I’m writing to publicize the unpublicized plans for the Webster Pool renovation at Archbold Gym as part of the new fitness facility. The pool will be reduced from six lanes to three, reconfigured from 25 yards (regulation) to 100 feet (non-regulation). Reformulated as a fun, water park-like environment where “swimmers” can lie in the water and watch sports events on an enormous screen, lap swimmers will be relegated to Sibley Pool in the Women’s Building, thereby creating a second tier of users.

Among our peer institutions in the ACC and those included in the recent Faculty Salary Review Report, every school except one has a minimum of one six lane 25-yard pool. It’s critical that appropriate peer institutions that correlate not only with student populations but also academic rankings, cost and student demographics are used because these are comparable universities.

In a meeting with Dolan Evanovich, senior vice president for enrollment and the student experience; Pete Sala, vice president and chief facilities officer; Rebecca Dayton, associate vice president, health and wellness; and Matt Hackett, director of recreation services; I was told that SU is focusing on the needs of our student population, in terms of both recreation and fitness. This is as it should be. However, faculty and staff also use these facilities, which was never acknowledged by the four administrators. Faculty and staff are vital community members — the university would not be here without them.

Who was surveyed for this renovation plan? Was it primarily representatives of Greek life? On average approximately 2000-2200 people used Webster Pool monthly during the academic year. Were any of these community members surveyed?

Why has this information not been made public? As an architect, I know in order to receive a construction bid, drawings are produced. These administrators told me they don’t have drawings they can make publicly available at this time. This can’t be true. The schematic design drawings must be released so public discussion can take place.

Is the student experience merely about fun, not fitness? We have aquatic users of all ages and abilities. However, this water park-like environment won’t serve these diverse users. To put millions of dollars into a “state of the art” health and wellness and fitness complex, and not replace the lap pool with one of comparable size, is both unfair and shortsighted. This isn’t an either-or situation, but a both-and. Our university community deserves more.

Sincerely,

Lori Brown

Professor of Architecture, Syracuse University

Published on March 26, 2018 at 7:37 pm