Environment and Behavior in Student Housing

ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR IN STUDENT HOUSING Case Studies: Ikenberry Commons North and Pennsylvania Avenue Residence Hall University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit School of Architecture, ARCH 423 Spring 2013 Photo by University of Illinois Student Affairs http://www.facebook.com/UIllinoisStudentAffairs

• To compare the newly renovated with the old student housing on UIUC campus • To observe and evaluate how the design responded to the key issues of college student housing

INTRODUCTION

Photo by University of Illinois Student Affairs

• College enrollments in the U.S. soared in the post-war years • The desperate need for housing caused most university administrators to think primarily in terms of the number of students, cost and durability of materials • In the late 1960s to 1970s, more research and symposiums addressed student living environment, e.g. Sim van der Ryn’s Dorms in Berkeley

COLLEGE RESIDENCE HALL DESIGN

Brainerd, Karen Sue. "Issues in the Design and Planning of the Outdoor Areas of Residence Halls." Master of Landscape Architecture University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1985. Print.

Photo source: Peabody Drive Residence Hall (1958) http:// uihistoriesproject.chass.illinois.edu/virtualtour/residencehalls/6pac/

“Dormitories built in the last 50 years were not designed as places of discovery, nor were they designed as laboratories for experimenting with different lifestyles. They have built

indestructible, inflexible structures, measuring the living area in terms of either ‘beds’ or ‘spaces.’ Physical layout resembles turn of the century prisons,

monoliths of concrete and brick. A relentless corridor cuts each floor, separating double occupancy rooms. Dining halls and impersonal lounges that look like bus terminals to complete the picture.”

Student Housing: A Report from Educational Facilities Laboratories.

New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1972. Print.

COLLEGE RESIDENCE HALL DESIGN

Photo source: Peabody Drive Residence Hall (1958) http:// uihistoriesproject.chass.illinois.edu/virtualtour/residencehalls/6pac/

Physical Environment

“Human aggregate”

Focus on the natural and synthetic features of environments, noting any limits they set on human behavior

Understand individual personalities and behaviors, and how they are reflected collectively

Structural organization

Perception

Study the organization of structures, whether they enhance or inhibit certain environmental characteristics and outcomes

Address the individual’s subjective interpretations of the environment, and how they respond to its key features Winston, Roger B., and Scott Anchors. Student Housing and Residential Life: A Handbook for Professionals Committed to Student Development Goals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. Print.

COLLEGE RESIDENCE HALL DESIGN - 4 CONCEPTS

• Outdoor areas (lawns, courtyards, terraces) must have unique characters, design with activities in mind and not being leftover areas with no designated or understood purpose.

• Outdoor spaces should have shelter and comfortable seating

Brainerd, Karen Sue. “Issues in the Design and Planning of the Outdoor Areas of Residence Halls.” Master of Landscape Architecture University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1985.

Print.

Photo: Ikenberry SDRP http://nacufsinterns2012.blogspot.com/2012/07/week-5-at-uiuc.html

KEY ISSUES - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

“Wrong kind of space” • Lounges are “furniture showrooms”, not for spontaneous socializing and casual meetings • Institutional Syndrome: lack of individual choice • Moveable furniture and flexible space allow students to personalize and re-arrange the adjust to their own needs Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

KEY ISSUES - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Density and Crowding • Students in high density halls reported less trust and behaved less socially responsible manner toward other residents • Students evaluated the building as impersonal, unfriendly, and cold • Suites encouraged social climates of “smallness, intimacy, and support”

Bickman, Leonard, Alan Teger, and Thomasina Gabriele. “Dormitory Density and Helping Behavior.” Environment and Behavior Volume 5 Number 4 December 1973: 465-90. Print.

Heilweil, Martin. “The Influence of Dormitory Architecture on Resident Behavior.” Environment and Behavior. Volume 5 Number 4 December 1973: 377-412. Print.

