New ND requirement: Live On Campus for 3 years
by ndmdchgo (2017-09-13 10:41:35)



Dear Students,

We write to you today to let you know about new proposals to enhance our on-campus undergraduate residential communities. While these strategies will not affect any current students, many of our plans have benefitted significantly from student input, and we wanted to share them with you directly and thank you for your help.

Since our University’s founding 175 years ago, the cultivation of a community where students can grow and learn has been central to Notre Dame’s educational vision, a vision shaped by our Catholic mission and Holy Cross tradition. For the past 50 years, residential halls of mixed classes—from first-year students to seniors—have helped create such communities and have become a critical part of the undergraduate experience. When Notre Dame graduates meet, just after the question, “What year did you graduate?” each inquires, “In what hall did you live?” The question is prominent not because it is about a place of residence, but because the answer is a reflection of the community that shaped a person’s experience.

Notre Dame is dedicated to doing all we can to help residential life flourish for many years to come. In 2016, we opened Dunne and Flaherty Halls to relieve overcrowding. In August, Walsh Hall reopened to residents after a yearlong transformation that included both physical improvements as well as the creation of more common space for residents to gather and interact. In coming years, we will renovate an older hall, a major project that will take a full year, and a newer hall, a project that can be completed over the summer. Our goal is to make these buildings the best they can be for the communities they serve.

We have seen a trend in recent years for upper-classmen/women—especially seniors—to move off-campus. While we understand the decision to move off-campus is motivated by a number of good reasons, we believe a critical strength of our residence hall communities is upper-classmen serving as models and mentors to underclassmen. Thus, we undertook a one-year study to better understand the reasons for students moving off-campus, and explored strategies for attracting more seniors back to campus. The Office of Strategic Planning and Institutional Research and Student Affairs staff facilitated more than a dozen student focus groups, visited off-campus complexes, and actively engaged with Campus Life Council, Student Government, and Diversity Council. We also sought the input of rectors, parents, and the Holy Cross community.

We learned a lot. We learned, among other things, that while students overwhelmingly valued the community formed in their halls, they were attracted by off-campus amenities and the greater independence of off-campus living. Some found off-campus housing more economical, others were unhappy with the inflexibility of meal plan options on campus, and some were put off by a lack of consistency in procedures and rules across residence halls.

Based on what we learned, we will look for ways to retain seniors on campus. We are considering increased flexibility in meal plans, more autonomy in room picks, and additional leadership roles for seniors in the halls. We are reviewing how we can offer a more consistent experience in halls while retaining important traditions and distinctiveness among them. We will continue to solicit student feedback as we develop and implement senior incentives over the next two to three years.

Because we believe the residential experience is an essential component of a Notre Dame undergraduate education, beginning with the matriculating class of 2018 (graduating class of 2022) the University will require first-year students, sophomores, and juniors to live on campus for six semesters (with study abroad counting toward those six semesters). This change will not affect any students currently enrolled at Notre Dame.

To accommodate more students, we will seek funding for two new residence halls, which will also allow us to provide additional on-campus housing to transfer students.

Should you wish to further discuss what we learned and our plans, we invite you to join us for a presentation and questions on Wednesday, Sept. 13, from 7:30 to 8:30 p.m. in DeBartolo Hall, Room 101. If you are unable to attend and want to provide feedback, please email CampusResidency@nd.edu.

On behalf of Notre Dame, thank you for your valuable input as we develop our plans, and for your commitment to Notre Dame.

In Notre Dame,

Rev. John I Jenkins, C.S.C.
President, University of Notre Dame

Erin Hoffmann Harding
Vice President for Student Affairs


If I had been forced to live on campus Junior year
by dulac89  (2017-09-13 23:34:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I would have been kicked out of school for parietals violation by the second week


Mazel!
by shea  (2017-09-14 11:56:31)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I have mixed feelings but actually think this could be good
by revressbo  (2017-09-13 22:41:42)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Disclaimer: I lived on campus all four years (and graduated within the past five years fwiw).

First, in general, I don't like a university forcing its students to live on campus for any amount of time (even freshman year, though obviously "no one" who's not from the SB area/living at home would live off campus freshman year, even if they were allowed). It feels a bit like ND is babying its students and is trying to generate extra $$ which doesn't sit right with me.

However, this really doesn't impact many people. Only about 15% of ND students don't stay on through junior year (and the vast majority of that 15% stays on through sophomore year), so only about 300 kids in each class would be impacted. That's really not that many.

Plus, it might help ND self-select. There's a concern on this site that ND is losing its identity partly because students are choosing it because it's the best school they got into, and not for the overall balance of community, athletics, dorm life, Catholicism, etc. I don't think it's as dire as many on NDN think, particularly older alumni, but to the (in my opinion, small) extent students don't care about ND culture and choose the school just for its rank, this policy may cause those types of students to choose to go elsewhere (which does sound kind of bad, but it could be the best thing for both ND and that student).

And finally, anyone who chooses ND knows what they're getting themselves into, since it starts with next year's freshmen. It's not like current freshmen or sophomores were all of a sudden told they can't live off campus their junior year when they were planning on it. So overall, I'm not outraged.




I'm only going to say this...
by potatohouse  (2017-09-13 17:35:15)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I was back on campus Temple weekend, and on Friday afternoon, a few of us wandered our way into our old lovable home: The Cinderblock Palace of Stanford Hall.

That place is the same fucking shit hole it was fifteen some years ago when I arrived. I'm guessing the annual budget for capital improvements is somewhere in the tens of dollars range. Same janky ass no A/C having barracks it always was. Same beat fucking couch in the basement. Same wack TV that was purchased during a 1997 Circuit City close-out sale. Same morgue looking kitchen. There was a desk in the basement study lounge. It was lying on its side broken in three pieces.

I know living on campus at Notre Dame can be a unique and special experience and that many of us stayed the standard three years or even the duration. And I'm sure some of these newer dorms are palatial and updated and don't smell like concrete and virgin sweat. But if Stanford and Keenan residents are not exempt from this policy shift, I will happily file a class action lawsuit on their behalf. And before the school is allowed to solicit a single dime for new dorms, they should have to fully fund a 2-day crane and wrecking ball rental to free the prisoners of North Quad.


Apparently Keenan alums give more generously to the basement
by The Holtz Room  (2017-09-13 17:50:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

fund than Stanford's.

As of last year they redid Zaland (Food sales), had big projection TVs and other new amenities.

The cells, I mean rooms, still looked the same. Though they knocked out some walls in a few places.

My single is gone and, I'm sad to say, The Holtz Room no longer exists.

None of us did well enough in life to hold a room in a dorm for perpetuity.


I think you just found the cheat code for getting my name
by potatohouse  (2017-09-13 22:35:00)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

on a building on campus: sponsoring dorm peripherals! Given the way they maintain Stanford, I'm sure naming rights would start in the low three figures.

