Last month, the Gilbane Development Corporation submitted plans to construct a four-story apartment on Thayer Street. Aimed primarily at students, the building would serve as luxurious off-campus housing - including private bathrooms for each bedroom, yoga studios, fitness facilities and other amenities - minutes from the main campus. If approved, filling the 277 beds, at a cost of more than $1,000 per month, would begin in 2014. The plan must be approved by the Providence City Council, and for several reasons, we hope that they do not approve these apartments. Not only would the building itself be out of place on Thayer, but also more worryingly, it could exacerbate socioeconomic segregation among the student body.
When the Gilbane Corporation presented the plan to the College Hill Neighborhood Association last week, local neighbors expressed concern over the size of the development. It is true that if confirmed, this building would replace more modest two- and three-story houses on the block. This would drastically alter the immediate environment, contributing to a sense of density and development on Thayer. It is certainly important, especially with tensions between Brown and Providence having been already heightened, to take the neighborhood's concerns into consideration. The proposed project is wholly independent of the University, but public resentment towards the development would easily extend to the University and the student body.
What is even more concerning is the effect that this apartment complex could potentially have on socioeconomic segregation on campus. If approved, these apartments would price out many students. While most off-campus housing represents a cheaper living option than on-campus dormitories, these apartments would be significantly more expensive than the cost of living on or off-campus. The students who could afford these apartments would likely be among Brown's wealthiest, and they could inevitably be forced into having to choose between living with a diverse group of friends or enjoying the tempting amenities of these apartments.
Other schools have seen similar results from the rise of luxury private apartments. For example, a 2009 op-ed in the University of Wisconsin's Badger Herald lamented the development of pricey dormitories that appealed mostly to wealthy East Coast students, noting that these dorms fostered "tension, stereotypes and hostility based mostly on ignorance and a lack of interaction and communication." In a recent Herald poll, 44 percent of students said their friend group consisted mostly of people from their similar socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic segregation persists on campus, and the Herald poll shows that some Brown students already struggle to expose themselves to people from a variety of economic backgrounds. This proposed development would represent a worrisome step backward if approved, potentially further driving a wedge between those students who can afford this top-notch housing and those who cannot.
As any rising senior can attest, deciding whom to live with can be a time of high drama that strains even the closest friendships. If these apartments are built, their high cost will only aggravate these pressures - and the result could be increased socioeconomic segregation. We hope Providence considers the effect this development will have on the Brown student body and rejects the plan.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
