Welcome
Subscribe to our RSS feeds.

Get involved by joining our mailing lists.

Submit a news story to uwstudent.org.

Submit an event to uws' calendar.

Read what's hot on uwstudent.org.

Want to know more? Read our Frequently Asked Questions.

Check upcoming events on the calendar

The links on our links page point to interesting things.

User Functions
Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

Sections
Home
Announce -- Feds
News
Not uws news
Reader-directed content
uws archive
uwstudent.org
Warrior Sports Reports

Support uws ?
In Association with Amazon.ca

K-W weather

uw411
search the uw phone directory by name, department, location + more





UW's architecture school moving to Cambridge (Paul Schreiber)

This is an archived story posted by Paul Schreiber. You can view the original here.

UW's School of Architecture's (UWSA) plan to move to Cambridge in two years' time was approved by the Board of Governors last week.

Oskar Ganahl, an Austrian architect, donated 3.5 acres of land on Water Street near Simcoe Street to UW. The City of Cambridge, a group of business leaders known as the Cambridge Campus Consortium and the university will work together to move UWSA to its fourth home in 34 years.

The $30-million project is being funded entirely by sources outside the university. In addition to the private land donation, the Cambridge group will raise the money needed to finance the building and the environmental cleanup of the site. Additional funding will come in the way of the province's municipal SuperBuild grants.

In order to have the 85,000-square-foot building ready for the fall of 2003, work is starting right away. The first stage is an international design competition to design the building, explains UWSA Director Rick Haldenby. The competition, which will be overseen by the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, will take approximately eight months. Once the design and architect are selected, construction will take at least a year, Haldenby explained.

Background
UWSA opened on Phillip Street in 1969; two years later, it moved into 419 Phillip Street, where it stayed for a decade. In 1981, they moved into their current location, Enivornmental Studies 2.

Haldenby has been aware of the problems with ES2 for many years. He describes UWSA as "an excellent school" with "very inadequate" space and facilities.

Third-year student Juhee Oh said that ES2 is insufficient facility-wise, stating that the air circulation has numerous problems that haven't been properly addressed. Champika Fernando agreed. "We need a building for sure," she stated, noting that the current computer labs are inadequate.

Student Kyle Sanvictores called the current building "an embarrassment." Work spaces are cramped and there's "no air," he explained. He's depressed about the lack of lounges and student space and the stigma attached to the building.

The one thing that keeps the students here, Oh said, is UW's reputation.

Haldenby agreed with the statements about the air system, describing the process to repair it as "a comedy of errors."

Shortly after becoming Director of UWSA in 1988, Haldenby began working with then-UW president Douglas Wright to find a new location for the UWSA. The search continued under James Downey. Someone from Ariscraft approached Haldenby about moving to Cambridge two years ago, but he didn't think it was feasible at that time.

In the intervening two years, "more walls came up." The SuperBuild fund for universities only offered funding to those seeking to increase undergraduate enrollment, and didn't apply to the UWSA, who want to increase the number of graduate student spots available. No large donation was forthcoming to build new space in Waterloo, despite what Vice President (academic) and Provost Alan George described as "vigorous attempts" to raise funding to improve UWSA's facilities.

When he was approached at a Cambridge Chamber of Commerce meeting last November, Haldenby decided the move "was really worth pursuing." Talks with the university leadership began in earnest.

Approval Process
Haldenby and George described everyone involved as supporting the move. Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig has been "incredibly supportive" and the city staff have been "enthusiastic," Haldenby said.

The move was approved first by the School of Architecture, then the Faculty of Environmental Studies Council, the Deans' Council, the Executive Council, the UW Senate, the Board of Governors' Building and Properties Committee and finally, the Board of Governors itself.

FES council voted unanimously for the move and there were only two dissenters on the Senate, UW's academic governing body, which has 70-80 members. While the exact board vote is confidential, George said that only five or so of the 30 members opposed the move. There were some reservations in principle; several members were "apprehensive about setting a precedent."

Federation of Students President Chris Farley was noncommittal in describing the move. "It's not a good thing, it's not a bad thing," he said. Farley is sure about one thing, however: the move will improve the school and the quality of education.

Cambridge benefits
Haldenby feels that UWSA's presence in Cambridge will benefit the city. The urban setting is a "great location," he added.

George described the move as "bringing a showpiece to the downtown core." Both the vice president and the city hope the addition of UWSA will help rejuvenate the downtown Cambridge core.

The downtown location will be great for the students as well, George added, explaining that the many heritage buildings in Cambridge will be excellent for study by architecture students. In addition, he feels it's a good opportunity to promote the university.