The Potatohouse Basement Bathroom. The Icemaker brought to you by Potatohouse. 4 E/W: The Potatohouse Wing.

I'm going to send Father Jenkins an email. ND is leaving cash on the table. I can't imagine they'll be pleased to discover this.


We are charging quads ~$3500 a month in carroll to live in
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 17:26:42)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

squalor. Here is the math:

Room and Board(A): $14,358
Meal Plan(B): At most $3640 (cite here).
Room = A - B = $10,718 /yr, $893/mo

That means a quad in Caroll Hall is paying $3,572 per month to live in a 20x18 box with onerous rules, shared bathrooms, disgusting / noisy radiators, no parking, etc.

That's a joke and shameful.


Don't you need to double B?
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 20:01:07)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Those are per semester costs.


Yes. That's the platinum plan. The regular is 2600 will do *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 20:42:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I see a 230-mean plan with no flex points for $2,145 per...
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 21:00:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...semester. Which works out to 14 meals a week, leaving you to buy a meal a day on your own (which makes sense, because these are all off-campus meal plans).

This is presumably not what's included in on-campus room and board, which almost undoubtedly is 21 meals a week or 14 meals a week PLUS some amount of Flex Points to enable you to actually eat a third meal a day. Meaning the plan you've labelled "platinum" is probably just about exactly what constitutes the basic on-campus meal plan you get with room and board.

So, $3,640 times 2 or $7,280 for board.

EDIT: I think I see where you got $2,600. The basic on-campus undergraduate meal plan appears to be the $2,145 one plus $500 flex points. So board is $5,290.


I will post more later
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 21:12:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But it's around 10 per meal. Students get the flex plan and can opt into the 21 plan.

14x16x10 = 2240+500 flex points (though these usually cost <$1 per point)
If you use the faculty full freight of 12.5 you get 14x16x12.5 = 2800. 500 flex gets you to 3300.
2740 per semester

You can't use 21x16x10 for the 21 plan because a student can't actually eat 21 meals a week (reduced hours on weekends, not open as much during two breaks, not open as much during finals)

I'll split difference above and say 3k per semester is a good guess. That leave 8358 for board.

That brings the quad to 2786 on an monthly basis assuming 365 days of occupancy.

In reality it's more like $ 4280 for days used. Again the university can use the form for other stuff during down time or at least maintain it less.

8358 x 100 is $835,800 to run Carroll.


I feel like $835K sounds like a lot but would get eaten up
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 21:39:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...pretty quickly. Heat/utilities. Dorm staff. Maintenance. Janitorial. Etc.


Back of envelope costs
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 22:02:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

These are purposely high:
$16k x 3 for ras
100k for rector
67k for ar
90k cleaning staff (we only had one at Carroll but assume 2)
80k for annual deferred maintenance (approx 10% receipts or huge renovation every 10-12 years. Again yeah right)
40k for outside maintenance (grounds)
80k electric water and heat (no ac) this is way high due to power plant and heat pumps.

507k

330k left to cover events, furniture replacement (hah), internet, tv, phone

Per kid thats 3300

You could buy all new furniture, give each kid a cell phone, etc for that. Every. Year.

We housed 60 tenants in south bend up until 2 years ago. Our costs were no where this high per kid and we had a mortgage plus we furnished the houses and had to pay real estate taxes.

I have heard arguments about allocating police, fire, counseling etc to rooming costs but that seems inappropriate. At the very least those services should come more from tuition.


80K is "way high" to heat and provide electricity to a...
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 22:20:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...an aged building that houses 100 people? I need to build a power plant.

At my school you'd owe a 12%-15% tax to the university on your $507K budget, the idea being that you use central university resources (e.g., HR had to hire the dorm staff, someone from IT has to troubleshoot network jacks, etc.) that do not show up in your direct costs. So assuming ND has a similar policy there's another $60K or so. I believe my center's budget also gets hit with the equivalent of a property insurance fee and a PILOTS (payment in lieu of property taxes) allocation, but I'm not 100% sure. I feel like there's other stuff we're probably missing here.


Carroll has no AC, and only radiators
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 22:52:24)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Carroll is around 50-75000 sq. ft., and I'm guessing it's 65k sq. ft.

It would be around 1 million BTUs to heat the dorm with degree days of around 6000. That puts the cost around $60,000 a year for heat.

EDIT: I ran some other numbers. The average office space uses 28 cubic feet of natural gas per year to heat and cool. It's around 16 Mcf. That puts costs around $27000. Again, I think your numbers are off. $60k for heat sounds incredibly expensive.

The electricity comes from the power plant. Figure $1.5 / sq. ft. for electricity and we're at around $105k so total utilities $165k.

If we're going to sharpen the pencil the cleaning services are probably around $75,000 and the grounds maintenance are around $25,000.

I'll add in your tax and $50,000 for insurance (though that seems high).

$16k x 3 for ras
100k for rector
67k for ar
75k cleaning staff (we only had one at Carroll but assume 2)
25k for outside maintenance (grounds)
165k utilities. this is way high due to power plant and heat pumps. Also the water in Carroll tasted like copper.
Total: $480k

15% "tax": $72k
Subtotal: $552k

80k to build a maintenance fund to be used every 15 years for major renovations.
$632k

200k left to cover events, furniture replacement, internet, tv, phone

The sad thing is if we charged students that cost it would still be $6320 per student for housing.

Right now 25% of the costs are the staff.

If Room and board were $5k per year, the RAs would be $15k not $45k. That's $30k in savings right there.

An AR can be a grad student who gets $5k room and board plus $500 a month so figure $11k.

The Rector can be a younger alum or priest and be around $50-$75k.

Moving back to that would lop off $100-$150k.

I still think the heating and electricity numbers are high.


And to respond to your edit...
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 23:20:14)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I think the latter part of your post is where you're more on target. It is likely the case that the university could be doing things more cost effectively. It seems ridiculous that my unionized staff's benefits cost me 67% of salary, but that is in fact the cost of what the university agreed to so it's right to hit my budget for that 67% even though it should be less.

But that's very different from saying that the university's cost to provide housing is X and they're charging 2X. My suspicion is that a more accurate assessment would be that the university's cost to provide housing is X and they're charging X, but that it's cost should be 80% of X.


That $330K surplus is shrinking fast.
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 23:09:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Look, as noted below, particularly as someone employed by a university who has seen it all up close, I'm more or less on board with the idea that universities generally and Notre Dame specifically are greedy institutions. But the idea that requiring juniors to live on campus is a money grab or that the University is making a killing on room just doesn't add up when you really start digging into the numbers. I can tell that you're very knowledgable about this stuff, but even you don't seem to have been aware of things like the university "tax" common to most schools in my experience, PILOTS payments, etc. (Nor would I have been before I started working at one). There's a level of complexity here that I don't think lends itself to quick conclusions based on back of the envelope calculations.


