A

New
Role
For
Student
Housing
Revitalizing a Mid-sized City Core

by

Katherine Bowman

A thesis presented to the

University of Waterloo
in fulfillment of the thesis requirement
for the degree of
Master of Architecture

Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2007

© Katherine Bowman 2007

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION FOR
ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF A THESIS

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true
copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted
by my examiners.

I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to

the public.

iii
ABSTRACT

Of the many urban revitalization strategies currently being

implemented, one in particular is gaining in popularity. The revitalizing
tactic of establishing a satellite University campus within the heart of a
mid-sized city suffering socially and economically is demonstrating a
positive shift in terms of urban evolution. The relative newness of these
‘Town & Gown’ partnerships, however, is simultaneously creating a unique
situation with respect to many common University facilities, such as the
Student Residence. The establishment of a post-secondary facility in a
mid-sized city centre forces defined University boundaries to dissolve into
the existing city fabric, rendering the once-conspicuous campus edge
non-existent. This has made decisions regarding an appropriate student
residential typology exceedingly complicated. The many unexplored
opportunities within a mid-sized city setting, for both ‘Town & Gown’ alike,
demand a reconsideration of preconceived student residential roles, prior
to the establishment of a residence within a downtown environment.
Neither technically on- or off-campus, a student residence would require
the characteristics from both in order to flourish in its unfamiliar mid-sized
downtown environment. The question then becomes which characteristics
would find the greatest success not only for a University and its students,
but for the city as well.

This thesis will examine how a student residence located in the

heart of a mid-sized city can contribute successfully to the revitalization
of its declining downtown, and will then propose a reconsidered approach
to the design of a student residence, using the University of Waterloo’s
School of Architecture’s new home, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada, as the
siting for the final design proposal.

v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank you, Rick Haldenby, for your guidance and endless encourage-
ment. Thank you, Jeff Lederer and Lloyd Hunt, for your insight and in-
spiration.

Thank you, Lily Kim, Somya Singh, and Kristy Wung for your support and
friendship.

vii
For Mom and Dad

ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract v

List of Illustrations xv

1.0 Introduction 5

2.0 Mid-Sized Cities 7

2.1 A Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 A Creative Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.1 Town & Gown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.0 University-Community Relations 19

3.1 Early Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.1.1 The Academy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.1.2 The Dawning of Higher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.1.3 Here Comes the West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.1.4 A Man with a Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.1.5 20th Century Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3.2 Current University Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3.2.1 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3.2.2 Savannah College of Art and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.2.3 Laurier-Brantford University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.3 Residence as a Revitalizaing Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

4.0 Cambridge, Ontario, Canada 37

4.1 A Breath of Creative Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.0 A Role in Revitalization 47

5.1 Where to Begin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.1.1 An Out-dated Typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

5.1.2 But in a Mid-Sized City Core . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

5.1.3 Can This Work for Student Housing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

5.2 Reconsidering Site | XL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

5.2.1 Student Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2.2 Community Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

xi
 5.3 Reconsidering the Immediate | L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5.4 Reconsidering Grade | M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.4.1 Community Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

5.4.2 Students & School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

5.5 Reconsidering Residence | S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

5.5.1 Student Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

5.5.2 School Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

6.0 New Roles for Student Residences 77

6.1 The Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.1.1 Public Servant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

6.1.2 Event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

6.1.3 Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
6.1.4 Community Engagment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

6.1.5 Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

6.2 The Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Appendix A 91

Site Imagery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Present Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Potential Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Appendix B 107

Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

Elevations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Appendix C 133

Section Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Costing Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Epilogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

Post Script . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

Notes 140

Bibliography 148

xiii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

2.1a Intense Use of Personal Vehicles. Corbis (http://pro.corbis.com/, 2007) 10

2.1b Celebrating Urban Living. Corbis (http://pro.corbis.com/, 2007)
2.1c A City Core in Deep Decline. Author (2007)
2.1d An Urban Patchwork. Corbis (http://pro.corbis.com/, 2007)
2.3a Increase Density. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/joescamera/, 2007) 16
2.3b 24-hour Life. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thisisforever/, 2007)
2.3c A Pedestiran Environment. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fritz_da_kat/, 2007)
2.3d Interesting & Accessible Public Spaces & Places. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/, 2007) 17
2.3e Attracting Youth & Creative Cultures. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephaniejm/, 2007)
2.3f Historic Preservation. Flickr (http://flickr.com/photos/mistercgg/, 2007)
2.3g “Eyes on the Street”. Flickr (http://flickr.com/photos/fermata_daily/ , 2007)
2.3h Waterfront Development. Author (2006)
2.3i A Sense of Community. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamiepaul/, 2007)
3.1a Plato. Britannica Online (http://www.britannica.com, 2007) 22
3.1b Plato and Aristotle at the Academy. Sweet Briar College (http://witcombe.sbc.edu, 2007)
3.1c Oxford University. Davidson College (http://www.bio.davidson.edu, 2007) 23
3.1d Memorial Hall, Harvard University. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/houben/, 2007) 24
3.1e Typical Harvard Gate. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyradis/, 2007)
3.1f Henry Tappan. Britannica Online (http://www.britannica.com, 2007)
3.1g Thomas Jefferson. VisitingDC (http://www.visitingdc.com, 2007) 25
3.1h University of Virginia. Teacher’s Paradise (http://www.teachersparadise.com, 2007)
3.1i The Academic Village ‘Now’. University of Virginia (http://www.virginia.edu, 2007)
3.1j Jefferson’s Plan of the Village. The Library of Congress (http://www.loc.gov, 2007)
3.1k A WWII Barrack Scene. Navy Historical Center (http://www.history.navy.mil, 2007) 26
3.1l Typical Barracks. Idaho National Guard Resourse Office (http://inghro.state.id.us, 2007)
3.1m Typical barracks. AMC Companies (http://www.amccinc.com, 2007)
3.1n University ‘Life’. Southern Polytechnic University (http://www.spsu.edu/, 2007) 27
3.1o Residence Halls. Northwestern University (http://groups.northwestern.edu/, 2007)
3.1p A Main Residence Hallway. Discover ND (http://www.nd.gov/, 2007)
3.1q York University Graduate Residences. John McCallum (http://www.jcmit.com/, 1970)
3.1r Verducci Hall. San Francisco State University (http://www.sfsu.edu/, 2007)
3.2a Rural. Author (2007) 29
3.2b Suburban. Author (2007)
3.2c Urban. Author (2007)
3.2d Savannah Revitalization. Victorian Society of America (http://www.victoriansociety.org/, 2007) 30
3.2e A SCAD Renovation. Archinet (http://www.archinect.com/, 2007)
3.2f Select SCAD Residences. SCAD-Savannah (http://www.scad.edu/, 2007)
3.2g Map of Downtown Savannah. Author (2006) 31
3.2h Post House Residence. Laurier-Brantford University (https://www.wlu.ca/, 2007) 32
3.2i The Carnigie Building. Laurier-Brantford University (https://www.wlu.ca/, 2007)
3.2j Grand River Hall. Laurier-Brantford University (https://www.wlu.ca/, 2007)
3.2k Downtown Brantford. G.K. York (http://www.gkyork.ca/, 2007)
3.2l Map of Downtown Brantford. Author (2006) 33

xv
3.3a Rural. Author (2007) 35
3.3b Suburban. Author (2007)
3.3c Urban. Author (2007)
3.3d Mid-Sized City. Author (2007)
4.0a Map of Southern Ontario. Author (2007) 39
4.0b An Early View of the Skyline. McLaughlin (1987) 40
4.0c Grand River Industry. McLaughlin (1987)
4.0d A Typical Textile Machine. McLaughlin (1987)
4.0e Map of the City of Cambridge. Author (2007) 41
4.0f A View from School. Author (2007) 42
4.0g Main Street, 1972 Flood. McLaughlin (1987)
4.0h Main & Water Streets. McLaughlin (1987) 43
4.0i Cambridge Citizens. McLaughlin (1987)
4.0j Contemporary Cambridge. Author (2007) 42-43
4.1a UW’s School of Architecture. Author (2007) 44
4.1b Map of Downtown Cambridge. Author (2007) 45
5.0a ‘Pocket Park’ Installation. Gabe Li (2006) 50
5.0b Mayor’s Celebration of the Arts. School of Architecture (2007) 51
5.0c Riverside Gallery within the School. School of Architecture (2007)
5.0d Utilities Included. AlphaProfit (http://www.alphaprofit.com/, 2007) 52
5.0e Loft or Apartment Typology. 2Modern (http://2modern.blogs.com/, 2007)
5.0f Proximity to Amenities. BrandflakesForBreakfast (http://www.brandflakesforbreakfast.com/, 2007)
5.0g Hamilton. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8613870@N04/, 2007) 53
5.0h Kitchener. Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sonja_010676/, 2007)
5.0i Burlington. Panoramio (http://www.panoramio.com/, 2007)
5.0j Sudbury. Sudbury Photos (http://www.sudburyphotos.ca/, 2007)
5.1a Village 1. Author (2007) 54
5.1b Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1c Village 1. Author (2007) 55
5.1d Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1e CLT Residence. Author (2007) 56
5.1f Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1g V1 Student Lounge. Author (2007) 57
5.1h Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1i A Possible Placement. Author (2007) 58
5.1j Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1k A Possible Result. Author (2007) 59
5.1l Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1m Untitled. Author (2007) 60
5.1n Familiar Engagement. School of Architecture (2007) 61
5.1o Untitled. Author (2007)
5.1p Architecture at Night. School of Architecture (2007) 62
5.1q Untitled. Author (2007)

xvi
5.2a Map of Downtown Cambridge. Author (2007) 65
5.2b Site Model. Author (2007) 67
5.2c Ground Floor. Author (2007) 69
5.2d Second Floor. Author (2007) 71
5.2e Third Floor. Author (2007) 73
5.2f Fourth Floor. Author (2007)
5.2g Typical Apartment. Author (2007)
5.2h Fifth Floor. Author (2007) 75
5.2i Roof. Author (2007)
5.2j Typical Apartment. Author (2007)
6.1a Public Servant Render. Author (2007) 82
6.1b Public Servant Diagram. Author (2007)
6.1c Event Render. Author (2007) 83
6.1d Event Diagram. Author (2007)
6.1e Infrastructure Render. Author (2007) 84
6.1f Infrastructure Diagram. Author (2007)
6.1g Community Engagement Render. Author (2007) 85
6.1h Community Engagement Diagram. Author (2007)
6.1i Residence Render. Author (2007) 86
6.1j Residence Diagram. Author (2007)
A Looking North-East along Water Street. Author (2007) 94
B Looking North along Water Strees. Author (2007) 95
C Looking South-West along Dickson Street. Author (2007) 94-95
D Looking South along Water Street. Author (2007) 96
E Looking South-East along Water Street. Author (2007) 96-97
F Public Servant - Looking North-East. Author (2007) 101
G Event - Looking West. Author (2007) 102
H Infrastructure - Looking South-East along Water Street. Author (2007) 103
I Community Engagement - Looking North. Author (2007) 104
J Residence - Looking South. Author (2007) 105
Ground Floor Plan. Author (2007) 109
Second Floor Plan. Author (2007) 111
Third Floor Plan. Author (2007) 113
Fourth Floor Plan. Author (2007) 115
Fifth Floor Plan. Author (2007) 117
Sixth Floor Plan. Author (2007) 119
East Elevation. Author (2007) 121
North Elevation. Author (2007) 123
West Elevation. Author (2007) 125
South Elevation. Author (2007) 127
North-South Section. Author (2007) 129
East-West Section. Author (2007) 131
Wall Section Detail. Author (2007) 134

xvii
A
New
Role
For
Student
Housing

1
 “In the early 20th century…down-
towns were centers of highly con-
centrated activity, with streets and
sidewalks that pulsated with hu-
man activity, the highest land val-
ues in the city, and the full spec-
trum of economic functions.”i

3
Introduction 1.0

Realizing the importance of a unifying and centralized city core,

mid-sized urban centres across North America are attempting numerous
initiatives to revitalize their downtown areas. One such example is hap-
pening in Cambridge, Ontario, Canada, the location which serves as the
site for this thesis.

In 2004, the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture, in

search of improved facilities and more space for its own growing popu-
lation, relocated to an abandoned silk factory in the heart of downtown
Cambridge. This move has acted as a catalyst for the revitalization of
the core by providing increased spending and a constant influx of young,
energetic minds. But above all, it has brought new opportunities for the
school and community to discover levels of communication and engage-
ment which would have never previously been possible.

The potential now lies in creating a central student residence

which would further the momentum of the current city revitalization al-
ready underway. But because the establishment of a satellite campus
in the downtown of a mid-sized city is still a relatively new endeavour,
the impact of a student residence on both the University and the city has
yet to be evaluated. In fact, specific conditions and requirements for a
student residence still need to be fully understood in this unique situa-
tion. Universities* have yet to realize the important opportunities which
residences hold with regards to community engagement, something most
Universities in their mission statements pride themselves on doing, but * For the purpose of this thesis the term ‘University’ is not
strictly limited to just that. ‘University’, in this case, is meant
fail to achieve. to encompass all post-secondary institutions (College,
Vocational, etc.) and will only be used for continuity and
By proposing a student residence for the University of Water- ease of understanding throughout the remaining paper.
loo’s School of Architecture in downtown Cambridge, Ontario, this thesis
will attempt to evoke discussion regarding the potential effects of student
housing on the downtown core of a deteriorating mid-sized city.

5
Mid-sized Cities 2.0

7
 We live in an evolving society where almost every aspect of
our communities is either flexible or dispensable. In fact, few aspects
of North American culture can be labelled as permanent. Contemporary
economies, culture, values, beliefs, urbanization and technology are ad-
vancing at such a rapid pace that constant change relating to not only
how we live, but where we live is unavoidable.

The Mid-sized City, or ‘MSC’, considered by some to be the

backbone communal typology of Canada, is no exception to the destruc-
tive nature of progress. Fortunately, a growing recognition of the value
of MSCs is beginning to counter-act the ‘dispensable’ stigma currently
associated with these quietly-deteriorating communities.

