University of Arkansas Projects

[akahogfan]

I missed that about Dickson being extended but that idea goes directly against what they meant to do when they closed Garland to through traffic. They keep saying they want to direct traffic away from the center of campus and Dickson extended to the stadium would be heavily used.

Per the master plan, the Dickson extension would be pedestrian only. Not really sure how that would work, as there would have to be some major renovations to make it possible.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/pdf8/719463.pdf?ATCLID=205019737&SPSID=30851&SPID=2431&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=6100

[zman9810]

1. Garland Ave. Garage and bookstore

2. courtyard between the garage and bookstore.

3. nearly finished NanoTech building.

[iowhogs]

I heard from the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission that there are plans to expand Razorback Road to four lanes from MLK to West Maple in chunks, first being MLK to Leroy Pond. Has anyone else heard anything about this?

Also, the Graduate School is going to build onto Ozark Hall in the Collegiate Gothic style. The new structure will be where the old Commerce Building was before it was razed.

[Mith242]

1. Garland Ave. Garage and bookstore

2. courtyard between the garage and bookstore.

3. nearly finished NanoTech building.

Thanks for the pics. I got busy doing chores yesterday and totally forgot about trying to get out to take any pics.

[Mith242]

I heard from the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission that there are plans to expand Razorback Road to four lanes from MLK to West Maple in chunks, first being MLK to Leroy Pond. Has anyone else heard anything about this?

Also, the Graduate School is going to build onto Ozark Hall in the Collegiate Gothic style. The new structure will be where the old Commerce Building was before it was razed.

Yeah, I've heard about them wanting to widen Razorback. But I thought the U of A was resisting some of that. Or maybe it was another street like Maple. But Razorback I could see out of any of the roads near the university.

I've also heard about Ozark Hall. Originally it was designed as a U shape building. But for some reason that last week was never built. But I'm not sure just how the new section will look compared to the rest. It may be done in the 'Collegiate Gothic' style. But I don't think they're going to use limestone like the rest of the building.

[iowhogs]

Yeah, I've heard about them wanting to widen Razorback. But I thought the U of A was resisting some of that. Or maybe it was another street like Maple. But Razorback I could see out of any of the roads near the university.

I've also heard about Ozark Hall. Originally it was designed as a U shape building. But for some reason that last week was never built. But I'm not sure just how the new section will look compared to the rest. It may be done in the 'Collegiate Gothic' style. But I don't think they're going to use limestone like the rest of the building.

I heard that the University gave the ROW up for free because they want the four-lane Razorback Rd as well. I'm not sure how four lanes will fit around the stadium or with the Police Department building so close to the existing road.

Most of the students I talk to on campus are aware of the dorm projects, and there is buzz about Humphreys/Yocum becoming some sort of mega-"McIlroy Commons" area...

[thewizard16]

Thanks for the pictures! The bookstore complex turned out a little different than I'd imagined (the deck was essentially done when I left), but it looks good, in my opinion. Not sure if it will age well or not though. I think Nanoscale looks good too, but I really wish they'd built it larger and just shelled in some more floors until money was available to finish them, because I doubt they planned ahead enough to have the ability to add floors at a later date. (Which is something UAMS does constantly, and it's a fantastic idea for wise-land use and future planning.)

I heard that the University gave the ROW up for free because they want the four-lane Razorback Rd as well. I'm not sure how four lanes will fit around the stadium or with the Police Department building so close to the existing road.

Most of the students I talk to on campus are aware of the dorm projects, and there is buzz about Humphreys/Yocum becoming some sort of mega-"McIlroy Commons" area...

They've wanted a 4-lane Razorback for a while now, but the logistics are what makes it difficult since there isn't a lot of space there and I think they really wanted it to be like Garland is with a tree-lined center.

Any major project involving Humphreys/Yocum is years away, but that's been a popular rumor the last few years among students for some reason. The University, and University Housing, have their hands more than full with the multi-multi-millions worth of projects going on right now, and the money simply isn't there to do a full renovation of the Humphreys/Yocum buildings yet. However- keep your eye on the Pomfret project. That renovation had a lot of input from the Honors College and students, and if that final product is popular/well-received, I think you could see something very similar happen with Humphreys/Yocum. This is of course somewhat conjecture- but leveling two high-capacity, paid-for buildings to build a new, expensive, low-rise suite complex doesn't make good financial sense, and according to the most recent growth plans, there is no plan to get rid of them or replace them. However, that style of residence hall has fallen out of favor with students. The Futrall renovation has been a big hit as far as traditional, small buildings go, and I think that would be a workable (and relatively affordable) solution for Humphreys and Yocum for the next couple decades, but if Pomfret proves to be a big hit and is cost-effective, you may see that mentioned as an option too, and it would do wonders for the exterior aesthetics of the buildings as well. It would also probably extend the viability of those buildings by considerably more than 20 years.

