A representative from the NAT UP 2010 referendum presented proposed renovations to the Natatorium to the Shared Governance committee Thursday. The amount students will pay was called into question.
Recreational Sports Representative Mike Bernatz highlighted all the new renovations to the Natatorium, including a hardwood floor, a multi-purpose room, a juice bar and a cardio and strength training center.
Bernatz said renovations need to be made for a number of reasons, including crowded spaces and a “hot and sweaty” male-dominated weight room.
“Females just don’t feel comfortable getting a set of free weights,” he said.
While the student population at the University of Wisconsin has plateaued in the last decade at around 40,000, the number of visits annually has increased by approximately half a million.
Bernatz said other universities in the UW System have better recreational facilities than UW, and while UW has crowded, run down facilities, UW-Green Bay and UW-Oshkosh have state of the art facilities with no one using them.
Effective fall 2013, students would be paying a maximum of $54.19 out of segregated fees and the doors of the renovated Nat would open as soon as fall 2014 if students approve the renovations.
A number of committee members expressed concern with the maximum amount of tuition paid.
Bernatz said it is yet undetermined how much students will be paying, but Rec Sports will solicit for private donations if the Nat renovations are approved by students.
He said it is hard to get private donations on a project that has yet to be confirmed, but once it is, Rec Sports will work to lower the cost of the renovations for students.
The vote for the renovations will be April 12-14, and Bernatz said all students are encouraged to vote.
Shared Governance Chair Melissa Hanley said she thought her committee asked good questions.
She said it is important to evaluate the priorities of the student body whether it be affordability, academics or recreational facilities.
Hanley would not say if she was going to vote for the Nat renovations or not.
IP hash: 066433cc
Students should reject the NATUP 2010 referendum because it completely fails to address campus demand for expanded rec opportunities close to areas where the majority of students actually live and spend their time.
Moreover, if there is such a need for expanded recreational space on campus, then why is the Athletic Department taking over existing Rec Sports space at the Shell? On that note, why isn’t the Athletic Department, which uses much of the space in the existing Natatorium, funding any of the proposed expansion and renovations?
Personally, I want to support needed improvements to our campus’ recreational facilities, but the NATUP 2010 plan simply does not address the key problem, which is an outdated and over-used SERF. Sorry, but I have a hard time believing students will take a bus all the way to the Natatorium in the middle of winter simply for a view of the lake when they are exercising.
IP hash: 3efcca4c
While I agree that NATUP should be voted down, I disagree that the SERF is “outdated.” I’m guessing you weren’t on campus then, but the SERF was expanded and renovated less than 10 years ago. The only saving grace to the NATUP folks is that the Nat has yet to see a serious update in almost four decades.
There is more to campus than what is south of Randall Ave. Not everyone needs to take a bus to get to the Nat. You also fail to recognize UW Housing’s plan to add up to four additional dormitories in the lakeshore section of campus in the near future. Many apartment dwellers along “Old” University Ave also use the Nat as well. Why should everyone have to take a bus to the SERF?
IP hash: 895c22ed
The athletic department doesn’t use very much space in the Nat at all. The kinesiology department and rec sports make up the significant use of space. Varsity athletics have one run down private locker room for men and women which is shared between the soccer and swimming and diving teams.
Where do a majority of students live? Do you have any statistics? Exactly. A significant portion of the 10,000 graduate students live near or around eagle heights while there is a significant percentage of students that do live either somewhere in the middle or closer to the Nat.
The Nat was built 50 years ago. That was before man stepped on the moon.
IP hash: db6cdaa4
We seriously need to add hardwood floors and a juice bar? The NatUP people need to run for Congress, because that’s the only other place in which people spend money on such niceties.
IP hash: 840346d3
God, students are idiots.
IP hash: e2c8cdd2
I haven’t decided how to vote but I am frustrated by this debate. I am an RA and work in Ag Hall, most of my time is spent on the West side of campus, and the Nat is the most convenient gym for me to use. Compared to the SERF, the Nat IS RUN DOWN. It offers fewer Group X classes, has older and fewer facilities, and the point about the weight room is totally correct. As a woman, I always glance it but never go further. Sure the “juice bar” sounds a little extravagant, but only until you consider that this side of campus also has almost NOWHERE to buy food! I don’t think that wanting windows is that crazy either. I agree with the No New SegFees people that we should be keeping tuition down, and I really think the university should be paying for this remodel rather than the students. But I wish the people against this fee increase would stop deriding the very idea that we need a new NAT, and that having pleasant and modern exercise facilities is important to student quality of life.
IP hash: 876246f3
VOTE YES!!!!!! The Nat is where lakeshore kids have to wait in line to use a treadmill. People who won’t pay $56 extra dollars clearly didn’t have to live in Cole and take turns on the bench press.