In transition.
Struggling badly.
Failing outright.i

9
 Fig. 2.1b

Fig. 2.1a Fig. 2.1c Fig. 2.1d

2.1 A Definition

As of the 2001 census, approximately 32% of Canadians called

a MSC homeiii. Canada has 84 MSCs with 34 located in Ontario. Rang-
ing in population between 50 000 to 500 000 people, MSCs are often
treated as micro-versions of their larger metropolitan counterpartsiv. The
same successful tools used for urban revitalization in metropolises such
as Toronto are frequently applied within MSCs and, more often than not,
A Mid-sized City Check Listii
Fig. 2.1a Intense Use of Personal Vehicles find little success. Current research is revealing that MSCs have their
Fig. 2.1b Celebrating Suburban Living own unique social atmospheres, policy issues and basic needs, perhaps
Fig. 2.1c A City Core in Deep Decline underscoring why progress in revitalizing MSCs has been tedious and
Fig. 2.1d An Urban Patchwork
slow. However, recent improvement initiatives, such as increasing down-
town density through an increase in residential developments, are begin-
ning to prove successful for the community scale of a MSC.

10
Issues 2.2

Because of their centralized mass and diverse population,

metropolis cities are easily able to adapt to changing market conditions;
MSCs cannot. The smaller and more dispersed urban forms of MSCs
tend unintentionally to discourage economic diversity within their down-
towns and encourage the various developments to take place at the city’s
fringev. Convincing entrepreneurs to develop their businesses where a
majority of the population is located is not difficult.

There was a time when living at the city’s edge was impractical
because basic amenities were located within the compact city core. But
today this situation is reversed. Cambridge, for example, in 2005, esti-
mated that 96 percent of the population lived outside the designated city
cores, leaving a mere 3 percent to live within the downtown boundariesvi.
The far reach of a personal automobile allows residents unprecedented
mobility and choice in virtually all aspects of their lives. Most people now
consider living within a MSC centre as inconvenient. What was once
valued as the city’s economic and political centre is now deemed out of
the way, inconvenient and no longer viable.

Beyond the perceived mobility, the seduction of the suburban

lifestyle also includes several preconceived notions such as affordable
housing, safer communities and a ‘laid back’ lifestyle. Suburbia now
reigns supreme as the residences of choice. The abandonment of MSC
centres has created an environment that supports why people believe
they had to leave in the first place. Lingering concerns such as personal
safety and a lack of street activity and/or cultural activity are common
beliefs made by people who avoid the city centre but these elements exist
ironically because of the city fringe being the locale of choice in the first
placevii.

11
 The decline of MSCs has been partly blamed on “society’s em-
phasis on the individual and private sector”viii but has accelerated with
the infinite reach of the automobile. Downtown crime has been both a
reason for decline as well as a result of it. The resulting city core is a
cold, barricaded and isolated island whose primary use has become that
of a ‘transportation corridor’. A resulting fear is the inevitable extinction of
centralized urban life.

Attempts at reversing MSC core decline have been quietly per-

sistent through the years and the current situation is certainly not due to a
lack of support. MSC centres have endured “continuous redevelopment
policies and projects [but most] still have serious economic problems and
are perceived, particularly by suburbanites as inconvenient, obsolete and
even dangerous places.”ix MSCs continue to lack a vital interaction be-
tween people and objects within their cores that would cause their econ-
omy to excel, enhancing their social environment and providing a unique
and appealing environment that would attract a diverse population back
into their downtowns.

12
A Creative Industry 2.3

What were once the life-blood for North American cities, manu-
facturing and service trades, are now being replaced by the more lucra-
tive and advantageous creative sectorx, “a fast-growing, highly educated,
and well-paid segment of the workforce,”xi that have, until recently, made
their home in the larger metropolitan regions. MSCs are now beginning
to see value in trying to attract this ‘creative class’ to their communities
instead. But how are they proposing a shift of people from mega-cities to
MSCs in the knowledge-based industry?

It has been shown that North American communities who suc-

cessfully maintain a prominent ‘creative class’ have a multitude of cre-
ative-generating elements, such as “a solid mix of high-tech industry,
plentiful outdoor amenities, and an older urban center… Creative-minded
people enjoy a mix of influences. They want to hear different kinds of mu-
sic and try different kinds of food. They want to meet and socialize with
people unlike themselves, trade views and spar over issues. The most
highly valued options were experiential ones---interesting music venues,
neighborhood art galleries, performance spaces, and theaters.”xii Other
common factors often include a pedestrian-friendly environment, public
transit and the presence of post-secondary institutions – which is not sur-
prising considering that creative people enjoy being around and inspired
by other creative people.

For MSCs, the presence of a post-secondary institution has

become the catalyst for urban revitalization. After all, universities are a The 21st century has brought with
it a renewed appreciation in the cre-
“treasured part of civilization: exemplary as…social milieu, and as cata-
ative sector. Becoming a reliable en-
lysts for ideas, knowledge, and cultural insight.”xiii Larger cities have
gine of economic growth, it has “gen-
well-established Universities because of the existing creative community erated roughly 20 million new jobs
that is already there to support it; MSCs are enticing these same institu- between 1980 and 2000 [within the
tions in order to attract the creative community to it. The result is a variety US], and is projected to add another
of unique needs for a university, its students and the existing MSC com- 10 million between 2004 and 2014.”xiv
munity.

13
2.3.1 Town & Gown

Many issues concerning the decline of MSC centres are be-

ing addressed by regional and local groups. One such organization
that is providing research about MSC revitalization is the Community-
University Research Alliance (CURA). Working as a sub-group of the
governmentally funded Social Sciences and Humanities Research Coun-
cil of Canada (SSHRCC), CURA is focused on supporting the “creation
of alliances between community organizations and [universities] which,
through a process of ongoing collaboration and mutual learning, will fos-
ter innovative research, training and the creation of new knowledge in ar-
eas of importance for the social, cultural or economic development of Ca-
nadian communities.”xv CURA is promoting the importance of “keeping
downtowns distinct from suburbs in terms of dynamics, activities, appear-
ance and markets”xvi as well as creating “magnets to attract people and
an appealing environment [in which] to retain them.”xvii To date, CURA
has been a major player in the development of Community-University
(or ‘Town & Gown’) partnerships and the relocation of some well known
Canadian post-secondary campuses to the heart of suffering MSCs.

“Weaving in rather than

walling out.”xviii

14
 Higher education is one of the most competitive businesses in
the world. As with most major corporations, it wants to attract the top
faculty, staff and students. To do so, it must also ensure that the sur-
rounding environment is equally creative and revitalized. After all, a viva-
cious urban setting comprised of historical buildings, new architecture,
commerce, services and a broad range of cultural activities is vital to the
success of any larger metropolitan city. For decades, many universities
have been “inner-directed, focusing on the school’s traditions…[while]
largely ignoring the world outside.”xix By relocating a campus immedi-
ately into a MSC core, this can no longer be the case. The survival of
these ‘Town & Gown’ relationships depends on the “mutually-beneficial
exchange”xx. Even if in its conception, the act of relocating a portion of
a university into a MSC has been a matter of self-preservation for both
partiesxxi, the Universities within small, pre-existing communities in their
presence are transforming the MSC into an extroverted and committed
community partner.

“Post-secondary education is at the heart of Canada’s economy

and society.”xxii The ways in which universities are enhancing MSC’s
are being better understood; however, fundamental institutional elements
and their specific roles within the community remain unexplored. What is
clear, however, is that the act of ‘weaving’ universities into the MSC com-
munity is “providing an opportunity for students to serve and learn…al-
lowing them to put their ideas and ideals into practice in a real world
context where their actions can make a difference.”xxiii

15
 Fig. 2.3a Fig. 2.3b

Fig. 2.3c Fig. 2.3d

“Because most universities will remain in their current locations

indefinitely, their futures will continue to be intertwined with their sur-
rounding neighbourhoods,”xxvi making the reconsideration of each institu-
tional element essential. In the past, the student residence rarely saw a
need to consider its immediate integration with and impact on a suffering
MSC core. Because of constantly increasing enrollment numbers, con-
A Revitalization Check Listxxiv
Fig. 2.3a Increase Density temporary campuses are now having to dissolve into their neighbouring
Fig. 2.3b 24-Hour City Life communities in order to provide adequate facilities for their students. The
Fig. 2.3c A Pedestrian Environment University of Waterloo is an example of this trend and will be discussed
Fig. 2.3d Interesting & Accessible
Public Spaces & Places further in the next chapter. As a result, new definitions and strategies
Fig. 2.3e Attracting Youth & Creative Cultures for some of their most fundamental elements MUST be considered. “As
Fig. 2.3f Historic Preservation partnerships between institutions of higher education and local commu-
Fig. 2.3g “Eyes on the Street”xxv nities have become more numerous and have enjoyed a higher profile,
Fig. 2.3h Waterfront Development
more attention has been paid to how they are formed, how they operate,
Fig. 2.3i A Sense of Community
and what they accomplish.”xxvii

16
 Fig. 2.3e Fig. 2.3g

Fig. 2.3h Fig. 2.3f Fig. 2.3i

Conclusion 2.4

However ‘successful’ and popular the implementation of com-

munity-University partnerships may have become, there has still been
little research conducted on the roles and reconsideration of specific uni-
versity elements and their place within a MSCs downtown context. This
thesis is an attempt to begin to evoke discussion regarding the roles and
design potential of a university student residence in the revitalization of
a mid-sized city centre. What elements should be present in a design
which would benefit not only the students residing in the space but the
community members as well? How can this be done while maintaining
specific university housing standards? What can a student residence
contribute to the mid-sized city culture and society? Why do student
residences even need to be reconsidered?

By performing and analyzing student and community surveys

regarding the existence of post-secondary institutions in a downtown set-
ting, and by proposing a massing strategy and an example residential de-
sign, this thesis hopes to initiate new discussions pertaining to the roles
of student housing in the revitalization of a mid-sized city centre.

17
University-Community Relations 3.0

19
 From its earliest beginnings, higher education has been commit-
ted to providing students with an all-encompassing learning environment
which, for the most part, has included the student residence. Throughout
its existence, however, the relationship between universities and commu-
nities has varied radically. This shifting relationship has caused the role
of the student residence within society to fluctuate from being a necessity
to being a nuisance.

The 21st century has ushered in an array of unique issues and

opportunities for universities and communities alike, issues such as the
mid-sized city core decline (Chapter 2), and opportunities such as the re-
surgence and strengthening of ‘Town & Gown’ partnerships. The result is
that relocated universities are now being forced to take into consideration
that which, through history, was well beyond the walls of the ivory tower
– the community. This has also put the student residence into a role
which it has never had before: as an agent for downtown revitalization.

In order to hypothesize how student housing can potentially be-

come a contributing member of a society while maintaining its long-stand-
ing commitment to provide students with a ‘well-rounded’ educational
environment, it is necessary first to examine the history of University-
Community relationships.

21
 Fig. 3.1a Fig. 3.1b

3.1 Early Education

3.1.1 The Academy

Credited with establishing civilization’s first locale for higher

learning, the Greek Philosopher Plato would lecture and inspire his pu-
pils under the notion that mankind’s nature is composed of wonder and
investigation, a mantra still echoed by contemporary universities. ‘The
Academy’ (which could more accurately be called Plato’s backyard) was
Early Education the place where the philosophizing mentor would “receive students for
Fig. 3.1a Plato the purpose of discussion and argument.”i His teaching encouraged in-
Fig. 3.1b Plato & Aristotle at the Academy
dividual thought, expression and opinion, while being surrounded by a
Plato with his most recognized student - Aristotle -
as depicted by the Renaissance painter, Raphel. society which was rewarding sameness and conformity. This intellectual
Fig. 3.1c Oxford University introversion would eventually lead to the elitist labeling of universities as
‘Ivory Towers’ - private, high-brow societies, guarded from the rest of pop-
ulation. For present-day universities, overcoming these “ancient, elitist
habits and customs dating from Plato’s Academy”ii has proven difficult.

22
 Fig. 3.1c

The Dawning of Higher Education 3.1.2

In the Medieval Ages, higher education began to focus more on

the “coming together of people with a common aim”iii with meetings ini-
tially held in various available rooms or halls within the community. Over
time, the almost exponential growth of an institution’s reputation, as well
as its physical mass, caused the inevitable formation of distinct campus
borders within a city (or town) environment. Like Plato’s Academy, the
exclusion of the community at-large from higher education had become
commonplace.

Some of the most long-standing examples of Medieval universi-

ties can be found in the United Kingdom. The most notable is the eight-
hundred-year-old Oxford University, a school closely mimicked in many
aspects by Canadian universities. As an historical example of higher
education, Oxford was an obvious force in setting early precedents for
student housing. First provided for students between 1249 and 1264,
residences at Oxford were established not from a purposeful educational
formula; rather, they were created to avoid the increasing rioting tak-
ing place between their students and the townspeople. Initially, Oxford
students found shelter in various boarding houses throughout the com-
munity but a growing tension between the two clashing lifestyles living
haphazardly amongst one another created an inherent need for Oxford’s
creation of “primitive halls of residence.”iv This decision would become
the first step in the complete physical and mental separation of a Univer-
sity campus from the community.
“We are all equal at birth and
...our future development is de-
Within a student residence at Oxford was a relatively small
pendent upon the nature and
body of students who would have become well known to their teachers.
variety of our experiences.”vi
Eventually referred to as the ‘English System’ of housing and labelled the
‘Residential College’, these were places which claimed to be committed
to the “education and development of the total student.”v

23
 Fig. 3.1d Fig. 3.1e Fig. 3.1f

3.1.3 Here Comes the West

Following closely in the footsteps of their European ancestors,

North American universities would unite educational and residential facili-
ties in the formation of a secluded campus. Like Oxford, Harvard Univer-
sity (est. 1637) – the oldest American university – was “centred on hall
buildings and residential colleges”vii where faculty members would live,
In North America eat and supervise students in conjunction with their teaching duties. This
Fig. 3.1d Memorial Hall, Harvard University arrangement, according to Harvard, promoted a democratic atmosphere
Fig. 3.1e Typical Harvard Gate
conducive to intellectual debates. The student residence was now raised
Like many similar Ivy League Facilities, Harvard
is surrounded by a continuous wall and numerous from mere shelter to a learning environment which united faculty and
gates. students. The community, however, remained at a distance.
Fig. 3.1f Henry Tappan
The first North American educator to voice the
In the mid-nineteenth century, Michigan University’s first presi-
opinion that a state University should be a center
for advanced study, not merely a place for voca- dent, Henry Tappan (1852 – 1863), argued against the English system
tional training. of housing, saying that “by withdrawing young men from the influence
Fig. 3.1g Thomas Jefferson of domestic circles and forming them into a separate community, they
Fig. 3.1h University of Virginia (1843)
Fig. 3.1i The Academic Village ‘Now’ are often led to contract evil habits, and are prone to fall into disorderly
Fig. 3.1j Jefferson’s Plan of the Village conduct.”viii Tappan’s solution was the German residential system.

