I knew you had mentioned this earlier but was too lazy to go back and find the post. It is how the campus has evolved with the inner buildings getting the money and the outskirts being abandoned. I do know Nesmith got a small reno 10 years ago but that's a lip stick on a pig type. Same with NH Hall. They have spent millions on a building that probably should have been demolished and redone.
In fairness, I think this is probably a common issue with schools located out in the relative boonies, as there are usually limited options for repurposing or reuse outside the school itself. A funky outdated building in Allston (BU) or on Huntington Ave. (NU) can become a donut or coffee shop, or even an upscale bar or any number of options. With the locations of these now seemingly doomed UNH buildings, it's not like some honky-tonk establishments can pop up there without taking away from the bucolic nature of the campus. Obviously, that doesn't matter so much in urban Boston, or Providence to a lesser degree. It is what it is.
Then again ... taking government funding to the tune of $10 million (give or take) to do the "lipstick on a pig" temporary thingy, and then tearing these places down (with more government funding) is the kind of stuff that makes the folks in Concord get agita over further funding of the U.
It's actually not very different from the school districts who habitually feel the need to launch the next school rebuild project the second the bonds on the last (re)building are paid off. If you're around in a single place long enough, these are the questions that you have to ask. Sometimes the answers are unpleasant.
For example ... before we landed in Effingwoods, my wife and I grew up in a much more urban setting. Our original high school - the one our parents went to a generation earlier - was a beautiful classic brick & mortar that had held up pretty nicely over 50 years. There was plenty of room to expand to meet the rising enrollment, and there were local yokel shops and stores around it that probably depended on teacher and student usage that had been there forever.
But rather than upgrade a perfectly fine structure, and maybe do a modest expansion on lots of available land, the local pols opted for the new building etc. approach, and plopped it on the edge of wetlands in an otherwise residential neighborhood. Just in case anyone had silly thoughts of reusing the previous building, it was burned to the ground a year after the new place opened. All of the small businesses near the old place closed or moved, and the only things that showed up even moderately close to the new facility were owned by ( ... wait for it ... ) local politicians. And a few years later, some of those politicians got their hands caught in the proverbial cookie jar, receiving copious amounts of payola (kickbacks) from the general contractor on the project. Shocking, I know.
And here we are, another 50 years down the road, and guess what?!? Said same community wants to build another high school, using all the same old excuses, and here we go, all over again. Literally, the proposed new site is on the other side of the tracks from the current one. Politicians all arguing for using their preferred site, and their preferred contractors ... wonder why, eh?!?
Proving once again, there are good rea$on$ politician$ "volunteer" at low/no pay to do their "job$" relative to $chool project$ lol