My mistake - my problem is with costs
by airborneirish  (2017-09-14 09:17:59)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

My curiosity was piqued by the new requirement. I hadn't looked at room and board costs in about 5 years. When I saw it was nearly what I paid in tuition in 1998 I thought I'd dive into things more deeply.

My main gripe is that the value just isn't there in terms of the facilities themselves. Take Carroll: far from campus, ancient building that hasn't been renovated in a half century, no AC, low sq. ft. to student ratio, obsolete layouts, old furniture, disgusting plumbing that tastes like metals, excessively large common spaces that are outdated and gross, etc.

There are no depreciation or financing costs associated with these structures. As we can see the majority of the holding costs are personnel and "taxes."

On that last point, after talking with some female friends I have come to recall that women dorms have even more personnel that men dorms don't (e.g. security officers, etc.)

My numbers remain conservative and have assumptions that just aren't valid. ND certainly isn't allocating 80k a year to updating Carroll - the place looks the same since any one of us Vermin have lived. The only thing that has changed is someone finally got the FUCK YOU tile removed from one of the second floor quads.

ND would do well to evaluate the personnel costs in the dorm, examine maintenance costs, and decide whether all of the services included in the 'taxes' are necessary. ND gets away with paying no taxes but then has to provide fire, power, police, etc. Perhaps it can slim down those costs.

Perhaps it's silly to think that a dorm of Carroll's size should really pay over $75k a year for IT/staffing management/etc.

I wish I had more time to jump into this. Some things I'd like to determine:

1. What were utilities costs in 1998
2. What were personnel costs in 1998
3. How has the shift away from Priests changed costs
4. How have student quality of life requirements changed things? (we all had internet in 1998, what else has really changed?)
5. How have changes in security requirements effected costs?
6. If overhead is figured as a percentage of the budget, has that percentage stayed constant despite ballooning costs?



Wanna live in Eddy Street Commons?
by KeoughCharles05  (2017-09-13 18:14:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

2/2 apartments at the Foundry apparently run about $1750 a month, or around $2 per square foot.

For $893 a month, with two roomies, you could easily get a brand new 3/3 that is essentially on campus, only without all of the bullshit. Honestly, I'm surprised more people aren't moving off campus after sophomore year with that kind of pricing. Especially since it's likely closer to your classes than Caroll is.


Well now they can't haha. *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 18:16:21)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


If you go by 34 weeks of occupancy it's actually $5400/month *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 17:48:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


The local landlords charge 12 months
by shea  (2017-09-14 12:00:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Right? At least mine did ("Clover Village").


yes but the local landlords can't rent out those properties
by airborneirish  (2017-09-14 16:13:06)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

in the summer for reunion, summer camps, summer school, etc.


Does it cost $1 million a year to operate Carroll Hall?
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 17:34:53)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

10718/student x 100 students = $1,071,800. The dorm is only in use 34 weeks of the year, has been depreciated to nothing on the books and is lightly maintained.

I'd love to see the accounting on this.


would of excluded me who lived at home in SB * *
by discNDav  (2017-09-13 16:27:52)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Surprised
by SteveM  (2017-09-13 14:51:01)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

When I saw the headline I thought it was ND saying that students could only live on campus for three years. As mentioned by others below, how times have changed.


Next up: required to buy FB tickets *
by basicbasket  (2017-09-13 13:38:35)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


They will just be added on to the tuition bill with a small
by akaRonMexico  (2017-09-13 16:50:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

but mandatory convenience charge.


laugh all you want...
by cujaysfan  (2017-09-13 18:12:05)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

but that's how we got tix back at CU during my era (not sure if it's still true)

a mandatory student activities charge - some of that went into athletics, speakers that were brought to campus, and cool stuff like the Hoodoo Gurus for the spring concert

i rather would have paid $100 or something for my tix - and gotten an actual seat (plus) digging into your pocket creates more value IMO - but that's just the marketing guy in me


Like John88, I lived in Keenan all four years.
by The Holtz Room  (2017-09-13 13:35:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I figured I had plenty of time to live in an appartment post ND and off campus housing was pretty shitty when I was there.

I spent a fair amount of time at my girlfriend's off campus place senior year and had the 3rd floor single then, but at least for me, the comradery of the dorms is a once in a lifetime experience...well, twice if you were in one in HS too, but with booze.

We also had hard alcohol then so I had a nice little bar in my room. Tried to add a touch of class to the joint.

As far as the policy, I don't care one way or the other.


I feel 3/1 is the way to go
by DavidAddison  (2017-09-13 17:57:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If you live senior year in a complex made up mainly of ND/SMC Students, there is adequate comradery. More than adequate, if you are the outgoing type. If you can't experience the wonders of dorm life enough in three years, you probably won't in four.

I get it though, to each their own. The vibe overall is certainly completely different between the two options.


Mine was definitely different b/c I lived w/ a transfer soph
by The Holtz Room  (2017-09-13 18:48:55)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

my freshman year. The kid that was supposed to be my roommate went to NYU at the last minute.

So we lived together for 3 years and by junior year all the other guys in the quad were Seniors. They graduated and I was odd man out.

I lucked out (still think I got some NBA draft style "luck") getting the overall #1 room pick. The booze rules were loser back then and I had a good balance of friend on and off campus.

Plus, the first two things I saw when I woke up in the single were the Dome and Heidi Klum. Not bad.


Your first line was exactly my thinking.
by milhouse  (2017-09-13 16:16:26)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I had the rest of my life to live off-campus... might as well enjoy another year in Carroll.


And look how you turned out! *
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 16:03:44)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Is that your way of calling me charming and handsome? *
by The Holtz Room  (2017-09-13 16:15:34)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Where will they build the 2 new dorms? *
by ddc  (2017-09-13 13:24:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Bring Grace back to its previous glory. *
by ksqdomer  (2017-09-14 06:25:23)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Two options
by pmoose  (2017-09-13 20:07:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The old St. Joes HS or on Holy Cross campus.


Dorms to be named Seamus-Moore and Dewey, Cheetum & Howe *
by Father Nieuwland  (2017-09-13 16:44:50)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


50 yard line. *
by mkovac  (2017-09-13 16:29:35)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I was just going to ask same question
by NDoggie78  (2017-09-13 15:09:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And more thoughts.
East of Dunne & Flaherty is problematic as it is getting further from the center of campus and the new McCourtney Hall already fills one of the areas to form a courtyard or small quad.