The German system was a typology where universities became

“indifferent to students’ moral or social development [and instead] focused
on instruction and research.”ix Veering from the previous residential be-
lief of educating the whole student, the German system promoted student
housing as having “no longer fulfilled its purpose of being an extension of
the classroom, but rather was only a shelter for students.”x Seen then as
a waste of energy and resources, the on-campus residential hall waned
in popularity. Students were, for the first time, being viewed as adults
and were treated as such by being forced to seek independent means of
shelter away from the confines of the university.

24
 Fig. 3.1h

Fig. 3.1g Fig. 3.1i Fig. 3.1j

A Man with a Plan 3.1.4

One of the most determined and influential North American

campus planners was Thomas Jefferson. Through his rationalization of
the campus and its core elements, Jefferson hoped to “evoke the clarity
and potential of man’s rational understanding in contrast to the chaos of
the natural world.”xi Labelling his vision a ‘pavilion landscape, university
buildings were organized around a large, open space which is commonly
referred to today as “the Lawn”xii.

Student residences would be relocated once again to within the

confines of the university campus. These ‘Academic Villages’ promot-
ed campus unification, unlike the German system’s ideal of dispersion.
Jefferson’s introverted campus organization became one of the most ad-
opted university planning strategies in North America.

In Canada, universities were adopting this same planning strat-

egy because most of the young host communities were in the midst of
growing and establishing themselves. Having little to offer at the time in
terms of student boarding facilities, these communities and their growing
universities had no choice but to implement Jefferson’s relatively ordered
on-campus housing program in order to fulfill every student’s needs.

25
 Fig. 3.1l

Fig. 3.1k Fig. 3.1m

3.1.5 20th Century Learning and Living

The Second World War caused the world to stand still, result-
ing in virtually all aspects of people’s lives being affected in one way or
another. It seemed that nothing was able to go unscathed - including
universities. During the war, campus construction halted and enrollment
numbers plummeted as most of the perspective students were away in
Barrack Living combat. Following the conclusion of the War, however, post-secondary
Fig. 3.1k A WWII Barracks Scene education in North America experienced an explosion in popularity which
Fig. 3.1l Typical Barracks
was facilitated by the G.I. Bill of Rights.xiii Designed to provide greater
Fig. 3.1m Typical Barracks
opportunities for the returning veterans, the G.I. Bill of Rights allowed
for more people to gain a higher education than some universities were
physically prepared to offer. Student residences filled to complete oc-
cupancy without difficulty which meant that universities were scrambling
for additional shelter for the sudden overflow of students. The solution
was the re-use of recently-abandoned structures which were originally in-
tended for war purposes, such as soldier barracks.xiv Bought by schools
and converted into cheap and efficient residences, these buildings re-
mained stark places stripped of ornament and frills. Numerous students
lived in tight quarters with one-another sharing everything from rooms,
to bathrooms, to mess-halls. No longer referred to as ‘barracks’, thus
eradicating any war connotations, the ‘Dormitory’ was born.xv

“The secret nurseries of every vice

and the cages of unclean birds.”xvi

26
 Fig. 3.1q

Fig. 3.1n Fig. 3.1o Fig. 3.1p Fig. 3.1r

During the 1960’s Canada experienced its own educational

boom which resulted in a shortage of student housing. Educational fund-
ing was limited and, as a result, Canadian universities focused a majority
of their budget dollars toward what they deemed to be valuable educa-
tional facilities (laboratories and lecture halls) and allotted to their student
residences monetary scraps. The limited residential budgets resulted Dormitory Living
in cost-efficient, “multi-floor, large-capacity buildings.”xvii The anonymity University ‘Life’ Fig. 3.1n
of the hotel-like atmosphere of rows upon rows of identical rooms lining Residence Halls Fig. 3.1o
A Main Residence Hall Fig. 3.1p
equally bleak and noisy corridors proved efficient, yet, like the old war
York University Graduate Residence Fig. 3.1q
barracks, remained emotionless and uninspiring in their design. Residence at S.F. State University Fig. 3.1r

As the decades continued, numerous “dormitories were built to

house and feed students and to maximize the number of beds construct-
ed for the dollars available, with little or no regard for the quality of stu-
dents’ educational experiences and personal development.”xviii It would
be a number of years before the student residence would be witness to
any major re-tooling in terms of its execution and design.

27
3.2 Current University Status
3.2.1 21st Century

Currently North American universities are often generalized

into three categories based on their location: Rural (fig. 3.2a), Suburban
(fig. 3.2b), or the locale of focus for this thesis – Urban (fig. 3.2c).

The involvement of universities in urban affairs is by no means a

modern concept. Throughout the history of higher education, there have
been interactions between ‘Town & Gown’. The 21st century’s version
of University-Community relationships is one which places a university
within the immediate heart of a MSC downtown. This has meant that the
definition of what is considered to be an ‘urban campus’ must be revised
to include universities within the downtowns of MSCs, not just large met-
ropolitan centres.

While the scale of previous urban ‘campuses’ and their sur-

roundings allowed a university to look after its own affairs without connec-
tions to the surrounding community, an urban MSC campus cannot. The
often tired, dilapidated, and relatively small MSC core is physically unable
to provide a university the anonymity it would have had in a mega-city.
Universities are, therefore, discovering the need to become contributing
citizens to the surrounding community, and that, “much like their Medieval
predecessors, [they] are making the…everyday life and the world of aca-
demic investigation…a vital part of civic life.”xix

28
 Fig. 3.2a Fig. 3.2b

Fig. 3.2c

Once an “invisible substance”xx within society, universities are University Campus

finding themselves experimenting with new expansion strategies in order Downtown
Rural Fig. 3.2a
to keep pace with an evolving society. The establishment of a satellite Suburban Fig. 3.2b
campus within a MSC centre, has resulted in a university having to re- Urban ig. 3.2c
define what it considers to be its ‘campus’ and reconsider its position
within a community - a role that today goes beyond the mere produc-
tion of ‘tomorrow’s leaders’. Expectations for tired cities to be revitalized
by a university are also slowly being seen in various examples across
the United States and Canada, countries where the long term effects of
such a ‘Town & Gown’ are still relatively unknown. Two examples which
do currently exist are the thirty-year-old SCAD in Savannah, Georgia,
and the six-year-old Brantford-Laurier University in Brantford, Ontario.
Though almost two decades separate Laurier-Brantford from SCAD in
terms of realization, both have followed a similar pattern of revitalizing
and interacting with their new host communities. Unfortunately, they both
have not realized the full potential of this partnership.

29
 Fig. 3.2d

Fig. 3.2e Fig. 3.2f

3.2.2 Savannah College of Art and Design (SCAD) Savannah, Georgia

Founded in 1733xxi Savannah is one of America’s oldest MSCs.

In 1970 Savannah was Georgia’s second largest city when, like most
other MSCs of the time, its downtown fell victim to the growing popularity
of the suburbs and was quickly abandoned to become “severely impov-
erished and dispiritingly lifeless.”xxii Savannah officials were desperately
Symbols of SCAD searching for ways to fill the unoccupied storefronts and repopulate their
Fig. 3.2d Savannah Revitalization historic streets, when they were approached by SCAD. Founded in 1979
Fig. 3.2e A SCAD Renovation
by Paula Wallace, Richard Rowan, and May and Paul Poetter, SCAD
Fig. 3.2f Select SCAD Residences
(from top to bottom) was established as an independent school on a very tight budget and
Turner Annex was, therefore, an ideal candidate to infill Savannah’s seemingly unfill-
Turner House able core.
Pulaski Residence
Ogelthorpe Residence
Gaston House Since the purchase and renovation of its first building, a der-
Forsyth House elict armoury, the school has grown to more than 2 million square feet
in almost 60 buildings throughout Savannah’s historic core. As of 1999,
SCAD had a direct impact on its surrounding area with the spending of
over 40 million dollars and almost 1000 jobs.xxiii Today, Savannah is a
vibrant university town brimming with tourism, culture and a 24-hour city
life. Priding itself on its ability to entice “surrounding regeneration”xxiv
without heavily altering the downtown aesthetics, SCAD has dispersed
“...the SCAD population does not
leave the city in the evening. Stu- itself throughout the historic district and has, without a doubt, aided in the
dents, faculty and administrators successful rejuvenation of one of America’s most mature cities. “SCAD
both live and work in the downtown. puts people on the street. More than 6 000 students, faculty and staff
Students go between where they populate the downtown.”xxv
live and the library or labs and stu-
dios. Students, faculty and admin-
istrators particiapte in numberous
special evening programs. With up
to 5 000 people on the streets in
the evening, the streets are safer
and now, evening businesses have a
base of clientele. All of these infuse
the city with people and activity.” xxvi

30
 7

3
2 8
4
1
9
5

6 10
Fig. 3.2g

An opportunity missed by SCAD, however, is closer integra- Green Space

tion of student residences into the public realm. Many of its educational Savannah River
buildings make attempts to engage the public more intimately than other University Buildings
Student Residences
universities, but its residential projects have failed to demonstrate the
Weston House 1
same care in terms of public integration and city revitalization. A num- Dyson House 2
ber of SCAD’s residential projects lie in purchasing and converting exist- Turner Annex 3
ing buildings to suit their needs, certainly an admirable endeavor for a Turner House 4
Boundary Village 5
school, but, in doing so, have limited core revitalization to whatever pre- Barnard House 6
existing elements the renovated structure would have had in its previous Ogelthorpe House 7
life. These once private buildings (i.e. Hotels) often found on the outskirts Pulaski House 8
Gaston House 9
of the core - remain inclusive and fail to find public-engaging opportuni-
Forsyth House 10
ties. To date, SCAD has established eight residences, many of which are
within restored and converted structures throughout the city core. “The
disperse nature of SCAD converts downtown Savannah into the SCAD
campus. This accomplishes what all of the above strategies aspire to do;
it puts pedestrians on the streets. Students moving to classes in different
locations, going to the library or just conducting such business as buying
books puts...people on the streets daily.”xxvii

Fast Factsxxviii
Savannah
> Manufacturing, Tourism, and Creative City
SCAD
> Founded in 1979 by Paula Wallace, Richard Rowan,
May Poetter & Paul Poetter
> Has had an immediate downtown economic impact of approximately
$40 million/year
> Offers to the community use of select facilities
> 2005 enrollment was 6,851 students
> The direct impact of students upon the downtown include:
Restaurants $3.4 million
Housing $1.0 million
Transportation $4.5 million

31
 Fig. 3.2h Fig. 3.2i

Fig. 3.2j Fig. 3.2k

3.2.3 Laurier-Brantford University Brantford, Ontario

The Wilfred Laurier-Brantford campus opened its doors to stu-

dents in September 1999. Considered to be a thriving example of a Uni-
versity-Community partnership, Laurier-Brantford has had to put great
faith upon the support and generosity of the Brantford community. Like
any fulfilling relationship, however, the support has gone both ways.
Symbols of Laurier-Brantford
Fig. 3.2h Post House Residence Prior the University’s decision to find new space for its expand-
Fig. 3.2i The Carnigie Building
ing Arts program, Brantford’s central community was, much like Savan-
Fig. 3.2j Grand River Hall
Fig. 3.2k Downtown Brantfrod nah, desperately in need of a long-term urban renewal solution. Like
many mid-sized cities across Canada, Brantford’s core was quickly be-
coming a dissolute place, void of visitors. People were pushing further
and further away from the social heart of their hometown.

The introduction of post-secondary education to the city core

has meant that Brantford’s downtown environment has clearly begun to
once again show signs of prosperity. A steadily increasing population, the
renovation or demolition of numerous dilapidated structures, and count-
less development projects are all, without a doubt, a result of the injected
educational and youth demographic. This sleepy Ontario town is getting
the second chance it so rightfully deserves.

In the early stages of this Town & Gown example, realization

that a portion of a university campus in their core may be their last chance
at a drastic change caused many members of the Brantford community
to step up to the plate and pool their energy and resources in an effort
to entice Laurier into their home. The risk has certainly paid off. The
campus, which initially took up a long abandoned movie theatre, has ex-
panded to engulf 10 core buildings within only six years. The University
has embraced its evolving urban development and “continues to play a
key role in helping transform downtown Brantford from a once derelict
core into a vibrant centre known for its educational, historical and cultural
attractions.”xxix

32
 5

3
2

1
Fig. 3.2l

Nevertheless, the Laurier-Brantford campus demonstrates a Green Space

similar developmental path as SCAD. Though it prides itself on physical Downtown Buildings
urban revitalization, very little is said about its revitalization of the com- University Buildings
Student Residences
munity. The University buildings are mostly for the use of the staff and
Grand River Hall 1
students and all but ignore the chance to engage the surrounding popula- Rizzo Residence 2
tion. The campus residences, which are only a half decade old and are Lawyer’s Village 3
no more than a seven minute walk to any other campus building,xxx also Post House 4
Wilke’s House 5
neglect the possibility of giving more back to a community than a reno-
vated building or an influx in population.

