U of T’s new housing policy, passed by the Governing Council last month, suggests that residence construction in the medium term will take place largely on the university’s suburban campuses.
But while maintaining the university’s first-year residence guarantee and spurning the “low-service model” of residences, the revised policy puts less emphasis on housing for student families, drawing criticism from one campus group.
The new document, which replaces a previous one from 1989, stems from a 2004 report by the university’s Task Force on Student Housing.
One major change from the previous policy is its rejection of the so-called low-service residences, which were endorsed in 1989 in a bid to increase residential space, resulting in the construction of residences such as the ones at Innis College, or Graduate House. The 2004 housing report strongly rejected this model.
At the same time, the St. George campus is unlikely to see significant residence expansion in the coming years. University College’s Morrison Hall, with 273 beds, which opened last fall, was the last in a series of new residences on St. George campus.
Upcoming projects are all on the suburban campuses: a 418-bed residence is due to open at UTM this fall. Another residence, at UTSC, is in the planning states.
The acquisition of the 89 Chestnut St. residence in 2003, a 27-storey structure boasting 721 rooms, put a stop to the university’s pricey practice of putting up first-years into rented downtown hotel rooms in order to fulfill its residence guarantee.
And now that the enrollment expansion associated with the double cohort years has subsided, the university projects that enrollment will remain flat over the next decade. So the new housing policy shelves further expansions of downtown residence space until the fate of the 89 Chestnut Street residence is settled.
Student families were facing something of a crisis just two years ago as it pertained to housing, with a waiting list of almost 2,000 for the 714 spaces for families on campus. As a result, the report made by the 2004 Task Force on Student Housing recommended that student family housing be the focus of future residence expansion.
Two years later, however, the student family housing situation “has changed drastically” according to Pearl Karimalis, director of student housing services.
The waiting list today is down to roughly 300 families, with most of that reduction being the work of an “off-campus market [that is] so much better,” she said. A relatively high vacancy rate in Toronto has forced landlords to offer incentives and amenities to prospective tenants, such as a month’s free rent.
Regardless of the reduction, Karimalis said, the university should definitely be in the business of student family housing, rather than leaving it up to market forces. “They live in a community on campus,” she said, where they find likeminded families and services.
The new policy retains student families as a group for which residential space is a priority, but lumps them as only one part of a “highly diverse student population” that, for example, includes students of differing ethnic and racial backgrounds.
And Oriel Varga, executive director of APUS, which represents part-time students at U of T, however, pointed out that housing is only available to full-time students. “We are very concerned that this discriminates against part-time students,” she said, going on to say that “the recruitment strategy is only for full-time students.”
Varga described a culture of exclusion for the 6,000 students taking fewer than four courses during the fall-winter session. Many students, she said, leave residence or school altogether because “the culture favours full-time students.”
“The university must prioritize housing for part-time students,” she said, many of whom balance their studies with careers and families.
Asked about the matter at the June 29 Governing Council meeting, when the policy was discussed and approved, David Farrar, deputy provost and vice-provost students, replied that “the only group that’s actually guaranteed a place in residence are [direct-entry] first-year students.” Those students occupy half of available housing, he said, and “the extra capacity that’s available is distributed based on criteria that are developed by individual residences.”
With files from Mike Ghenu.