Using the campus map, here are some other possibilities:
1) North of Flanner & Grace, south of Holy Cross Dr. - not much room, but you could enclose that new quad - albeit with 2 high rise office buildings in the midst

2) Replace Fisher & Pangborn - some discussion has already occured on this path - not sure you could build 2 new larger dorms there that would give you the additional capacity

3) Encroach on Burke even more - would have to redesign golf course to keep 9 holes

4) Sports fields west of Ryan Hall, northwest of Bookstore. Since Ryan already started a new "quad" or at least row of dorms, this might be logical

5) Tear down old ROTC and build there and in Lake parking lot - dorms would have a great view of the lake and actually bring Carroll into the campus


Pangborn is already a transition dorm for when a dorm is
by G.K.Chesterton  (2017-09-13 21:54:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

being renovated. I assume when they are all done fixing the other dorms, they will blow Pangborn sky-high and put something else there. I can't speak for Fisher.

Signed,

A Violence alum


And it's a women's dorm
by NDoggie78  (2017-09-14 08:57:15)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Some would argue that's not a change


Condo additions attached to Crossroads! *
by jammer  (2017-09-13 15:06:35)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I believe east of Dunne and Flaherty *
by fontoknow  (2017-09-13 14:23:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Are these real places? *
by John88  (2017-09-13 15:10:09)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Same question
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 16:04:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Font could make up names at this point and I wouldn't know if he's screwing with us or not.


It's funny because it's true *
by NJND96  (2017-09-13 17:39:34)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


They're real and they're spectacular. *
by rick  (2017-09-13 15:46:03)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


2 new dorms east of Pasquerilla E & W
by NDoggie78  (2017-09-13 15:12:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Built close to where Juniper used to be

1255 & 1256 if you look on campus map


The north side of the stadium *
by zaggie  (2017-09-13 14:01:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Perhaps they should let 21yo adults posses hard liquor?
by Wooderson  (2017-09-13 12:39:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I was a junior when they announced the last booze ban. I had to con my parents into letting me move off ("forgot" to send in my rooming form) but I sent my dad a spreadsheet of the cost savings and he never said another word.

Whilst hosting a party the fall of senior year, the clock struck 3:00 and my gf, my roomie's gf, and all their girlfriends were noted as having a fun time at our place without any worries about an RA to come break up the fun.

Funny enough, no one got sick, no one got arrested, and no one drove drunk. But hey, gotta keep it in the dorms.

Wonder what they'll do about kids who get the boot off campus for disciplinary issues, or if that becomes a full on boot now.


Perhaps should let 21 year olds knock boots after midnite? *
by Inigomontoya  (2017-09-13 15:14:59)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Are there any University's that allow liquor in
by TWO  (2017-09-13 13:26:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

University owned Dorms? I know at Texas and Texas A&M they have been dry for quite awhile. Just too much liability I would assume.


Not prohibited at Sewanee
by coachslacker  (2017-09-13 14:37:26)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I suppose smaller schools it is less common to prohibit liquor

Edit - or Vanderbilt, except grain alcohol. So, maybe not just by size of school, but an institutional viewpoint.

U. of Alabama: "The consumption of any alcohol stronger than 80 proof is not permitted on campus"

Auburn is an alcohol-free campus except the president's house.


Definitely not at Purdue *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 13:29:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Purdue doesn't allow any alcohol in the dorms. That used to
by Jeash  (2017-09-13 15:54:01)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Include married student housing.


This is a shame for students who already struggle
by harmonica  (2017-09-13 12:30:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

with a $67k pricetag. Although I considered moving off early, I lived on campus three years and immensely enjoyed it. And I'm sure I would have also enjoyed junior year from off campus.

But more importantly, one of the draws of moving off campus is its significant discount to room and board fees. My rent senior year was under $400. Living off campus can be a way for students to offset ballooning tuition costs. Instead, Notre Dame charges them prime real estate prices for shoeboxes (at least in my case) and more meals than almost anyone uses.

As others have noted, if Notre Dame wants more upperclassmen present on campus, they should create policies to attract them, not treat them like children.


They should offer economy pricing for dorms like Keenan *
by Father Nieuwland  (2017-09-13 16:42:12)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


My rent senior year was $210/month
by jerseyirish07  (2017-09-13 14:28:14)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

in a 5BR with 5 other guys.


I lived inside the large coal pile junior and senior year.
by Inigomontoya  (2017-09-13 15:12:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Burrowed in and set up pilings and walls. Coal is an excellent insulator and if you seal it with plastic sheeting it keeps the dust down.


How are the lungs? *
by mkovac  (2017-09-13 17:29:14)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


A little grey lung, but I think that was the marlboros. Hard
by inigomontoya  (2017-09-13 22:06:29)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

to tell.


Sounds like Lafayette? *
by LondonDomer  (2017-09-13 14:42:37)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


#21 Lafayette, in fact.
by jerseyirish07  (2017-09-13 15:18:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Good times.


I also lived in #21 Lafayette *
by CaptainIrish  (2017-09-13 19:53:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I was in Lafayette #17. I also transferred to ND as a soph.
by Beer30Light  (2017-09-14 11:06:58)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Does the 6 semester minimum mean that all transfers would have to stay on campus during their entire time at ND?

Five of us lived at Lafayette #17 in '07/'08. I think our rent was sub $400 and we were able to splurge on HD cable/DVR because we split utilities five ways.

It was great and all saved money was spent on kegs. All of it.


"It's gonna be a long night-the Murphy twins are drunk again *
by Father Nieuwland  (2017-09-13 19:59:16)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Also lived there. Such good times, can't remember which # *
by LondonDomer  (2017-09-13 15:25:26)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Rent under $400?
by stevec28  (2017-09-13 14:19:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

A mortgage on a 3-BR house a mile from campus can be had for < $400/mth.

SB real estate has incredibly low value, which is why it is shocking that ND's room and board is more than Columbia University in New fricking York City.


It might have been under 300.
by harmonica  (2017-09-13 14:41:32)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I couldn't remember if it was 290 or 390.


ND's black Ops budget
by cujaysfan  (2017-09-13 14:21:44)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

is buried under line items like Yocream and funded through dorm rooms at crazy $/sq foot prices

the pentagon are amateurs at this sort of stuff in comparison


Lame, and likely a money grab
by garbageplate  (2017-09-13 12:10:31)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I moved off campus as a junior and loved it. Let the students decide what they want to do.


This announcement is really burying the lead
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 12:08:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

5-6 paragraphs talking about how they want to attract seniors to live on-campus and the improvements they're making to be more competitive.

1 paragraph at the end about a new rule/law/draconian measure they are implementing which is only tangentially related to the previous 5-6 paragraphs.

That kind of communication can only mean they're well aware that what they're doing is bull-shit.

Congratulations to all the parents who invested money in buying a condo for their domer kids to live in as they rotate through every couple of years. You just lost half of the utility for your purchase.


I weep for them.
by stanford_07  (2017-09-13 17:36:20)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I would hope that this policy was crafted with little or no thought to parents who purchased second and third homes for their children. They'll be just fine.

