Search Results
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
(09/03/99 9:00am)
In a process that progressed "faster than expected," the University has completed the first phase of renovations of the Quadrangle as well as structural changes to the Hill College House dining hall, Penn officials said. Though years of planning and construction remain, these changes mark the first major steps in a 10-year, $300 million project announced last fall to dramatically alter students' dormitory and dining spaces. The Quad renovations -- a $75 million project in itself -- will ultimately merge the Quad's current four college houses into three, add new facilities and utility systems and repair and restore parts of the building's architecture. This summer's changes, which began in late May, were the first of four main phases and consisted primarily of restoration of the exterior architecture and installation of new mechanical infrastructure. "I think people will see a difference," Director of College Houses and Academic Services David Brownlee said of the recent renovations. The changes that won't be readily visible to students include new systems installed in the Quad's basement for bringing hot and cold water, electrical service and air conditioning connections to the rooms. While rooms will not have air conditioning connections this year, Brownlee said as many as one-third of the rooms may have that amenity after next summer. Other renovations included cleaning the exterior brickwork and limestone in the oldest section of the Quad, the stretch along Woodland Walk, between Memorial Tower -- the 37th Street entrance -- and the western corner. "Every inch of mortar was routed out and replaced," Brownlee said, adding that with the help of sand brought in from the Great Lakes, that section now sports a reddish tint and should be "good for another 100 years." In addition to the structural changes, the area of the Quad formerly known as Butcher-Speakman-Class of '28, was completely refurnished, as were parts of Ware and Community houses, where new lounges were built. Memorial and Provost Towers were also thoroughly cleaned. Finally, a new roof was constructed above Memorial Tower. Because of the lack of rain this summer, workers unexpectedly did not lose a single construction day, Associate Vice President for Campus Services Larry Moneta said, allowing this first phase -- the cheapest of the four, at a cost of about $15 million -- to be completed by the August 16 deadline. While some work may continue throughout the school year, it will not be extensive enough to cause any major disruptions for students, Moneta said in May. That will include working on three mechanical rooms in the basement and repaving the area outside Memorial Tower, Brownlee said. Other yet-to-be-determined projects will be be worked on where possible. The administration plans to notify students about the new and upcoming renovations via a newsletter, and Brownlee said officials will continue to tell residents when they decide on other projects. Renovations to Hill Dining, while far less costly than those to the Quad -- about $1 million, according to Moneta -- should nevertheless be a major aesthetic and functional improvement, Brownlee said. A wide variety of seating was built in around the perimeter of the facility, including booths, stools and conventional tables. Additionally, the walls were replaced and the serving stations redesigned to make them more conducive to the demonstration cooking style of Bon Appetit, the University's new food services contractor, Brownlee added. A formal opening of the facility will be held today. In a second phase over winter break, the University will renovate Hill's private dining room and create a retail shop for service outside dining hours. The entire 10-year project calls for renovating all 12 current college houses, which will likely include destruction of the Stouffer Triangle building in favor of a more transparent dining facility. Additionally, administrators plan to construct between two and five new dormitories -- housing about 1,000 beds -- in Hamilton Village, the area formerly known as Superblock. Preliminary designs for the new look of Hamilton Village were prepared over the summer. Six architectural firms submitted designs, from which the University plans to select the best aspects of each in creating at least one new building and substantially renovating the existing high rises and low rises.
(07/15/99 9:00am)
This past weekend, I was watching the World Cup women's soccer final in a sports bar. At one point, the poor soul operating the giant screen decided to divide it into four sections, to show a baseball game and a golf match as well as the Cup game. He quickly faced the wrath of more than 100 screaming fans -- mostly American, mind you -- loudly chanting, "change it back!" He swiftly met our demands. It was weird that the Budweiser-drinking crowd chose to watch soccer over the national pastime. But what made the experience surreal was that it was women's soccer. Let me note this isn't an appeal to feminism. I admit that I don't think that men and women match up in many team sports. For example, I am a huge basketball fan and I would never be caught dead at a WNBA game.When you're fed a steady diet of world class men's basketball, it's hard to find the women's game exciting. But this soccer game, this victory, was a game I enjoyed watching, not because the players were "good for girls" but because the U.S., as well as China, truly played the game the way it's supposed to be played. And they were damn good at it. The women's movement in sports has been progressing for decades. Today one in three high school girls plays a sport compared to one in 27 in 1972, when Title IX legislation was passed. But this hardly means that men's and women's sporting events are equally attended or supported by the public. And female athletes are hardly as visible to the public as male athletes. Many of the 90,000 fans -- a record for a women's sporting event -- at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., Saturday were young girls hoping to be the next Mia Hamm. But while it is great that women's soccer inspires young girls to athletic achivement, I don't believe the success of our women's soccer team simply means young athletic girls suddenly have role models in team sports. The bottom line is that our team played an incredible game, by any standard, and they deserve all the media attention and kudos they're currently recieving. Now, I'll admit, I knew little about the women's game before the final. But unlike most Americans, soccer isn't foreign to me. As the son of a former NCAA coach, every big game was a major event in my house growing up. Soccer is by far the most popular sport internationally, with passionate fans cheering it on across the globe. Over the years, I've seen some great soccer and some that was really mediocre -- like Major League Soccer, the rather poor American version of a professional men's league. But this women's game ranked up there with the great ones. Now, there's talk amongst the team members and other experts of creating a women's soccer league. Sure it is a long shot, but perhaps not a bad idea. Granted, it'll be hard to sustain the enthusiasm created by this year's Cup. In fact, the MLS failed to do just that after the 1994 World Cup -- which introduced many Americans to the sport for the first time -- was held in the US. But consider this: The current league is mediocre largely because the best American players play "football" professionally in Europe. A women's league, though would attract the best players in the world because there isn't a market for it in Europe. Then there's the ongoing argument that soccer can't be popular in America because there isn't enough scoring. If that's the case, were those hundreds of people in the sports bar glued to the screen throughout the entire two hour scoreless game? Despite the lack of an actual goal -- the game was decided by penalty kicks -- the women kept it exciting by continuously pushing the action, stopping the audience's hearts several times with near misses. By contrast, men'steams are known for playing defensively in scoreless games. And the Americans, though already the home team, seemed to win over the crowd of multiple nationalities. For instance, 33-year-old Michelle Akers, the team's oldest player and considered the best women's player of all time, is now known as the team's warrior and emotional leader. Not unusual? except that she has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome for the better part of a decade. If the guys out there still need more reasons a women's league is worth the trouble this time, here are five: 1) U.S. forward Mia Hamm is not only the leading scorer in international soccer of all time, male or female, but she could be the covergirl of a dirty magazine (or, for that matter, a clean one). 2) Defender Brandi Chastain practically IS on the cover of dirty magazines, as she stripped down to her sports bra after scoring the winning penalty kick in the final game. 3) Soccer is the only team sport where the American women are comparatively better than the American men. 4) Unlike basketball, in which the Americans dominate the international competition, our women's soccer team survived tremendous challenges from its competitors. As exciting as it is watching the NBA all-stars in the Olympics, Croatia and Yugoslavia simply never have a prayer. 5) Did I mention Mia Hamm? So, when and if the powers that be do create a women's league, I highly recommend you go to a game. And ladies, if you have no interest, but you're intrigued by my sensitivity? by all means, feel free to look me up and give me a call.
(05/20/99 9:00am)
Well, after the sarcastic "ha-ha" and awkwardness that followed, it dawned on me. First, women at many other schools commonly wear black pants along with their friends, sorority sisters, etc. But more importantly, I realized that most of the conventions we label as "exclusively Penn" are, in actuality, more broadly represented in society, and particularly among our peer universities. It's convenient to label Penn students as one giant mass of apathy, for instance, because we might not stage a protest against sweatshop labor. But the truth is, we really aren't all that different from everyone else. The conventional argument is some variation of the following: Because of the enormous influence of Wharton, Penn students generally have a more pre-professional attitude than those in peer schools. Therefore, they are less interested in deeper issues and instead remain apathetic. The basic flaw of this line of reasoning is that, even if it were true that, in general, Penn students are more pre-professionally minded, that doesn't necessarily mean we don't feel strongly about world events. As I prepare to enter my senior year, I feel I've been exposed to a wide range of issues and met some of the most brilliant and active minds of my generation, many of whom juggle a vast range of activities and interests. Yet throughout my time here, all I've heard is that Penn students, unlike others, only care about two things: money and themselves. True, Penn was the only Ivy League school not to have a student protest against their university licensing apparel made with sweatshop labor. I will not defend students for not taking action. But it would be a gross misperception to say that Penn students don't feel strongly about such an issue. Forums organized by such groups as the Progressive Activist Network only reinforce that. Furthermore, just last month, a student group was formed to join a national collegiate alliance dedicated to holding universities accountable for responsible investing. Penn also recently held a rally and an emergency forum on the situation in Kosovo. Different ethnic groups on campus frequently hold discussions and debates concerning cultural issues and their role on campus. Another fallacy the argument relies on, though, is that Penn is uniquely pre-professional, relative to its peers. Now granted, I cringe at the thought of my Whartonite friends making six figures right out of college and I, too have dropped resumes trying to get in on the party and find a consulting internship. I'll even come out and say it: Most Penn students want to make money. Lots of it. But is it really plausible to think that students at other Ivies don't want that as badly as we do? The truth of the matter is that while a student may choose Wharton because of its highly acclaimed business curriculum, almost everyone who enrolls in an Ivy League -- or peer -- school does so at least partly because having the name gives them a better chance of getting a good job upon graduation. Whether their eventual field be politics or software developing, law or medicine, architecture or investment banking, a major reason students work hard in high school and shell out the $30,000+ per year is have the greatest chance for success. For better or for worse, we live in a capitalist society, which is inevitably based upon maximizing economic gain. Perhaps you've seen Latrell Sprewell's new commercial, in which he purports to being the "American Dream." Sprewell, the NBA star best known for choking former coach P.J. Carlesimo when he was a member of the Golden State Warriors, was let back into the league this year after one year's suspension. Who remembers what product he's even endorsing --the message, rather, seems to be: choke your coach, show no respect, and you'll make millions. Sounds more like a nightmare. But I'd be lying if I told you I don't cheer every time Sprewell hits a big shot to bring my Knicks closer to a championship. Forgive me for being so bleak. The world we'll soon enter isn't a decaying place without morals or values. And never give up the dream of revitalizing a city, finding a cure for cancer or simply teaching impoverished kids how to read. But don't let the stigma of apathy steer you away from your goals -- or diminish the value of our University. If you think Penn's different, it is. We have access to a sprawling metropolis, a beautiful campus and a friendly, social atmosphere. And our basketball team can beat the crap out of anybody in the league.
