Noah notes that CUL will urge

future attention to the addition of more high-quality singles through the conversion of small houses that are currently in use as offices (but no longer will be after the new Stetson complex is completed).

If there is one thing that “everyone” agrees on — other than the system of first year entries with junior advisors — it is the wonderfulness of Co-ops. (It would be handy if a current student could tell us how many co-op spots there currently are as well as how many applicants there were this year.) I suspect that the students on CUL and the Anchors Away folks all agree that co-ops serve a useful purpose and that the College should provide more such opportunities. I would suspect that, if the data were public, we could see that seniors living in co-ops are some of the most satisfied students at Williams, at least as far as living space and social life are concerned.

But, despite the fact that Noah and other CUL students might be pro-co-op, there can be no doubt that the anchor housing proposal is, objectively, anti-co-op. First, unless and until the clusters have equivalent amounts of desirable senior single space, there will be a constant demand that any new space that comes available be devoted to this. So, instead of turning newly freed buildings into co-ops, they will be added to clusters. Second, if not enough new space becomes available, there will be a demand, in a few years time, to add co-ops back into clusters. You heard it here first.

Print  •  Email