Grad school expanding
A big part of the space crunch comes from the expansion of UWSA's Master's of Architecture program. Starting this year, instead of offering a five-year undergraduate program, UWSA will offer a four-year undergrad program and a 16-month MArch program.

About 60 students are admitted to architecture each year, meaning that there are between 200 and 300 students on campus at any given time. When autumn rolls around, no space will be available for the Master's students. "The space problem was really bad before," Haldenby said. "It's acute now."

By June 2002, he expects to have 80-100 students enrolled in the Master's program. "We will have to find space," he continued. "I'm not sure what to do."

Student life a concern
Students were generally supportive of the move, but all expressed concerns about being disconnected from campus. "There's quite understandably lots of concern," George said.

Mark Cichy, a third-year student in favour of the move, explained that while many students didn't approve and felt it was taking away from the university environment, he believes the university had no other options and "they won't see another offer [like this] for 20 years."

Fernando, who's in first-year architecture, is "basically in favour" of the move. She, too is concerned about "being part of a university" and the ability to choose non-architecture electives.

Haldenby said the school is looking at a variety of options, including offering some of the more popular non-architecture electives at the Cambridge location. Architecture 100 and 276, popular among non Architecture majors, will continue to be offered on the main UW campus. George explained that UW is considering satellite offices for some services. UW will make transit arrangements as well.

George stated UW "will do extraordinary things to ensure the school remains an integral part of the university community."

Farley added that UW is looking at other universities with satellite architecture schools -- such as Laval and Dalhousie -- for ideas. Moving part of the university to another city is "not the ideal situation," but he is confident the necessary services will be provided.

Oh worries about the isolation from the rest of campus that will result from the move. "We're already isolated enough," she said. If the school moves to Cambridge "we'll only see architects."

Architecture school called city anchor The Record, March 13, 2001
UW agrees to Cambridge deal DB, March 9, 2001
Move of UW architecture school wins governors' OK The Record, March 8, 2001
Skepticism greets UW campus shift The Record, February 7, 2001
UW satellite campus urged for Galt core The Record, January 12, 2001
Cambridge hopes to get UW satellite campus The Record, December 20, 2000



UW's architecture school moving to Cambridge (Paul Schreiber) | 32 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
More proof that Farley is a jackass (Retarded Monkey)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 08:42 AM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Retarded Monkey. You can view the original here.

"It's not a good thing, it's not a bad thing,"
-Chris Farley, FedS President

More proof that Chris Farley is totally incompetent. Then he goes on to say that "the move will improve the school and the quality of education." It would seem to me that that would mean it has some good to it doesn't it?

True, the School of Architecture will be quite a ways from main campus and could limit the number of classes outside the School of Architecture that architecture students will take, but that can be worked around through a shuttling system since the structure of the architecture academic plan is so rigid.

And it is certain, no one will make another offer like this within the next couple of decades. Too bad it couldn't have been put up by Columbia Lake to offer some inspiration, while at the same time, keeping it relatively close to campus.

[ Parent ]

This is Ridiculous (char)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 11:22 AM CST

This is an archived comment posted by char. You can view the original here.

Has anyone REALLY thought this through, or is everyone just excited about getting the money and so they think this is the best option?!?! Has there been any consultation with the rest of the faculty and students?? I certainly can't recall any! What about the architecture profs and staff that don't want to leave waterloo?? Has anyone taken their thoughts and opinions into consideration?

For those who are in ES and who use the facilities on a daily basis, what happens to them? What happens to the digital darkroom, the scanners, the computers, the software, the workshop etc. etc. Architects are not the only ones who use these facilities!

Granted, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed (space, ventilation), but I don't think that moving the school to CAMBRIDGE is the answer. I don't know how many acres are available on the north campus, but there has got to be a way to satisfy the needs of the Architecture school without moving them out of the city. What about downtown Waterloo - I'm sure the city of Waterloo has something to offer the school, or even the city of Kitchener - Kitchener would be a much more ideal location than Cambridge.

As for the shuttling of students back and forth from Cambridge to Waterloo - it's ridiculous! What are they going to do when people have back to back classes in 2 different cities? What about students who are not in architecture that want to take architecture classes??

What about the MAD (mapping and design) library?? Are the architects going to take that with them as well?? What about the other students who use this library and the resources in it??

Why hasn't the Environmental Studies Student Association done anything about this? It seems that no one else has been considered in this proposal. Environmental Studies needs the school of architecture and the school of architecture needs the rest of ES - there is a relationship there that should not be severed just because a SELECT group of people want the school moved.

Finally, what's with the comment from Farley?? Get a backbone already!!

[ Parent ]

This smells (zo)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 11:27 AM CST

This is an archived comment posted by zo. You can view the original here.