Photo: Florida Avenue Residence Hall http://www.housing.illinois.edu

KEY ISSUES - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Focus on users • No “Ideal Student” - cannot design a standardized environment • Personal space and territory • Communication and social grouping • Diversity of activities and friends • Living-learning environment: bring faculty and student casually together

Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

Photo by University of Illinois Student Affairs http://www.facebook.com/UIllinoisStudentAffairs

KEY ISSUES - HUMAN AGGREGATE

• Academic

• Vocational

• Collegiate

• Non-Conformist Photo: Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

KEY ISSUES - HUMAN AGGREGATE

• Intense study

• Small group study

• Waiting for something to happen study

• Casual study Photo: Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

KEY ISSUES - HUMAN AGGREGATE

• Casual dining

• Solitary meals while reading • Intimate conversation with friends

• Gorge and go Photo: Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

KEY ISSUES - HUMAN AGGREGATE

Sociability, Solitude and Privacy • Common dining facilities, centralized showers, doors directly opposite to each other do not satisfy students’ needs for privacy • Staggered door placements on an open corridor, small and spread out amenities • Patterns of friendship defined by adjacency and traffic flow

Winston, Roger B., and Scott Anchors. Student Housing and Residential Life: A Handbook for Professionals Committed to Student Development Goals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. Print.

Riker, Harold C. and Frank G. Lopez. College students live here; a study of college housing. New

by University of Illinois Student1961.

Affairs http://www.facebook.com/UIllinoisStudentAffairs York: Photo Educational Facilities Laboratories, Print.

KEY ISSUES - STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION

Corridors • Students living on long-corridor floors had higher crowding stress, social withdrawal, and sense of learned helplessness • Conventional long-corridor residence halls generated the least satisfaction

Cherulnik, Paul D. Applications Of Environment-behavior Research: Case Studies And Analysis.

Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1993. Print.

Davis, G., and R. Roizen. “Architectural Determinants of Student Satisfaction in College Residence Halls”. EDRA 1970: 28-44. Print.

Photo: Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

KEY ISSUES - STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION

Students were most satisfied with halls that were perceived as • Experimental • Non-conventional, noninstitutional • Unique • “Homey” • Physical setting and maintenance affect residents’ perceptions of safety and desire to use the space Davis, G., and R. Roizen. “Architectural Determinants of Student Satisfaction in College Residence Halls”. EDRA 1970: 28-44. Print.

Sommer, Robert. “Student Reactions to Four Types of Residence Halls.” Journal of College Student Personnel Volume 9.Number 1 January 1968: 232-7. Print.

Photo: Lincoln Avenue Residence Hall and Busey Hall http://www.housing.illinois.edu

KEY ISSUES - PERCEPTION

COLLEGE RESIDENCE HALL DESIGN - RECENT STUDIES

Changes in expectations • Luxury amenities • Not sharing bathrooms with a whole floor of cohorts • Flat panel TVs, cable, highspeed internet everywhere • Comfortable nooks • More storage (more personal possessions)

Fabris, Peter. “Major Trends in University Residence Halls.” Building Design + Construction.

18 May 2011. Web. http://www.bdcnetwork.com/major-trends-university-residence-halls.

Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.” Treanor Architects. 30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/sector/treanorstudent-life/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-student-learning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo: University of Illinois Public Affairs http://images.publicaffairs.illinois.edu/

KEY ISSUES - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Sustainability • Daylighting and views to improve student performance, satisfaction, productivity, and psychological health • Indoor air quality • Thermal comfort and thermal control • Healthy behavior (gym and exercise room)

Zhiri, Nadia. “Designing the Healthy Residence Hall.” College Planning and Management. Oct. 2009. Web. http://www.peterli.com/cpm/resources/articles/archive.php?article_id=2365.

Accessed 2 February 2013.

Photo: Ikenberry SDRP by Booth Hansen Architects. http://www.boothhansen.com/projects/ university-of-illinois-student-dining-and-residential-programs/

KEY ISSUES - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Different needs for privacy • Younger students desire incidental socialization to explore their own social identity • Students in higher class standing and older want privacy and independence. They prefer stronger sense of control than opportunities to meet new people

Devlin, Anne Sloan, et al. “Residence Hall Architecture and Sense of Community Everything Old is New again.” Environment and Behavior. Volume 40.Number 4 2008: 487-521. Print.

Fabris, Peter. “Major Trends in University Residence Halls.” Building Design + Construction.

18 May 2011. Web. http://www.bdcnetwork.com/major-trends-university-residence-halls.

Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.” Treanor Architects. 30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/sector/treanorstudent-life/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-student-learning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo by University of Illinois Student Affairs http://www.facebook.com/UIllinoisStudentAffairs

KEY ISSUES - HUMAN AGGREGATE

Corridors are not necessarily negative • Corridors offer opportunities for friendship formation among a larger base of dorm residents; “casual stops” • The longer the corridor is, the less socialization becomes

Devlin, Anne Sloan, et al. “Residence Hall Architecture and Sense of Community Everything Old is New again.” Environment and Behavior. Volume 40 Number 4 2008: 487-521. Print.