Like anything with ND, part of this is a money grab. But I do think this is also a sincere effort by the Administration to preserve and enhance ND's residential atmosphere, which, like it or not, is unique.


Those who bought the condos
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:21:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Are making quite an assumption that all their kids will get admitted or want to go to ND in the first place, no?



Whatever assumptions they're making
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 16:02:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Those are their assumptions when they make the financial commitment.

The reality that a new rule would reduce their utility probably wasn't in the equation.


I agree one can take issue with this new policy
by vivaflanner  (2017-09-13 17:24:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

but unless ND was a financial participant in those condos and/or made statements about the market for student rentals, I dont see where ND needs to consider the impact on these condos in NDs decision making.

Its not ND's job to worry about a few real estate investors, and if those investors didnt consider that ND might change its policy, they werent very smart investors. Hardly an earth shattering move by ND, many colleges have residency requirements. ND adjusted theirs as I am sure many colleges do from time to time.


I never said they should
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 23:17:52)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I was just pointing out that if this had happened to some of my friend's parents they'd screwed.

It's not uncommon. One of my buddies bought and lived there junior and senior year and then his little sister did the same behind him. If she wasn't able to do so it wouldn't have been as good of a situation for him.


True but now there are fewer potential renters...
by NavyJoe  (2017-09-13 12:27:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And just as much inventory. Bad news for them either way.


Garbage *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 12:00:11)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I'm against any policy
by Rockbrig97  (2017-09-13 11:52:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

that treats 20 or 21 year old students like children by mandating certain behavior.

There are hosts of reasons someone might live off campus before their senior year. My wife did, and she was not a trouble maker or anything. She just didn't like the bullshit policies enforced by her dorm rector.


Plus she liked knocking boots *
by Inigomontoya  (2017-09-13 15:16:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


You must not know my wife. *
by Rockbrig97  (2017-09-13 17:46:13)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I think that's all of them
by DakotaDomer  (2017-09-13 12:09:13)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Or close to all of them


In loco parentis can drive one loco
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:07:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But there is the other side of the coin.

Consider any dorm at IU, for instance. Or so I've been told. Or your basic Penn State frat.


It strains credulity to compare ND student life
by KarlHungus  (2017-09-13 13:14:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

with IU dorms or Penn State frats, no?


Not the point of why I posted what I did
by sprack  (2017-09-13 13:20:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'm speaking as a parent.

I don't think I need elaborate. And if my kids went to either school it would have been their choice. But I'd be glad (am glad) it wasn't.

Now, once a kid is 21, the law considers said kid an adult and I most certainly do think he/she should be treated that way, whether in a dorm or out. For example, Indiana law allows 21 year olds to consume hard liquor. But it doesn't mean the liquor has to be consumed in the dorm. Go to a freaking bar!


Got it...
by KarlHungus  (2017-09-13 13:44:18)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I just wonder if the ND Administration sees things as getting out of control (or maybe more aptly, out of ITS control) and veering toward large state university norms. I wouldn't be surprised if there was that conservative perception within the university leadership, the collars, ResLife, etc. Which, of course, would be ridiculous.


Vanderbilt has a similar policy.
by TWO  (2017-09-13 11:47:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

from their web page.

Vanderbilt has a residency requirement for all undergraduate students, meaning they must live in university housing. Seniors may apply for off-campus housing, but most seniors will continue their fourth year of school in campus housing. There are multiple reasons for the residency requirement, but simply put: we believe on-campus living increases academic and social success.

Years of academic research results point to higher retention rates and higher cumulative GPAs for those who choose to live in university housing. Furthermore, academic research suggests that greater social engagement directly ties to academic success. All of this is an authoritative way of saying it is a good idea to live and learn in the same place.


George Washington University (B23's alma mater) too.
by John88  (2017-09-13 11:56:52)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The George Washington University requires all first-, second-, and third-year students to reside on campus unless they are approved for a Residency Exemption.

Collectively, GW's residency requirement is intended to foster community development and best support the undergraduate experience at GW.


Unless you are living out in NOVA, it is probably
by steelhop  (2017-09-13 14:52:00)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

comparable to live on campus at GW as it is to live off campus. Or at least the difference is negligible.


Different considerations for women vs. men students
by HoundDog1973  (2017-09-13 11:35:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Both my son (class of '08) and daughter (class of '11) attended and graduated from ND. Both had great experiences. My son lived in his dorm for 3 years then moved off campus. He did it for the experience and because most of his dorm friends moved off for senior year. He had no complaints about living in the dorm when he did. My daughter's experience was different. While she enjoyed the friends she made in her dorm, she moved off campus for her junior and senior years, although one semester junior year she was abroad. She moved off because of the stifling atmosphere of her dorm. Most of her friends felt the same way. There is a double standard at ND re men's and women's dorms. The men are treated as adults more and enjoy more freedom while the women are living in a much stricter atmosphere, which drives some of them off campus earlier. Women's dorms are not as much fun.


This is not true
by Shifty  (2017-09-13 12:27:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I had lots of fun in the women's dorms!


Improve the product and people will buy it.
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 11:18:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

People went off campus because there was a superior product at a better price. This is in spite of the fact that most people love their dorm and fondly remember their time there.

Instead of competing, ND pulls this.


Instead of competing? They're doing major dorm renovations
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:35:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

of just about every dorm on campus, and I think you'd have a different opinion if you visited Dunn or Flaherty Halls as prime examples of the new dorms they're building.

My daughter lived in Ryan Hall, beginning the year it opened, and I can tell you the rooms there are as good as any off campus room I've seen, including in the new apartments where the daughters of friends have been in the last couple of years. And those apartments are nice.

They're going to be renovating Morrissey next year. It will be interesting to see what they can do with that place.

Now, Keenan and Stanford can be improved most by implosion, so it's not to say there won't be challenges.

Now, relaxing the alcohol rules and parietals would be truly competing, but we know that ain't happening.


Have you been in Carroll? compare what you can get
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 12:44:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

for the same $ off campus. We already have had these debates and the value in on campus isn't there. You stay because you like the lifestyle. But it's expensive.


Speaking as a Vermin, I don't see many renovation options
by rflor  (2017-09-13 15:35:03)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I was thinking this while reading the announcement. There's not a whole lot you can do to dramatically improve Carroll's experience. Most of the rooms are already either singles or doubles, and the triples/quads are decent sized to begin with.

I guess maybe upgrade the kitchen and recreation facilities?


No, too far to walk
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:50:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Yeah, I get the reason why the residents are called Vermin.

Never did I mean to imply that every dorm is going to be as nice as off campus apartments. There's only so much you can do with what you've got. Carroll first became a dorm while I was at ND (I can't remember who lived there before, priests?). I pitied the poor souls.

