University of Virginia Library

Lambeth Field Controversy

Council Discusses Housing Plans

By Ann Brown
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Apartment and residential college
controversies in the Lambeth Field
Housing proposals raised angry comments
from several Student Council members
Tuesday night.

Dan Garst, Council's representative to
the Lambeth Field Housing Committee,
reported that the site planner had been
recalled to study the feasibility of
low-rise housing on the Lambeth Field tract.
These low-rise plans replaced earlier proposals
for high-rise apartments and dormitories.

Mr. Garst stated that the site planner had
reported that 400 to 500 students could be
placed in walk-up apartments with 400 or 500
more in low-rise residential college structures.
These plans, according to Mr. Garst, call for
four and six-person apartments.

Several Council members criticized the large
number of people living in each of the proposed
apartments. Dick Andry, newly elected
Architecture School representative, expressed
disapproval of the entire plan on the grounds
that the Committee's efforts to accommodate
up to 1000 students on this tract are not
feasible. Mr. Andry said that it would be
impossible to house that many students in that
amount of space and provide a pleasant living
environment for them.

Tom Collier, Council Secretary, warned that
perhaps it would not be advisable for Council
to become involved in the apartment
controversy since its original position had been
against any apartments at all and in favor of the
residential college concept.

He added that he had queried many students
as to their preferences. Most had replied that
they would prefer apartments; but when the
residential college plan was explained to them,
they changed their preference to that idea. Mr.
Collier stated that the Council should first try
to "educate the people living in the dorms as to
what a residential college is."

Council President Kevin Mannix reported
that he had received a letter from John Richey,
executive Assistant to Governor Holton.
According to Mr. Mannix, Mr. Holton is still
considering the Council's nominees to the
Board of Visitors, although no decision has
been reached. Mr. Mannix also stated that there
will be three more vacancies on the Board in
February of next year.

In other business, a letter was approved to
invite University President Edgar F. Shannon to
speak in an "open forum" on his recent
statement on growth in the "Report to the
University Community." The letter stated that
Mr. Shannon's statement of course, could not
completely cover the entire scope of the future
of the University, and it creates as many
questions as it answers. For this reason, Council
feels that there is a need for further
communication between yourself as well as
various members of your administration and
members of the University community."

Michael Cohen, Law School representative,
asked that Mr. Shannon be invited to attend
Council meetings so that he could become
aware of the problems under discussion.