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.” Treanor Architects. 30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/sector/treanorstudent-life/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-student-learning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo: University of Illinois Public Affairs http://images.publicaffairs.illinois.edu/

KEY ISSUES - STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION

Clusters or suites • Students move in with their friends, and have less incentives to meet new friends • Students have higher tendency to drink alcohol (suites allow larger gathering) • Favorable in terms of basic functions, e.g. thermal comfort, bathroom facilities, room storage

Cross, Jennifer E., Don Zimmerman, Megan O’Grady. “Residence hall room type and alcohol use among college students living on campus.” Environment and Behavior, Volume 41 Number 4 2009: 583-603. Print.

Devlin, Anne Sloan, et al. “Residence Hall Architecture and Sense of Community Everything Old is New again.” Environment and Behavior Volume 40 Number 4 2008: 487-521. Print.

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.” Treanor Architects. 30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/sector/treanorstudent-life/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-student-learning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo: University of Illinois Public Affairs http://images.publicaffairs.illinois.edu/

KEY ISSUES - STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION

Hybrid Style • Low to mid-rise buildings (five or fewer floors) with no more than 500 residents total

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.” Treanor Architects.

30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/sector/treanor-studentlife/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-student-learning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo: Student Lounge in Weston Hall, Ikenberry Common South. Daily Illini. http://newstudents. dailyillini.com/2011/07/19/residence-halls-offer-a-variety-of-food-in-a-variety-of-locations/

• Multiple, small social and study spaces • Suite designed with 10-12 rooms opening onto common living, dining, and kitchen facilities

KEY ISSUES - STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION

Student as a consumer of housing • Student housing competes with off-campus housing and therefore must increasingly become marketable • University Administration wants to attract students (domestic and international) • Become more sensitive to neighborhood concerns and town relations

Devlin, Anne Sloan, et al. “Residence Hall Architecture and Sense of Community Everything Old is New again.” Environment and Behavior. Volume 40 Number 4 2008: 487-521. Print.

Fabris, Peter. “Major Trends in University Residence Halls.” Building Design + Construction.

18 May 2011. Web. http://www.bdcnetwork.com/major-trends-university-residence-halls.

Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Photo: Rendering of Ikenberry Commons Residence Hall #2 (Bousfield) http://www.housing. illinois.edu/Ikenberry%20Commons%20Construction.aspx

KEY ISSUES - PERCEPTION

Change in terminologies: residence halls vs. dorms • Sense of place: feelings of belonging to an environment • Sense of self: use of symbols to communicate to others one’s personal underlying identity • Opportunities for customization, e.g. adaptable furnishings, paintable surfaces • Spaces to feel like home

Clemons, Stephanie A., David McKelfresh, and James Banning. “Importance of Sense of Place and Sense of Self in Residence Hall Room Design: A Qualitative Study of First-Year Students.”

Journal of The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition Volume 17.Issue 2 2005: 73-86.

Print.

Photo: University Housing at Illinois http://www.housing.illinois.edu

KEY ISSUES - PERCEPTION

• “Allow students to be themselves, to be individuals, to be free from an inhibiting sense of regimentation and molding” • “As the individual contributes to the enrichment of the community, so the community is able to enrich the individual” • “Residence halls should foster community, collegiality, communication, and interaction”

SUMMARY

Davis, G., and R. Roizen. “Architectural Determinants of Student Satisfaction in College Residence Halls”. EDRA 1970: 28-44. Print.

Winston, Roger B., and Scott Anchors. Student Housing and Residential Life: A Handbook for Professionals Committed to Student Development Goals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.

Print.