I know from lousy rooms in a decrepit setting at ND, by the way. First semester freshman year I lived in the old, no longer extant St. Ed's annex. I also don't think the entire dorm had been renovated at that time since it was built. In 1882. It sure didn't look like it. The most lasting memory of I have of St. Ed's is the smell of roach powder.


The whole thing pisses me off to no end *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 14:09:30)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I don't think dorm amenities are that big of a driver
by tdiddy07  (2017-09-13 12:19:07)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

of off-campus moves. Community pride in my experience had little to do with that. Edit: although with the flurry of construction of off-campus options lately, that could have changed.


If the renovations made them competitive...
by 11thFloorGrace  (2017-09-13 12:15:10)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

then they wouldn't need new policies/rules like this


I didn't mean equal or better, to be clear *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:20:28)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


What can be done with Sorin?
by TWO  (2017-09-13 11:49:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Nephew lived in a room in the basement freshman year that was shockingly small, even in the '60's at Texas I had more personal space.


and on the other hand
by ND8486  (2017-09-13 16:15:41)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

My son was in the basement of Sorin last year and didn't get a good enough pick to stay there.

He loves Sorin, and the basement.

He lived in one of the new dorms this summer while working on campus.

He still loves Sorin.

I was shocked at the size of the room he loved. It was smaller than his room at our house and had a whole other guy in there with him.


Sounds like Dillon in recent years
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:56:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The biggest problem is sticking too many people into the rooms.

When I was in Dillon in the 70's we had 3 rooms for 4 guys (or 2 rooms for 3). That meant you had a "party room" with the beds, lockers and desks in the side room or rooms. There were also 3 massive quints, one on each floor. It was great. In recent years it's been two guys in each of those rooms. It's like living in a shoebox. Enduring it freshman year is one thing. For four years is quite another.

I'm told in Dillon it's finally back to the way it was since new dorms were constructed, starting with Duncan (is that true? Enquiring minds want to know).


Freshmen in Dillon have two to a room.
by harmonica  (2017-09-13 12:02:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They try not to have anyone else do that, but overcrowding my sophomore year meant that I had to do it again. But usually sophomores have three-room quads. My junior year some sophomores even had singles.


Good to hear. Then it is back to the way it was
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:03:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

There were two freshman in a room starting my sophomore year, but it was only freshman, and they're to be seen and not heard anyway.

My freshman room was 339, a one room triple at the end of the ghetto with sloping ceilings. What. A. Dump.

I've been told the fight song has also been resurrected. Which is awesome.


I lived in 339 my sophomore year, only it was a double
by Dignan  (2017-09-13 14:20:29)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I recall seeing some cave drawings in there. Must have been yours.

I can't imagine 3 dudes in that space. That room was miserable in the winter- no insulation between those sloped ceilings and the roof.


To be fair, it's going to take a real long time-probably
by rick  (2017-09-13 11:48:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

at least 20 years-until all the dorms are renovated. The new ones are palaces, but the old ones are bad.


That is true, but this is all future stuff anyway *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:54:15)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


My wife was in Ryan the year it opened.
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 11:48:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'd take my Turtle Creek apartment over that. A shoebox is a shoebox regardless of how nice the facade is. I'll take a full size bed and more elbow room for studying.

Beyond the old places like TC, the new construction is nicer than the dorm construction. I've seen in-laws at 3 different off campus facilities built in the past 7 years, all are considerably nicer to live in than Ryan.

And yes, partying is a big part of it for many people, but we're not talking about anything outlandish. It gets old to sneak beer across campus, kick friends or girlfriends out at midnight, etc.

If they brought back true SYRs, that would be a way to compete.


Well, sure, but that's an impossible standard
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:52:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I doubt there's any college in the country with dorms with rooms like what you had at Turtle Creek.

ND's not going to change the rules, and with 17,000 applicants a year now (or is it more?) they don't need to.

What class year was your wife and what floor did she live on? Maybe my daughter knows her.


Most senior housing apartments compare.
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 11:55:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Villanova, among many others, has such apartments on campus. FOG is basically the same thing as TC.

My wife was '10 and on the first floor with a bunch of Lewis transplants.


Maybe they do know each other
by sprack (click here to email the poster)  (2017-09-13 12:06:17)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

My daughter was also a Lewis transplant on the first floor (at least I think she was on the first floor that year), class of '11. Could you shoot me an email? Attached above.


They are still competing for SRs
by fontoknow  (2017-09-13 11:23:56)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

This policy impacts about 340-350 students per year.


I assume there are much better off campus options
by 1978Irish  (2017-09-13 11:15:31)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

now than in the 1970's and 1980's.

More students have cars now than in the old days which gives them more options on where to live. I think maybe 10% of the students had cars in the late 1970's.

Don't a lot of football players move off campus by junior year?

Many schools keep seniors on campus by having really nice "senior dorms" with kitchens and bathrooms in the unit - essentially apartments owned by the university. That cuts against the ND model of staying in the same dorm 4 years.

This also might be a money thing for ND. They have built all of these new dorms and if there is a possibility they might have empty dorm rooms, that will hurt revenue. I think we have all learned that most things at ND are about maximizing revenue.


On athletes moving off campus
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:21:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

As you of course recall, athletes on scholarship had to live in the dorms back when we were there.

But then there was the reality. The room was paid for, so . . .

Put it this way - I never once saw Billy Paterno in Dillon Hall in the year and a half when our "tenures" overlapped, and for a year I was one section over from his "room" on the third floor.

That's not to say most of the athletes did really live in the dorms as juniors and seniors, mind you, because they did. But there were some who basically kept the rooms as a mailing address, which was nice for the roommates who actually did live in the rooms. It was in the tradition of George Gipp (and maybe Paul Hornung too?), so why not?

I'd be very surprised if this new thing changes anything at all for today's players.


Lived next door to a starting BB player who was hardly
by G.K.Chesterton  (2017-09-13 11:37:09)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

ever around.


Great, this means even less football parking in the future
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:08:31)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I think the biggest reason by far for people moving off have compared to the olden days is that off campus housing is vastly superior to what it used to be. Night and day, in fact. It's not like people used to like the dorm rules any better then than now. Far from it. But it really was pretty rare for juniors to move off - maybe 10% did - and if there were even a hundred sophomores off campus who weren't South Bend natives, I'd be very surprised. I'd bet it was closer to 50.

But I'm sure this will go over with the current student body like a lead zeppelin. Looking forward to reaction when the levee breaks on this one.

I'm neutral, have no dog in the fight. I lived 4 years on campus and would again.


Nit-it doesn't impact the current student body. *
by rick  (2017-09-13 11:29:21)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Ah! Missed that, and that's kind of important!
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:32:45)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Then I truly don't care. Applicants will know what they're getting into, and it's not like ND is hurting for applicants.

But man, 2 new dorms will still mean less football parking.