Fast Factsxxxi
Brantford
> Manufacturing town with an economy in transition
> Said to have been one of the worst-off Downtowns in Ontario.
Wilfred Laurier-Brantford
> Founded in conjunction between Wilfrid Laurier University,
Mohawk College and Nippising University
> Doors opened in 1999
> Enrollment went from 39 to 1500 students over 6 years
> Has so far found success in the reuse of significant buildings
> Has encouraged a significant increase in spending:
Restaurants $1.1-$1.5 million
Food $1.7-$2.4 million
Housing $4.2-$5.6 million
Transportation $1.8-$2.4 million
> A 2005 study revealed an Economic impact of
$32 million/year for Brantford

33
3.3 Residence as a Revitalizing Force

For a majority of its existence, the student residence has been

adamantly protecting young minds from the surrounding physical world.
Acting as youth-filled incubators, universities and their student residenc-
es have maintained an educational force field which has limited a stu-
dent’s personal interactions and experiences to within boundaries of the
campus. There has been little reason for them to do otherwise. Larger
city centres, being able to sustain themselves, have allowed the urban
student residence the luxury of being invisible. Rural and suburban cam-
puses can afford the space to appropriately distance their residences
from the dangers of the outside world. A student residence in a MSC can
afford to do neither.

MSC revitalization strategies have always stressed the vital role

housing plays in the renewal of a suffering city centre. In fact, a university
presence and residential development are two elements being credited
in reports as potential downtown saviours, but rarely are they mentioned
in unison. The obvious application of a university residence as a tool for
downtown core revitalization has been left relatively unexplored. The
escalating popularity of satellite campuses infiltrating MSCs creates an
opportunity to begin to do so.

As previously discussed, existing examples of student residenc-

es affecting a MSC can be found as far away as Savannah, Georgia,
and as close as Brantford, Ontario, but to date, the student residences or
Revitalize: “laboratories for living”xxxiii have yet to realize their potential as contribut-
trans. To restore to vitality; to put
ing members of their respected city centres.
new life into. Hence re vitalized ppl.
a., re vitalizing vbl. n.xxxii

34
 Fig. 3.3a Fig. 3.3b

Fig. 3.3c Fig. 33d

In order to keep up with the times, student residences must be University Campus
willing to adapt. The recent escalation in the number of developing com- Downtown
Rural Fig. 3.3a
munity-University partnerships has resulted in the need for exactly that:
Suburban Fig. 3.3b
the reconsideration and adaptation of student residences within their ad- Urban Fig. 3.3c
opted communities-in-need. Inserting a progressive university culture Mid-sized City Fig. 3.3d
into a declining downtown core has resulted in new issues, needs and
benefits for the school, the community and the students alike.

Outside of the classroom, the student residence is the place

where students will be influenced and inspired; pushed and pulled; gain
and lose friendships and discover exactly how it is they fit into the world.
It is without question that a student residence plays a vital role in a per-
son’s social and cultural education and is part of the reason why higher
education has long been credited with producing the leaders of tomorrow.
The relocation of universities and the development of student residences
in MSCs provide an opportunity to inspire the leaders of today.

Using the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture, its

home, Cambridge, Ontario, and its current lack of organized Student
Residences, the following chapters begin to explore the potential of the
Student Residences as a MSC revitalizing force within a relatively imma-
ture ‘Town & Gown’ environment.

“The urban University is a much dif-

ferent entity than a business or a gov-
ernment agency. The role or position
of the University is unique in the pan-
theon of urban organizations..[urban]
Universities are not simply in the
city but of the city, and the impor-
tance of activities with their sur-
rounding environment is central
to the life of the institutions.”xxxiv

35
Cambridge, Ontario, Canada 4.0

37
 7

5
4
2

Fig. 4.0a

“Ten buildings including two or three log homes, a distillery, Ontario

Waterway
and a log blacksmith shop”i were all that comprised the village of Shade’s
National Border
Mill in 1820. Located along the Grand River, Shade’s Mill, still referred
Cambridge
to today as ‘Galt’, would eventually mature into a thriving industrial town. Major City
Founded by William Dickson and Absalom Shade, Galt would eventually (Kilometres)
amalgamate with nearby Preston and Hespeler to form the City of Cam- 1 Sudbury (449)
bridge. 2 Kitchener-Waterloo (22)
3 Windsor (277)
4 Niagara (124)
5 Toronto (98)
6 Ottawa (534)
7 Montreal (625)

39
 Fig. 4.0b Fig. 4.0c

Fig. 4.0d

Designated thirty years ago (1973) as the city centre of Cam-

bridge, Galt has experienced many highs and lows throughout its two-
hundred year history. The construction of the Park Hill Dam in 1840 acted
as a catalyst elevating Galt from a mere Southern Ontario village to a
thriving industrial town. Between 1851 and 1891, the number of factories
Early Cambridge in Cambridge rocketed from 13 to 162 - a majority of which were located
Fig. 4.0b An early view of the Skyline upon the banks of the Grand River. Galt’s once leafy, tree-filled hori-
Fig. 4.0c Grand River Industry
zon quickly filled with recognizable symbols of prosperity and progress:
Fig. 4.0d A typical Textile machine
smoke-billowing chimneys and sky-scraping church spires.

40
 Fig. 4.0e

Even though these now historic skylines stretched to the nearby City of Cambridge
towns of Preston and Hespeler, neither of the two were able to rival the Waterway
industrial success being experienced by Galt. In fact, up to the 20th cen- Hespeler
Preston
tury, “Galt remained one of the largest and most important towns in the
Galt
area.”ii A kinship between the three towns was unofficially solidified in
the late 19th century thanks to the construction of an electric inter-urban
railway which transported up to “36 000 passengers a month”iii from town
to town.

Success continued up to and throughout the Second World War.

Galt, Hespeler and Preston had become one of the major manufacturing
trifectas of war-related textiles and were dominant suppliers to Canada
and her allies. While countless communities were suffering during the
global war, for Galt, Hespeler and Preston, the future looked bright.

41
 Fig. 4.0g

Fig. 4.0f

Following the conclusion of the War, however, the increasing

popularity of the personal automobile and demand for ‘a home to call
your own’ meant that families were abandoning the confined urban cores
in pursuit of the expansive suburban dream. This, in combination with
the emerging neon-landscape of Highway 24, meant that the once lively
downtown environments would begin to slowly fade from people’s daily
Symbols of Cambridge
Fig. 4.0f A view from the School lives. To make matters worse, 1973 saw the amalgamation of the three
Fig. 4.0g Main Street, 1972 Flood towns into the City of Cambridge, which, instead of accomplishing the
Fig. 4.0h Main & Water Streets intended unification of the three communities, seemed to only confuse
Fig. 4.0i Cambridge Citizens
Fig. 4.0j Contemporary Cambridge the new city’s identity. “Preston and Hespeler…were insistent that their
historical [individuality] not be swallowed up in a ‘Greater Galt,”iv which
was proclaimed city centre. The result has been 30 years of continual
efforts to formalize the urban soul of Cambridge - with little success.

42
 Fig. 4.0h Fig. 4.0i

Fig. 4.0j

Today, the City of Cambridge is home to approximately 124,000

v
people and, even with its historical significance and enthusiastic commu-
nity, for years has struggled to overcome its status as just another MSC
with an obsolete downtown core. Fortunately for Cambridge, proactive
groups, including the Business Improvement Association (BIA) and the
previously mentioned CURA, are dedicating efforts toward reversing the
unfavourable downtown trend through various revitalization strategies
and are beginning to see results.

Fast Facts
Cambridgevi
> Comprised of three Mill towns along located along the Grand River
> Was once a thriving manufacturing city
> Has a compact downtown full of historic limestone buildings
> Limited retail and office sectors

School of Architecture
> UW School of Architecture needed space, had no money
> Opened in September 2004
> Spectacular learning environment
> Community use of Gallery and Lecture Hall
> Students & Faculty are getting involved in community

“History is made every day, but

there are some days and events
and even moments that change the
world. Fifty years from now, histori-
ans may very well look back at last
night’s signing ceremony between
the University of Waterloo School
of Architecture and the City of Cam-
bridge as the day that proved to be
the catalyst for this city’s future.”vii

43
 Fig. 4.1a

4.1 A Breath of Creative Air

Downtown Cambridge
Downtown Boundary In 2004, the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture re-
Business Improvement Area located from its main campus in Waterloo to an abandoned Silk Mill in
20-minute Walking Radius
the heart of downtown Cambridge. The move introduced approximately
10-minute Walking Radius
300 staff and students to Cambridge’s core as well as a much needed
5-minute Walking Radius
Green Space sense of progress and energy. Prior to the renovation, the deserted fac-
Grand River tory stood as a depressive void along the once active river edge. Now
Attractions it is continuously alive as a 24-hour ‘creation factory.’ What once easily
1 Outlet Mall camouflaged into the dark night now stands proud as a lit beacon dem-
2 Sculpture Garden
onstrating potential and change. And, for the first time since its formation
3 Horticultural Society
4 Cambridge Theatre 30-years ago, the School of Architecture is now in direct and constant
5 Armory interaction with whom the students are taught to serve and enhance, the
6 Centennial Park community. However, still in its freshman years and therefore lacking
7 UW School of Architecture
8 Queen’s Square some fundamental elements, such as a student residence, the School
9 Cambridge Library definitely has room to grow.
10 Carnegie Library
11 Farmer’s Market
The Industrial Revolution meant that most cities turned their
12 Old City Hall
13 New City Hall back on the water because it was then dirty and unhealthy. The School of
Art’s Centre Architecture now has the opportunity to not only face the metaphoric river
Civic Square of today - the downtown - but to welcome, engage and be part of it. A
14 Mill Race
15 Dickson Park better understanding of what the School can do for Cambridge and what
Cambridge can do for the school is a necessary exercise which could
result in a new university building which interacts and, more importantly,
enhances a lack-luster downtown environment.
Fig. 4.1a The University of Waterloo’s
School of Architecture
Cambridge, Ontario, Canada

44
 14
15

13
12 6
11

10

9 5
8
7

Fig. 4.1b

45
A Role in Revitalization 5.0

47
 Since its incorporation into higher education, the Student Resi-
dence has been portrayed as being a vital component of a well-rounded
post-secondary education. More often than not, however, it has been dis-
connected from forming any worth-while relationship with the city or town
in which it stands. Instances in the past when a Student Residence was
located within an urban setting often resulted in “feelings of distrust, dis-
interest, disdain”i and even violent physical and verbal conflicts between
students and members of the community. The unique and distinct life-
styles of the two social groups rarely had an opportunity to interact with
one another in a constructive atmosphere even though they were living
as neighbours. Whether the Student Residence has been located on- or
off-campus, it has constantly been a secret world utilized and understood
by its inhabitants, and has ignored the community even though it is the
community that students are taught to strengthen.

“The city then was the centre of so-

cial life, the place in which institu-
tions naturally gathered, where am-
bitious corporations believed they
had to have their headquarters…
They were where we all looked for
the kind of public life that gives cit-
ies their special quality…the chance
meetings and random, unexpected
social accidents of life. They were
characterized by the cafe and the
court house as well as the cinema
and the university. The city cen-
tre was also the place that could
accommodate the awkward, not
always picturesque aspects of ur-
ban reality that suburbs find too
uncomfortable to deal with…”ii
49
 Fig. 5.0a

The contemporary university has made great strides since its

origins in the gardens of Plato’s Greek home. The university has been
repeatedly erected in rural, suburban and urban settings where it has
been able to proudly stand in solitude, unobtrusively off to the side or
fade quietly into a city fabric. In all of these circumstances student resi-
dences have essentially remained the same. They continue to be social
laboratories unfortunately cut-off from the realities and complexities of
the outside world. Often uninspiring and horribly outdated in design, the
contemporary residence remains remote and static in a civilization on the
move. A more recent version of Student Residential layout has begun a
new chapter in the history of Student Residences. Seen more and more
over the past decade is the abandonment of the familiar dormitory-style
residence (multi-storied, shared washrooms and sleeping quarters) in
favour of the apartment-style layout. Students are choosing to live in a
more private, more adult-like atmosphere over the traditional typology.

More recently has the move of some university facilities into

downtown MSCs raised cause for a reconsideration of the responsibili-
ties of a University and its components within an economically suffering
setting. Some of the new roles that universities are having to take on
are that of a corporation, a developer and a community enhancer. The
new goal for urban universities is to “not only focus on training knowl-
edge workers but to enhance the social, cultural, and intellectual life of
the community that chartered it or in which it was founded.”iii Though in
its infancy in Canada, positive results for Universities and communities
are being demonstrated as these newly formed Town & Gown affiliations
begin to ripen.

50
 Fig. 5.0b Fig. 5.0c

The most obvious example previously discussed is the Univer-

sity of Waterloo’s School of Architecture. Its main building demonstrates
that universities in MSCs are capable of creating buildings with the com-
munity in mind. Almost half of the School of Architecture’s building is pub-
licly accessible and, more often than not, is teeming with a mix of staff,
students and curious visitors; according to the School’s Director, almost School of Architecture
200 000 visitors a year explore the School’s facilities. It is this unique ‘Pocket Park’ Installation Fig. 5.1a
learning environment that is providing young architectural students the Mayor’s Celebration of the Arts Fig. 5.1b
Riverside Gallery within the School Fig. 5.1c
chance to practice precisely what is preached to them. Projects are con-
stantly being dreamt, designed and executed under the watchful public
eye. Inquisitive conversations between the members of the community
and members of the University have begun to chip away the ivory tower
and have allowed the school to become an extension of the downtown
rather than a hindrance. The question then becomes, can a student resi-
dence get similar, if not better, results? And can it maintain a necessary
commitment of safety to the staff and students which comprise its semi-
permanent population?