Photo by University of Illinois Student Affairs http://www.facebook.com/UIllinoisStudentAffairs

Ikenberry Commons North - SDRP and Nugent Hall

Photo by Booth Hansen Architets http://www.boothhansen.com/projects/university-of-illinoisstudent-dining-and-residential-programs/

Pennsylvania Avenue Residence Hall and Dining

CASE STUDIES

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Ikenberry Commons North - SDRP and Nugent Hall 301 E. Gregory Drive Champaign IL 61820

Map: http://maps.stamen.com

Pennsylvania Avenue Residence Hall and Dining 902 College Ct., Urbana, IL 61801

Map: http://maps.stamen.com

Architect: Opened: Capacity:

Booth Hansen Fall 2012 410 students, coed (Nugent Hall); 4 stories Recognition: LEED Silver Certification • UIUC Architecture Professor Ambrose M. Richardson was involved in the original design of the Ikenberry Commons Complex in 1956

Photo by Booth Hansen Architets http://www.boothhansen.com/projects/university-of-illinoisstudent-dining-and-residential-programs/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Architect: Not published Opened: Fall 1962 Capacity: 250 students each building, co-ed layered; 4 stories Dining Hall Renovation Architect: DeStefano Partners Opened: Fall 2009 Award: AIA Chicago 2011 Interior Architecture Award

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE RESIDENCE HALL & DINING

Ikenberry

What works:

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Match University’s overall aesthetics + Match University’s overall aesthetics + Integrate courtyards with building design + Integrate courtyards with building design

What does not work well: - Looks out-dated and homogenous

EXTERIOR

Ikenberry

Photo by Booth Hansen Architets http://www.boothhansen.com/ projects/university-of-illinois-student-dining-and-residential-programs/

PAR

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

What works:

+ Layout is spontaneous and casual

+ Several benches available

What does not work well: - Lack comfortable seating - Large rocks have no purposes - More hardscapes than softscapes

What does not work well:

EXTERIOR

- Layout is more rigid - More hardscapes than softscapes - Students use the space for smoking

Ikenberry

Photo by Booth Hansen Architets http://www.boothhansen.com/ projects/university-of-illinois-student-dining-and-residential-programs/

PAR

What works:

What works:

+ Good daylight and views + A place to gather, to meet friends + A variety of seating options + Sociable space, full of actions + Smell of food

+ Good daylight and views + Open layout + Newly renovated (2009) + Smell of food

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What does not work well:

PUBLIC SPACES- LOBBY

- Too much space, not enough furniture - Lack seating options; all built-in

Ikenberry

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PUBLIC SPACES- LOBBY

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Ikenberry

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Good daylight and views + A variety of seating options + Operable windows + Updated technologies (wi-fi, flat panel TV) + Smaller lounges

What does not work well: - No window treatment

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Good daylight and views + A variety of seating options + Control glare with shades + Updated technologies (wi-fi)

What does not work well:

- Too much space, not enough furniture - Cannot control room temperature

PUBLIC SPACES- COMMON LOUNGE

Ikenberry

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PUBLIC SPACES- COMMON LOUNGE

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Ikenberry

Photo by University Housing http://www.housing.illinois.edu

What works:

PAR

Photo by Barbara Karant, Karant+Associates, Inc. http://www.aiachicago.org

What works:

+ High ceiling, good daylight and views + Ceiling panels add visual interest + A variety of seating + Seating groups position to daylight + Seating area exposes to south-facing windows

What does not work well:

What does not work well:

- Separate seating into two zones - No access to outdoor areas (university policy) - No access to outdoor areas (university policy)

DINING HALL

Double Room Bathroom/ Shower Lounge/ Study Room Resident Assistant (RA) Single Room Elevators

Ikenberry

What works:

+ Decentralize bathrooms + Lounges spread out + Break up length of corridors + Daylight in corridor through lounges

What does not work well:

- Long travel distance from elevators (for some)

LIVING SPACES- LAYOUT

Floor Plans by University Housing http://www.housing.illinois.edu

PAR Double Room Bathroom/ Shower Lounge/ Study Room Resident Assistant (RA) Elevators

LIVING SPACES- LAYOUT

What works:

+ Central gathering space + Compact organization of rooms

What does not work well:

- Centralize bathrooms - Monolithic corridor - Limited daylighting in corridors - Lounges have no access to daylight and views Floor Plans by University Housing http://www.housing.illinois.edu

Ikenberry

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Lively and bright colors + Good interior lighting, not institutional + Easy wayfinding

What does not work well:

- Carpet color/pattern is not very effective in breaking up the visual length of corridor

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Easy wayfinding

What does not work well:

- Interior colors are dull - Hard surfaces resulted in bad acoustics - Carpet color/pattern is not very effective in breaking up the visual length of corridor

LIVING SPACES- CORRIDORS

Ikenberry

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Control of thermostat/ heat + Plenty of storage + Allow personalization and create identity + Movable furniture + Soft flooring (carpet)

PAR

Photo by University Housing http://www.housing.illinois.edu

What works:

+ Large windows + Plenty of storage + Allow personalization and create identity + Movable furniture

What does not work well:

LIVING SPACES- ROOMS

- No control of thermostat/ heat - No air-conditioning, no wi-fi - Hard flooring

Ikenberry

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Views and daylight + Comfortable furniture + Small rooms, located throughout the floor + Control of thermostat

What does not work well:

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Bigger space allows group study

What does not work well:

- No views and no access to daylight - Uncomfortable furniture - No wi-fi

- No shades - Small space - can cause disruption

LIVING SPACES- STUDY ROOM

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Photo by Booth Hansen Architets http://www.boothhansen.com Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What works:

+ Wide hallways + Same design as other floors + Allow personalization and create identity + Open atmosphere (students leave doors open) + Encourage socialization

ACCESSIBILITY (IKENBERRY ONLY)

Ikenberry

What works:

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PAR

Photos by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

What does not work well:

+ Accessible - Commercial look + Home-like - Not integrated with other social spaces (in + Adjacent to lounge and lobby, encourage the corner, next to the library) community use

AMENITIES

Ikenberry

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit Photo source- http://www.flickr.com/photos/23513946@N00/6326243095/

AMENITIES

PAR

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Summary Physical Environment

+ Plenty of program office spaces

+ Large windows made the building look different from other buildings

+ Many lounges throughout

+ Common spaces and amenities are accessible to all students living in the complex + All amenities are accessible + Sustainable features e.g. low VOC paint, controllable theromstat, lighting with sensors

+ Flat panel TV screens for event announcements + Outdoor space not utilized (yet) - Large rocks in outdoor spaces have no clear purposes and are not comfortable enough for seating

Photo source - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tourismguy/5205248718/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Summary Human Aggregate + Supports the students’ individual personality and also large social groupings + Many choices (amenities, lounges, seating) support different uses - Many students are returned residents and are not as eager to get involved in hall government activities

Photo source - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tourismguy/5205248718/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Summary Structural Organization + Corridors are colorful and bright (well-illuminated) + Staggered clusters make the corridor seem shorter

- Resident Assistant (RA) rooms should have been closer and more integrated with resident rooms - Inconvenient connection between Nugent and SDRP. Students exit to Gregory Street, or must go through dining hall (even when it is closed)

+ Cluster arrangement and decentralized bathrooms create small communities - Bike racks are not placed near building entrance (too far from the functional distance) Photo source - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tourismguy/5205248718/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Summary Perception

incentive to use the lounge

+ Students respect new buildings and well-maintained spaces

- Basement is not advertised well and is under-utilized

+ Sustainable and healthy features encourage healthy behaviors (students do not tape flyers on walls) + Co-ed floors allow residents to expand their social groupings - Too many lounges lower students’

Photo source - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tourismguy/5205248718/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Recommendations • Provide comfortable seating and shades in courtyard • More plants and less hardscapes can make the courtyard more welcoming • Improve environmental graphics, e.g. intuitive and universal symbols, to help clarify purposes of rooms • Diversify the purpose of lounges, e.g. game room

Photo source - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tourismguy/5205248718/

IKENBERRY COMMONS NORTH - SDRP & NUGENT HALL

Summary Physical Environment + Central lounges support large group activities or individual study + The newly renovated dining facility and lobby are spacious - Overall interior spaces are poorly illuminated. Common spaces and corridors on residence floors have no access to daylight

- Rooms fail to meet in today’s standards, e.g. wi-fi, air-conditioning, too small - Some rooms and spaces lack clear purposes and are under-utilized, e.g. “press room”, a seating area near dining hall entrance - Some spaces are not accessible

- No control over indoor temperature

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE RESIDENCE

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Summary Human Aggregate + A variety of lounges and classrooms to accommodate casual gathering or formal classes + The function of the central lounge on each floor is collectively decided by the residents

- Each corridor and plan layout are essentially identical and symmetrical; lack diversity and variations - University imposes many rules and policies on territory (students are limited to the amenities within their own building)

- Many incidents of students moving lounge furniture to their own room, which indicate their attempts to personalize their own living space

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE RESIDENCE

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Summary Structural Organization + Long corridors work well because students tend to form friendships with other residents in the hallway + Central lounges are used by students very often - Centralized lounges and hallways do not allow for much privacy - Travel distance to the shared bathroom (with multiple shower and toilet stalls) is long for some residents

