The Grizzly, November 19, 1982

Dorm Intrusion: Attack Prompts Security Changes • Council Approves Precalc • Student Apathy: Who Cares? • Elephants and Donkeys Revived on Campus • President\u27s Corner • Pledging Changes Planned • Commentary: Be a Good Boy, Johnny - Take Back Your Tray • Lewis on Wall Street • Applying for the Job • Robert Hazard: The Grizzly Interview • Final Exam Schedule • Grizzly Paws Boost Football Program • Women\u27s Basketball Set to Have Big Season • X-Country Takes a Disappointing Sixth • Soccer Team Was Tough All Year • Men\u27s Swimming Falls to Dickinson in Openerhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1089/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, December 3, 1982

Graterford Prisoners Counseled • Phi Psi Sponsors Santa • Chem Society Rated Outstanding • Renowned Professor Dies • Steinbright Scholarships Offered • News Briefs: Sigma Pi Sigma Inducts New Members; Operation Native Talent; New Evening School Class; Winterfest II Schedules Events; Going for Baroque • Commuters Don\u27t Get No Respect! • Letters to the Editor • Is Tuition Increase Justified? • Recent Thefts and Attacks Prompt Security Questions • Cheating at Ursinus? • A Last Squeeze Before Departing • The Missionary: A Blessing • Roving Reporter: How Do You Feel About the New Security System in the Quad? • Challenge Yourself at Outward Bound • The Perfect Man • UC Faculty Not Burnt Out • Sports Profile: Mullahy and Bazow, Football Captains • Women\u27s Basketball Tops Aggies in Opener: Jankauskas Scoring and Rebounding Was Key • UC Making a Contribution to Olympic Efforthttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1090/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, November 13, 1981

Suspicious Visitor Causes Alarm • Whistle Blowing: The Problem of Ethics in Business • Two Students Caught In Breaking and Entering • Pledging Discussion • Student Teachers Putting in Their Hours • Powlette Speaks on Values • USGA Notes • Students Attend Orchestra Concert in Philadelphia • Ursinus Represented at PCCA Choir Festival • Winterfest Brings Culture Shock to UC • Study Abroad Series: Gidget Goes to Rome • UC Attempts \u27World\u27s Largest Sandcastle\u27 • Davis Selected All-American • Dickinson vs Bears in ECAC Championship • Student Plays for Peru in Pan Am Games • Swimmers Enthusiastic About New Season • Fencing Foils F&M • Bears End Disappointing Season With Loss • Grapplers Anxious To Begin • U.C. Harriers MAC Champs... Againhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1067/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, September 18, 1981

Thomas P. Glassmoyer Elected Board President • APO Retains Highest GPA Last Spring • Chemistry, Economics, History and English Departments Receive New Faculty • Forum Programs Now \u27til Christmas • Editorial: Just Like the Good Old Days? • Message From the President: Play an Active Part • Evening in Photography Offered • Evening School Expands Computer Program • New Staff Appointments • Dr. Schultze Represents UC in Conference • UC Buying Up Main Street: New Off-Campus Housing • Anarchy in America: Let\u27s Kill All the Lawyers • Decatur Follows Shakespeare to Germany • Electric Factory Does it Again • IFC Getting it All Together • USGA Notes • Six New Faculty • Improving Relationships and Self-Image Workshop • Lacrosse Club Announces Fall Season • Gridders Kick Off \u2781 Season With Victory • Field Hockey Looking Good • Cross Country Team Off to Fast Starthttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1060/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, February 19, 1982

Union Victim of Apparent Vandalism • Bomberger to be Closed After Hours if Vandalism Continues • Foreign Language Career Day: Getting an Edge in Business • Arnold to Join Administration • Reagan: Friend of the Forces • Richter Urges Campus Involvement • Parents Notified of Possible Changes in Aid • Fraternities and Presidents • Meistersingers Begin Spring Concert Tour • English Department Considers Changes • News Briefs: Astronomer to Speak at Ursinus College; Winning Photographer to Conduct Courses at Ursinus College • Joan Jett at the Tower: I Don\u27t Care About a Bad Reputation • Winterfest 1982 • Pi Nu Epsilon: New Members Honored • UC Represents Bahrain in Model UN • USGA Notes • Aggies Buried by UC Women • Women Lose Thriller • Women\u27s Badminton • Sports Briefs: Aquabears Drop One to F&M; Men\u27s Intramural B-ball; Gymnasts Vault to Best Scores • Men\u27s Hoops Takes Two Out of Three • Grapplers Record Best in UC Historyhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1073/thumbnail.jp

Lents: Alternatives for the Future

This document is the complement to the Issues Analysis. The Issues Analysis looked at the problems and issues which confront the Lents neighborhood. This document proposes actions that can be taken to address the issues identified in the previous analysis. Each section, e.g. Environment, Transportation, etc., has its own goals and subsequent objectives and actions. A goal is a broad statement of what is the desired outcome for the neighborhood. More specific objectives identify what needs to be done to improve things and to remedy the identified problems. The actions are means to achieve an objective. Specific potential implementers are then proposed for each action suggested. Interconnections between different sections exist for many problems and solutions. For example, the light rail alignment is a transportation issue but has ramifications in all aspects of life. Because of the inter-relatedness of the urban system, it was concluded that a unifying vision would be the best vehicle to present the means of addressing the neighborhood\u27s issues. Three distinct visions of potential futures for the neighborhood of Lents are presented below. The time scale for these visions is long, approximately 50 years. This allows for three distinctly different visions for Lents. The three visions are; Status Quo, Urban Villages and Regional Attractor. The visions act to encompass all the linkages and provide direction towards a unified future state of existence for the neighborhood. An urban system, like any system, needs to have connection and continuity between its various parts for it to function efficiently. The visions are a means of achieving this. In the Status Quo vision the neighborhood will continue to move through time without major adjustments to its existing state. The actions for change are congruent with the existing state of the neighborhood. Goals and objectives for this vision relate directly to current neighborhood concerns. The suggested actions work towards alleviating current problems and making the neighborhood a better place to live, work and do business. The land use structure and neighborhood function would be not be altered in any significant way. The Urban Village\u27s fundamental idea is to strive for neighborhood selfsufficiency. The neighborhood is separated into nodes or activity centers. A node or activity center is a relatively small area of diverse and intense activity. The nodes help to define residents\u27 sense of neighborhood. A node might have a public open space, such as a developed park, which would be surrounded by mixed-use development, commercial on the first floor and residential above. The nodes would be linked by pedestrian friendly greenways (streets improved with trees and flora) encouraging walking as the preferred mode of transportation. Density would be increased around the nodes to further encourage pedestrian travel and make businesses economically viable to customers using this mode of travel. Educational facilities would be linked closely to neighborhood needs, and cottage industries would be encouraged. In the Regional Attractor vision, the neighborhood would serve a specialized function to the whole metropolitan region. The focus would switch from mainly residential concerns to primaily employment generating concerns. Industry and business would be the critical elements in this neighborhood vision. Automobile or transit use would be the major modes of travel to ensure the neighborhood has regional accessibility. The neighborhood would serve as a single component within a regional system. This document will explore each of these visions in greater depth and present the means to making the vision a reality. While no single vision of Lents will seem preferable to everyone, the hope in presenting these three distinctly different potential futures for the neighborhood, is to reinforce an understanding of the tradeoffs that must be considered when developing a Lents plan. The intent is not to actually see the implementation of one of these visions, but rather to make the choices that must be made between one action and another more explicit. Our sincere hope is that any dialoque this document provokes will be one in which the interests of all Lents residents, present and future, are considered