(05/14/99 9:00am)
At least eight Penn undergraduates have earned national acclaim this year, garnering highly competitive fellowships for academic merit in various fields. Among the members of the graduating class, Engineering senior Yeung Tan Li and Wharton and Engineering senior Ting Ng received National Science Foundation graduate research fellowships, while College senior Dina Westenholz won two fellowships. Westenholz, who earned a J. William Fulbright fellowship for a one-year graduate study in Iceland, declined the honor so she could accept the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation's Andrew W. Mellon Fellowship. "I cast a pretty wide net and applied for almost everything I got my hands on," Westenholz said, adding that winning the two awards was "extremely gratifying." Along with four recent Penn alumni, Westenholz was among just 98 students nationwide who received the Mellon Fellowship, given annually to fund doctoral work in Humanistic Studies. The Mellon Fellowship pays for all tuition and fees for the first year of doctoral work plus a stipend of $14,500. The winners were chosen from a pool of nearly 800 applicants. Westenholz said she accepted the Mellon, which she called "the only truly academic fellowship out there," partly because it is "more competitive." She will study next year at the Center for Medieval Studies at the University of Toronto. With seven honorees, Harvard University was the only school with more Mellon winners than Penn. Ng and Li, along with six Penn alumni who also received NSF fellowships, will merit a three-year government stipend for graduate study. Not to be outdone was the Class of 2000, from which several members have already received national scholarships for graduate education. College junior George Blaustein was one of only 20 juniors in the country to receive a Beinecke Brothers Memorial scholarship, which pays $15,000 per year for two years of graduate study anywhere, in any field. Blaustein, a History and English major, will receive $2,000 upon completion of his senior year, in addition to the yearly stipend. He is currently undecided as to what he will study and where and said he was "rather shocked" to hear he had actually won the award. "I thought it was a joke," Blaustein said, adding that "it made the decision for me -- that I'm going to graduate school." And earlier in the year, College junior Sarah Zimbler received a Harry Truman Scholarship, given to a handful of students dedicated to a career in public service and planning to attend graduate school. Engineering junior Adrian Shieh received one of that field's highest honors, the Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship, for academic merit in math, science or engineering. Shieh is one of 304 students to receive tuition and fees for up to $7,500 per year to cover part of the costs of the 1999-2000 academic year, his senior year at Penn. And two students, Wharton and Engineering junior Cliff Haugen and College junior Cynthia Liebman, won Morris K. Udall Scholarships. The Udall Foundation awarded 75 scholarships of $5,000 toward the cost of tuition, books, fees and room and board to sophomores and juniors from 42 states who have demonstrated a commitment to environmental fields and to Native American and Alaska native students in fields relating to health care and tribal public policy.
(04/07/99 9:00am)
The popular gym in the heart of campus may be replaced by a new diner. Citing "structural and logistical" problems, University officials announced yesterday that Gimbel Gymnasium and the new Katz Fitness Center will close permanently at the end of the semester, just one year after successful renovations caused the facility's popularity to soar. And according to several sources, the gym facility may be replaced with a third branch of the Eat at Joe's franchise. The decision came as a surprise to students, faculty members and administrators alike, thousands of whom joined the new state-of-the-art fitness facility during the year. "This is just typical of the University," said College senior and regular body-builder Brian Lamphouse. "Every time there is something good that students like, Penn gets rid of it in favor of the all-mighty dollar." Despite the gym's popularity, Recreation Director Mike Diorka partially attributed the closing to the fact that the University could not maintain the gym charging students only $75 a year. "Rather than increase the cost of memberships, which we knew would be extremely unpopular with students, we decided the best thing to do would be to go in a different direction with the building," Diorka said. But according to College junior Dick Yaskin, who is closely connected to the Recreation Department, a major factor in the decision was that the machines in Katz were found to be faulty and extremely hazardous. He pointed to one incident he witnessed, in which a treadmill collapsed under the weight of a particularly "big-boned" individual. Students will now have to work out at either Sweat gym at 24th and Walnut streets or simply "sit around and grow large," Executive Vice President John Fry said. Andy Cosenza of Cozco Management Co., the owner of the Eat at Joe's diner, said administrators were seriously considering selling him the Gimbel site to create another branch of the franchise that already exists in two other locations on campus. "This will be the Eat at Joe's 'Megadiner'," Cosenza raved. "It's gonna be a themed restaurant? like with memorabilia and pictures from the '50s. I bet no one's ever thought of that before." He added the diner will carry on the tradition of Katz Fitness Center by only staying open from noon until 6 p.m. on the weekends. And Fry, while refusing to confirm or deny whether the deal with Eat at Joe's had been made, said that an eatery was definitely a major possibility. Fry said he was unconcerned that students would be disappointed with the lack of an exercise facility. "Students can still lift. They'll get plenty of exercise lifting their fork to their mouth," he chuckled. Several student leaders said they were not upset the gym was closing, but that they were angry the University did not consult them first about the decision. They plan to hold a rally on Gimbel's basketball court later this week to protest the move.
(12/15/98 10:00am)
The department was supposed to return to College Hall by spring. One of the University's most respected departments will remain in its temporary home indefinitely in the 3401 Walnut Street complex. The History Department -- which moved to its current offices above the Moravian Cafes at 3401 Walnut Street from College Hall while that building underwent renovations -- was originally scheduled to move back into the University's oldest building by spring 1999, opening up space at 34th and Walnut streets for the second phase of the Institute for Advanced Science and Technology. But according to several professors and administrators, the University informed the History Department at the beginning of the semester that the move was being put off indefinitely. Vice President for Facilities Services Omar Blaik said his department has not received the "OK" from the University to move ahead with the necessary renovations of the east wing of College Hall, where the History Department offices would be. "We're still looking to make sure we have all design complete and that we have the resources to spend," Blaik said. History Professor Marc Trachtenberg, who said he has known of the decision to remain at 3401 Walnut since September, said the move has been "put on indefinite hold for budgetary reasons," although he did not name any specific budgetary constraints. According to Blaik, the renovations had been funded for the past seven years through deferred maintenance reserves, which have been dwindling over the last several years. History Department Chairperson Lynn Lees also said she was unaware of the details of the funding for the project and has "not been given a formal explanation," although she said it was "clear the work [in College Hall] has been stopped." "The University is obviously involved in a great many construction projects," Lees said. "Someone probably made a decision that the College Hall project should be postponed." But Blaik explained that the problems with funding the College Hall renovations have nothing to do with other facilities projects around campus, since there are difference sources of funding for the maintenance of old buildings and the construction of new ones. Lees said she was disappointed by the decision to postpone the move and said she hoped the renovations would commence as soon as possible. "I would hope completing the renovations of College Hall would be put back on a priority list," she said, adding that the building is a "fitting place for the History Department." Other department members said they weren't surprised by the postponement. "People suspected they weren't going to keep their word," Undergraduate Chairperson Bruce Kuklick said, adding that he doesn't expect the move to take place in the near future. "I'm unpacking my boxes," he said. A side effect of the postponement is that if the History Department stays in 3401 Walnut for much longer, it could alter the plans for the Institute for Advanced Science and Technology's computer science and cognitive science laboratories. The University has been planning since last November to move the IAST II project, the second phase of a three-part U.S. Air Force-funded program, into 3401 Walnut. The first phase, the Roy and Diana Vagelos Laboratories, opened last fall, providing lab space for the Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Medical Engineering departments. Blaik explained that since IAST II is still in the early stages of planning, "it doesn't look like it will be a problem" to use the 3401 Walnut space on the third and fourth floors, indicating that by the time it is ready for construction, the History Department will likely have moved. But Blaik added that the postponement does have some impact on the plans for IAST II, forcing the University to look at several other options for the project. He said it was too early to tell what those alternative sites could be but said "the next few months will tell" a lot about what will happen as the University approaches the design and construction stages of the project.
