policy & reform
Building a cam
In an arms race for federal funding, universities are encouraged to work out how much space they need and how to use it most efficiently. By Aileen Macalintal
Visiting one’ s university years after graduation can be such a nostalgic experience. Every space may have a memory attached to it, and any spatial change may ignite feelings – fierce disapproval, sudden detachment, or deeper longing.
Despite the disruptions it may cause, however, change is inevitable. Old buildings will fall and new ones will come. And in modern times, many of these architectural decisions are based on the question of sustainability. What is sustainable and what is not are necessary questions in determining whether a university space should be kept, re-designed, or zapped. Sometimes tradition and character must be balanced against these concerns.
“ I think that in general, if too many buildings are demolished and replaced, there’ s a danger of universities losing their sense of character and sense of slow steady growth over time,” says Peter Malatt, director of Six Degrees architects, who believes that every building in a university has a story to tell.
“ If you go to a campus with many new buildings, it’ s a little bit like going to an office park,” Malatt says.“ There’ s a sort of depressing feeling about it. There’ s something not quite right about a university that’ s full of new buildings. It just doesn’ t feel like it’ s got a sense of continuity caring about the past.”
At some point a building has to be kept because the university cares for its history, he says, even if that costs more.
Most people who have been to universities share a sense of belonging to the place, he says, and when buildings are replaced, the sense of place is lost.“ Universities are like a big family with a lot of shared history, and a lot of it is based on a sense of place.”
Such competing interests are front and centre as higher education
22 | Issue 8 2013