51
 Fig. 5.0d

Fig. 5.0e Fig. 5.0f

Students thrive on the interaction and variety that is unique to

city cores. This makes their lifestyle an obvious match for urban living
but, because common urban elements such as abundance of people,
variety of commercial and retail outlets and cultural events are current-
ly lacking from downtowns of MSCs, making them a desirable place in
which to reside for students becomes a difficult task.
Student Residential Desires
Fig. 5.0d Utilities included
Fig. 5.0e Loft or Apartment Typology According to the CURA survey, a majority of students attend-
Fig. 5.0f Proximity to basic amenities ing the School of Architecture are living on the extreme cusp of what
is considered by the City to be the downtown boundaryiv. The lack of
students renting within the core is quite simply because there is a lack
of rental units that suit their unique needs. Student seek housing which
offers 4-month leases and includes utilities, affordability, and proximity to
peersv. These characteristics are not often practical in the downtowns of
MSCs. If finding suitable accommodations within a MSC heart is often
next to impossible, students simply look elsewhere for more desirable
living arrangements. After all, they have no financial or emotional invest-
ment within the downtown which would persuade them to commit to living
there.

A new, centralized Student Residence is a mediating solution

which would benefit all parties involved in a new urban campus. The
students would be able to live amongst their peers in an environment
designed specifically for their housing needs and financial abilities; the
community would gain a much needed boost in its population density and
economy; and a school would gain a landmark environment in which stu-
dents would not only be housed and educated, but would also be thrust
into contributing to the community in which the residence would stand.
Rather than placing a typical Student Residential typology into a down-
town, which is often what happens, the layout, use and accessibility of
the structure must be re-thought. A reconsideration of student residences
and their potential benefits within a suffering mid-sized city is critical.

52
 Fig. 5.0g Fig. 5.0h

Fig. 5.0i Fig. 5.0j

Organizing satellite campuses within dilapidated MSCs is fast

becoming the 21st century revitalization trend of choice. In Ontario,
along with Hamilton, Kitchener, Burlington, and Sudbury, are MSCs vy-
ing for university programs to relocate into their cores and breathe new
life into their once vibrant and active downtowns. But when and if these
programs do get established, the student residences will most likely vary Various Downtowns
little from the common model of introverted student societies. There is Hamilton Fig. 5.0g
now opportunity to evolve the student residence to suit the needs of not Kitchener Fig. 5.0h
only the students but of the MSC community as well. A Student Resi- Burlington Fig. 5.0i
Sudbury Fig. 5.0j
dence as a tool for revitalization could result in creating a better environ-
ment for all.

The following is an outlined design approach which asks: Can a

Student Residence veer from a tradition of seclusion toward community
engagement and urban improvement?

53
 Fig. 5.1a

5.1 Where to Begin

5.1.1 An Out-dated Typology

Student Residences continually display certain traits that, al-

though they have been labelled successful for a number of years, now
need to be reconsidered if they are to adequately address the contempo-
rary issue of downtown revitalization.

UW Residence These introverted student incubators are sometimes found iso-

Fig. 5.1a Village 1 lated upon campus grounds.
Fig. 5.1c Village 1

Fig. 5.1b

54
 Fig. 5.1c

Other examples consist of identical, clustered models. From

above, these ‘villages’ resemble expanding root systems, slowly expand-
ing in hopes of merging with their surroundings. However, at grade they
unite to form a barricade, encasing students into an internalized, intro-
verted environment, void of virtually all real-world interaction.

Fig. 5.1d

55
 Fig. 5.1e

Sometimes the residences are secluded from not only the com-
munity but the rest of the campus, as well.

Living at UW
Fig. 5.1e CLT Residences
Fig. 5.1g V1 Student Lounge

Fig. 5.1f

56
 Fig. 5.1g

The addition of game rooms, media rooms and cafeterias en-

sures that these student oases fulfill virtually every need of an average
student. Such designs mean the human need to explore, interact and
learn from the world goes unfulfilled. A key educational tool is lost.

Fig. 5.1h

57
 Fig. 5.1i

5.1.2 But in a Mid-sized City Core...

Placing the traditional student residential typology in the heart

of a MSC is, quite simply, selfish and inadequate.

MSC Residence
Fig. 5.1i A Possibile Placement
Fig. 5.1k A Possible Result

Fig. 5.1j

58
 Fig. 5.1j

The Student Residence would ultimately be severed from the

surrounding community. Becoming ‘just another downtown building’, the
Student Residence would fail to inspire and influence downtown improve-
ment. Social responsibility is an important obligation that must not be
ignored.

Fig. 5.1l

59
 What if Student Residences were to instead follow the example
set by the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture? Its relocation
from main campus to the tired heart of Cambridge could have carefully
resulted in educational inclusion filtering the Town from the Gown.

Fig. 5.1m

60
 Fig. 5.1n

Instead, the Ivory Tower label was abolished and the School’s
doors were held wide-open to the public. The result has been a unique
learning environment, as well as a satisfying social experiment, where
staff, students, and community have amalgamated into a unified com-
munity learning and engaging with one another.
The School of Architecutre
Familiar Engagment Fig. 5.1n

Fig. 5.1o

61
 Fig. 5.1p

5.1.3 Can this work for Student Housing?

How can a Student Residence be reconsidered so that it trans-

forms into a revitalizing public structure which provides safe housing for
University students? Can it also maintain an important aspect which has
existed in Student Residences for all of their history, which is the fact
that they are the locale during a Student’s educational career where vital
Fig. 5.1p Architecture at Night peer relationships are forged and where the Student community is able to
support one another? The answer is yes, with a few scaled reconsidera-
tions.

Fig. 5.1q

62
 The following represents extensive research regarding the de-
sires of students (in terms of education within a MSC) and the community
(in terms of revitalization). The information was gathered through various
readings and, more importantly, Student and Community surveys, imple-
mented in 2006 throughout Cambridge, Ontario.v It became obvious that
the surveys would be the most important step in the design of any Univer-
sity structure within a MSC core.

Reconsidering Site | XL
Determining an appropriate location in a MSC core.

Reconsidering The Immediate | L

How to use and improve the existing environment.

Reconsidering At Grade | M
Designing for a public life [that world].

Reconsidering Residence | S
Designing for a student life [their world].

63
Downtown Cambridge
Business Improvement Area
Proposed Site
Grand River
Green Space
Pedestrian Traffic
Main Vehicular Route
Attractions
1 Outlet Mall
2 Sculpture Garden
3 Horticultural Society
4 Cambridge Theatre
5 Queen’s Square
6 Old City Hall
7 New City Hall/Arts Centre
8 Mill Race
Amenities
9 School of Architecture
10 GRT Bus Terminal
11 Main Street Retail
12 Farmer’s Market
13 Library
14 Grocery Store
15 Park & Recreation Centre
16 Drug Store
5.2 Reconsidering Site | XL
5.2.1 Student Expectations

Site selection can often be a tedious exercise and selecting the

site for a MSC student residence is no exception. It is very important to
keep in mind student’s needs and desires in housing. According to the
CURA survey, students’ at the School of Architecture identify proximity
to the school and amenities, an attractive and safe location, and acces-
sibility to public transit as the most important residential characteristics.
Finding a site that displays each of these characteristics is key because
the modern student tends to be very selective, especially when it comes
to university residencesvi.

5.2.2 Community Expectations

MSCs share many characteristics. Their downtowns are un-

der-utilized, the personal automobile is the transportation of choice, and
city streets are more often lifeless than not and are perceived as being
unsafe. MSC communities, therefore, have many similar desires for their
downtowns, most of which can be addressed with a thoughtfully-located
Student Residence.

“In city centres, especially outside shop and of-

fice hours, residential uses can help to create a
‘living heart’. The twenty-four hour life brought
by residents is a crucial contribution to its vital-
ity. More residences result in greater demand for
facilities in the city centre; thereby increasing
the number and mix of uses. There is a strong
perception that ‘peopled places’ see safer.”vii

64
 16

8 14

15 7

6
12

11

13
5 10
9

Fig. 5.2a

65
Proposed Footprint
Green Space
Pedestrian Path
New Pedestrian Path
Points of Interest
1 Carnegie Library
2 Post Office
3 Farmer’s Market
4 New Civic Square
5 Old City Hall
6 New City Hall
Points of Revitalzation
7 Empty Building
8 Parking Lot
9 ‘Back of House’
10 Enclosed Green Lot

5.3 Reconsidering The Immediate | L

The downtowns of MSCs have become increasingly character-

ized by ‘dead spaces’: “uninteresting parking lots, ramps, vacant build-
ings, and blank-walled offices.” viii When a potential site is chosen, there- 1
fore, it becomes important to recognize how a Student Residence could
positively affect the nearby surroundings by designing to aid, not hinder,
future improvements and developments. Nearby imperfections, such as
abandoned green spaces and closed buildings, hold the potential to have
their own reconsideration and renovation if an increase in density were
to occur within close proximity. The site should be far from esthetically 10
perfect, allowing the Student Residence to become an instigator of im-
provement rather than just a contributor and to eventually encourage pe-
destrian activity throughout the site rather than just around the residence.

“The vitality and positive image of a downtown

often are gauged not by economic indicators, but
by the volume of pedestrian activity. Downtowns
without pedestrians look lifeless and boring,
whatever the quality of the built environment.”ix

66
 6

4
3

8
2

8
7
8
8

Fig. 5.2b

67
Cambridge Community
School Community
Main Entry
Area Label
1 Specialty Convenience Store
2 Multi-Purpose Public Space
3 24-Hour Coffee Shop
4 Information & Security
5 Residential Entry
6 Storage/Office
7 Washroom
8 Display
9 New Landscaping

5.4 Reconsidering Grade | M

5.4.1 Community Expectations

In order for a Student Residence to become a contributing

member of the community it must open its doors for public movement
and use. Pedestrian permeability in many MSC building typologies would
contribute greatly to urban revitalization by encouraging people move-
ment, visual connections, and social entanglements. It would also pre-
vent ‘defensive architecture’, an uninviting method of design which coun-
ter-acts urban revitalization by hindering pedestrian circulation. Desires
for their downtown were expressed by the Cambridge community through
the CURA survey and follow the same train of thought. They include
increasing the range of downtown activity, providing community ameni-
ties, and more retail outlets. To include these within a Student Residence
is to provide accessible and enjoyable public spaces. Finally, it is the
continual presence of people at street level that would not only bring life
to a quiet city core, but would also be the “means by which a space is
naturally policed.”x

“The pivotal ground floor. Instead of being en-

closed and self-contained, it should be blown
open and encouraged to blend with nearby spac-
es. In doing so, public and pedestrian movement
would be encouraged because of new found per-
meability and the integration of environments.”xi

Accessible from front to back, this Student Residence shows

virtually no characteristics of ‘defensive architecture’ and provides the
Cambridge community, and the staff and students of the university an
environment in which they can shop, rest, socialize or merely observe.
As an extension of the street and the public realm, this space has the
potential to become an “arena for a diverse group of people to engage
in dialogue and debate” and be accessible and used by all,”xii providing
what all cities strive to create for their populous.

68
 6 8

7
6 9
8
3

2
6

1
5
8 7

4
9
7
8

01 02 03 04 05 06

Fig. 5.2c

69
Cambridge Community
School Community
Area Label
1 Quiet Study Area
2 Media Lounge
3 LED Communication Wall
4 Multi-purpose Student Lounge
5 Storage/Office
6 Washroom

5.4.2 Students & School

Providing a safe living environment for students to interact with

one another is important, not only to the students themselves, but to the
University as well. It is understood that the Student Residence is an es-
sential place where valuable life-long relationships between peers are
formed. It is also where students are able to learn how to be responsible
and contributing adults within a community of their own.

“The built environment can serve (like fash-

ion and facial expression) as a form of non-
verbal communication that instructs city
dwellers as to what is acceptable where.”xii

The student social space within this Residential design example

is elevated to the second level yet is able to provide strong visual con-
nections and natural surveillance of the community and the downtown
environment by way of outwardly focused spaces and mezzanines.

Though only physically accessible by members of the school

community, this student social space provides a visual connection be-
tween ‘Town & Gown’ because it is communication that allows a famil-
iarity between social groups to form. To further this idea, this project
includes a massive LED communication wall (3) that, when connected to
a digital network, would enhance ubiquitous communication by becoming
an electronic bulletin board, accessible by all.

70
 2

1 5

01 02 03 04 05 06

Fig. 5.2d

71
Cambridge Community
School Community
Area Label
1 Don Suite
2 LED Communitication wall
3 3-Person Suite
4 2-Person Suite
5 Laundry Facilities
6 Floor Lounge
7 Storage
8 Bedroom
9 Living & Kitchen
10 Washroom
11 Storage

5.5 Reconsidering Residence | S

5.5.1 Students Expectations

Discovering what exactly students look for in housing is an ob-

vious and vital step toward designing a MSC Residence. Part of the
CURA student survey was specifically geared toward student residential
desires, and the results revealed some very interesting information.

Of the 380 respondents a mere 1.6% expressed a desire to live

in a ‘Student Residence’; it may be the out-of-date university housing sys-
tems many students were adamantly against in their responses. The ma-
jority of students also indicated that either apartments or lofts with their
own bedrooms would be their living environment of choice over a shared,
dormitory style space. Other results indicated such things as little need
for parking, higher student spending on restaurants than grocery stores,
and a desire to live with one to three other people.

The design of student suites in this design example was driven

by these results. Apartment occupancy ranges from one to four people.
Considering the high number of times that students eat out, only a small
kitchenette is included in each apartment. The individual bedrooms are
all organized around the perimeter of the building in order to provide a
greater street presence of students and activity.