Amusing
by OrangeJubilee  (2017-09-13 11:08:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I think the shift towards more juniors moving off happened while I was there, 00-04. Probably went from 20% to 40%.

You really don't need some study here. Nice things about off campus:
- Girlfriend can stay the night.
- Free to have a party, liquor etc.
- Can smoke weed etc.
- Much more privacy.
- No RA/rector crap.
- Can park right by your house/apartment vs. dealing with gate guy to get on campus.
- Better options to cook etc.

There, ND please send me the $50K study fee.


The alcohol policy change in 1984 didn't help. *
by G.K.Chesterton  (2017-09-13 11:34:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Gee, sorry about that. Class of '83. *
by ksqdomer  (2017-09-14 06:38:27)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


And again in 02 or 03, whichever it was. *
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 11:52:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


2002. Right before I moved off for senior year. *
by Wooderson  (2017-09-13 12:44:42)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


40% of juniors lived off campus in the early 2000s?
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 11:10:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Umm no.


I think close to it by 04
by OrangeJubilee  (2017-09-13 11:13:07)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

my sample may be skewed as I was in Morrissey which was a dump.

Either way I'd say whatever the rate started at it doubled from 2000 to 2005. So if it was only 10% then I think it was 20% by 2005 or so.


I think that's grossly inflated in overall.
by KeoughCharles05  (2017-09-13 13:08:03)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'd agree that the number of juniors moving off increased significantly, but was still a substantial minority around '04-'05.


Doubtful.
by novusordo0205  (2017-09-13 11:22:36)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

From last spring's Scholastic: "Currently 63 percent of seniors live off campus, and only 28.5 percent of senior non-RAs live on campus." That was up from November 2003, according to "Scott Kachmarik, associate director of residence life, [who] said about 52 percent of current Notre Dame seniors live off campus. (http://ndsmcobserver.com/2003/11/nd-students-move-off-campus/). That said, the junior class number has never been as high as you suggest, though it certainly has increased. Keep in mind, perception gets skewed because of so many juniors that go abroad.


Practically speaking, is this big news?...
by Kbyrnes  (2017-09-13 11:01:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...I lived in my dorm (Morrissey) all 4 years. A lot of seniors went OC, but rather few juniors. I can't even remember one.

If lots of juniors (or sophs) went off campus each year, you could construe this as a forced-placing of room and board fees on students; and I'm sure, at any rate, that they have run the various numbers. One underlying thought must be: we've spent $$$$ building new dorms and renovating existing ones--we don't want a bunch of vacancies. But unless there have been significant numbers of juniors moving off campus, this seems like no big deal.


What rights would you like to lose, practically speaking? *
by stevec28  (2017-09-13 14:33:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Are you referring to an ND student's...
by Kbyrnes  (2017-09-13 15:44:35)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...constitutional right to live wherever they wish? I'll have to re-read the Constitution and have one of my brothers scan Westlaw to find the basis for that.

Or maybe it's a human rights violation.


Constitutional? Where do you get that?
by stevec28  (2017-09-13 16:48:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Don't faux lawyer.


OK, ok--I just don't understand your question. *
by Kbyrnes  (2017-09-13 16:51:06)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


That was basically the requirement when I attended. ’66-’70.
by so-it-goes  (2017-09-13 10:57:12)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Needed parental permission to move off campus senior year. I did and, at the end of the day, regretted it. Big ideas ended up be huge disappointment. Lost touch with too many classmates, etc.
It was tough to have a vehicle living on campus too.


This really doesn't impact many people
by DawsonMayes871  (2017-09-13 10:54:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

What percentage of people actually moved off-campus junior year? 10% on the high end? Especially if you're going abroad, no sense in signing a year lease when you're gone half the year.

This is much ado about nothing.


I heard 15% of jr's live off campus
by fontoknow  (2017-09-13 11:00:33)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

about 300 cats.

2% of sophs were living off campus ... about 40 cats.

room and board is about 15000. Let's say this increases marginal revenue by 10000 per additional student ... increased university revenue of 3.4MM. Though there are real costs of these students living on campus. New dorms will have to be built with real maintenance and operating expenses. Food will have to be purchased by dining halls and cooked...real costs.


I think the increased costs of food are probably lower. My
by 1978Irish  (2017-09-13 11:45:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

guess is that they make more food than necessary for most meals.

If they have empty dorm rooms because kids are living off campus then the room costs are all lost revenue.

Even if your calculations are correct, ND would do a lot to add $3.4 million per year in revenue net of costs.


there aren't vacant rooms *
by fontoknow  (2017-09-13 11:47:44)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


If there aren't, then where do the 350 juniors who would
by 1978Irish  (2017-09-13 12:38:35)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

move off campus live?

Will they force more seniors off campus?

Build another dorm?


As I mentioned my post ... new dorms will have to be built *
by fontoknow  (2017-09-13 12:45:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Juniors living off campus was higher than 10% 10 years ago
by manofdillon  (2017-09-13 10:55:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I bet it's even higher now. They wouldn't need to make it a requirement if it wouldn't have some meaningful impact.


Yep, and now that impact will hit the SB economy instead. *
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 10:59:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


This is a free-market economy. ND can impose this if
by G.K.Chesterton  (2017-09-13 15:14:53)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

they want. Nobody is requiring the 2018 and beyond admittees to come to ND.

I *am* curious if the admissions person coming to our HS in the coming weeks will be mentioning this policy change at all at all.


What the hell? *
by 512  (2017-09-13 10:54:12)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I'm a dork who lived in Keenan for four years.
by John88  (2017-09-13 10:53:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I like this idea. Pelt away.


I'm a cave pig who lived in Howard her Senior Year. I like
by 1NDGal  (2017-09-13 15:36:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

this move, too. I'll take some of the empties for ya, John.

I would have been there Junior Year, too, but I went on two programs abroad.


All 4 years with Sister MJ? God bless you. *
by Raristotle  (2017-09-14 21:32:56)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


me too. waddaya know?
by 84david  (2017-09-13 21:59:23)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Wait. that didnt come out right.

oh well too late.


Another 4 year Keenan dork here (86 - 90)
by AlanND90  (2017-09-13 14:32:54)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I loved it, but I can definitely see how it was not for everybody.


I stayed through Senior year and think it sucks.
by stevec28  (2017-09-13 14:13:49)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Clearly just a money grab, as I'm sure they'll police it as vigorously as they policed the football team "having to live on campus" when I was a student (i.e. not at all). Just another mandatory student service fee to tax the wealthy parents, whether their kids use it or not. I'm sure the parents buying the $400k townhomes across the street from campus are going to make their poor kids suffer through sharing a monk's cell with another student for any longer than they want to rough it.




I lived on campus for 4 years, but I don't think campus life
by NDEE01  (2017-09-13 13:17:38)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

is the same as it once was. If I went to ND now, I would move off.


