UCSB may build $200 million dorm, designed by Warren Buffett's right hand man Charlie Munger, where 94% of rooms have no windows

Luv2Run wrote:

high school xc coach wrote:

would love to see how it is possible for this kind of design to pass fire codes, etc.

windows in a lot of high rise dorms cannot be opened any way so I doubt that is a problem.

Interesting to see that the common area has a window just the bedrooms do not. That makes it a lot more understandable. Heck I put up black out curtains in my bedroom and rarely have them not drawn. Probably also decreases heating and cooling costs.

yeah. i think i read somewhere that window escapes are not a necessity above 3rd floor.

$200 Million is a drop in the bucket for one of the extremely wealthy, deep pocketed Top 6 Skunk Works schools in the world (unverified, rumored, not in any order: Cal Tech, USC, UC San Diego, UC Irvine, UC Los Angeles, UC Santa Barbara). UCSB will simply order freshman and sophomores who have to live in dorms per rules stay in the Cell Block dorm, then let them choose other accommodations in their junior and senior years.

That’s not going to happen.

Building code requires each room has a window.

just Marvin wrote:

Iron Bars wrote:

This is the most ridiculous, ass backwards design I've ever seen. Looks like a concentration camp from North Korea. Has this idiot ever lived in a dorm? No windows? In Santa Barbara (technically Isla Vista) of all places? What a joke. Arrogance, that is what it is.

Uh-huh. That’s why you work in a small office as a cog in the wheel, making $75k/yr…because you’re waaaay smarter than a billionaire. The irony is your mention of “hubris” in your critique.

Of course, being a billionaire automatically elevates you to a God-like "genius".

I'll Take This One... wrote:

Proof that rich old white egotists want young minds to be accustomed to the drudgery of working their lives away in a cold sterile environment, free from distractions like sunlight, and forced to collaborate in cramped quarters with other similar lab rats. In effect, he is conditioning them at a young age to office life and the sort of world that billionaires want - serfs locked in rooms with nothing to do but work to enrich the billionaires.

I worked in a windowless office for 5-years. To see any outdoor light you had to walk from your workplace, walk down a long windowless corridor (some 100 yards) and down the stairs, or an elevator, to a windowless lobby access area. To get to the actual lobby with windows you had to scan a special badge that noted the time you "left" the building. Management always knew exactly when you entered and exited the windowless, above-ground, workplace dungeon.

The claimed reason for the horrible building was that the work being done was classified. But management offices were placed on the perimeter and those had windows. The real goal was to prevent workers from easily knowing what the light outside was like. If you don't know it is dark you might get "distracted" and work longer hours that otherwise.

thats not gonna happen wrote:

Building code requires each room has a window.

Imagine thinking that the project got to this stage without anyone thinking about the building code.

I don't know anything about Santa Barbara's code specifically, but these egress rules are applicable to smaller structures built to residential standards. Larger buildings typically do not need windows in bedrooms if there are sprinklers. Large, modern buildings have a lot of design elements that make them very, very safe from fires (e.g., they're not made of wood, textiles are all fire resistant, etc.), regardless of whether rooms have two exits. In any event, windows in larger buildings aren't viable escape routes anyway--they don't open, and they're way too high above the ground.

I generally and genuinely respect Munger, I am familiar with his mental models and think he has a very keen intellect (though I tend to disagree with his politics).

It sounds like his plan is as much focused on the building process as the end design. Using materials that can be built offsite.

I go back and forth on this one. I don’t really understand the outrage. If UCSB is willing to roll the dice on this and its students don’t protest living there, then why not give it a shot. But It seems risky for the university to take on a billion dollar plus debt to build this thing. I m not as much concerned with the sunshine as I am the ability to open a window to get fresh air. Recycled air can only do so much. That place will be ripe after a few weeks.

I am also struck by the scale of it and how few entrances it will have. 4500 students and two entrances.

Seems like there are lots of potential problems/liability here.

joed|rt wrote:

Building with no windows and donated money should keep the expense of going to college down, which is probably of greater concern for the kids. .

If you think decreased costs associated with heating / cooling will be passed on to students in the form of lower tuition, you haven't been paying attention since the Reagan administration.

That place sounds miserable. Crap like this - the poor conditions and the tracking - are why workers definitely need unions.

Why not just solve the housing crisis by building more, smaller buildings with natural light and environmentally efficient designs? There are plenty out there now.

Here's an example.

https://www.reed.edu/reed-magazine/articles/2020/trillium-platinum-leed.html

Campus sits on one of the most gorgeous piece of seaside property in California. The best they can do is the awful cube?

When I went to UCSB I had a dorm room with a view of the ocean. If you lived on the other side, you had a view of the mountains. Santa Barbara is gorgeous. Building a giant warehouse of a dorm where 94% of the rooms don't have windows is absurd. The only upside is everyone gets singles. The biggest downside would be the smell... and the people boning in the cubicle next door.

You want people to be more social? Most people kept their doors open in the dorms. It was the most social living I've ever experienced in my life. If you want to see social, walk down DP on a Fri/Sat night. Munger is trying to solve a perceived problem that doesn't exist.

Oh there’s a HUGE amount of protest/outrage right now. I actually go to UCSB, and literally everybody is against it. Thankfully nobody is forced into dorms, but for the unlucky, this would be hell. People literally come from all over the world to go to school in this beautiful location. No natural air/sunlight would take a HUGE toll on the students, just on top of an average student schedule. This is probably the worst idea I’ve ever heard of. Plus there’s like, two doors to exit out of. Did I emphasize how HUGE of a mistake this would be? I don’t think there’s any significant positives for the people actually on campus.

FrankLloydWrong wrote:

They don't have building codes for that?

That's what I was thinking too. Isn't this against fire code to have bedrooms without windows? There's no escape if there's a fire blocking the only door to your room.