“With a reconsidered student residence within

a MSC comes a greater vitality to a downtown
core. The more centralized critical mass of peo-
ple can improve the safety of the city centre, es-
pecially at night, by merely improving building
frontage and eradicating the vacant or derelict
appearance of upper floors. Outside of store
hours, the streets would be under constant sur-
veillance, increasing the sense of security.”xiv

72
 1

7 3
9

8
7
4 11

2 4
11
8 10
10
4
4

4
8
4
7
9

4 7 5

6
8

01 02 03 04 05 06 Undergraduate Graduate Faculty

Fig. 5.2f Fig. 5.2g

73
 Cambridge Community
School Community
Area Label
1 Don Suite
2 LED Communitication wall
3 3-Person Suite
4 2-Person Suite
5 Laundry Facilities
6 Floor Lounge
7 Storage
8 Bedroom
9 Washroom
10 Living & Kitchen
11 Bachelor Apartment
12 1-Bedroom Apartment

3
7

3 2
3 5.5.2 School Expectations

A Student Residence in a MSC can potentially take on many

new roles. It could become a community centre, an agent of urban revi-
4
talization, and a source of constant surveillance. It will always be, how-
4
ever, an important place for staff and students to provide support and
give valuble advice to one another. A Student Residence has the ability
to create a casual environment in which students can become part of a
community and gain an important sense of belonging.
4 7
4
“Of course the feelings that an individual has to-
wards a city are influenced by the degree to
which that city fulfills the individual needs…
7 5
One of the most fundamental of all human
needs is the need for a sense of belonging.”xv

4 6
It is common for university residences to be categorized into
specific years. Graduate housing and Undergraduate housing, for ex-
ample. This separation tends to increase a divide between the years
that is often difficult to bridge. This project instead suggests a Residence
that houses a variety of ages - from undergraduate students to faculty.
In doing so, mentorship, guidance, and advice could become valuable
daily experiences otherwise unobtainable in the stressful environment of
a lecture hall or studio. A Student Residence is a home away from home
where everyone is on a level playing field and should, therefore, create
a welcoming, comfortable, and safe atmosphere for all of its inhabitants
and visitors.

01 02 03 04 05 06

Fig. 5.2e

74
 9

10

01 02 03 04 05 06 Undergraduate Graduate Faculty

Fig. 5.2i Fig. 5.2j

75
 11
7

2 11

11
12

11

7
11

01 02 03 04 05 06

Fig. 5.2h

76
New Roles for a Student Residence 6.0

77
 The deterioration of MSCs is an all too familiar urban crisis
throughout North America. The exponential growth of globalization and
technology are causing MSC cores and their unique downtown environ-
ments to reach the brink of extinction. In hopes of reversing this negative
trend, numerous revitalization strategies are being implemented, includ-
ing one which has been demonstrating some success: the incorporation
of universities into MSC cores. After all, “universities are perhaps [the
greatest] untapped urban revitalization resource”i.

Learning from past experiences, these ‘Town & Gown’ associa-

tions are being redefined to suit the contemporary needs of universities
and the cities in which they now reside. “Historically, many institutions
have cut themselves off from their neighbours”ii or have arrogantly infil-
trated their surroundings forcing tension between distinct social groups
– transient students and permanent community members. Such tension
now would eradicate any hope of a revitalized MSC downtown. As a
result, rather than focusing on self-preservation, universities are willingly
collaborating with the community. The resulting enthusiasm, generation
of ideas and experience are proving this revitalization strategy to be a
successful one.

79
 The incorporation of universities into MSCs has exposed un-
charted opportunities for urban revitalization. University facilities such as
the Student Residence can support this renewal. No longer just an on-
campus shelter, a Student Residence located within a MSC core has the
ability and responsibility to become a venue for important urban elements
such as a much needed residential density and a 24-hour street pres-
ence. For the school, it could not only be host to countless occasions for
students, faculty, and staff to engage with, and learn from, the surround-
ing community, but it could also let down the gates to the ivory tower and
establish itself as a sincere and committed public servant. All of this, from
outside the confines of a lecture hall.

In order for this benefit to be realized, the Student Residence

must be thought of as a contributing member of the community. It is
important to note that proposing specific rigid design guidelines in an
attempt to achieve this would not rightfully address the unique needs and
environments of each distinct MSCs. What might work in Cambridge, for
example, might not work in downtown Hamilton. Instead, Student Resi-
dential principles which hold value in any MSC circumstance should be
addressed.

80
The Good 6.1

The relocation of universities into the hearts of MSCs has pro-

vided the opportunity for schools and their components to become reju-
venators of downtowns. The Student Residence has not yet been able to
contribute revitalizing benefits to suffering MSC cores even though there
is great opportunity to do so. Its traditional role is to be a safe, welcom-
ing, yet temporary home for students. Its contemporary roles extend well
into the public realm and include becoming a public servant, an ambas-
sador, community infrastructure or support, an event, and of course, a
residence.

See Appendix ‘A’ for site photos.

81
 Fig. 6.1a

6.1.1 Public Servant

In the heart of a MSC, a Student Residence must recognize

the value and importance of the surrounding community if it is truly to
become part of it. What does the downtown need? How can its strengths
be heightened and its flaws be fixed? Continually addressing such ques-
tions can reveal how a Student Residence may be organized in such a
way that it provides service to the community and begins to enhance the
downtown environment.
Fig. 6.1b

Never “underestimate the importance

of street level activity. Too much
indoor orientation removes pedes-
trians and eventually business from
the street, thereby draining the vital-
ity from the image of downtown.”iii

82
 Fig. 6.1c

Event 6.1.2

For communities to interact, a place of social gathering and

activity is required. A Student Residence can become an unbiased envi-
ronment, inviting to many social groups and encouraging the formation of
many casual dialogues. Not only could this provide a place outside main
university buildings for staff and students to converse, but it could also
blend together the existing downtown community with the school’s, in an
informal atmosphere. The Student Residence could potentially become
Fig. 6.1d
a popular downtown destination for interaction and dialogue.

A good downtown is where “peo-

ple can mix and mingle without
feeling socially embarrassed,
where to some degree everybody
is equal…[and where] the major-
ity of people still feel that the town
centre belongs to everyone.”iv

83
 Fig. 6.1e

6.1.3 Infrastructure

In a MSC, a Student Residence has the ability to become a

requirement for a successful community. Regardless of whether its infra-
structure role leans more toward the physical (an extension of sidewalks)
or theoretical (a ‘system’ of communication), it should eventually be so
seamlessly integrated into a downtown that it begins to be considered as
being an important system or element within a creative-industry based
MSC.
Fig. 6.1f

84
 Fig. 6.1g

Community Engagement 6.1.4

By suggesting such a prominent, centralized downtown loca-

tion, a Student Residence must accept the role of University Ambassador
and must represent proudly the staff, students and faculty. Community
engagement is an important step in educating students as well as the
surrounding community to be accepting and tolerant of each other. If
each social group is able to gain a better understanding and appreciation
for each other’s lifestyles, then perhaps a more socially satisfying and
Fig. 6.1h
co-operating downtown core would be the result. As an ambassador, the
Student Residence has opportunity to encourage this understanding as
well as mutual good-will.

“[Communities] are abandoning their

suspicions about the relevance of
the University as engaged partners.
…As universities create offices and
institutions to provide portals to
campus, community leaders are
able to navigate the complexities
of the academic world to find the
right people and the campus con-
nections they need. They have ex-
perienced the valuable ways that
universities can help to create intel-
lectual and social capital essential
to the future of our cities, towns and
regions. They are connecting with
students and faculty to identify new
research agendas and together find
solutions to community problems
relevant to their culture and place.”v

85
 Fig. 6.1i

6.1.5 Residence

The role of a University Residence as a home for students is its

first priority. Above and beyond all else, it is vital that the Student Resi-
dence provides a safe, comfortable and interesting living environment
for students and faculty. By developing the layout that best suits each
downtown circumstance, a MSC Student Residence can be a student’s
home, and also a community. The inhabitants of the residence must live
comfortably before they would be willing and able to engage the sur-
Fig. 6.1j
rounding community and devote time to revitalizing it.

86
The Challenge 6.2

“The role of universities in urban areas and economically dis-

tressed inner cities remains relatively unexplored”vi and, for the most
part, has been discussed in this thesis with positive overtones. What are
the negative results of a centralized Student Residence in a MSC down-
town? After all, when inserting a relatively foreign element into an already
fragile environment, the outcome may not always be entirely positive.
For example, in any university town, the gentrification of the existing envi-
ronment is always a concern. “As universities expend resources on local
revitalization projects, they often set other forces in motion that may alter
or threaten the cultural and demographic identity of the neighbourhood.”vii
With such a young venture, “openly discussing university plans with the
community can help keep a project on track,”viii allowing the entire com-
munity a constant and contributing voice. For a student residence to suc-
ceed, this is an imperative step in the development process. A university
and all of its parts “cannot be only a real estate developer, it needs to be
a community developer as well”ix if it has any hopes of avoiding failing
the surrounding community and itself. “Authentic partnerships are best
when they are not dependent on the vision of a single individual but when
partnerships offer multiple ways for engagement by diverse members of
the community and the university.”x Engaging in this process is critical
and results in revitalization itself, as both partners explore the possibilities
of cooperation and communication.

87
6.3 Summary

For centuries cities were “recognized as centers of social ex-

change, transactions and interaction between people”xi but the recent
population shift to suburbia has greatly diminished their appeal. In fact,
downtown centres of MSCs have long since been considered centres
of little except urban decay. Struggling to stay competitive socially and
economically, MSCs are being forced to look beyond traditional means of
urban revitalization because they are simply not working. New hope has
been found, however, in the rising popularity of the creative industry.

Seen recently as a revitalizing asset, universities are being invit-

ed into MSC communities throughout North America in hopes of fulfilling
the current need for creative people and enterprises within a city centre.
This contemporary campus typology has caused the defined campus
boundary, often separating school from community, to erode, allowing the
public unprecedented access to students, staff, and faculty, a community
of creative leaders. And, “unlike mobile corporations…universities are
likely to stay in their present locations.”xii This relationship, of course,
goes two ways. Where a university can aid in urban revitalization, cities
are able to provide the university with a “wonderful setting for learning
about how society works and how to improve it,”xiii making an education
in a MSC an ideal place to live and learn about ourselves and the society
around us.

88
 It is now imperative that MSCs and their University counterparts
begin to make use of the Student Residence as a contributing agent of
urban revitalization. The key elements are there, the ability to increase
density, and improve the safety, culture, activity, and street frontage of a
downtown. By careful design, community engagement, an important as-
pect of MSC living, can be accomplished by a Student Residence. With
the possibility of becoming a valuable venue for dialogue between the
community and the school, a Student Residence holds the potential to
be an informal space where the public can further appreciate the student
lifestyle, and students can learn about the value of being a contributing
member of a greater society.

If higher education is to “serve our students with deep learning,

our faculty and staff with opportunities for integrated scholarship, and our
communities with our creative and intellectual resources, it will require
broad support in making possible the kinds of institutional transformation
that only engagement can provide.”xiv This thesis is intended to instigate
further conversation and exploration regarding the new roles of Student
Residences in MSC centers. With the fast growing numbers of MSCs in-
viting Universities into their tired downtowns, that is a conversation which
is past due.

89
Appendix A

91
92
Site Imagery
Present Conditions

93
 A

A Looking North-East along Water Street E C

B Looking North along Water Street
C Looking South-West along Dickson Street D
D Looking South along Water Street
E Looking South-East along Water Street

B
A

94
 B
v

95
 D

96
97
Potential Conditions

99
100
F Public Servant - Looking North-East
G Event -Looking West
H Infrastructure - Looking South-East along Water Street
I Community Engagement - Looking North
H
J Residence - Looking South

G
J

I
F
 F

101
 G

102
 H

103
 I

104
 J

105
Appendix B

107
1 Specialty Convience Store
2 Multi-Purpose Public Space
3 24-Hour Coffee Shop
4 Information & Security
5 Residential Entry
6 Storage/Office
7 Washroom
8 Display
9 New Landscapuing

0m 5 7 9 11

108
8 6 8

7 6 7

1 2 3

6 5 6

8 8

01 02 03 04 05 06

109
1 Quiet Study Area
2 Media Lounge
3 LED Communication Wall
4 Multi-purpose Student Lounge
5 Storage/Office
6 Washroom

0m 5 7 9 11

110
 2

5 5

1 4

6 6

01 02 03 04 05 06

111
1 Don Suite
2 LED Communitication wall
3 3-Person Suite
4 2-Person Suite
5 Laundry Facilities
6 Floor Lounge
7 Storage

0m 5 7 9 11

112
 1

7 7

3 2 3

4
3

7 7
5
4

01 02 03 04 05 06

113
1 Don Suite
2 LED Communitication wall
3 3-Person Suite
4 2-Person Suite
5 Laundry Facilities
6 Floor Lounge
7 Storage

0m 5 7 9 11

114
 1

4
7 7
3
2

4
7 7
5

01 02 03 04 05 06

115
1 Mechanical Room
2 LED Communitication wall
3 Bachelor Apartment
4 1-Bedroom Apartment
5 Storage
6 Floor Lounge

0m 5 7 9 11

116
 1

5 5

3 2 3

3 3

6 5

01 02 03 04 05 06

117
0m 5 7 9 11

118
 01 02 03 04 05 06

119
121
0m 5 7 9 11 NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST

121
123
0m 5 7 9 11 NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST
125
0m 5 7 9 11 NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST
127
0m 5 7 9 11 NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST
129
0m 5 7 9 11 North - South East - West
 Appendix C

131
0m 5 7 9 11 North - South East - West
Appendix C

133
1 Vegetation
Soil / Loam
Filter Fabric 1
50 mm Drainage Board 2
Polypropylene Water Retention
50 mm Rigid Insulation
Protection Cover / Root Barrier 3
Air / Vapour Barrier
200 mm Reinforced Concrete Slab
Stainless Steel Brackets
Batt Insulation
19 mm Double-ply Gypsum Board