(12/11/98 10:00am)
Construction on the new building is set to start in May or June. When outgoing Wharton School Dean Thomas Gerrity announced his resignation in October, he maintained that the University would still break ground for the soon-to-be-constructed $120 million Wharton building next spring and that the facility would become operational in 2001. But officials now say it is doubtful that major construction will begin before the summer of 1999. Administrators gave different reasons as to what is causing the delay of plans to demolish the old University Bookstore building at 38th Street and Locust Walk, where the new classroom building will be located. The projected date of demolition was tentatively changed to May or June because the project planners are still waiting for completion of the design, which administrators said has taken longer than expected. University President Judith Rodin said Wednesday that demolition and construction will begin in the summer, not the spring. Only rough guidelines were sketched out for the completion of each stage of the project, according to Vice President for Facilities Services and Contract Management Omar Blaik, who maintained that no official dates had been pushed back. But according to Rodin, the project will not begin in earnest until the summer months so as not to inconvenience students who have put up with campus-wide construction projects for the last several years. Blaik, though, said he still hopes the project can start closer to the time period originally planned, but that the prospects of such a start were unlikely due to the complexity of the design process. "Given how the design demands are [now], we're thinking more like June," Blaik said. In November, University Council's Facilities Committee unveiled its year-end report, in which members criticized the University's plan to build a 134-foot rotunda atop the new classroom building. Members said the sheer size of the tower -- already located on one of the highest points on campus -- would overshadow adjacent buildings on Locust Walk. But despite the committee report, which was discussed at Wednesday's Council meeting, Blaik said the the delay was based on the "very sophisticated, complex" nature of the design and not an "architectural critique," as Blaik called the committee's complaint. The design, according to Blaik, is in the second of three stages -- that of design development -- which follows schematic design and precedes construction documents. Officials would not reveal the building's specific design plan. Once completed, it is intended to become Wharton's main classroom building and house vastly expanded computing facilities for the school.
(12/08/98 10:00am)
A Look At Penn's College House System When the University transformed residential living into a comprehensive system of 12 college houses, added staff and social and academic programs and eliminated first-year houses, a primary goal was to allow each house to gradually mold itself into a unique community. Nearly a semester into the program, the $64,000 question remains: Are the changes leading the system toward that goal? A random survey of current college house residents conducted by The Daily Pennsylvanian from November 12 to 24 revealed mixed results. While the study showed that some students found that the college houses encourage a sense of community, in its first year the new system has not fostered the type of participation and interaction that University officials have said they ultimately want. A large minority of students have not met the faculty living in their house or interacted with the student members of the residential staff. Additionally, few students said they have attended more than a handful of residential activities. But at the same time, most students indicated that they intend to continue living on campus next year. When the new system was unveiled last year, its planners said they expected it to take several years for the program to counteract the impersonal nature of many houses under the old residential system. The DP survey asked 183 students living on campus in all 12 of the college houses about their degree of participation in college house activities and interaction with faculty in residence and house staff. Of the students, 90 are freshmen and 93 are upperclassmen. The survey, which used randomly selected students, has a margin of error of 7 percent. While a large majority of students said they were satisfied with their decision to live on campus, the statistics did not conclusively indicate whether the increased services and support of the college house is responsible for that satisfaction. On a scale of one to five, with five being most satisfied, 51 percent of upperclassmen rated their satisfaction a four, while 27 percent said it was a five. Another 19 percent gave a three rating. Among freshmen, though, an overwhelming 81 percent said they were most satisfied with their experience living in a college house. But when asked about the degree of interaction with their resident advisor or graduate associate, only 40 percent of all students gave a four or five rating, with answers fairly evenly distributed among the five choices. And when asked if they had met their faculty master, faculty fellow or house dean, 39 percent of the students said they had not. "The parity of answers is not terribly surprising," said David Brownlee, director of College Houses and Academic Services. He explained that the system is designed to provide services to those who "reach out and find them," and that some students don't take that opportunity. And College junior Emily Pollack, chairperson of the Residential Advisory Board, explained that the most important thing is to give students the opportunities to interact with faculty and students in the house and to allow them the choice of whether to take advantage of house programs. "I would be amazed if 10 years from now all 800 students in a high rise met their faculty master," she said. English Professor Al Filreis, former chairperson of the Residential Faculty Council, said the percentage of students who met their faculty in residence was "pleasantly surprising." Filreis emphasized that interaction with the RA or GA is more important than interaction with faculty. He said, however, that he does not believe the survey indicates that students are not interacting with RAs or GAs enough. "That's the statistic that will tell us how we're doing," he said, referring to the degree to which student staff actively try to make contact with residents. And just because a student does not meet his or her faculty master, Filreis said, "doesn't mean it's not a supportive environment." Still, officials pointed out possible ways to foster greater enthusiasm within the houses and increase the opportunities students have to take advantage of the programs and services offered. "There's room for improvement and it will come with time," Pollack said, adding that facilities upgrades -- which the University plans to conduct when it implements its $300 million renovation and construction plan over the next decade -- will greatly contribute to the college houses becoming better at reaching their goals. Without the physical improvements, she said, the dormitories are college houses in name only. Brownlee agreed that upgrading the facilities would create a better environment in the houses, with improvements in study spaces, common rooms, computer labs and both inner and outer structure. But he also emphasized increasing the use of communication systems within each house. "The houses all have Web pages and house councils," he said. "With the combination of human contact and electronic contact, the message of available activities can be transmitted more effectively." Officials also said they were pleased with other results of the survey. For example, when asked whether they would live on campus next year, 55 percent of the 165 non-seniors said yes, while just 21 percent said no. The other 24 percent said they were undecided. Brownlee said he was very encouraged by that statistic, particularly in terms of next year's sophomores and juniors -- among which a clear majority of students said they would stay on campus. "That a good portion of the students who have been on campus for two years want to stay for a third could provide a strong base for increased upperclass stability," Brownlee said. "Yikes," Filreis said, expressing a positive reaction to the numbers. "My guess is 55 percent is high," he said. "If anybody had questions whether the college house program would create vacancies if students don't like it, these numbers seem to answer them." Neither Brownlee nor Filreis could provide statistics to show how many students have chosen to remain in dorms in previous years. Pollack, who is also an RA in Spruce College House in the Quadrangle, said she was encouraged by the number of freshmen who want to remain in the house and be involved. "The more you get people excited early on, the more chance you have to really develop the college house system," she said. But what do students really want from their college house experience? The DP survey asked students to rank five aspects of on-campus living in order of importance. Thirty percent of those surveyed said simplicity and convenience were the most important factors in their decision to live on campus, while 22 percent valued location the most; 21 percent community; 20 percent safety; and 7 percent named activities and social events as most important. The last choice was also most frequently named as the least important aspect. Additionally, when asked how many college house activities they had been to, the vast majority of students -- 71 percent -- said one to five, while 15 percent answered zero. Just 14 percent said they went to 6 or more. But although students seemed to be saying activities weren't that important to the house experience, officials said they were not discouraged by the figure. "The objectives aren't futile," Pollack said, pointing out that students often take activities such as free pizza and study breaks for granted. "A lot of people don't even realize it's there until it's not there." Brownlee said he believes over time, the numbers will change. "I would expect that increasingly, students would become familiar with residential faculty and staff, and increasingly identify community as the most important thing about living on campus and living in the college houses," he said. Daily Pennsylvanian staff writers Brian D'Ottavio, Harrison Denman, Ambika Ganesti, Sabrina Gleizer, John Gutin, Faye Iosotaluno, Jeffrey Joseph, Tori Katz, Dana Klinek, Rod Kurtz, Danielle Lewin, Sharon Male, Emily Papir, Nina Smolyar, Aliya Sternstein, Ratha Tep and Cila Warncke contributed to this article.