There are some pretty ambitious plans for Brough Commons in the near-ish future, so I'm going to be watching out for that. I'm also interested to see what their timeline is for when they think they'll need to build the new residential complexes out next to the NW Quad and Maple Hill. I'm hoping it's far enough out that they won't be Maple Hill clones, which although nice, are very expensive to build and lower density than a University with land availability issues should be building.

If you guys get bored, the U of A planning website has been updated with some new renderings, as well as the next big projects that will be happening now that Nanoscale is winding down, Davis Hall and the Peabody renovation are moving right along, and the Garland Ave. complex is finished.

http://planning.uark.edu/campus_planning/construction_proj.html

I'm most excited about the Hillside Auditorium replacement project (that Science and Engineering Auditorium is horribly outdated and an inefficient use of high-demand academic land), the Center for Health Professions renovation and addition (it will completely transform the look of that building), and the Pomfret project, which is an impressive renovation project. I remain deeply concerned and disappointed by the Vol Walker addition, which although the rendering has changed for, still looks like a badly tacked-on addition to a beautiful, historic building.

If you're interested in the Pomfret project: http://planning.uark.edu/campus_planning/content/pomfrethallreport.pdf - It's a large PDF, but they're essentially gutting and redoing the building, and installing a lot of green features as they do so, as well as addressing some handicap accessibility issues with that complex.

[thewizard16]

Thanks for the links. I've got to agree with you. It won't be a huge project but the Hillside Auditorium is a needed improvement. I also think the Yocum/Humphries situation is while off as well. While things overall have slowed down in the area, it's nice to have the university doing some developments.

Yeah, the University has been growing rapidly over the past several years. A huge wave of construction: Walker Hall, JB Hunt, Maple Hill, Bev Lewis Center for Women's Athletics new Band building, huge law school addition, Gregson renovation, Old Main restoration, Brough Commons renovation, NW Quad complex and the Chemistry Building full renovation were all pretty much done in a 2003-2009 range, and then from the 2009-? range we have the renovation of Kimpel (which is being done a room at a time), renovation and addition to Ozark Hall, renovation and addition to the Nursing building, Davis Hall renovation, Nanoscale, Pomfret full renovation and additions, Vol Walker addition, Hillside auditorium, Peabody Hall full renovation, and Bud Walton hall renovation going on now. Also there have been quite a few greek houses redone. Total amount of construction being done in the past decade is likely in the billions of dollars at this point, but it's certainly high end of hundreds of millions if not.

[Mith242]

Thanks for the links. I've got to agree with you. It won't be a huge project but the Hillside Auditorium is a needed improvement. I also think the Yocum/Humphries situation is while off as well. While things overall have slowed down in the area, it's nice to have the university doing some developments.

[zman9810]

Thanks for the pictures! The bookstore complex turned out a little different than I'd imagined (the deck was essentially done when I left), but it looks good, in my opinion. Not sure if it will age well or not though. I think Nanoscale looks good too, but I really wish they'd built it larger and just shelled in some more floors until money was available to finish them, because I doubt they planned ahead enough to have the ability to add floors at a later date. (Which is something UAMS does constantly, and it's a fantastic idea for wise-land use and future planning.)

They've wanted a 4-lane Razorback for a while now, but the logistics are what makes it difficult since there isn't a lot of space there and I think they really wanted it to be like Garland is with a tree-lined center.

Any major project involving Humphreys/Yocum is years away, but that's been a popular rumor the last few years among students for some reason. The University, and University Housing, have their hands more than full with the multi-multi-millions worth of projects going on right now, and the money simply isn't there to do a full renovation of the Humphreys/Yocum buildings yet. However- keep your eye on the Pomfret project. That renovation had a lot of input from the Honors College and students, and if that final product is popular/well-received, I think you could see something very similar happen with Humphreys/Yocum. This is of course somewhat conjecture- but leveling two high-capacity, paid-for buildings to build a new, expensive, low-rise suite complex doesn't make good financial sense, and according to the most recent growth plans, there is no plan to get rid of them or replace them. However, that style of residence hall has fallen out of favor with students. The Futrall renovation has been a big hit as far as traditional, small buildings go, and I think that would be a workable (and relatively affordable) solution for Humphreys and Yocum for the next couple decades, but if Pomfret proves to be a big hit and is cost-effective, you may see that mentioned as an option too, and it would do wonders for the exterior aesthetics of the buildings as well. It would also probably extend the viability of those buildings by considerably more than 20 years.

