It’s not exactly commonplace for students to remain in the residence halls after their freshman year. The primary goal of the University’s Strategic Housing Plan is to change that.
During the next decade, at the cost of $40 to $60 million funded by new unit rate increases and an annual three percent increase in housing rates, the University’s housing capacity will increase from 3,948 beds to 5,478 beds by 2017, according to the plan. One-third of the existing beds will be renovated, two-thirds will be replaced, and the remainder will be constructed – all with the idea of integrating academia into housing.
The plan outlines the University’s housing goals, with a primary objective of recommending housing that will meet the needs of students currently not accommodated by University Housing, primarily upper-division students. A Housing Strategic Planning Group analysis found that a significant number of non-freshmen would consider University Housing if the residential lifestyle was more independent, and the plan identifies several steps to accommodate these students in an academic living environment similar to the one offered at the Living Learning Center.
When the Oregon University System approved the University’s request to sell the Westmoreland family housing apartments, it asked the University to develop a long-range housing plan to accommodate a wide range of students. The Strategic Housing Plan is a response to that request, and Provost Linda Brady will present a draft to OUS for input at the State Board of Higher Education meeting Thursday and Friday. In the following weeks, the University will solicit campus community feedback from students, faculty and staff.
“Whatever we build, whatever we create, needs to be a combination of a facility and a program that are both designed to support the academic success of students,” said Housing Director Mike Eyster. “We’ve got the Living Learning Center, which has been a tremendous success, but it’s only about 10 percent of our total housing product. We’ve got to get more housing product out there that accomplishes the same goals that the Living Learning Center has accomplished.”
Eyster said hypothetically, new residence halls could be built on open campus spaces, and then parts of existing residence halls could be demolished to create new open areas. For example, a new building could be erected on the Humpy Lumpy Lawn near Bean Complex, and part of Hamilton Complex could be torn down to make up for the lost study area. Then, construction crews could move to a different complex and repeat the process, in a sort of “leap-frog.”
Last year the Housing Strategic Planning Group formed a web-based survey to which more than 3,000 students responded, gauging interest in what amenities they would look for in a University Housing experience. Thirteen student focus groups also offered input.
“What this really means is we’re changing the inventory of what students want from an on-campus living experience from strictly the traditional doubles with gang showers and the kind of stuff that exists currently,” said Dennis Howard, co-chair of the committee. “We’re trying to modernize it. It’ll still be group living, but it will give students many more options in terms of the kind of living space they’re going to be in.”
While the details still need to be hammered out – answers to questions such as location, resident assistant supervision and construction timeline – the conceptual plan of where University housing is headed is strong, Howard said.
“It will be a different kind of living experience on just about every dimension than we see in the freshmen dorms,” Howard said.
Chris Ramey, university planning senior director and architect, said it’s still going to be awhile before implementation begins because of other issues such as cost, delivery, project phasing and construction management.
“It’s a good two years, 2 1/2 years until we can move in,” Ramey said.