(12/08/98 10:00am)
A Look at Penn's College House System When the University transformed residential living into a comprehensive system of 12 college houses, added staff and social and academic programs and eliminated first-year houses, a primary goal was to allow each house to gradually mold itself into a unique community. Nearly a semester into the program, the $64,000 question remains: Are the changes leading the system toward that goal? A random survey of current college house residents conducted by The Daily Pennsylvanian from November 12 to 24 revealed mixed results. While the study showed that some students found that the college houses encourage a sense of community, in its first year the new system has not fostered the type of participation and interaction that University officials have said they ultimately want. A large minority of students have not met the faculty living in their house or interacted with the student members of the residential staff. Additionally, few students said they have attended more than a handful of residential activities. But at the same time, most students indicated that they intend to continue living on campus next year. When the new system was unveiled last year, its planners said they expected it to take several years for the program to counteract the impersonal nature of many houses under the old residential system. The DP survey asked 183 students living on campus in all 12 of the college houses about their degree of participation in college house activities and interaction with faculty in residence and house staff. Of the students, 90 are freshmen and 93 are upperclassmen. The survey, which used randomly selected students, has a margin of error of 7 percent. While a large majority of students said they were satisfied with their decision to live on campus, the statistics did not conclusively indicate whether the increased services and support of the college house is responsible for that satisfaction. On a scale of one to five, with five being most satisfied, 51 percent of upperclassmen rated their satisfaction a four, while 27 percent said it was a five. Another 19 percent gave a three rating. Among freshmen, though, an overwhelming 81 percent said they were most satisfied with their experience living in a college house. But when asked about the degree of interaction with their resident advisor or graduate associate, only 40 percent of all students gave a four or five rating, with answers fairly evenly distributed among the five choices. And when asked if they had met their faculty master, faculty fellow or house dean, 39 percent of the students said they had not. "The parity of answers is not terribly surprising," said David Brownlee, director of College Houses and Academic Services. He explained that the system is designed to provide services to those who "reach out and find them," and that some students don't take that opportunity. And College junior Emily Pollack, chairperson of the Residential Advisory Board, explained that the most important thing is to give students the opportunities to interact with faculty and students in the house and to allow them the choice of whether to take advantage of house programs. "I would be amazed if 10 years from now all 800 students in a high rise met their faculty master," she said. English Professor Al Filreis, former chairperson of the Residential Faculty Council, said the percentage of students who met their faculty in residence was "pleasantly surprising." Filreis emphasized that interaction with the RA or GA is more important than interaction with faculty. He said, however, that he does not believe the survey indicates that students are not interacting with RAs or GAs enough. "That's the statistic that will tell us how we're doing," he said, referring to the degree to which student staff actively try to make contact with residents. And just because a student does not meet his or her faculty master, Filreis said, "doesn't mean it's not a supportive environment." Still, officials pointed out possible ways to foster greater enthusiasm within the houses and increase the opportunities students have to take advantage of the programs and services offered. "There's room for improvement and it will come with time," Pollack said, adding that facilities upgrades -- which the University plans to conduct when it implements its $300 million renovation and construction plan over the next decade -- will greatly contribute to the college houses becoming better at reaching their goals. Without the physical improvements, she said, the dormitories are college houses in name only. Brownlee agreed that upgrading the facilities would create a better environment in the houses, with improvements in study spaces, common rooms, computer labs and both inner and outer structure. But he also emphasized increasing the use of communication systems within each house. "The houses all have Web pages and house councils," he said. "With the combination of human contact and electronic contact, the message of available activities can be transmitted more effectively." Officials also said they were pleased with other results of the survey. For example, when asked whether they would live on campus next year, 55 percent of the 165 non-seniors said yes, while just 21 percent said no. The other 24 percent said they were undecided. Brownlee said he was very encouraged by that statistic, particularly in terms of next year's sophomores and juniors -- among which a clear majority of students said they would stay on campus. "That a good portion of the students who have been on campus for two years want to stay for a third could provide a strong base for increased upperclass stability," Brownlee said. "Yikes," Filreis said, expressing a positive reaction to the numbers. "My guess is 55 percent is high," he said. "If anybody had questions whether the college house program would create vacancies if students don't like it, these numbers seem to answer them." Neither Brownlee nor Filreis could provide statistics to show how many students have chosen to remain in dorms in previous years. Pollack, who is also an RA in Spruce College House in the Quadrangle, said she was encouraged by the number of freshmen who want to remain in the house and be involved. "The more you get people excited early on, the more chance you have to really develop the college house system," she said. But what do students really want from their college house experience? The DP survey asked students to rank five aspects of on-campus living in order of importance. Thirty percent of those surveyed said simplicity and convenience were the most important factors in their decision to live on campus, while 22 percent valued location the most; 21 percent community; 20 percent safety; and 7 percent named activities and social events as most important. The last choice was also most frequently named as the least important aspect. Additionally, when asked how many college house activities they had been to, the vast majority of students -- 71 percent -- said one to five, while 15 percent answered zero. Just 14 percent said they went to 6 or more. But although students seemed to be saying activities weren't that important to the house experience, officials said they were not discouraged by the figure. "The objectives aren't futile," Pollack said, pointing out that students often take activities such as free pizza and study breaks for granted. "A lot of people don't even realize it's there until it's not there." Brownlee said he believes over time, the numbers will change. "I would expect that increasingly, students would become familiar with residential faculty and staff, and increasingly identify community as the most important thing about living on campus and living in the college houses," he said. Daily Pennsylvanian staff writers Brian D'Ottavio, Harrison Denman, Ambika Ganesti, Sabrina Gleizer, John Gutin, Faye Iosotaluno, Jeffrey Joseph, Tori Katz, Dana Klinek, Rod Kurtz, Danielle Lewin, Sharon Male, Emily Papir, Nina Smolyar, Aliya Sternstein, Ratha Tep and Cila Warncke contributed to this article.
(12/01/98 10:00am)
After long delays, students began using the hightech hand scanner in Hamilton House yesterday. Hamilton House residents are finally waiting in line to enter the future. After a 20-day delay, an experimental biometric hand-scanner debuted in the renamed High Rise North yesterday as the residence's student and staff occupants began to register their hand prints, allowing them to test out the security device, which is enclosed in a glass portal. While the portal was installed in the lobby of Hamilton and originally scheduled to begin functioning on November 10, the Division of Public Safety said they needed extra time to finalize the process for "enrolling" handprints and acquiring the necessary equipment and personnel. In addition, the November 8 attack on a female student in Steinberg-Dietrich Hall diverted Public Safety officials' attention away from the portal. If the test proves successful, officials may install portals in other residences and shift security-guard resources elsewhere. Public Safety officials could not be reached for comment yesterday. Registration to use the device -- which will continue throughout the week -- is taking place at a table set up next to the portal. There, students swipe their PennCards, which brings up their personal information on a database. The security guard stationed at the table then enters the student's identification number into the computer. The student then scans his or her hand through a handprint reader identical to that inside the portal three times, allowing them to enter the portal. Inside the device, participants must scan the same hand they used to register through the reader, which matches the handprint with that enrolled in the database. Although security guards explained that students were steadily lining up for enrollment throughout the day, information on the number of students that registered was unavailable, from either security guards or college house officials. "I think I was the first or second person to use it," Roberta Stack, house dean of Hamilton, said. "I haven't been out of the building all day [since registering]." Since residents still have the option of using the old system of simply swiping their PennCards at the security gate, some were confused as to whether enrollment was required. The Spectaguard security guards urged students to register early, before the line gets long. But to answer any uncertainties residents have, guards are distributing fact sheets -- developed by Public Safety and the office of College Houses and Academic Services -- which answers frequently asked questions about the test portal. The sheet notes that while participation is voluntary, all residents are encouraged to register, "in order to give the project the most vigorous and varied test possible."
(12/01/98 10:00am)
In preparation for the first phases of the University's 10-year, $300 million renovation and construction plan for dormitories and dining facilities, Penn residential-living officials have appointed students, faculty and staff to three consultative committees. The eight- to 10-member committees -- representing, respectively, the Hamilton Village area, the four houses of the Quadrangle and Hill College House -- will meet periodically to discuss specific plans for the building construction and renovation project, now called the Housing and Dining Renewal Program, according to a press release issued yesterday. While the Hamilton Village and Hill House committees will meet after the new year, the Quad committee will have its first meeting this week, said Larry Moneta, associate vice president for campus services. Moneta also chairs the administrative Capital Projects Steering Committee, which will work directly with the architects and designers on the project. "Those [new] committees will really represent the community interests," Moneta said, explaining that the committees of students and faculty and staff members will discuss ideas his committee proposes. "We'll line up all the issues for discussion to present to the community committees, Moneta said. The committee for the Quad houses will meet first because renovations in the Quad, consisting of infrastructure improvements, are scheduled to begin next summer and progress over the following two summers. Moneta added that officials are in the process of creating a master plan for scheduling committee meetings and outlining their plans. Each of the three committees consists of two undergraduate students, a graduate associate, faculty masters, house deans and various college house officials. Additionally, David Brownlee, director of College Houses and Academic Services and Douglas Berger, director of housing and conference services, will sit on all three committees. Representatives from Trammell Crow Co., the outside firm that manages most campus buildings, will periodically meet with the three committees as project managers for the renovation. Ultimately, as the project enters further stages, subcommittees for the individual college houses will form to provide further feedback from the community. All committee meetings will be closed to the public, said Sue Smith, a spokesperson for the college house system.