There are some pretty ambitious plans for Brough Commons in the near-ish future, so I'm going to be watching out for that. I'm also interested to see what their timeline is for when they think they'll need to build the new residential complexes out next to the NW Quad and Maple Hill. I'm hoping it's far enough out that they won't be Maple Hill clones, which although nice, are very expensive to build and lower density than a University with land availability issues should be building.

If you guys get bored, the U of A planning website has been updated with some new renderings, as well as the next big projects that will be happening now that Nanoscale is winding down, Davis Hall and the Peabody renovation are moving right along, and the Garland Ave. complex is finished.

http://planning.uark.edu/campus_planning/construction_proj.html

I'm most excited about the Hillside Auditorium replacement project (that Science and Engineering Auditorium is horribly outdated and an inefficient use of high-demand academic land), the Center for Health Professions renovation and addition (it will completely transform the look of that building), and the Pomfret project, which is an impressive renovation project. I remain deeply concerned and disappointed by the Vol Walker addition, which although the rendering has changed for, still looks like a badly tacked-on addition to a beautiful, historic building.

If you're interested in the Pomfret project: http://planning.uark.edu/campus_planning/content/pomfrethallreport.pdf - It's a large PDF, but they're essentially gutting and redoing the building, and installing a lot of green features as they do so, as well as addressing some handicap accessibility issues with that complex.

Great info! The Garland Ave. project turned out very nice althought the floating facade still looks a little strange up close.

4 laning Razorback Rd. will a major job. How they will squeeze in 4 lanes and a median by the stadium I can't imagine. It will take some high priority parking spaces on the west side of the road and entail the removal of a lot of dirt and rock. I wonder if they have considered building it as a covered roadway by the stadium. That would gain space for parking and provide a path for fans to enter the stadium without crossing Razorback at grade. It also might enable a project to finish the west side stadium facade like the east is now.

I always hear that Humphreys and Yocum are some of the most popular dorms on campus, even without air conditioning. Renovation of those buildings is much preferable to new construction.

The new Vol Walker addition rendering has indeed changed and isn't as bad as what the first one looked like but still bad. It still looks like they are going for a huge contrast instead of blending it in with the rest of the building and the rest of the area. Hopefully it will evolve more as plans advance.

[thewizard16]

Great info! The Garland Ave. project turned out very nice althought the floating facade still looks a little strange up close.

4 laning Razorback Rd. will a major job. How they will squeeze in 4 lanes and a median by the stadium I can't imagine. It will take some high priority parking spaces on the west side of the road and entail the removal of a lot of dirt and rock. I wonder if they have considered building it as a covered roadway by the stadium. That would gain space for parking and provide a path for fans to enter the stadium without crossing Razorback at grade. It also might enable a project to finish the west side stadium facade like the east is now.

I always hear that Humphreys and Yocum are some of the most popular dorms on campus, even without air conditioning. Renovation of those buildings is much preferable to new construction.

The new Vol Walker addition rendering has indeed changed and isn't as bad as what the first one looked like but still bad. It still looks like they are going for a huge contrast instead of blending it in with the rest of the building and the rest of the area. Hopefully it will evolve more as plans advance.

I know- it'll involve some sorcery to fit all that in there for a 4-lane Razorback Rd., I think. I would like to see the West side get the same type of facade as the east though- that side, the side fewer people see on a daily basis, is far more attractive.

Humphrey's is the only building without air-conditioned rooms (has nice air-conditioned common rooms and the first floor common spaces have AC), but it normally is one of the first dorms to fill up when the selection process starts. Yocum always fills up first- it's relatively affordable compared to the other dorms, the location is prime, and it has AC, so people jump on it. I think a major renovation on them (or even a relatively light renovation like they did with Futrall) would make those buildings more student-friendly while preserving the nice things about them.