Carroll all 4 years...ducking the empties now... *
by Vermin96  (2017-09-13 12:37:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Me too. No reason to move off.
by geoffgeoffers  (2017-09-13 21:20:13)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

We already mostly were off.


Me too. Loved it. *
by Giggity_Giggity  (2017-09-13 13:08:55)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Same here! *
by BigBadBrewer  (2017-09-13 13:05:20)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


those were good times
by SkullND88  (2017-09-13 12:04:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But I did leave Keenan senior year with 3 other Keenanites. It certainly was different off campus - I loved both.


Agreed.
by John88  (2017-09-13 12:09:13)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And this policy shift will still allow that.

Hope you are well!


Good training for sub duty! *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:16:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Not quite as good as Zahm would have been. *
by John88  (2017-09-13 11:28:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Or Alumni *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 11:41:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Dillon provided different occupational training
by NDoggie78  (2017-09-13 12:02:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Professor of environmental science? *
by sprack  (2017-09-13 12:17:33)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


aren't all residents of Keenan classified as dorks? *
by DBCooper  (2017-09-13 11:13:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Only by those not lucky enough to have lived there. *
by NDBob  (2017-09-13 11:55:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Well said. *
by benjaben525  (2017-09-13 21:06:02)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


My (failing) memory is that in the mid-70s they began
by IAND75  (2017-09-13 11:07:03)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

allowing some junior to move off campus and encouraged (required) some portion of seniors due to shortage of dorm space. I moved off senior year and don't think it was a particularly smart decision. Housing options in those days were pretty awful. It is certainly better now. But requiring students to live on campus for 3 years is fine. The ND dorm life experience separates it from most other universities, for the better.


Glad you had a good experience in the dorms.
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 11:03:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Not everyone did. And the spineless reactionary nature of RAs, dorm rules, and ResLife alike mean that if one person in your hall doesn't like you or your roommates, they can easily create huge hassles.

Not everyone can afford the $10k a year proce tag either.


I think list room and board this year is $14,800
by rick  (2017-09-13 11:26:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

You can get a very nice apartment east of the tennis center with your own room for much less.
But, the nice places require well over a year notice. I heard from a dad a couple of years ago at Christmas that he just signed a lease for his sophomore to live in an apartment his senior year.


Exactly *
by airborneirish  (2017-09-13 12:46:10)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Even the late and overbearing rector
by maniactranspodriver  (2017-09-13 11:02:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Brother Bonaventure was vocal in recommending seniors with the exception of necessary RAs, should move off campus.

So unless you were an RA, you are a dork. But you were a Keenan dork, so you're still okay.

I am certain I'd heard BroBo say that once sometime in 1992. For what it's worth, despite my past conflicts in the 3 years in Keenan, I made peace with him so much so that I made certain to attend his funeral in Baltimore just about one year ago.


I was one and done with him.
by Revue Party  (2017-09-13 17:00:35)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I would have moved off anyhow but Bonny made it easy. Fr. Gerrick was a little overmatched for the job (I'll never forget the stunned look on his face during his first Revue Party) but I preferred him over Fr. Scully. And yes, I know he came out years later.


Ah, Bonny. He and I didn't always see eye to eye, but
by Barrister  (2017-09-13 11:08:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

we had lots of lively discussions over a drink or when he'd ask me to drive him around to run errands. He even let me borrow his car a time or two when I didn't have transportation.


OT
by maniactranspodriver  (2017-09-13 11:54:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Somehow wish I had seen him between 1994 and 2016. A classmate from 93 and Keenan would meet with him for lunch somewhere near Takoma Park, MD where he had been residing and doing his social justice. I never got to it. While I still am far from him on the political spectrum, I do see things different in the world and he probably would be pleased at some of my "growth." His wake was very good in reconnecting with others from Keenan in the early 90s and of course his extended family. Truly did put me at peace with someone who I had confrontations and irritations with though over time in Keenan, I redeemed myself to be one of the lower level rabble rousers he and his minion hall staff had to contend with.


He always used to complain about everyone getting
by Barrister  (2017-09-13 12:04:58)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

so worked up about football games. He could never understand how 60,000 people could get together and spend all that time, effort, and money to watch a game, when taking those same 60,000 people and having them do some good in the world for 4 hours instead could make much more of a difference.

He once suggested that ND have a canned food drive at the stadium for the home game closest to Thanksgiving. I actually wrote Fr. Jenkins about it a few years ago, but never got a response.


Same. *
by Barrister  (2017-09-13 10:57:29)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Lived in Siegfried for 4 years, and agree with you... *
by bmoney  (2017-09-13 10:53:59)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Same here. I wish I knew you back then, because
by Go_Crazy_Folks  (2017-09-13 11:38:21)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

my 3 roommates were awful.


took me a second... *
by bmoney  (2017-09-13 11:43:14)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


BS money grab. *
by Irish Tool  (2017-09-13 10:52:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


That's a reasonable presumption about most actions...
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 11:24:05)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...undertaken by universities generally and ND specifically, but per font's math above I don't think it's the case here. The net amounts are likely negligible.


Agree.
by KarlHungus  (2017-09-13 11:07:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

This is a step backward that:
- Further limits interaction among the sexes
- Indirectly manages university risk re: substance use/abuse
- Undercuts South Bend property owners/landlords and general town-gown goodwill

It does little for student independence and decision-mkaing, engagement with the local community or generally students encountering realities beyond the bubble.

I'd be curious to see how many of the other, oh...top 100 universities...impose such byzantine rules.


It's funny how people decry us trying to be like everybody
by FL_Irish  (2017-09-13 11:18:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...else when it suits their purpose and at other times want us to be like everybody else when it suits their purpose.

I agree with everything you said about the benefits of living off campus. I also agree with ND's position that having a critical mass of upperclassmen (especially non-RA upperclassmen) in dorms is a good thing. Requiring people to live on campus for junior year while leaving them completely free to move off senior year strikes me as a reasonable way to meet both objectives.


Not sure if you are referring to me or
by KarlHungus  (2017-09-13 12:56:47)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

just speaking in generalities, but I am rarely on the "pearl-clutching, oh my God a jumbotron strips away Notre Dame's Catholic identity" side of things. I think they should abolish parietals...and single-sex dorms, for that matter. I am not resistant to modernity like the university (or Church) is, and I am fine with bench-marking the school's residential policies with other leading institutions. There's still plenty of crushing Catholic guilt to go around.

"That's not how it works, Tracy. Even though there is the whole confession thing, that's no free pass, because there is a crushing guilt that comes with being a Catholic. Whether things are good or bad or you're simply... eating tacos in the park, there is always the crushing guilt."
-Jack Donaghy

(I will concede that the field turf was an unnecessary choice, but that's pretty low on the list of grievances for me.)