(11/25/98 10:00am)
Some claim Trammell Crow Co.'s housekeeping has been inadequate. Penn officials say they're satisfied. Slightly over a year ago, when the University announced it was outsourcing management of most of its buildings to Trammell Crow Co., administrators envisioned a more convenient and cost-effective system that would provide every campus residence with a nearby representative to contact for maintenance or cleanliness concerns. But while administrators expressed satisfaction with the progress of the company's first full semester of management, several students in residences and numerous college house officials -- particularly in the Quadrangle -- pointed out significant problems with the system. Under the outsourcing deal -- which Penn Executive Vice President John Fry said last year would save the University 15 to 20 percent of the cost of management -- maintenance services are more decentralized, with each area of campus having access to a nearby management office. Residents can communicate problems to their area representatives via e-mail, telephone and a Web site. In previous years, all buildings would refer problems to a central maintenance office. "The idea was to have better response rates," Omar Blaik, vice president for facilities management, said. But despite the added communication resources, some residents said Trammell Crow has been responding to problems less efficiently than previous management did. And even Trammell Crow officials concede that the new system still has a few kinks. Amy Raphael, a College senior and a resident adviser in Spruce College House, said students in her house have had repeated problems getting their representatives, who are based in an office in the Quad's Community House, to respond to problems with their bathrooms. For example, she said, overflowing toilets in one of the bathrooms caused leaks through the ceiling and left feces on the floors of several bathrooms about a month ago. "Clogged toilets are considered an emergency, but when we call in to the emergency line, they say it's not an emergency and refuse to send anyone," Raphael said. She added that at one point, there was vomit on her bathroom floor for several days. It took several phone calls and e-mails to get workers to respond. "If I had known things would be like this, I don't know if I would have taken the job," Raphael said, adding that she did not experience similar problems as an RA in Spruce last year. Aramark, a Philadelphia-based company affiliated with the University, supervises housekeeping services, but Trammell Crow still oversees their operations and is responsible for making sure housekeepers respond to problems. According to administrators, part of the problem is the physical limitations of the Quadrangle. "The Quad is a difficult place for us to maintain, given how old the infrastructure is," Blaik said. And Linda Kinder, director of residential facilities services for Trammell Crow, said that since there are so many people sharing bathrooms in the Quad, they are difficult to keep clean. Kinder said she could attribute Raphael's concerns to three possibilities: A custodial person was not performing his job, the residents had unreasonable expectations or there was a supervisory problem. She speculated that members of Spruce Street House may have an "agenda," explaining that the other three Quad houses have not complained of as many problems, even though they are managed by the same team. "They don't like Trammell Crow," Kinder said. She insisted that cleanliness has not been a chronic problem, and that her staff is well equipped to respond to all concerns. Indeed, some officials in other Quad houses said they were not experiencing such drastic cleanliness problems or having as much trouble with communication. "Response time was not a big problem," Christina Cantwell, a College freshman and Goldberg College House resident, said. And Katherine Becht, house dean of Ware College House, said that service has been prompt and that "the people responsible for doing work are incredibly conscientious." When asked why her house complained about more problems than others, Raphael said, "Maybe we're just more vocal about it." But officials in other houses added that not everything is running smoothly with the transition to Trammell Crow. Becht said there seemed to be problems in the system. Often requests for service are not conveyed to the correct people at first, forcing the house dean herself to deal with Trammell Crow and taking time away from her other responsibilities. There were "too many new faces" in the process at the beginning of the year, Becht said. Blaik agreed, explaining "we put too many changes into the operation at the same time, which was very taxing on the people." She added, though, that the staff is "on the upside of the learning curve." And Jane Rogers, house dean of Goldberg, said that around October and November her residents started to complain about the bathrooms. Goldberg RA Damien Wertz said that while Trammell Crow has been fairly responsive to his residents' needs, other parts of Goldberg have not been as fortunate. "I've heard certain bathrooms were without toilet paper for quite a while," the College and Wharton junior said. Despite the concerns, Kinder reiterated that the necessary resources are in place. "I have 22 custodial staff in the Quad," she said. "That exceeds all industry standards. There would be no reason not to respond." Kinder conceded, however, that while the custodial staff is responding to calls, a lack of training may prevent them from doing the job well. "A lot of employees are not well trained," Kinder said, explaining that most bathrooms probably are being cleaned, but perhaps not properly. Since the custodial workers are University employees, it is not Trammell Crow's responsibility to train them. But Kinder added that she suspects residents might also be overly critical because Trammell Crow did not appropriately clean the bathrooms before RA and GA move-in at the beginning of the semester. Since then, she said, the situation has improved, despite isolated incidents. "We had a couple of issues where people made calls on the weekends and the response wasn't timely," Kinder said. She pointed out that housekeepers are now working Saturday shifts, which was never done before. In spite of the problems in the Quad, Blaik said he was pleased with the outsourcing transition thus far. "We were anticipating bigger problems," he said. "At least we maintained some level of service." And to improve the communication between students and management, Blaik said officials from Trammell Crow and the University will meet with groups from each of the houses to respond to their concerns. Cantwell, who is the president of Goldberg's student government, said her group met with representatives last week. At the meeting, residents discussed major concerns, which generally dealt with bathroom cleanliness. Trammell Crow staffers told the group that there were "some deeper problems" which required more time to fix, Cantwell said, adding that the group was told to expect a lot more improvement when they return from winter break, since the workers typically get more accomplished over breaks. And in the future, Blaik expects the system to run much more smoothly because it will not have to deal with a new college house system again.
(11/18/98 10:00am)
Division of Public Safety officials are blaming the recent attack on a female student in Steinberg-Dietrich Hall and difficulties coordinating with other departments for the unexpected delay in the University's attempts to begin a trial run of a new hand-scanning security device. The high-tech scanner, which is being tested in Hamilton House -- formerly High Rise North -- was supposed to have been operational last Tuesday. It is now uncertain when residents will be able to use the glass portal, according to Stratis Skoufalos, Public Safety's director of security services. When it is operational, students will swipe their PennCards and then scan their hands to enter the building. The portal itself was constructed and installed on time last Tuesday, and currently sits next to the security-guard booth in the Hamilton House lobby. But Skoufalos said that officials are still in the process of installing the hand scanner and hooking up wires. Once that happens, he said, they will test and program the device before it becomes operational. Yesterday, Skoufalos said he could not give a specific date for when he expects the portal -- intended as an added security measure -- to be up and running, explaining that "there are several other non-security University entities which are involved in this project, and we must work with them and their schedules." In addition to those logistical concerns, Skoufalos said the recent knife attack on a Wharton sophomore in the basement bathroom of Steinberg-Dietrich Hall diverted Public Safety's attention away from the hand-scanner experiment. "Because of the unfortunate incident at Steinberg-Dietrich, responding to that and related issues became a priority to us," he said. Several of those involved in the consultation process for the portal experiment said they were unaware of the reasons for the delay. "I'm wondering what's happening," Hamilton House Dean Roberta Stack said. College junior Emily Pollack, who chairs the student-run Residential Advisory Board, said she was concerned the delay might confuse students. "I expected they would have at least registered people last week," Pollack said. "Students want to know what is going on." Still, some students said they were hardly anxious to use the device. "It's like I'm in prison," Hamilton House resident Scott Dash, a College sophomore, said last week. "I've never felt unsafe on campus."
(11/13/98 10:00am)
It seems as if the University could not have picked a better time to show off its product. Perhaps fittingly for a year in which Penn began a new, integrated college house system and unveiled a $300 million dormitory renovation plan, the University hosted this year's Ivy Housing Conference, an annual event at which administrators from the eight Ivy League schools and Stanford University gather to exchange ideas and discuss issues regarding campus living. The location of the conference -- which began Wednesday and concludes today -- rotates each year among the nine schools involved. Penn's outgoing Executive Director of College Houses Chris Dennis is hosting this year's event, which is also being attended by special guests from the University of Wollongong in Australia. For many of the representatives, the visit is a chance to compare Penn's residential living system with that of their their respective universities. "I'm interested in hearing how [the college house system] is received at Penn," said Jean Reese, project leader for the residential initiative at Cornell University. She explained that her school is in the process of changing its dormitory system. "We're probably two to four years behind you," Reese added while eating pasta and salad in the new Harrison House basement dining hall. She said Cornell is moving all freshmen to one part of the campus and is exploring the idea of upperclass residences. Cornell has a less-expansive college house system than Penn; it was Harvard and Yale universities that set the standard for residential colleges. Robert Mortimer, Harvard's associate director for building services, explained that Harvard students typically live in the same house for their last three years at the school, as part of the 70-year-old system. "Penn has a very unique and diverse residential system," Mortimer said. "Harvard's is more traditional." The conference concludes this morning with a continental breakfast at the University Bookstore and a program at Hill College House during which administrators representing the nine schools will discuss issues including alcohol initiatives. Other workshops and discussions included issues such as fundraising strategies, renovation planning, resident advisor training and graduate student housing. The University also gave representatives a sense of the Penn campus through walking tours yesterday. Several administrators said they found Penn's massive construction and renovation plan interesting. "It's astonishing to us," said Emily Allen Farnham, the fiscal officer for Dartmouth College. "Any time you see $300 million worth of anything, it's quite something." Other representatives said they were curious about Penn's outsourcing of facilities management. "I'm interested in seeing how the Trammell Crow management system is going," said Rodger Whitney, associate director of housing and dining services at Stanford. "It sounds like a year of transition," he added, saying that Penn seems to be experiencing the "usual issues you'd have" with such a significant change. The program was not without entertainment, as the agenda included drinks at Shula's Steak 2 and dinner at local restaurants on Wednesday, as well as a cocktail reception, dinner and performance by the a cappella group Counterparts at the University Museum last night.