Something is up and the UW population is not being told the real story behind this move. I for that matter, do not portend to know what it is either.

Is the university administration, the faculty of environmental studies (from which I am a graduate) and the school of architecture as short sited and naive as they seem to be? Surely this proposed move does not only revolve around space shortages and the inadequacy of the facilities. I would suggest that ever since the SA moved into ES2 there has been a strong desire on certain factions of the architecture professorial staff to locate to a more autonomous site. Now onto the short sightedness of the affair. Surely, surely an alternative scheme could have been work out. I understand that there are many meters of land north of the university on the other side of Columbia St. that the University owns that could be developed! Perhaps further space (to accommodate the graduate programme) could have been found in south campus hall? Or in the soon to be vacated Needles Hall?

Further, where is the plan for this relocation? Is there one? There are a few issues that come to mind. I find it intriguing to hear architecture students complain about the facilities they use. Perhaps they should take a moment to think about the facilities that they have at their disposal, as it is clear that their administrators have not. Does the SA intend to pick up and leave with all the facilities and infrastructure they use on a regular basis? This would include the numerous iMac and PC's used for 3D modelling; the darkroom and digital darkroom; the wood shop; the multi media computer facilities; the maps and books at the UMD library; and the art and architecture collections held at the Danna Porter Library, of which the SA makes frequent use. For as long as I attended the University these facilities have been shared, for use by other ES students and indeed other UW students. My problem is that the facilities listed above have been purchased with monies from the Faculty of Environmental Studies and the University, not the School of Architecture exclusively. Obviously I am mistaken in my assuming the SA would pick up and leave with all of these facilities. Clearly their cash flow is bountiful and it would not pose a problem for them to replace all of this equipment in their new Cambridge home.

My next problem is the manner in which the Feds and ESS (environmental student's society) have handled the situation. Clearly Mr. Farely is spineless fool, not willing to take a clear stand on the issue. Come on!!!! Not a good thing, not a bad thing? I am as willing as the next person to accept a shade of grey but I like to know which shade of grey we are taking about. Mr. Farley statements smack of indifference, and show that he is out of touch with students. No Mr. Farley we do not need a referendum on this one, you might consider strolling the halls of ES to find out what people feel.

In any case the UWSA move seems like a sure thing. I only wish someone would find a way to loosen the tightness of the black turtlenecks worn by certain decision-makers at the school of architecture, this would allow for a stronger flow of blood to the brain.

[ Parent ]

Priorities (Mike)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 12:37 PM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Mike. You can view the original here.

I think this decision is symptomatic of a larger issue at Waterloo. This issue is that if your not in Engineering, or Math the university does not want to hear about your needs. It has been known for years that even when the School of Architecture moved into ES2 in the early 80's that they did not have enough room. Environmental Studies is the largest faculty of its kind in Canada and was the first of its kind but it appears that the university cares very little about ES.

If engineering needs new buildings the university somehow finds the money to get them, ES just gets ignored. This has forced the School of Architecture to look elsewhere, although I will admit Cambridge is a great location as it is much more Architecturally diverse than Waterloo the concept is just insane. I am in ES and I was under the impression that what makes this faculty work is the integration of Geography, Environment and Resource Studies, Planning, and Architecture so we can all learn from and about one another's programs so that we can make more environmentally responsible decisions in the future. While I know not many Architecture students have the opportunity to take other courses as their program is very rigid in its structure, they should have the opportunity. Limiting that opportunity in any way allows only for a single view of issues and they do not have the opportunity to interact with the rest of us to try to understand etter the constraints under which their structures will have to exist in the future. Also this limits my ability to make my education as broad or all encompassing as I would like it to be. Maybe I want to take Architecture courses, and to tell me there is the possibility I can't simply because the only place the School of Architecture could get money for a building was in Cambridge is simply not acceptable. Also I happen to work at the UMD Library where the majority of our books are for Architecture, I don't like the prospects of those resources leaving, it leaves a lot of people without them and the knowledge they could provide.

If I am going to be treated as a second class citizen in this university because my faculty doesn't make the university millions of dollars in grants and donations then I am glad I am graduating, because I don't want to be here any more.

[ Parent ]

Prof's opinion in Record (Jon W.)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 02:15 PM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Jon W.. You can view the original here.

Len Guelke, geography professor and Board of Governors member, has a Second Opinion piece about it in today's Record:

Architecture students will be cheated of campus life The Record, March 14, 2001.

[ Parent ]

Students have given support? (Jon)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 03:42 PM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Jon. You can view the original here.

