Another Design Session at ASU

Last night I attended another design session (6pm-7pm) presented by
ASU, Century Development, the company that will manage the project,
and the Architects from Gould-Evans that are designing the site which
was in turn followed by a meeting address management issues of the
site (7pm-8pm)

I did not hold out much hope that what they would be showing us would
begin to address the numerous flaws in their design and they did not
disappoint.

Some of the low-lights of the meeting

1. One of the telling moments for me was when Boyd Heckle (SigEp)
asked the Architect (the same guy that I said I would have graded an
“F” in my last email) making the presentation if he could discuss the
philosophical difference in building a Fraternity House and a
Dorm. He stuttered and stammered for a while and finally started
going on about how fraternities were begun as study groups and lived
on big plots of land in big houses but that the needs had changed and
that besides the shape of a Chapter House differed from region to
region. He of course did not indicate how he knows any of this or
that he has looked at how our needs in this region have been analyzed
and looked at.

2. Boyd also asked him to explain what the design criteria was that
ASU supplied them with. Sally Rammage from ASU then stood up to
start talking about this and Boyd told Sally that he wanted to hear
it from the Architect not from ASU. He then gave a none answer.

3. In addressing the concerns on Chapter room size that were brought
up in the previous meeting they showed various room configurations
with furniture and walls, but did not address actual square footage
as the design of the structure has not actually been changed. They
showed how the room could be configured to accommodate tables for
dining, couches for relaxing and chairs for chapter meetings. They
did not show where all this furniture is to be stored when one of
these three needs in being exercised.

He did try to show that by removing a room above the Chapter room
that they could open up the ceiling to make the chapter room more
airy. I asked the flippant question that “since we are unable to
levitate how does making a high ceiling addresses the needs of square footage?”

4. They showed various pictures of buildings around campus to justify
the exterior brick treatment that the clusters will be given so as to
identify the buildings with ASU. I pointed out that I need the
building to identify Sigma Chi not ASU.

They went off on a discussion that the Houses need to be part of a
greater community and not to be individual kingdoms (or words to that effect).

The extent of our individual “branding” will be in putting a vote in
as to weather the complex will have Greek letters on the side of the
building (in either a vertical or horizontal arrangement or will the
names be spelled out.

5. On a positive note they have deleted the walkways on the second
and third floors that tied all the buildings together and have
increased the elevators so that there in now one for every two buildings.

6. Two houses of 80 guys each will be sharing a single laundry
room. This to me is an issue of concern.

7. There is still no parking and since that design criteria was not
provided to them they will not be addressing it.

8. They have changed the bathrooms in the rooms to have showers
instead of tubs.

9. To address the issue of natural lighting in the rooms they are
proposing to use glass doors and for the rooms that are in the inner
hallways without direct contact with the courtyard they propose glass
walls too. Again they are building a dorm not a fraternity house.

The second meeting entailed providing ASU with a list of questions
and concerns dealing with how the structure will be managed. Such as:
1. How it is determined who gets to move in
2. Is the building classified as Fraternity Housing or Residential
Life Housing (the alcohol policy is different)
3. Can the individual rooms have things built in them.
4. Is the building held by the House Corp which in turn licenses
space to members or does ASU lease directly to the individual.
5. If all beds are not filled will ASU move random students in
And many pages more of questions. When the answers are supplied by
ASU I will forward them on.

As for time lines to move in they are giving “right of first refusal”
to the fraternities to be displaced on Old Row and they have to sign
a letter of intent by the local Chapter, the House Corp and their
Headquarters by March 1 as well as submit an applications. Selections
will be announced in early April and individual license agreements
will be due in May.

As for our ability to continue occupancy of one of these structures,
should we decide to move to one (over my cold dead body), beyond a
one year individual license agreement signed by our members with the
University there is no guarantee and final authority to determine
this will rest with the Vice President for Student Affairs there is
no allowance for Alumni and house Corp input into the hearing or
decision process.

Enough for now…