From: Paddy Tillett, Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership

1. Why are we looking at a living-learning center now when there are so many other priorities, and what is special about it? Response: Bill Zeller’s presentation is available to describe the concept. What we know is that you get more value out of a residence hall if it is integrated with academic programming. That value is recouped in the attainment of students. We know that we need more student beds, and that we need to build them differently. For a little more money, you get a lot more value – enabling faculty to relate better to students, in provides a richer student life and a better learning environment. A wide variety of intellectual activities are programmed in what the students view as their living space. Faculty are used to owning’ the space in which they teach, so this will require an adjustment for many faculty.
2. We are trying to increase the local concentration of students and faculty to increase interaction between them. What we want to get away from is the clear division between going to school, and going home to the dorm. Bringing faculty who understand the formation of ideas into frequent contact with students will cultivate an ongoing sense of inquiry, extending intellectual development far beyond the classroom.
3. ZGF does higher education projects all over the country, and one of the things we do is to create spaces within them that encourage interaction outside programmed space – especially in research buildings. The UO's ‘Process for Change’ inspired by the Boyer Commission dwelt on furthering academic accomplishment in lower division classes. It suggested mixing up the components of the university to promote mingling and interaction.
4. Isn’t there a natural boundary between living and learning? Response: The spaces for teaching and living would certainly be clearly distinguished, but the spaces between them become places for interaction because they are peopled by faculty as well as staff.
5. The Willamette Atrium works in this way. Classrooms, offices and coffee places provide that mix. Attracting participation by faculty may be the key. Superior classrooms and the presence of faculty offices would accomplish this. It matters where the living-learning center is on campus – faculty will not walk too far from ‘their’ parts of campus. Some junior faculty members don’t even know where all the buildings are.
6. We are working hard to create a residential nature in the campus now; the triad of University Life comprises EMU, student activities and the residence halls. Movement between these marks the progress of the day. The campus open space is an important component of this, and is in a sense bigger than the residential component. We have a number of building expansions planned, and each will take away open space, and will take away the residential nature of the campus. Look ahead several generations to grasp the potential demand for new residence halls. As you strike out to find a new model, how can it infuse the entire system of residence halls? Is it the hub, or on the periphery?
7. An analogy in a mixed-use development in a town: journeys are less polarized than they are on campus today, distinctions between study, recreation and residence are blurred so that the entire university experience is one of learning.
8. At today’s workshop, we will try to develop ideas – for example around Greg’s concern for open space. We need to increase capacity first, because we cannot renovate and replace existing residence halls until we provide more capacity. The program necessarily involves the existing residence halls. Students need their own place and privacy, but there can be quasi-public parts of the building as there are of a house.
9. Incoming students offered a new living-learning program would probably reject it on the grounds that they want the full university experience, but in fact they have no concept of what it means, or what its value might be – as progress of the FIG students have demonstrated over the last twenty years; over the last four years in residential programs.
10. In the 1980s, there were some faculty members in the residence halls who taught there. It was a partial and voluntary program, but showed some real success. Many faculty appreciated the peak into student life, and if the space for teaching was good, then so much the better.
11. It would be good to include a large lecture hall or auditorium that would bring other students in, and would serve the needs of other programs in the evenings.
12. Enrollment is at 20 to 21,000, and we can say we want to hold it there, but have failed to cap it in the past. How does this affect where we build? Imagine the Law School leaping further to the east than it did. The paradigm that is constructed around the seven-minute walk is probably at its limit. We will find academic development wrapping around the residence halls. Unless there is trading of spaces, can this happen? The east campus plan is for apartments for upperclassmen, not for first year students.
13. The shortage of space is not unique; the demand for growth will continue to the extent that satellite campus development will probably be discussed in future. We are unique, however, as a ‘big little research university’ for the compactness of our campus. These projects have the potential to make the less-attractive parts of the campus more attractive and more closely associated with the better parts. There are ways to improve what we have. On what parts of campus would we like to model the look, feel and open space?
14. It is not one space but a series of spaces that fulfill different purposes in different seasons. The residential community concept suggests that there should be opportunities for informal recreation, for informal gatherings. 13^th and University is perhaps the most dynamic place on campus, bringing a great vitality as classes change. Elevate these as celebrations of campus life. Agate and 13^th display almost a Coney Island gaiety. Other spaces are small and charming, like the geology waterfall – a space to detour through to enjoy it. Hendricks, Gerlinger spaces are charming too, as is the space in front of the Rec. Center where the water feature is. The open space across the street to the north is nice - but people don’t hang out there. . Maybe because the traffic dominates on all sides. South side of the library is special too. Students like to people-watch, so this draws people to the Rec. Center, and the bookstore corner.
15. Even if the enrollment is capped, the demand for more sophisticated facilities will demand more space. Part of the living-learning concept is about multiple uses of facilities throughout the day – making more extensive use of facilities without compromising those special spaces around campus.