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE RESIDENCE

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

Summary Perception - PAR is perceived as the “freshmen� hall. Students tend to move out after the first year - Low percentage of returned students (about 20 out of 250 residents in one building). Students who choose to return are actively involved the livinglearning community and International Crossroad programs

PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE RESIDENCE

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

PAR • Define and clarify the purposes of the under-utilized spaces • Improve interior lighting and interior finishes (carpet, paint colors); update furniture • Improve ventilation and indoor air circulation by adding fans • Need major renovation in the long-run to provide up-to-date technologies

RECOMMENDATIONS

Photo by Wiktor Czechura and Annie Sit

• Who have lived in suite-style halls? Who have lived in conventional corridor-type layout? What are your best and worst experience?

• Compare and contrast what you learned from the research with what you actually experienced in student housing.

• Share some of the amenities that are provided in the residence halls you are living in/have lived in. Where are they located? How do you and other residents use them?

DISCUSSION

Bickman, Leonard, Alan Teger, and Thomasina Gabriele. "Dormitory Density and Helping Behavior." Environment and Behavior Volume 5.Number 4 December 1973: 465-90. Print.

Foubert, J. D., R. Tepper, and D. Morrison. "Predictors of Student Satisfaction in University Residence Halls." The Journal of College and University Student Housing Volume 27.Volume 1 1998: 41-46. Print.

Brainerd, Karen Sue. "Issues in the Design and Planning of the Outdoor Areas of Residence Halls." Master of Landscape Architecture University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1985. Print.

Heilweil, Martin. “The Influence of Dormitory Architecture on Resident Behavior.”

Environment and Behavior Volume 5 Number 4 December 1973: 377-412. Print.

Brown, Barbara, B. & Irwin Altman. “Territoriality, Defensible Space and Residential Burglary: An Environmental Analysis.” Journal of Environmental Psychology Volume 3 1983: 203-220. Print.

Lawless, Julie W. “Residence Hall Design in the Success of Student Learning.”

Treanor Architects. 30 January 2012. Web. http://www.treanorarchitects.com/news/ sector/treanor-student-life/2012-01-30/residence-hall-design-success-studentlearning/. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

Cherulnik, Paul D. Applications Of Environment-behavior Research: Case Studies And Analysis. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1993. Print.

Riker, Harold C. College Students Live Here; a Study of College Housing. New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1961. Print.

Clemons, Stephanie A., David McKelfresh, and James Banning. "Importance of Sense of Place and Sense of Self in Residence Hall Room Design: A Qualitative Study of First-Year Students." Journal of The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition Volume 17.Issue 2 2005: 73-86. Print.

Sommer, Robert. "Student Reactions to Four Types of Residence Halls." Journal of College Student Personnel Volume 9.Number 1 January 1968: 232-7. Print.

Corbett, Judith. “Are the Suites the Answer?” Environment and Behavior Volume 5 Number 4 1973: 413-419. Print.

Cross, Jennifer E., Don Zimmerman, Megan O'Grady. “Residence hall room type and alcohol use among college students living on campus.” Environment and Behavior Volume 41 Number 4 2009: 583-603. Print.

Davis, G., and R. Roizen. "Architectural Determinants of Student Satisfaction in College Residence Halls". EDRA 1970: 28-44. Print.

Devlin, Anne Sloan, et al. "Residence Hall Architecture and Sense of Community Everything Old is New again." Environment and Behavior Volume 40 Number 4 2008: 487-521. Print.

Fabris, Peter. “Major Trends in University Residence Halls.” Building Design + Construction. 18 May 2011. Web. http://www.bdcnetwork.com/major-trendsuniversity-residence-halls. Accessed 2 Feb 2013.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sommer, Robert. "Crime and Vandalism in University Residence Halls: A Confirmation of Defensible Space Theory." Journal of Environmental Psychology Volume 7 1987: 1-12. Print.

Student Housing: A Report from Educational Facilities Laboratories. New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1972. Print.

Van der Ryn, Sim, and Murry Silverstein. Dorms at Berkeley. Berkeley: Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, 1967. Print.

Winston, Roger B., and Scott Anchors. Student Housing and Residential Life: A Handbook for Professionals Committed to Student Development Goals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. Print.

Zhiri, Nadia. “Designing the Healthy Residence Hall.” College Planning and Management. Oct. 2009. Web. http://www.peterli.com/cpm/resources/articles/archive. php?article_id=2365. Accessed 2 February 2013.