(11/11/98 10:00am)
Plans for a new Wharton building were top on Council's agenda. and Edward Sherwin For the first time in nearly six years, officials yesterday canceled a University Council meeting, postponing a potentially contentious discussion of the plans for the forthcoming Wharton School building at 38th and Walnut streets. Despite the planned discussion of the Wharton building, University Secretary Rosemary McManus, who handles scheduling for Council and the University Board of Trustees, said yesterday's agenda was not full enough to warrant a meeting. Council, composed of about 92 Penn faculty, staff and students, regularly meets monthly to advise the president and the provost on issues facing the University. The last Council meeting to be canceled was in January 1993. The 1997-'98 year-end report of Council's Facilities Committee -- released Tuesday in Almanac, the University's journal of record -- focused on the new Wharton classroom building and was to be discussed at the session yesterday. Along with the other postponed agenda items, the report will now be discussed at Council's next meeting on December 9. A major point of contention highlighted in the committee report was that the University did not consult the committee on the plans for the new building until the blueprints for the facility were near completion. "The main problem was that [consultation] was somewhat late," Facilities Committee Chairperson Vukan Vuchic said. Vuchic, a Systems Engineering professor, added that his committee was not brought up to speed on plans for the building until May, by which time planning on the project was nearly complete and committee members did not have time to give significant input on the project. Plans for the new $120 million facility have not been released to the public yet, and have thus far only been seen by Penn officials, members of University Council and University Trustees. Wharton Associate Dean Scott Douglas said planning for the new building has "taken a little longer than expected." The University granted Wharton use of the old University Bookstore site in November 1996, and ground will broken next spring in anticipation of the facility's 2001 opening. According to some administrators, the Facilities Committee's complaints are a bit off-base. Vice President for Facilities Services Omar Blaik said that the University does not review construction projects with the Facilities Committee and that Council's focus is supposed to be on long-term planning, rather than immediate facilities concerns. "[Graduate School of Fine Arts] Dean [Gary] Hack felt it would enhance the design if we got different views on the design for the building," Blaik said, explaining why the University even solicited opinions from the Council committee in this rare case. Physiology Professor Martin Pring, who chairs two Council committees, said that while Blaik may technically be correct that the University does not have to consult Council on short-term matters, the committees should still have a voice in such decisions. But School of Social Work Professor Vivian Seltzer, a Council member and former chairperson of the Faculty Senate, disputed Blaik's assertion that the new facility does not fall under the heading of "long-term planning" that requires Council's input. She explained that a major facilities project should not be considered short term. Also, Pring emphasized that using Council only for long-term purposes would signify a "limited view of the role of constituencies on campus."
(11/10/98 10:00am)
Students living in the building, likely to be demolishes in 2001, want University officials to reconsider their plans. "We live here, and we love it." Not only did Stouffer College House residents duct-tape that message to the side of their building last week, but last night they tried to convey that same sentiment to University administrators involved in planning the massive renovation project that may include Stouffer's demolition. David Brownlee, director of College Houses and Academic Services and Doug Berger, director of housing services, met with about 25 of Stouffer's 130 residents in the house's seminar room to answer questions about the way Penn's $300 million, 10-year plan to build new dormitories and renovate existing residences and dining halls would affect Stouffer. In response to the proposal to demolish the Stouffer Triangle in 2001 -- which came as a surprise to most Stouffer residents -- students in the house submitted a resolution to the officials stating their opposition to moving the house to another location and expressing their devotion to a house that is "thriving as a unique and successful community." While the original plan called for the University to likely demolish the entire Stouffer building, Brownlee and Berger said all proposed plans and dates are subject to change. Stouffer's demise is likely because renovating the building so that it is in compliance with federal disabilities regulations would be "almost impossible," Berger said. Administrators also want to put a more-transparent dining hall with a better view of the Quadrangle in Stouffer's place. Under the current plan, the new building is scheduled to be finished in 2003. Brownlee explained that because officials eventually need to obtain the University Board of Trustees' approval for the project, the planners had to present the group recently with a concrete and organized plan, although in reality the project is still in the "preliminary" stages. Berger said that the current plan -- based on analysis of the building -- is to demolish it, although he could not say for sure when that would take place. He added that it is possible the plan for demolition could change, but he did not say under what circumstances those plans could change. But despite the reassurances that the fate of their house was far from sealed, Stouffer residents expressed fears that if they moved to another building, the unique sense of community they say the house provides will be lost. College sophomore Eric Lomazoff said that even though he would not be there to see Stouffer's likely destruction, any location change would hurt the house. "Stouffer has provided such a framework for my life on campus," he said. "It would be an absolute tragedy to deprive any students of this kind of community." Brownlee said that consultation for all phases of the project will involve Stouffer residents. He added that campus-wide committees composed of students, faculty and staff will be announced in about a week. Stouffer residents stressed that preserving the unique character of their house should steer planning for the house's now-uncertain future. While students in other houses often change residences from year to year, residents explained, Stouffer students commonly remain in the house. Some students said that if the small population of the house was not preserved in a new site -- one or more yet-to-be-constructed dormitories in Hamilton Village, according to the proposal -- it would cease to be as close-knit a community. The officials explained that although the size of each new dormitory -- which will all together hold an estimated 1,000 beds -- has yet to be determined, the buildings could hold as few as 150 students each, preserving small communities. Others expressed fear that interest in the house would decline as prospective students learned of the building's imminent destruction. "There's a very real fear that it will be less appealing to freshmen," Anne Nickle, Stouffer's house dean said. And Wharton freshman Adrian Jones said he was considering living in Stouffer after this year, but probably won't now that the building's days may be numbered. Lomazoff said, though, that he will live in Stouffer for all four years at Penn. Nickle added that she thought the meeting was helpful but that students didn't leave completely satisfied. "It seemed they were circumventing a lot of the questions," said Ian Kelley, a fifth-year College senior. The current proposal also leaves unclear the fate of the various retail establishments on the 3700 block of Spruce Street, including Wawa and Salad Works Cafe.
(11/06/98 10:00am)
Students must register their prints before using the new hand scanner. As Tuesday's installation of a high-tech hand scanner in Hamilton House nears, officials said yesterday that the device may not be operational until later in the week since procedures for registering students' prints are still being finalized. A glass portal will be installed in the lobby of the building -- formerly High Rise North -- which students who choose to participate in the pilot program will enter by swiping their PennCard and then scanning their hand to allow entry. The test run, which could eventually develop into a standard in campus dormitories, is designed to strengthen residential security. Even if the scanners become standard, it is likely that students will still have the option of using their PennCard, according to Stratis Skoufalos, Public Safety's director of security services. Students and staff who wish to use the portal must first "enroll" their handprint into a Division of Public Safety database. When the system becomes operational, security guards will still be present for those who do not wish to participate. At this point, only Hamilton residents can register to use the hand scanners. Public Safety, in conjunction with the Office of College Houses and Academic Services, originally planned to debut the program this Tuesday. But Skoufalos said the scanner may or may not be operational that day, depending on when the project planners obtain the necessary resources -- such as a hand scanner separate from the portal -- for the enrollment procedure. Once that happens, though, those who enroll can immediately use the portal. "As soon as people enroll their hands, they'll be able to use it," he said. He estimated enrollment would take about five minutes per person. Students will present their PennCard to a guard who will then access their name on the database. The guard will then scan the student's handprint. While Skoufalos said the portal will likely not provide added convenience, he stressed that it is intended to boost safety. Additionally, Skoufalos said he does not expect the portal to be faster than the current system. "We're not just bored at Public Safety and looking for new ways to play with our toys," he said. Vice President for Public Safety Thomas Seamon explained that the portals will offer two major advantages. "It's foolproof from the standpoint that it doesn't get tired and doesn't get distracted by other duties," Seamon said. "And it's very cost-efficient." Officials could not provide a cost estimate for the new system. Skoufalos said that if the program is successful, some security guards could be redeployed elsewhere. It is not clear whether any would lose their jobs. Officials also emphasized that feedback from students will be the key factor in whether more portals will eventually be installed in other dormitories. Residential Advisory Board Chairperson and College junior Emily Pollack, who officials consulted during the planning process, said she will request a list of the students who register to use the portal and survey them to gauge their satisfaction with the system. The portal would prevent students from swiping their card and handing it back to a friend. Another advantage, Skoufalos pointed out, is that the machine replaces the human functions of the guard. While guards currently look at the person to make sure the card is theirs, the hand scanner automatically matches the person with the PennCard. The portal may also provide shorter lines by giving students a second option. Skoufalos said enrollment is likely to remain optional even if the program ultimately proves successful, because there will still be people who choose not to use it, such as those who are physically disabled. But despite the exceptions, officials said they believe the technology will decrease the possibility of something going wrong. "If 90 percent of people are going through the portals, the human error is less," said Doug Berger, director of housing services. Daily Pennsylvanian staff writer Ben Geldon contributed to this article.