[thewizard16]

There's some commentary from Blackwell and the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the upcoming Vol Walker addition. They mention "message boards"... I have no doubt that UrbanPlanet is at least a board being referenced (I do know that department staff and faculty have read our less than glowing comments about this upcoming addition), so go us, haha. At any rate, for more insight into the project and design, see the article at the link:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2010/nov/07/architectural-fusion-20101107/

[Mith242]

There's some commentary from Blackwell and the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the upcoming Vol Walker addition. They mention "message boards"... I have no doubt that UrbanPlanet is at least a board being referenced (I do know that department staff and faculty have read our less than glowing comments about this upcoming addition), so go us, haha. At any rate, for more insight into the project and design, see the article at the link:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2010/nov/07/architectural-fusion-20101107/

Yeah sorta funny that we sometimes seem to be inadvertently mentioned. I can't say I know of any other message board that has discussed the upcoming addition. Nice to know we do get noticed, to a certain degree at least. Just for the record I'd like to reiterate I do like Marlon Blackwell's work. I think a number of people here on the forum would agree. I think what's at question is this particular work. Now while there's nothing wrong with the current Nanotech building being worked on now. I think that would have been a really great example of a location to display Marlon Blackwell's architecture on campus. While I've seen examples of ultra modern being mixed in with older buildings, in particular in Europe. I'm still just having a hard time seeing the design as I last saw it working well. I just think that particular location is one of the worst locations on campus to put in a nice sleek ultramodern design. I don't think you have to put in a bland design that totally gets overlooked. But I still think you can't really have a design that stands out that way in contrast with the rest of the surrounding architecture and have it work well.

[thewizard16]

Yeah sorta funny that we sometimes seem to be inadvertently mentioned. I can't say I know of any other message board that has discussed the upcoming addition. Nice to know we do get noticed, to a certain degree at least. Just for the record I'd like to reiterate I do like Marlon Blackwell's work. I think a number of people here on the forum would agree. I think what's at question is this particular work. Now while there's nothing wrong with the current Nanotech building being worked on now. I think that would have been a really great example of a location to display Marlon Blackwell's architecture on campus. While I've seen examples of ultra modern being mixed in with older buildings, in particular in Europe. I'm still just having a hard time seeing the design as I last saw it working well. I just think that particular location is one of the worst locations on campus to put in a nice sleek ultramodern design. I don't think you have to put in a bland design that totally gets overlooked. But I still think you can't really have a design that stands out that way in contrast with the rest of the surrounding architecture and have it work well.

I agree, and I find his attitude about this a little off-putting. I like the vast majority of his projects and find them very interesting, but his logic about this addition is completely ridiculous. The whole mindset of "we can't build an addition to the architecture building that looks like the nearly 100-year old historic building it's connected to or we're telling our students their major is in the past" makes absolutely no sense. By that logic the building would have to been updated or added on to every time architectural styles change, which obviously isn't a smart move. I think a lot of the problem with this addition is location and the effect it will have on a timeless example of architecture. Blackwell's work is very interesting right now and could look good in a lot of places, but if asked I'd have to argue his work certainly won't be viewed as "timeless" and in 25-30 years people will wonder what the hell the UofA was thinking when they built that thing onto the building. (As we have with some of the 1960s-70s projects on campus.) Although I haven't had any extended interactions with him, I'm sure he's a bright enough guy to know all this. I fear he's using this need for the program to expand its space and his position as a department head in the college of architecture to get his work featured in a prominent location on the UofA campus while he has the chance. I know that there is significant opposition to this within the college itself, and have heard concerns and complaints from numerous other faculty and employees about this project, so I just can't see how this would have happened if he weren't a significant faculty member within the college.

[Mith242]

I agree, and I find his attitude about this a little off-putting. I like the vast majority of his projects and find them very interesting, but his logic about this addition is completely ridiculous. The whole mindset of "we can't build an addition to the architecture building that looks like the nearly 100-year old historic building it's connected to or we're telling our students their major is in the past" makes absolutely no sense. By that logic the building would have to been updated or added on to every time architectural styles change, which obviously isn't a smart move. I think a lot of the problem with this addition is location and the effect it will have on a timeless example of architecture. Blackwell's work is very interesting right now and could look good in a lot of places, but if asked I'd have to argue his work certainly won't be viewed as "timeless" and in 25-30 years people will wonder what the hell the UofA was thinking when they built that thing onto the building. (As we have with some of the 1960s-70s projects on campus.) Although I haven't had any extended interactions with him, I'm sure he's a bright enough guy to know all this. I fear he's using this need for the program to expand its space and his position as a department head in the college of architecture to get his work featured in a prominent location on the UofA campus while he has the chance. I know that there is significant opposition to this within the college itself, and have heard concerns and complaints from numerous other faculty and employees about this project, so I just can't see how this would have happened if he weren't a significant faculty member within the college.