2 Decking Material
Wood Sleepers
50 mm High Density Rigid Insulation
Air / Vapour Barrier
200 mm Reinforced Concrete Slab
4
3 90 x 380 Black Brick Veneer
5 mm Stainless Steel Bracket
50 mm Air Space
50 mm Rigid Insulation
Air / Vapour Barrier
200 mm Reinforced Concrete Slab

4 20 mm Wood Cladding
Stainless Steel Sleepers
50 mm High-Density Rigid Insulation
Continuous Vapour Barrier
200 mm Reinforced Concrete Slab 5
Stainless Steel Brackets
Batt Insulation
19 mm Double-ply Gypsum Board

5 Curtain Wall / Spandrel Panel Assembly

6 20 mm Wood Flooring
60 mm Concrete In-fill
Vapour Barrier
200 mm Reinforced Concrete Slab

7 Soffit Assembly

8 Nana Wall Folding Facade Assembly

134
Costing Analysis

Project Statistics
Gross m2 # of Residents
Ground Floor * 915 -
Second Floor 859 -
Third Floor 947 20
Fourth Floor 948 18
Fifth Floor 783 6-12
Roof 580 -
TOTAL 5,032 m2 44-50
*Includes 2 Retail Units

Elemental Project Hard Costs

Cost/m2 Elemental Amount % Hard Costs
Substructre 258 1,299,175 8.8
Structure 715 3,445,852 23.4
Exterior Enclosure 440 2,214,036 15.0
Partitions + Doors 293 1,476,024 10.0
Finishes 165 830,264 5.6
Fittings + Equipment 238 1,199,270 8.2
Mechanical 425 2,137,064 14.5
Electrical 200 1,107,018 7.5
Landscaping 367 1,005,466 6.8
$
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE 2,954 $14,714,169 100%

Development Charges $
100,000
General Deposits + Fees $
20,000
Architectural + Engineering Fees 10% $
1,471,417
TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $
16,605,586

135
 Eplilogue

Student Residences are often built based on a budget limited

to approximately $77/sq.ft. At $295/sq.ft., this design is currently beyond
the realities of building in downtown Cambridge. There are however, a
few economic strategies that some builders employ in order to turn a
fantasy project into a realistic venture. Things such as long-term leases,
individual apartment ownership or even time-share units are attractive
options to students and their parents. The current economic climate
of MSCs means that builder’s are more prone to rent. Renting, if all
goes well, guarantees eventual increasing revenue. As the mortgage of
a building decreases over time, rental rates rise (see fig. ‘C’). Though
a profit from renting might be further in the future compared to, for ex-
ample, immediate ownership per unit; in the long run, for a MSC student
residence, maintaining the university standard of term-by-term renting is
perhaps the most viable financial option available at this time.
Fig. C
As noted on the previous pages, the estimated construction cost
is of this design is approximately $14,714,169 and, assuming that build-
ers expect an annual return of 7-10% of initial expenses, what would
have to be charged in rent in order to generate revenue?

Construction cost:
$14,714,169
8% Annual Return:
$1,177,134
Assume the 2 commercial properties pay $5,000/month in rent:
2(5000 x 12) = $120,000/year
(Return – Commercial Profit):
$1,177,134 - $120,000 = $1,057,134
The residence holds 44 people making rent:
$1,057,134 / 44 = $24,026/year

$24,026 / 12 = $2,002/month or $8,008/term (on average)

136
 Given that each student - to live in this proposed residence -
would have to willingly pay $5,000 more than what they are currently pay-
ing in rent, this is a design proposal that is highly improbable. Without the
aide of a philanthropist or the financial ingenuity that brought the School
or Architecture into downtown Cambridge in the first place, a residence
such as this will most likely remain a proposal.

A large price tag can stop a Student Residential project from

ever breaking ground. Recent attempts at developing a University sanc-
tioned student residence in downtown Cambridge have yet to move into
a construction phase. Regardless of the reasons as to why these propos-
als have stalled, it is important to remember that, when a student resi-
dence finally receives the go-ahead, that is can be incredibly beneficial to
the students, to the school and to the community.

137
Post Script

I entered the master’s program with lofty expectations. I thought

I would somehow revolutionize my area of focus, though I honestly wasn’t
completely certain what that ‘area’ was going to be. I was confident that
I was going to finish in four terms. I thought I was going to write a mani-
festo so powerful and enthralling that not a person in the world would be
able to hide their emotions upon reading it from cover to cover. Once the
second day rolled around, I realized that none of these things idealistic
expectations that never going to happen.

After two years of researching, writing, designing, re-writing, re-

designing and re-re-writing, I’m not entirely sure I can produce a proper
definition of what an architectural thesis IS (or how to do one for that
matter) because it’s more than just a bound proposal. I could only do
it justice by describing it as walking blindly through a vast field with no
compass. However I was quick to discover that I was not the only one
trying to navigate this seemingly insurmountable task. My peers became
an invaluable contribution to my thesis through not only their scholarly
suggestions, but from their constant and unwavering support -- a domi-
nant characteristic of UW’s Grad school. The independent thesis is an
intimidating project that benefits greatly from such events as peer reviews
(which I participated in on a monthly basis) and casual conversations
over coffee or a beer. Though you may have varying thesis topics, at
least these meetings were a chance to realize that though it’s indepen-
dent work, you’re still part of a close-knit community.

138
 Following the completion of my defence, I was asked to write
this post-script as a sort of thesis ‘How-to’ but after trying for a couple
of days to think of how-to ‘How-to’, I realized that I simply am unable to
properly do it justice. A thesis is an endeavour that varies from person to
person. It’s what you make of it and how you execute it. There are cer-
tainly highs and lows but the two years of conversations within a scholarly
community have made it an invaluable experience that is without a doubt,
worth the moments of insanity, the days, weeks and months of frustration,
and the micro-seconds of clarity.

Kate Bowman
M.Arch
December 2007

139
Notes

i. Kent Robertson Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End-of-the-

Century Assessment, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, Issue 4, (Autumn
1995) p. 429.

Chapter 2.0

i. Mark Seasons, Blake Hudema, Karne Hammond, Jeff Lederer, and Glenn Scheels. Revitalizing
the Downtown of Midsize Cities (Canadian University Research Alliance: APA Conference, April
25, 2006).

ii. Ibid.

iii. Statistics Canada. Census 2001.

iv. Barbara Elve. Centre will study middle-sized cities, Faculty of Environmental Studies Newsletter,
(September 2002), http://www.fes.uwaterloo.ca/faculty/newsletter/sept2002/mcrc.html/ (accessed
May 8, 2006).

v. Bunting, T., Filion, P., Frenette, S., Curry D., and Mattice, R., Housing Strategies for Downtown
Revitalization in Mid-Sized Cities: A City of Kitchener Profile (Canadian Journal of Urban
Research, V9) pp. 146.

vi. Cambridge Core Areas Revitalization Program: Core Areas Monitoring Report, (Cambridge: City
of Cambridge Planning Department, 2005)

vii. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm. Taner Oc and Steven Tiesdell, (ed.), (London:
Paul Chapman, 1997) p. 226.

viii. John Gilderbloom and R. Mullins, Promise and Betrayal: Universities and the Battle for
Sustainable Urban Neighborhoods, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005) p. 5

140
ix. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End-of-the-Century Assessment,
p. 429.

x. Richard Florida, Gary Gates, Brian Knudsen and Kevin Stolarick, Creative Class Group, The
University and the Creative Economy, (December 2006), http://creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/articles/
univ_creative_economy082406.pdf/ (accessed August 15, 2007).

xi. Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class, (New York, NY : Basic Books, 2002), http://www.
washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0205.florida.html/ (accessed May 8, 2006).

xii. Ibid.

xiii. First Thoughts from the Allston Planning Team, p. 1.

xiv. Richard Florida, Gary Gates, Brian Knudsen and Kevin Stolarick, Creative Class Group, The
University and the Creative Economy, (December 2006), http://creativeclass.com/rfcgdb/articles/
univ_creative_economy082406.pdf/ (accessed August 15, 2007).

xv. Community-University Research Alliance (CURA), (Ottawa: Social Science and Humanities
Research Council of Canada, 2007), http://www.sshrc.ca/web/apply/program_descriptions/cura_
e.asp/ (accessed December 15, 2006).

xvi. Ibid.

xvii. Ibid.

xviii. Allegra Calder and Rosalind Greenstein, Universities as Developers. (Planning and Development
Department Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, July 2001) p. 1.

xix. Henry Cisneros, The University and the Urban Challenge (Maryland: Aspen Systems Corp.,
1995) p. 7.

xx. Barbara Holland, Characteristics of “Engaged Institutions” and Sustainable Partnerships, and
Effective Strategies for Change (Indianapolis: Indiana University, March 2001) p. 1.

xxi. Universities as Developers, p. 1.

141
xxii. Don Drummond and Craig Alexander, Time to Wise up on Post-Secondary Education in Canada
(TD Bank Financial Group, March 2004) p. 1.

xxiii. Henry Cisneros, The University and the Urban Challenge, p. 3.

xxiv. Mark Seasons, Blake Hudema, Karne Hammond, Jeff Lederer, and Glenn Scheels. Canadian
University Research Alliance (CURA). Revitalizing the Downtown of Midsize Cities. (APA
Conference), April 25, 2006.

xxv. Jane Jacobs The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York: Random house, 1961).

xxvi. Victor Rubin, Evaluating University-Community Partnerships: An Examination of the Evolution of

Questions and Approaches. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, Volume
5, Number 1, 2000 (California: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) p. 219.

xxvii. Ibid.

Chapter 3.0

i. Martin Pearce University Builders. (Chichester : Wiley-Academy, 2001) p. 8.

ii. James T. Harris III and Ira Harkavy Colleges, Universities and Communities Advancing Social and
Economic Justice (Clearinghouse Review, July-August 2003) p150.

iii. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 10.

iv. A Brief History of Oxford (University of Oxford, 2007), http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_University/

introducing_oxford/a_brief_history_of_the_University/index.html/ (accessed March 1, 2007).

v. Roger B. Winston, Student Housing and Residential Life (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993) p.
168.

vi. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 11.

142
vii. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 10.

viii. Roger B. Winston, Student Housing and Residential Life, p. 169.

ix. Ibid.

x. Ibid.

xi. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 11.

xii. Ibid.

xiii. Roger B. Winston, Student Housing and Residential Life, p. 172.

xiv. Ibid.

xv. Ibid.

xvi. John Brubacher and Willis Rudy Higher Education in Transition (New York: Harper & Brothers,
1958) p. 41.

xvii. J. Bland University Housing in Canada (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1966) p. 9.

xviii. Roger B. Winston, Student Housing and Residential Life, p. 172.

xix. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 13.

xx. Martin Pearce University Builders, p. 15.

xxi. SCAD History (Savannah College of Art and Design, 2007) http://www.scad.edu/about/college/
history.cfm/ (accessed May 15, 2007).

xxii. Adaptive Learning (Metropolis, October 2005) p. 54.

143
xxiii. Savannah College of Art and Design: Its Growing and Complex Contribution to the Chatham
County Economy (Savannah: Bureau of Business Research and Economic Development, August
2001) p. i.

xxiv. Adaptive Learning (Metropolis, October 2005) p. 56.

xxv. Savannah College of Art and Design: Its Growing and Complex Contribution to the Chatham
County Economy, p. i.

xxvi. Savannah College of Art and Design: Its Growing and Complex Contribution to the Chatham
County Economy, p. 33.

xxvii. Ibid.

xxviii. Savannah College of Art and Design: Its Growing and Complex Contribution to the Chatham
County Economy

xxix. Tracy Arabski, et. al Century Strategic Plan Laurier Brantford (Prepared for: Brantford Divisional
Council, April 15, 2005) p. 1.

xxx. Housing/Residential Life (Laurier-Brantford, 2007) https://www.wlu.ca/page.php?grp_

id=1983&p=668 (accessed June, 2007).

xxxi. Mark Seasons, Blake Hudema, Karne Hammond, Jeff Lederer, and Glenn Scheels. Revitalizing
the Downtown of Midsize Cities (Canadian University Research Alliance: APA Conference, April
25, 2006).

xxxii. William R. Trumble, Angus Stevenson, Lesley Brown, Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford; New
York: Oxford University Press, 2002).

xxxiii. David J. Neuman Building Type Basics for Colleges and Universities (Hoboken: John Wiley,
2003) p. 161.

xxxiv. John Gilderbloom and R. Mullins, Promise and Betrayal: Universities and the Battle for
Sustainable Urban Neighborhoods

144
Chapter 4.0

i. Kenneth McLaughlin Cambridge: The Making of a Canadian City (Windsor: Windsor Publications,
1987) p. 33.

ii. A Short History of Galt p. 6.

iii. Kenneth McLaughlin, p. 77.

iv. A Short History of Galt p. 12.

v. Frequently Asked Questions (Cambridge: City of Cambridge, 2007) http://www.city.cambridge.

on.ca/faqs_detail.php?qid=7&did=8 (accessed October 9, 2007).

vi. A Short History of Galt

vii. From an editorial in the Cambridge Reporter Mar. 16, 2001.

Chapter 5.0

i. Promise and Betrayal: Universities and the Battle for Sustainable Urban Neighborhoods, p. 6.

ii. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 1.

iii. Promise and Betrayal: Universities and the Battle for Sustainable Urban Neighborhoods, p. 7.

iv. C.U.R.A. Report: Effects of the School of Architecture in Galt City Centre (CURA, 2007), p XX

v. Ibid.

vi. Blake Bumprecht Fraternity Row, The Student Ghetto, and the Faculty Enclave Journal of Urban
History, Vol. 32 No. 2, January 2006.

vii. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 156.

145
viii. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End-of-the-Century Assessment,
p. 430.

ix. Ibid.

x. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 162.

xi. Ibid.

xii. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 224.

xiii. DJ Walmsley Urban Living: The Individual in the City (New York: Longman Scientific & Technical;
Wiley, 1998) p. 79.

xiv. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 165.

xv. Urban Living: The Individual in the City p. 7.

