The article states, “Chancellor Henry Yang has hailed [Munger Hall] as ‘inspired and revolutionary.’” How much influence would he have had in bringing the plan to this stage of development?
Chancellor Yang has been a good one. I hope he’s right on this too.
There may be a selection bias – those who care most about windows in their bedrooms are less likely to choose to live there versus other housing. Those writing reviews from experience living there are more likely to be those who (at least initially) did not mind the windowless bedrooms.
1 Like
This looks like a stalinist architecture building.
Add the fact it’s got 94% rooms without windows and it is disquieting.
After covid in particular, I can’t imagine a small room without a window and a view - “virtual light” simply isn’t the same.
Note that the other dorms considered are grad housing - grad students can have a carrel in the library (BTW all grad students’ carrels back in my day were by windows) and would have lab space. Grad students can choose to live on their own - their maturity level makes it much easier. They know themselves better and they can thus choose to live on campus, in these dorms. Freshmen often don’t have a choice, living on their own may be too difficult for them to handle (which is why there are dorms). In other words, undergrads aren’t in the same situation as grad students, they likely wouldn’t be able to “choose” these rooms and their only “own” space would be in the dorm.
You can simply build large double rooms, divide them with a thin partition for privacy, have windows for all (interior courtyards), and to reach the same capacity, build higher.
I’m sure the school can build something better for 1.3 billion!
6 Likes
As described in post #11, long narrow doubles around the outside wall would give about 360 per floor, versus 512 per floor. Amenities could be on the inside, whether or not there is a donut hole. But that would require 13 instead of 9 residential floors to get the same capacity.
Alternatively, with a donut hole facing an interior courtyard and long narrow doubles with windows facing the courtyard, capacity per floor could be similar. But there would be minimal room for amenities like common areas, laundry, kittens, etc. due to loss of floor space to the donut hole. But note that in a taller building, the view from the lower floor rooms facing the courtyard would be very shaded and only see other parts of the building…
Increasing building height may not be feasible, even assuming additional cost isn’t an issue. There’s likely limitation on how tall a building near the ocean can be and greater setback requirement for a taller building.
More likely than not all this controversy will just lead to a decision being delayed. And in the meantime you have this: Housing crisis is leaving lots of UCSB students on the streets. How did it get this bad?
A redesign, especially one with environmental review consequences (taller building?) could easily delay this by years.
I doubt you believe “get a windowless room or live in a van” is a selling point for UCSB. So, the situation is desperate. Something needs to be done. It doesn’t mean “anything goes as long as we house a lot of them”, just like student slums don’t justify building subpar dorms.
This is A LOT of UC money. The least they can do is ask for input from the student community, listen to architects, etc. and pay attention to issues raised.
If the billionaire had gifted the whole amount, ok, let him build his social experiment building as he likes. But he’s only donating a small fraction of the costs.
3 Likes
It seems intentional as well that the current design does not exceed the height of Storke Tower.
Let’s not forget, unlike his partner Buffett, Munger’s net worth is only about $2b. He is donating about one-tenth of his net worth for this one building.
1 Like
This is pretty obvious. Why would anyone live there if they didn’t want to. No one signs a lease then finds out there are no windows etc. They knew going in what and what wasn’t offered. But it’s also affordable for Michigan housing in general with the amenities given. Also it’s school housing so it’s Sept - April lease and not having to find sublease for a 12 month lease. Plus utilities and internet are included so there’s lots to like. Also it’s a living theme community. If someone doesn’t want that then don’t apply.
1 Like
Interior courtyards are a good idea in Santa Barbara, less so in Michigan where snow has to be removed.
This seems pretty awful to me. Can’t imagine my kid would want to live some place like this.
3 Likes
One of D’s friends had a windowless pod last year. Her parents remarked recently on how awful and claustrophobic it was. OTOH she was like meh, it was fine, it was really conveniently located and had great facilities. She liked not having to share a bedroom and that was her priority in finding an apartment this year.
So perhaps we should think more carefully about whether our own priorities for housing design actually match those of the college students who will live there.
There are those men and women who will serve in the Navy and bunk in a submarine for months and months at a time. And there are those who would be driven crazy by it. Just don’t “enlist.” 
1 Like
@Twoin18 The problem is, some kids might not know ahead of time whether it might be an issue for them. Even with a window, my college roommate discovered freshman year she suffered from SAD. She could not get out of bed for a week. We had to contact her parents and professors on her behalf, bring her food, etc. She saw a doctor when she went home and was diagnosed and brought back this enormous light, nearly as big as a door, that she had to sit in front of daily as light therapy. It helped.
I’m sure there are kids out there who may live in sunnier climates until college and not realize how much lack of sunlight can affect their mood and motivation.
When my oldest was looking at colleges, there was one campus we visited after she got in where the dorms (suite style) were very dark and dismal, and we were there in early April. My D did already know that she had a harder time in winter months (lack of energy and motivation). I did not even mention the lack of light in the dorms, but she brought it up at the end of our visit when she moved that school down on her list of options.
6 Likes
The big issue is that freshmen choose to live on campus but can’t choose where they live -they’ll be assigned a freshman dorm if they ask for on campus housing.
This is totally different from grad student housing. Grad students are perfectly able to live on their own, they’ve already lived in various arrangements and know what works for them, they can choose to live in the windowless pods, ib apartments on campus or in town, etc.
Yes the interior courtyard was meant for a UCSB building.
Even though it’s a big % of his net worth, it’s still a fraction of the total costs.
6 Likes
Seems a great example of the kind of “inside-the-box” thinking we should expect from an amateur architect’s billion dollar vanity project.
But there is a real opportunity being missed here. Why isn’t Munger thinking under-the-box? Why not add multiple levels of dorm-cells below the surface, like an underground parking garage, only for students.
Think of the possibilities on campuses everywhere! Finally colleges could put to use all those wasteful malls, squares, and open spaces by housing students underneath them.
6 Likes
There ya go. Some innovative thinking! Combine it with an underground parking garage too!
I could see trying out spending a night in one of those Japanese style hotel pods, but actually living there all year long is a whole different thing.
5 Likes
Here is the campus marketing version:
It does not mention the lack of windows for the bedrooms, but it does say this:
On a cruise ship, some of the passengers and most of the crew have inside rooms with no windows or portholes, although many of the passenger rooms are on the outside with windows or portholes, while many of the amenities are on the windowless inside.