Yeah I'd like to give Marlon Blackwell the benefit of the doubt, I admit I don't know him personally. But I also have to admit some of this isn't sitting well with me either. Maybe it's easy to dismiss people like us because we aren't 'architecture experts', as far as I know I don't know if any of us on the forum are even architecture majors. But at the same time, as I mentioned before I don't know how dismissive you can be. A number of us who have spoken out on this actually do like his work. It's not as is we're a bunch of modern architecture haters or people who hate his work in general. I can understand the Architecture Dept needs to expand and on paper you'd think who better to do it than Marlon Blackwell. I wasn't expecting Marlon Blackwell to simply try to exactly copy the previous architecture and make it look as if it had been built at the same time the rest of the building was built. Knowing Marlon Blackwell was involved I knew it was going to be something 'different' from the rest of the building. I simply thought he would do something that blended in a bit better. Especially considering the surrounding architecture in that area. I think there can be a fine line in architecture. Or course an architect wants to have something stand out and get noticed. But at the same time I think you have to pay some respect to the surrounding environment or buildings. If there wasn't any other notable buildings in the area there probably wouldn't be any problem. Maybe it would be better if we could see some better more detailed renderings of the addition. That way we can know for certain and have a more defined judgment of it. But from what I've seen, I just have a hard time seeing it.

[zman9810]

There's some commentary from Blackwell and the Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the upcoming Vol Walker addition. They mention "message boards"... I have no doubt that UrbanPlanet is at least a board being referenced (I do know that department staff and faculty have read our less than glowing comments about this upcoming addition), so go us, haha. At any rate, for more insight into the project and design, see the article at the link:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2010/nov/07/architectural-fusion-20101107/

The article reads like a defense of the fusion of old and new architecture instead of an objective discussion of this particular project. Except for the rebuttal by the Notre Dame professor it is aimed towards promoting Blackwell's views and discounting any other ideas. It seems the author doesn't realize that the resistance to this project is because of the specific location and the sharp contrast with it's surroundings.

I thought a couple of examples of old/new fusion projects would be good to have here. The first is the Federal Courthouse with it's new annex in Little Rock. This was mentioned in the article and is indeed an example of a successful design. I've been by it and the annex does not contrast sharply with it's surroundings. The second is the old Chemistry Building and the new Chemistry/Biochemistry Research Building on campus. Although they are separate buildings they are so close that they work as one - you can't look at one without taking the other into account. I think they work wonderfully together.

The first Vol Walker addition rendering was a design that shouted "Look at me! Look at me!" to the detriment of it's surroundings. The current rendering has much less contrast with the current building and surroundings because of the addition of the limestone cladding. The picture published in the newspaper was completely different than what the original rendering looked like- only the glass on the west side in the UA planning page rendering looks like the original. IMO it still doesn't fit in but it is not nearly as obtrusive as originally planned. Hopefully further adjustments will be made.

[thewizard16]

The article reads like a defense of the fusion of old and new architecture instead of an objective discussion of this particular project. Except for the rebuttal by the Notre Dame professor it is aimed towards promoting Blackwell's views and discounting any other ideas. It seems the author doesn't realize that the resistance to this project is because of the specific location and the sharp contrast with it's surroundings.

I thought a couple of examples of old/new fusion projects would be good to have here. The first is the Federal Courthouse with it's new annex in Little Rock. This was mentioned in the article and is indeed an example of a successful design. I've been by it and the annex does not contrast sharply with it's surroundings. The second is the old Chemistry Building and the new Chemistry/Biochemistry Research Building on campus. Although they are separate buildings they are so close that they work as one - you can't look at one without taking the other into account. I think they work wonderfully together.

The first Vol Walker addition rendering was a design that shouted "Look at me! Look at me!" to the detriment of it's surroundings. The current rendering has much less contrast with the current building and surroundings because of the addition of the limestone cladding. The picture published in the newspaper was completely different than what the original rendering looked like- only the glass on the west side in the UA planning page rendering looks like the original. IMO it still doesn't fit in but it is not nearly as obtrusive as originally planned. Hopefully further adjustments will be made.

It is strange. I know Blackwell is aware of at least why people on this forum aren't thrilled about the project, but maybe the article author didn't read our posts .