How much research has been done to find how just how many students support this move? Does this research only include architecture students, or the student body as a whole? I have a hard time believing that the majority of students surveyed support the move. I'm not in architecture, so I obviously don't share the same perspective as those who are, but still. If Waterloo decided that they were going to ship CS off to Cambridge I'd be mightily PO'd.

If people think that these students aren't going to be missing out on campus life then they are sorely mistaken. Sure, they'll still find their way to the bomber on Wednesday's on Fed on Thursdays, but what about all of the day's activites? Special events in the great hall, sports teams or sitting on the bomber patio sucking back a cold one. None of these these activities are going to be easily accesible to architecture students. How many students will relocate to Cambridge in order to accomodate this move? Does UW plan to offer shuttles at all hours for them? What if they decide they need to study late at the Dana Porter or don't have a ride home after a late night at Fed? Taxis are expensive.

Waterloo already sorely lacks a sense of community (apart from the fact that some students never leave campus), and tearing us apart isn't going to make things any better. The Board of Govenors needs to look long and hard at this move and consider the long term implications, not just on their pocketbooks, but on the students.

[ Parent ]

Architecture students like it (brenda)
Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, March 14 2001 @ 11:44 PM CST

This is an archived comment posted by brenda. You can view the original here.

I really thought that this plan was totally half-assed/baked, until I spoke with a few Architecture students.

The 2 women with whm I spoke were entirely excited about raising the profile of their excellent program, while providing more studio space for a program that is bursting a the seams of the ES2 building.

They reported to me that many ARCH students take most of their electives from within the ARCH list and as the program stands now, due to their schedules, they are often ony able to enrol in night classes from other disciplines for their electives, so commuting back and forth through the day would not be as much as a problem for students in this program as it may be for others.

Their only concern was that the UMD (University Map and Design) is a valuable and frequently-used resource for them that they would miss out on. As a library employee, I know that even if we expanded the resource-sharing and monograph/document delivery options currently offered, to include those to the the Cambridge campus, materials would not be immediately available/accessible.

In addition, the administration must commit to ensuring that services that are currently offered to students (e.g., health, counselling) continue to be offered at comparable standards to those on campus.

[ Parent ]

Narrowing focus
Authored by: Stephen Forrest on Thursday, March 15 2001 @ 10:17 AM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Stephen Forrest. You can view the original here.

I cannot argue the economic justifications for the move, or the reasons the city of Cambridge wants the architecture school. And, not being an architecture student, I can't say conclusively what they lose by their isolation from the main campus. My objection is that that we, the rest of UW, will be lessened by their departure.

The School of Architecture has a regular lecture series, Arriscraft, at which prominent working architects speak about their portfolios and their ideas on both the philosophical and physical aspects of their profession.
I began attending these lectures only after repeated requests by a friend in Architecture (who is, incidentally, doing a CS minor, something that will likely be impossible after the move). I'll confess that I had a very distorted view of what Architecture was prior to these lectures.

Architecture is one of the very few disciplines at this school which sit at the meeting-place between technical skill, artistic talent, and social consciousness. It is the dialogue between these that is already sorely lacking on this campus, and I believe the removal of architecture from Waterloo will further narrow the focus of the rest of the campus.

Steve

--
Stephen Forrest
4N PM/CS

[ Parent ]

Mention in March 15th DB
Authored by: Stephen Forrest on Thursday, March 15 2001 @ 10:22 AM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Stephen Forrest. You can view the original here.

There's another mention of the Cambridge deal in today's Daily Bulletin. (March 15th).

Steve

[ Parent ]

Re: UW's architecture school moving to Cambridge (Shelley)
Authored by: uws archive on Tuesday, March 20 2001 @ 02:27 PM CST

This is an archived comment posted by Shelley. You can view the original here.

I don't think anyone has put much thought into the location they have signed for. I am a resident of Cambridge, and I think a university in town would be great, but not the location they are selling you. There is a reason they are offering that spot. First, Cambridge is known for floods. We have had two major floods, the latest being in the 70's. The park hill dam was created to ease the flooding, but we still get minor floods every year at the banks of the river, and it will affect the new school of architecture. Secondly, there will only be one entrance to the school, and it will enter onto a busy street, namely highway 24 or Water Street. Cambridge cannot support the traffic currently on that street, and adding a University to that street could cause major traffic headaches. That street is also a oneway street. It will require students to go out of the city in the opposite direction of Waterloo. Cambridge also does not have enough housing for the current residents, there is no way that it will have enough housing to support the added students. I think these issues should have been considered before signing a contract.

[ Parent ]

Story Options
  • Mail Story to a Friend
  • Printable Story Format


  •  Copyright © 2008 uwstudent.org
     All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.

    Powered By