely use more green space areas and actual usable parks.

For the comparison to the Grove at Ole Miss, while known for tailgating, students actually use the green space and they also use it for special events.

During the recession of 2008 the University slashed the budget, reduced staff, etc. Continuing along the lines of running the System like a business, around 2012/13 was when the grounds maintenance for the landscaping was outsourced along with other areas such as dining. I think College Station was first, and then the rest of the system campuses came later. Outsourcing can reduce certain costs, but among other things it does create the problem of complaints getting caught in a loop of 'whose fault is this?" Meaning, complaints to the University are directed to the contractor while complaints to the contractor are sometimes ignored (because the University is the contract grantee). So, if you wish to have the rehabbed park to be maintained properly, you would need to be very specific in the RFQ/contract.

As a student, I would love to see something like the pond at George Bush Library on main campus. For the amount of students we have, we lack usable green space.

Demolishing the president's house... no bueno

Zone416 said:

---

No one lives in the President's house and haven't in over 4 years. Same w VP. the president's vacant house requires more than $4,000 per month in maintenance and upkeep. The vice president's house costs more than $2,100 per month in maintenance and upkeep.

---

And on top of that Young is getting a housing allowance to live off campus. Just tear it down already.

fourth deck said:

---

Zone416 said:

---

No one lives in the President's house and haven't in over 4 years. Same w VP. the president's vacant house requires more than $4,000 per month in maintenance and upkeep. The vice president's house costs more than $2,100 per month in maintenance and upkeep.

---

And on top of that Young is getting a housing allowance to live off campus. Just tear it down already.

---

or get rid of the housing allowance and make Young live on campus and be accessible to the students, instead of living in a gated community.

Past presidents hosted student organizations in their homes. Students frequently had sit ins to protest x,y,z on the lawn, and Gates would go out and talk and listen.

It's all about $$ in the Chancellor's grand plan. It'll probably be renamed Exxon Park or some other corporate name.

I hate to see them tear down the President's home (even if Mrs. President had no interest in living in a moderate home like that one) in order to make more money through fees that will be charged.

I agree that it does need to be enhanced, but not at the cost of (from what I've read/heard) $2500 for a tailgating spot. Go ahead...I know my opinion will be shredded.

Zone416 said:

---

No one lives in the President's house and haven't in over 4 years. Same w VP. the president's vacant house requires more than $4,000 per month in maintenance and upkeep. The vice president's house costs more than $2,100 per month in maintenance and upkeep.

---

The VPSA house is occupied. The Pres home SHOULD be occupied.

probably because higher and better uses are what brought us a disjointed soviet-era / industrial complex architecture all over campus and it would be really nice to retain some sense of actual history. Noting of course that the pres. house isn't really historic (1965), but it does have a decent architectural style that reflects a collegiate setting. Not sure what era the VPSA house dates to, but the same could be said for it.