(11/02/98 10:00am)
In a move that will significantly alter the spaces on campus where undergraduates live and dine, University administrators Friday unveiled a 10-year plan to renovate every dormitory and dining facility and to construct several new residences in Hamilton Village. The approximately $300 million project is the school's largest single construction binge since the early 1970s, when it built three high rises, three low rises and a dining-hall-cum-parking-garage in an area where it had just demolished a neighborhood of Victorian-style homes. And like the earlier project, the impact of this phase of renovation and construction will be felt for decades. The proposal would affect buildings at every corner of Penn's campus: The University will build between two and five new dormitories in Superblock, totaling 1,000 beds; each high rise will close for about a year for major interior and exterior renovations; the Quadrangle's infrastructure will be overhauled and its exterior repaired; and all four dining halls will see some degree of change, including the demolition of the entire Stouffer Triangle building. The project also includes plans to renovate the low-rise buildings in Hamilton Village, such as the DuBois and Gregory college houses, and the possible introduction of retail or entertainment venues, such as convenience stores or a jazz club, into Superblock. The Hill and King's Court/English House college houses -- buildings which are less in need of large-scale structural changes -- will undergo renovations as necessary, as a final stage of the 10-year plan. Officials said the project -- which is in its planning stages and must still be approved by the University Board of Trustees -- is designed to offer the necessary physical complement to the programmatic changes implemented this fall with the introduction of Penn's college house system, which provides more academic and social support systems within each campus dormitory. "Now's the chance to make the structures live up to the programs," said Interim Provost Michael Wachter, who is spearheading the project along with Penn Executive Vice President John Fry. David Brownlee, the prime architect of the college house system and the current head of Penn's College Houses and Academic Services, is also heavily involved in planning the renovations. Hamilton Village Fry explained that the idea for a major overhaul of campus facilities originated two years ago when the University hired the outside consulting firm Biddison Hier to survey dorm facilities, although the bulk of work that went into the plan took place in the last 12 to 14 months. The entire project will cost about $300 million, officials said, though specific cost estimates were not available. Although officials initially considered building the new dormitories in other sites, like Hill Field, Fry said the planners ultimately realized that the Hill Field area was less in need of improvement than Superblock. "Our thought was that the most desperate need we had in terms of campus remediation was in Hamilton Village," Fry said. While officials said they were uncertain where the exact sites of the new Hamilton Village residences would be, they have set a tentative date of fall 2001 to open the college houses. This coming winter, officials will finalize plans for the new construction by holding an architectural design contest ahead of selecting a firm to plan the buildings. While the University plans to maintain a significant amount of the open space in Superblock, a main goal of the project is to "bring the vocabulary of Locust Walk across the bridge to 40th Street," Fry said. If the project is successful, he explained, the Hamilton Village area would ultimately be left with a more campus-like atmosphere -- and bear more of a resemblance to the "true village" the area was before Penn demolished it in the 1960s. "What we really want to do is take the significant amount of open space and begin to think about how we can program the buildings in a way that will enhance the streetscape of Hamilton Village," Fry said. Additionally, Penn may bring new retail into Superblock, possibly using the Carriage House -- which is being used as student space while Houston Hall is renovated -- as a coffee shop, jazz club or convenience store, he said. Construction of the new buildings, once the design and locations are finalized, will likely commence sometime in late 1999. After the new buildings are completed, the three 26-story high-rise residences -- or "tall college houses," as Brownlee has temporarily dubbed them -- will each close for about 15 months, during which time they will be extensively rehabilitated. The goal, according to Brownlee, is to "create better versions of what we already have." This will include large-scale renovations to the inside and outside of each building. Officials said they are likely to reconfigure the layout of each floor of the buildings to bring them more in line with the goals of the college house system, although specific plans are very far from being finalized. The overall intent of the interior renovations is to make the buildings less "institutional," officials said. The monolithic concrete structures may also be painted in an effort to spruce up their image, officials said. Other planned improvements include replacing windows, improving the buildings' heating and air-conditioning systems, landscaping the surrounding grounds, expanding study spaces and common areas and moving offices currently located in the high rises to other facilities to create more student rooms. Officials said they were not sure whether the reconfigurations would result in a net loss or increase in student beds in the existing high rises. While each high rise is closed, the new dormitories -- designed as swing space -- will house the overflow of on-campus residents. In 2004, when all three high rises are scheduled to be functioning again, the capacity of campus residences will increase to about 6,170, an additional 870 beds over this year's total. Although the Penn-owned Sheraton University City hotel had earlier been considered as swing space, Fry said the planners decided against it because of the hotel's profitability and because its design is not conducive to the function of a college house. "In the end we would have had either a bad dorm or a dysfunctional hotel," Fry said, adding that hotel profits will also help finance the project. Administrators explained that while they do not expect an increase in enrollment from the current 10,000 undergraduates, the extra beds are needed to accommodate an expected increase in the amount of students wanting to live on campus. Currently, the college houses are 99 percent occupied, yet they house only 54 percent of undergraduates. Where to Eat? Along with the addition of the new dormitories in Superblock, the project could lead to a reduction of 130 beds if the Stouffer Triangle -- including the dining hall, dormitory and retail stores -- is ultimately demolished in 2001, as officials have hinted is likely. In Stouffer's place, officials have talked about building a more "transparent" dining-only facility with a better view of the Quad. The building, which may or may not include retail, should be finished by 2003. Fry said the importance of the 38th and Spruce streets corner as a gateway to campus necessitates building a more aesthetically pleasing dining hall. Since most students living in the Quad typically eat their meals at Stouffer, built in 1972, there will be a need for swing dining space while the new facility is under construction. Stouffer is projected to close for its likely demolition in 2001, the same time that the expansion and renovations of the 28-year-old Class of 1920 Commons are scheduled for completion, providing additional dining space. Beginning in 2000, the University will enclose the patio area between 1920 Commons and Harnwell House -- or High Rise East -- and redesign the building's interior, greatly increasing the facility's ability to serve Quad residents left without a dining hall. Work on the Hill House dining hall, which will be the first to undergo renovations, will cause relatively little inconvenience, as the changes are scheduled to be completed over the summer of 1999. The Hill renovations will mainly involve modernizing the food-production facilities in both the kitchen and serving areas and creating a dining space that is more conducive to a community environment. Currently, Hill dining consists of long, narrow tables. Quads and Ends Another phase of the work that will begin this summer is the Quad renovations, the first residential phase of the project. The initial components of these renovations are designed to solve infrastructural needs, such as exterior wall repairs, drainage and foundational support. The renovations, which will take place mostly over the next three summers, will not necessitate the closing or disruption of any of the four college houses in the Quad. While it is unlikely that the Quad -- parts of which are 103 years old -- will see any major changes in room or hall configuration, Brownlee said the renovations may involve adding bathrooms and sinks to give all rooms convenient access to those facilities. The remaining campus residences will undergo renovations in the final phases of the project. This will include minor changes in the 27-year-old Gregory and Dubois college houses, scheduled for 2004 to 2005 and, if it is deemed necessary, in Hill and King's Court/English Houses in 2006 to 2007. None of these buildings -- which are better designed to function as college houses -- will close for the renovations. The project planners explained that while the plan is to complete all of the renovations and construction within 10 years, there are no guarantees that everything will proceed as planned. Fry explained that the University may have to extend the time period, depending on unforeseen developments. In addition to the time period, the details of the project are largely unofficial. Fry stressed that most of the specific changes in the residences have yet to be finalized and will depend largely on student input. Administrators said they will work closely with the student-run Residential Advisory Board, as well as faculty and student committees, throughout all phases of construction and renovation, to try to respond to student needs. "To the extent that we are good listeners and are doing our market research and asking you guys what you need, we'll be able to reflect that on the buildings as well," Fry said. Brownlee pointed out that by responding to a broad range of student needs, the strength of Penn's college house system, as opposed to others such as Harvard and Yale, will be its variety. But he stressed that responding to student needs will not guarantee a permanently successful plan, explaining that the initial design for the high rises came in large part from student consultation. Part of the need for the current master plan is that most students have said the structure of the high rises precludes a social atmosphere. Beyond 40th Street In addition to improving the facilities to support the new college house system, the project will have effects outside campus boundaries. Officials said that, along with the University's recent deals to build Robert Redford's new Sundance Cinemas and an upscale supermarket at 40th Street, the improvements in Hamilton Village, and particularly the prospect of future retail establishments, will further bridge the gap between Penn and the community. The hope, Fry said, is that these developments will help bring graduate students and young families who currently live in Center City or the suburbs back to the area. The project is also likely to improve off-campus living conditions in University City, Fry said. Not only will the project decrease over-crowding in area housing, but the higher capacity of on-campus living and improved facilities will put more pressure on area landlords to provide good service and maintain their buildings. "The strategy for on-campus and the strategy for off-campus go hand in hand," Fry said, speculating that those landlords who do not keep their properties in top shape will lose potential customers to campus residences. The planners admitted, though, that they expect that thousands of undergraduate and graduate students will continue to live off campus.