Totally agree on the Federal Courthouse addition- I drive by that several times a week and I think it's a beautiful example of seamlessly blending modern and historic architecture styles. It'd be nice if they could pull that off with this project, but the rendering on the planning website doesn't look that seamless. I don't get the print edition, so I haven't seen the other picture. I'll happily eat my words if Blackwell pulls off a nice, classy addition that complements Vol Walker well, but the initial rendering doesn't fill me with confidence on that matter. The more recent one is slightly less objectionable, but still looks like a scar on the side of the building. I guess we just have to wait and see how it turns out.

[comreguy]

Belle Boutique recently opened in the Garland Avenue project at U of A.

I'm hearing Subway is working on a lease there as well.

[thewizard16]

Belle Boutique recently opened in the Garland Avenue project at U of A.

I'm hearing Subway is working on a lease there as well.

I heard about the Subway a while back and found it funny that they were choosing to go in over there after Quiznos secured a spot in Brough Commons pretty recently itself. The sub shops are moving in on campus lately, haha.

[aerotive]

A Wal-Mart pharmacy is opening at the Garland parking deck:

http://newswire.uark.edu/article.aspx?id=15082

"“This is Walmart's first store of its kind. Our full-service pharmacy that accepts a wide variety of insurance plans will be a great way to help the campus and neighborhood community save money with programs like $4 generic prescriptions. I think it's a really good fit.”

I've read articles recently that say WM's looking to open smaller formats in big-city cores...I suppose standalone pharmacies in college towns could be an offshoot of that. Or it's just another test, like the way NWA Walmarts sometimes test things out.

[comreguy]

A Wal-Mart pharmacy is opening at the Garland parking deck:

http://newswire.uark...e.aspx?id=15082

"“This is Walmart's first store of its kind. Our full-service pharmacy that accepts a wide variety of insurance plans will be a great way to help the campus and neighborhood community save money with programs like $4 generic prescriptions. I think it's a really good fit.”

I've read articles recently that say WM's looking to open smaller formats in big-city cores...I suppose standalone pharmacies in college towns could be an offshoot of that. Or it's just another test, like the way NWA Walmarts sometimes test things out.

My understanding is that this is a test store for a smaller urban store footprint.

[Mith242]

A Wal-Mart pharmacy is opening at the Garland parking deck:

http://newswire.uark.edu/article.aspx?id=15082

"“This is Walmart's first store of its kind. Our full-service pharmacy that accepts a wide variety of insurance plans will be a great way to help the campus and neighborhood community save money with programs like $4 generic prescriptions. I think it's a really good fit.”

I've read articles recently that say WM's looking to open smaller formats in big-city cores...I suppose standalone pharmacies in college towns could be an offshoot of that. Or it's just another test, like the way NWA Walmarts sometimes test things out.

That's interesting to hear. I'm just wondering is Walmart forcing the other pharmacy out? Or is the other pharmacy just giving up because they know Walmart is coming?

[comreguy]

That's interesting to hear. I'm just wondering is Walmart forcing the other pharmacy out? Or is the other pharmacy just giving up because they know Walmart is coming?

Neither. They are partners. Changes in the pharmacy regulations for the U of A pharmacy caused many prescriptions to be kicked off the U of A insurance policy, making impossible for them to do business profitably. Walmart accepts most all insurance and will offer meds to students, faculty, staff and general public that couldn't be found at the U of A pharmacy.

Furthermore, I understand multiple pharmacies were extended the invitation to partner with the U of A, but turned down the opportunity.

[Mith242]

Neither. They are partners. Changes in the pharmacy regulations for the U of A pharmacy caused many prescriptions to be kicked off the U of A insurance policy, making impossible for them to do business profitably. Walmart accepts most all insurance and will offer meds to students, faculty, staff and general public that couldn't be found at the U of A pharmacy.

Furthermore, I understand multiple pharmacies were extended the invitation to partner with the U of A, but turned down the opportunity.

Okay, thanks for the info. I was just curious what was prompting all the changes.

[thewizard16]

Neither. They are partners. Changes in the pharmacy regulations for the U of A pharmacy caused many prescriptions to be kicked off the U of A insurance policy, making impossible for them to do business profitably. Walmart accepts most all insurance and will offer meds to students, faculty, staff and general public that couldn't be found at the U of A pharmacy.

Furthermore, I understand multiple pharmacies were extended the invitation to partner with the U of A, but turned down the opportunity.

Yep, and a third party pharmacy partner will likely have more flexible hours. There was talk with Walgreens a while back that for whatever reason didn't work out, but Walmart should be a good fit. I would imagine Walgreens and the like are kicking themselves now that they realize Walmart is going to use this to help test out a store format that will be direct similar-scale competitors to them.