Chapter 6.0

i. James Bow Cities finding Universities Perfect Partner: Building Satellite campuses helps revitalize
their downtown cores Business Edge, Vol. 6, No. 15 (Calgary/Red Deer Edition, 2006)

ii. Evaluating University-Community Partnerships: An Examination of the Evolution of Questions and

Approaches, pg. 1.

iii. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End-of-the-Century Assessment p.

429.

iv. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 224.

v. Mary Jane Brukardt, Barbara Holland, Stephen L. Percy and Nancy Zimpher Calling the Question:
Is Higher Education Ready to Commit to Community Engagement? (Wisconsin: Milwaukee Idea
Office, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2004) p. 4.
146
vi. Leveraging Colleges and Universities for Urban Economic Revitalization (Philadelphia: Greater
Philadelphia Regional Review, Spring 2003) p. 1.

vii. Universities as Developers, p. 2.

viii. Evaluating University-Community Partnerships: An Examination of the Evolution of Questions and

Approaches

ix. Ibid.

x. Calling the Question: Is Higher Education Ready to Commit to Community Engagement? p. 9.

xi. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, p. 222.

xii. Leveraging Colleges and Universities for Urban Economic Revitalization p. 1.

xiii. The University and the Urban Challenge p. 3.

xiv. Calling the Question: Is Higher Education Ready to Commit to Community Engagement? p. 18.

147
Bibliography

Articles

Alexander, C. & Drummond, D. TD Economics: Time to Wise Up On Post-Secondary Education in Canada. TD Bank Finan-
cial Group, 2004.

Brukardt, M., Holland, B., Percy, S. L. & Zimpher, N. Calling the Question: Is Higher Education Ready to Commit to Community
Engagement? Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Center for Urban Initiatives and Research, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
2004.

Calder, A. & Greenstein, R. University as Developers. Planning and Development Department, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy,
2001.

Cox, D. N. Developing a Framework for Understanding University-Community Partnerships. Tennessee: University of Mem-
phis, Date Unknown.

Davis, G. and Roizen, R. Architectural determinants of student satisfaction in college residence halls, in ERDA 2: Proceedings
of the Second Annual Environmental Design Research Association Conference. J. Archea and C. Eastman, eds.,
Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, (pp. 28-44), 1970.

Finnemore, Melody. Defining Vision.2000.

Flansborough, E. New-Wave Student Housing, Planning for Higher Education, V19 N3 (pp.1-10), 1991.

Gad, G. and Matthew, M. Central and Suburban Downtowns, in T. Bunting and P. Filion, eds., Canadian Cities in Transition:
the Twenty-First Century, Oxford University Press, Toronto. (pp.248-273), 2000.

Hahn, A. Colleges and Universities As Economic Anchors: Profiles of Promising Practices. Heller Graduate School of Social
Policy and Management: Brandeis University, Date Unknown.

Hecht, A. & Meyer S.P. University Growth Poles in Canada: An Empirical Assessment. Waterloo, Ontario: Department of
Geography, Wilfred Laurier University, Date Unknown

148
LaMore, R. L. & Link, T. Renewing People and Places: Institutional Investment Policies That Enhance Social Capital and
Improve the Built Environment of Distressed Communities. Date Unknown.

Legault, L.A. The Changing Demands on Today’s Residences, University Manager, Winter, 2000.

Leveraging Colleges and Universities for Urban Economic Revitalization: An Action Agenda. (Unknown).

Mullins, R.L. and Gilderbloom, John I. Urban Revitalization Partnerships: Perceptions of the University’s Role in Louisville,
Kentucky, Local Environment, V7 N2, (pp163-176), 2002.

Presiser, W.F.E. Behavioural design criteria in student housing, in EDRA 1: Proceedings of the 1st Annual Environmental De-
sign Research Association Conference, H. Sanoff and S. Cohn, eds., Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg,
Pennsylvania, (pp.243-259), 1970.

Reardon, K. M. Straight A’s?: Evaluating the Success of Community/ University Development Partnerships. Department of
City and Regional Planning: Cornell University, Date Unknown.

Rubin, V. Evaluating University-Community Partnerships: An Examination of the Evolution of Questions and Approaches.
Berkeley: University of California, 2000.

Student Housing at Ontario Universities : Study, Report and Recommendations. Toronto: Council of Ontario Universities,
1989.

Books

Alexander, Christopher. A Pattern Language: The Timeless Way of Building, Vol. I A Pattern Language, Vol. II, The Oregon
Experiment, Vol. III. [New York: Oxford University Press], 1977.

149
Blakey, M. Student Accommodation, in S. Hazelgrove ed., The Student Experience. [SRHE/Open University Press, Bucking-
ham], 1994.

Bland, J. University Housing in Canada. [Montreal: McGill University Press], 1966.

Bourne, L.. The Geography of Housing. [Arnold, London], 1981.

Boutilier, Terry H. Siting of a Major Regional Airport: A Hypothetical Case”. [s.l.: s.n.], 1974.

Bromley, R. Universities as Adaptive Re-Users of Historic Downtown Buildings. [Geography and Planning Department, Uni-
versity of Albany, State University of New York], 2001.

Brothers, J. and Hatch, S. Residence and Student Life: A Sociological Inquiry into Residence in Higher Education, Tavistock
Publications, London], 1971.

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and P. Filion. Impact of Restrictive Covenants on Affordable Housing and Non-
Single-Family Uses of Homes: A Waterloo Region Case Study.1992.

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation.: Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc., “CMHC Student Housing Study”. Ot-
taway: Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc, 2004

Dober, Richard P. Campus Planning. [Massachusetts: Reinhold Publishing Corporation], 1963.

Filion, P. Suburban Mixed Use Centres and Urban Dispersion: What Difference Do They Make? [Electronic Version].

Filion, P. Towards Smart Growth? the Difficult Implementation of Alternatives to Urban Dispersion [Electronic Version].

Filion, P. and Bunting, T. Core Area Housing: A Feasibility Report. [Kitchener: City of Kitchener, Department of Planning and
Development], 2000.

Filion, Pierre, and Trudi E. Bunting. City of Kitchener : Inner-City Housing, Market Study, Final Report. [Kitchener: City of
Kitchener, Dept. of Business and Planning Services, 1998.

150
Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, Carlos Lopes, and Khalid Malik. Capacity for Development : New Solutions to Old Problems. Sterling,
Va.: Earthscan Publications, 2002.

Gilderbloom, John Ingram, and R. L. (Robert Lee) Mullins. Promise and Betrayal : Universities and the Battle for Sustainable
Urban Neighborhoods. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005.

Hapgood, M. Homes for Students. [Conservative Political Centre, London], 1975.

Hudnut, William H. Cities on the Rebound : A Vision for Urban America. Washington, D.C.: ULI--The Urban Land Institute,
1998.

Jackson, Kenneth T. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. [New York: Oxford University Press],
1985.

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. [New York: Random House], 1961.

Lasun, Denys. Architecture in an Age of Scepticism. [Great Britain: William Heinemann Ltd.], 1984.

Mayne, Thom. Fresh: Morphosis 1998-2004. [New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc.], 2006.

McLaughlin, Kenneth. Cambridge :The Making of a Canadian City, [Windsor, Ontario: Windsor Publications], 1987.

Moyer, Bill. This Unique Heritage: The Story of Waterloo County, [Kitchener: CHYM Radio], 1971.

Neuman, David J. Building Type Basics For: College and University Facilities. [Massachusetts: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.],
2003.

Newman, Oscar. Defensible Space: Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. [New York: The Macmillan Company], 1967.

Oc, T. and Tiesdell, S. Safer City Centres: Reviving the Public Realm, Paul Chapman, London], 1997.

151
Pearce, Martin. University Builders. [Great Britain: Wiley-Academy], 2001.

Pencer, Irwin & Williams, John L. A Comparison Among Student Residences at the University of Waterloo. [Waterloo: Univer-
sity of Waterloo Press], 1971.

Pocklington, T. & Tupper, A. No Place to Learn: Why Universities Aren’t Working. [Vancouver: University of British Columbia
Press], 2002.

Robertson, K. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies in the United States: An End-of-the-Century Assessment [Electronic
Version].

Seasons, Mark L. (Mark Lawrence). Strategic Planning in Local Government: An Application to Local Economic Development.
[Waterloo, Ont.: University of Waterloo], 1989.

Smith, Helen Miller. Student Accommodation : A Study of some Aspects of Student Accommodation at the University of
Glasgow. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1969.

Tiesdell, S., Oc, T. and Heath, T. Revitalizing Historic Urban Quarters, [Architectural Press, Oxford, United Kingdom], 1996.

Walmsley, D. J. Urban Living : The Individual in the City. Harlow, Essex, England : New York, NY: Longman Scientific & Techni-
cal ; Wiley, 1988.

Winston, R. B. Student Housing and Residential Life. [San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers] 1993.
Hill, Nicholas. A Heritage Conservation District Plan for the City of Cambridge (Galt). [London: Prepared by Author], 1984.

Zeller, William. Residence Life Programs: The First-Year Experience, Second Edition. [South Carolina: University of South
Carolina], 1996.

Calder, A. and Greenstein, R. Universities as Developers, Land Lines, [Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Boston MA.], 2001.

152
Dissertation
Lederer, J. Mid-sized Cities: Educating the Downtown. The Role of University in Urban Revitalization. (Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Waterloo, 2006).

Journal

Beauregard, R. Urban Form and the Redevelopment of Central Business Districts, Journal of Architecture and Planning Re-
search, V3 (pp.183-198), 1986.

Bowden, M. Growth of Central Districts in Large Cities, in L. Schnore ed., The New Urban History, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey, (pp. 79-80), 1975.

Bunting, T., Filion, P., Frenette, S., Curry, D., and Mattice, R. Housing Strategies for Downtown Revitalization in Mid-sizedd
Cities: A City of Kitchener Profile, Canadian Journal of Urban Research, V9 N2 D’00, (pp.145-175), 2000.

Bunting, T. and Filion, P. Assessing Urban Renewal: The Changing Geography of Mainstreet and the Public Sector Connec-
tion, in J. Andrey and G. Nelson, eds., Public Issues: A Geographical Perspective, University of Waterloo, Department
of Geography, Publication Series No. 41, Waterloo, Ontario, (pp.159-180), 1994.

Christie, H., Munro, M., and Rettig, H. Accommodating Students, Journal of Youth Studies, V5 N2 (pp.209-235), 2002.

Filion, P. Fordism, Post-Fordism and Urban Policy-Making: Urban Renewal in a Medium-Size Canadian City, Journal of Urban
Research, V4 (pp.43-72), 1995.

Gilderbloom, J.I. and Mullins, R.L., Jr. The University as a partner: rebuilding an inner city neighbourhood, Metropolitan Uni-
versities, V6 N3 (pp.79-96), 1995.

Grayson, J.P. Place of Residence, Student Involvement, and First Year Marks, The Canadian Journal of Higher Education,
V-XXVII-1 (pp.1-24), 1997.

153
Hackney, S. The University and its community: past and present, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, V488 (pp.135-147).

Hudnut, W.H.III. Breaching the Wall (Exploring ways cities and Universities can cooperate to revitalize communities), Urban
Land, V59 No11-12 (pp.88-95), [Urban Land Institute, Washington D.C.], 2000

Koch, D., Wesse, D. and Stickney, R. New Trends in Student Housing, Facilities Manager, V15 N3 (pp.39-42), 1999.

Luzzo, D.A. and McDonald, A. Exploring Students’ Reasons for Living on Campus, Journal of College Student Development,
V37 N4 (pp.389-395), 1996.

Robertson, K. Can Small-City Downtowns Remain Viable? A National Study of Development Issues and Strategies, Journal of
the American Planning Association V65 (pp. 270-283), 1995.

Robertson, K. Can Small-City Downtowns Remain Viable? A National Study of Development Issues and Strategies, Journal of
the American Planning Association, V65 (pp.270-283), 1999.

Rugg, J., Rhodes, D. and Jones, A. Studying a Niche Market: UK Students and the Private Rented Sector, Housing Studies,
V17 N2 (pp.289-303), 2002.

“Journal of Architectural and Planning Research.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research. (1984): ad>.

Newspaper Article

Groarke, L. (2002, Februrary 14). What Laurier Brantford means for downtown, The Expositor
Brantford, “The Editor’s Page”

Pender, T. (2005, December 6). Progress by degrees: WLU satellite campus gives downtown Brantford a big boost. The
Kitchener Record, page unknown

154
Romano, L. (2006, January 9). Urban Colleges Learn to Be Good Neighbors: Universities Also Reap Benefits From Investing
in Their Communities. The Washington Post. p. A01

Websites

Bow, J. (2006, July 20). Cities finding Universities Perfect Partners: Building Satellite Campuses helps revitalize their down-
town cores. Business Edge, Calgary/Red Deer Edition, 6(15). Retrieved September 26, 2006, from Canada’s
Technology Triangle Web site: http://www.techtriangle.com/viewnews.cfm?newsid=381

Chrisafis, A. (2000, October 24). “Two Square Miles of Housing Hell”, The Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved August 10, 2006,
from Web site: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4080599,00.html

Unknown. (2006). About Oxford University. Retrieved August 28, 2006, from
Oxford University Web site: http://www.ox.ac.uk/aboutoxford/

Unknown. (2006). New Schools and New Houses. Retrieved August 10, 2006, from
The Harvard Guide: History, Lore, and More Web site: http://www.news.harvard.edu/guide/intro/hist2.html

Unknown. (2006). Residences. Retrieved August 8, 2006, from

The University of Waterloo: Housing and Residences Web site: http://www.housing.uwaterloo.ca/residences/index.html

Unknown. (2006). Student Housing: History. Retrieved September 5, 2006, from

College Town Life Web site: http://www.collegetownlife.com/college/CT_Student_Housing_Hist.htm

155