(10/30/98 10:00am)
Despite eating food described as "not quite home cooking," members of the University Board of Trustees came away with a very favorable opinion of the college houses after a visit to each of the houses and dining halls last night. Selected students from each of the 12 college houses chatted with some of the Trustees -- members of the University's top decision-making body -- over dinner and dessert in an event designed to give the Trustees a chance to sample life in the revamped residential system. For the students, it was a rare opportunity to pose questions about University developments to those who make the ultimate decisions. Groups of Trustees dined in the four University dining halls, along with about six to 12 students from each house, as well as the house's faculty master and house dean, before adjourning to the respective faculty master's apartment for dessert, coffee and cordials. At Stouffer Dining Commons, a dozen students from Spruce Street College House -- one from each section of the house and the house president -- enthusiastically questioned the three Trustees at dinner. Former Trustees Chairperson Alvin Shoemaker, who had headed First Boston Inc., spoke about future residential renovations and the need to continue to build first-rate structures while munching on mystery meat and french fries. "You can't compete long-term unless you make a statement," Shoemaker said, alluding to such projects as the new Penn bookstore. Despite the success of the discussions, there was a slight hitch in the plans, as the Trustees were nearly a half-hour late in arriving to Stouffer. "They're wasting our time," Engineering freshman Merav Kushner joked as the group ate dinner and waited for their guests. But after their arrival, most students said they found the experience both enjoyable and useful. "It's great to get an impression from somebody who really works on the financial side," said Spruce House President Keith Zeuner, a College freshman. "Sometimes students get a narrow perspective of who runs the school." And for the most part, the Trustees said they were quite impressed with both the students and the new college house system. Michael Tarnopol, vice chairperson of Bear Stearns & Co. and an overseer of the Wharton School, praised the college houses for creating smaller communities. "It's a more congenial, harmonious environment," Tarnopol said, adding that when he was a freshman, the dormitories were not divided into different sections, leaving little encouragement to meet people. As for the food, Richard Brown, a former partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius and a graduate of the Law School, said it was "not quite like home cooking." Meanwhile, over at Harrison House, or High Rise South, about 10 students gathered at a more cozy environment -- Faculty Master John Richetti's apartment -- for dessert. The nightcap, which featured an informal and spontaneous concert by Richetti, followed a dinner at the new Harrison Cafe in the building's basement. Trustee John Hover, a guest at Harrison, said the college houses have the potential to make residential life more interactive, even in the largest buildings. "I think it's possible to give the high rises the feel of a house," he said. And as the students chatted with Richetti and their guests, several of them praised their house's staff for making their college house experience enjoyable. "We wanted to? comment to the Trustees how great John [Richetti] and [House dean] Art [Casciato] have been," College sophomore Robin Rolewicz said, adding that she believes Casciato knows the name of every Harrison resident. Most of the Trustees explained that despite their initial optimism, they would not judge the system by this first visit to the new houses. "When you cook the broth, you wonder if the soup is going to be good," said Trustee Leonard Shapiro, one of the guests at Harrison.
(10/29/98 10:00am)
Many graduate students have settled for apartments in University City amid the lack of vacancies in center city. Six hundred bucks for a small and "crappy" efficiency. That's what first-year Veterinary student Catherine McManus said was her best option as she searched for an apartment in Center City this summer at the height of a booming housing market. For Penn graduate students -- many of whom opt to cross the Schuylkill River because of the perceptions of increased safety, more attractive housing and a livelier social atmosphere -- finding a place to live has gotten much tougher this year. The downtown housing market is so hot, in fact, that the resulting overflow into University City is also making once-plentiful housing west of campus harder to come by. According to University statistics, 43 percent of those graduate students who did not live in Penn dormitories lived in Center City in 1997-98. A much smaller percentage of undergraduates also typically live downtown. Because the neighborhood has reached its highest occupancy rates in recent years, many of them had to settle instead for housing in University City, according to Mihaela Farcas, Penn's director of off-campus living. And unless new spaces become available in both neighborhoods, the crunch is likely to continue next year. At the same time, the graduate towers -- the Penn dormitories on the 3600 block of Chestnut Street recently renamed Sansom Place -- are almost completely full, after several years of high vacancy rates. Those involved in the real estate market explained that, currently, it is nearly impossible to find an apartment in Center City. "There aren't any rentals," said Joanne Davidow, vice president of Fox & Roach, a large regional realtor. "Everybody's 100 percent occupied." Davidow added that she has spoken to several Penn students who told her they had difficulty finding an apartment. For many students, the only rentals available were out of their price ranges, especially if they waited until the summer to find an apartment. McManus, a Queens, N.Y., native who just graduated from the State University of New York at Binghamton, said the Center City apartments available in July were less than ideal. "I found a couple of options, but they were $600 efficiencies with not much room," she said. Quality of Life Apartments in the area haven't always been so hard to come by. In fact, while rentals are currently 98 to 100 percent occupied, in past years, that figure was in the low to mid-90s, according to Mary Barr, manager of membership services for the Center City District. According to Davidow, the increased demand is the result of general improvements in Philadelphia's quality of life. "So many people want to live in the city, which has driven rents up tremendously," she said, adding that improved cleanliness, "fabulous" new restaurants and a growing theater district are among the attractions that have brought more people into Center City. In addition, last October, the Central Philadelphia Development Corporation launched an advertising campaign with the tag line "Make Your Move to Center City." CPDC aimed the $50,000 campaign mainly at attracting young professionals, empty-nesters, young families and gays and lesbians. And Penn students have made up a big part of the increased demand, officials said. According to Tracy Mitchell, who manages the Embassy Apartments at 21st and Walnut streets, her building filled up -- largely with students -- before the busy late-summer season even began. "A lot more Penn students are coming here as opposed to living in University City," Mitchell said. "We don't have apartments for everyone and what they're looking for." Even vacant, newly constructed buildings are being filled within one to 1 1/2 months after construction, Mitchell said. The 43 percent figure was up from just 25 percent 10 years ago. Farcas said the figures for this year will be available next week. Closer to Campus The increased popularity of Center City housing, particularly in certain prime buildings, has forced many students to live closer to campus or in on-campus residences. "I had a bit of difficulty in the spring, mainly because of the building I was living in," said Jonathan Cross, a law student, who lived in the 2400 Chestnut Street apartment building. "They didn't have anything opening in August," Cross said, explaining that he decided to live on campus in graduate-student-oriented Mayer Hall, a seven-story dormitory near 38th and Spruce streets. Farcas pointed out that University City -- where 23 percent of the graduate population not living in dormitories made their home last year -- is also growing in population, partially due to incentives the University provides to professors and staffers who choose to live in the area. Other area officials cited various factors as helping increase demand for area housing, including the higher numbers of graduate students attending neighborhood schools and the addition of several new trendy shops and night spots, such as Xando and the University Bookstore. In addition to the higher demand, the overflow of students from Center City has made vacancies in University City more scarce. "We're 100 percent occupied," said Scott Kaufman, property manager of Campus Apartments, one of the biggest landlords in University City. Kaufman added that Center City being filled to near capacity "absolutely benefits us." In many cases this year, Farcas explained, students ended up with housing that was either further away from campus than they planned to live or that lacked the facilities they wanted. And McManus, who ultimately found an apartment at 44th and Spruce streets, agreed that those who don't begin looking early enough will miss the boat. "It's tough to find nice, decent housing," she said. "A lot of places are in poor condition." Still, McManus said she was satisfied with her choice of housing, adding that the rent was cheaper than housing closer to campus and that a lot of other graduate students live in the building. The housing crunch may also have a long-term effect: the creation of a larger student presence farther west into University City. Farcas explained that many students who were forced to take apartments further west of campus than they planned, told her they are now pleasantly surprised with the housing they obtained. "Some students ended up making very good living decisions," Farcas said, referring to several students who rented apartments west of 43rd street. Other Options Still, some students who could not find housing in Center City and did not want to live in University City ultimately chose a less convenient route. First-year Law student Matt Archer said he attempted via phone to find an apartment in Center City from his home in Dallas over the summer, but to no avail. Archer eventually chose an apartment in Ardmore, a Philadelphia suburb. "I was kind of apprehensive about living in West Philadelphia," he said. But Farcas explained that despite the common stereotypical notions, many buildings in University City are actually more attractive and better-kept than some Center City buildings. In particular, she said, the Alan Klein apartment building at 47th and Pine streets, where many students chose to live, is a "very nice building" that was completely occupied before August. Adding to higher occupancy in this area is the fact that private landlords have renovated or built hundreds of new apartments in the last year in University City, further increasing the attractiveness of living near campus. To accommodate the higher demand, area landlords recently formed a group to create minimum voluntary standards for the maintenance and ownership of their apartments. The hope is that through better management, the booming market will continue. And Kaufman of Campus Apartments said that area property managers have no reason to believe it won't. "The more you put into the apartments, the more people are going to live there," he said.
