Constructing Windowless Dorms Requires Impact Evaluation
Should UC-Santa Barbara Follow in the Footsteps of the University of Michigan?
The proposed Munger Hall at the University of California-Santa Barbara (UCSB) would increase on-campus student housing by 50%, allowing the university to comply with its development agreements with nearby cities and address student housing shortages. However, the high-density building, which includes windowless rooms, high-energy consumption, and large stature, is highly controversial among UCSB students and alumni, as well as professional architects. At the core of the debate is a tension between an immediate need to solve a student housing crisis and views of individual, environmental, and cultural well-being.
This not the first Munger Hall in the U.S — in 2015, a smaller yet similarly-designed dormitory at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (U-M) opened with a capacity of 630 students. There has been a variety of reactions to U-M’s Munger Hall, but no empirical research on the impact of the building’s design, most notably its windowless rooms, has been conducted. In an effort to build trust and make an evidence-based decision regarding whether or not UCSB’s Munger Hall should be approved for construction, UCSB should commission a participatory governance strategy combined with an analogical case study of U-M’s Munger Hall.
A Billionaire’s Donation and Campus Housing Crisis
Initiated by a $200 million dollar donation by Charles Munger, Munger Hall is slated to house up to 4,500 students, 94% of whom would not have windows in small, single-occupancy bedrooms. As shown in the above figure, each of the eleven residential floors are designed with eight “houses,” each housing over 60 students who share study areas, kitchens, and lounges. Munger alleges that he will rescind his donation if his exact design is not followed.
Meanwhile, students at UCSB face an increasing housing shortage. In Santa Barbara, the average rent for a 1-bedroom apartment averages between $2,400 and $2,900 monthly, leaving many students unable to find affordable housing near UCSB. In late 2021, the nearby city of Goleta announced its plan to sue UCSB for failing to provide enough student housing. The lawsuit cites the university’s 2010 Long Range Development Plan, in which UCSB pledged to provide new housing for 5,000 students by 2025. However, since 2010, the university has only added 1500 student beds. The addition of Munger Hall, and its 4,500 beds, would allow UCSB to fulfill its agreement.
Controversies Over the Proposed Dormitory Design
Compromising student health and well-being: Opposition to the design of Munger Hall cite evidence regarding the importance of natural light on residents’ health and well-being, claiming that university students are particularly vulnerable to negative mental and emotional impacts. In her opposition letter, a mental illness survivor and UCSB alumna claimed that she might have “not survived” her time on campus in a dorm designed like Munger Hall, referencing the likelihood of self-harm. Architects and behavioral health experts have also weighed in, calling the plans a “social experiment” and claiming the design is “reckless” for students’ well-being.
Jeopardizing environmental goals: Opposition also frames Munger Hall as a contradiction to the University of California’s Carbon Neutrality Initiative, in which UC pledges to be carbon net-zero by 2025. In an opposition letter, members of the California’s American Institute of Architects claimed that the building’s heavy reliance on electricity and mechanical air circulation systems, due to its lack of natural light and ventilation, will come at a high energy and environmental cost.
Damaging campus culture: Dennis McFadden, the USBC architect who resigned in protest of Munger Hall, wrote that his role was to ensure projects “fit the spirit and character of the campus that it could exist nowhere else,” claiming that Munger Hall did not follow the university’s cultural precedents. In an opposition letter, alumna Lacie Grisley also highlighted the cultural contradiction, citing the irony of the university’s motto: “Fiat lux” (Latin for: “Let there be light”) for students without windows in their rooms along the coast of the Pacific Ocean.
Recommendations
Participatory governance: Such a disruption to individual and community well-being requires participatory governance, especially when the tensions between an immediate need to solve a student housing crisis and views of individual, environmental, and cultural well-being are high. Evaluating the housing issue and proposed design through a participatory strategy (e.g., a participatory technology assessment) is a necessary step to consider multiple perspectives, increase transparency and legitimacy, and maintain trust with UCSB’s students and alumni, as well as the surrounding communities of Goleta and Isla Vista.
Analogical case study at U-M: It’s critical to note the existence of a Munger Hall predecessor at U-M, whose impacts have yet to be studied. Before implementing a similar building design with over seven times the student capacity, UCSB should commission a joint study with researchers at U-M that aims to measure the behavioral, cognitive, and affective variables of a sample of current and past residents of U-M’s Munger Hall. Findings from U-M should be analyzed to develop a framework for an analogical case comparison at UCSB. Ultimately, the outcomes should aim to identify the individual, social, and environmental challenges that may emerge if UCSB erects this dormitory.
