News: Top story

Student organization rallies support for renovations to aging natatorium

Tentative plans include synthetic turf surface, 4 more basketball courts
Student organization rallies support for renovations to aging natatorium

Courtesy of Nat Up

Tentative renderings of what a renovated natatorium may look like show large a glass enclosure.

A University of Wisconsin student group is rallying support for an addition and renovations to what they describe as the UW’s outdated natatorium.

UW students may have seen the Students for Nat Up gathering signatures on campus. This student organization is devoted to informing the student body about what a new natatorium could be; how it would look, what amenities it could have and what benefits it could mean for our campus.

The Natatorium, known to most students as the Nat, was built in 1964 and renovated in 1967. Since then, no updates have been made. Since 2000, however, there has been a 50 percent increase in the use of the Nat, according to Nat Up member senior Dan Schachte.

Nat Up member Sheala Mullaney visited other Big Ten campus’ fitness centers as a representative for the Big Ten Sportsmanship Conference. She said she was shocked at how much newer and nicer their facilities were.

The tentative plans for the Nat include a synthetic turf surface, four new basketball courts, a weight room four times bigger than the current one and a cardio room seven times bigger than the current one.

Mullaney added six other schools within the UW system including UW-Milwaukee, UW-La Crosse and UW-Eau Claire all have newer facilities than UW-Madison.

“We’re really falling behind,” Mullaney said.

Tentative plans to renovate the Nat have already been made. However, because students would be paying for the updates through segregated fees, a student referendum is required before any money can be spent.

The increase in segregated fees would be a maximum of $54.19 per semester and would not be applied until the doors to the new Nat open, Schachte said, meaning those voting for the renovation and increased fees would likely not see the benefits.

“We’re not asking anybody to pay for something they’ll never use,” he said.

UW sophomore Megan Aley said even though the changes will not affect her life at UW, she still intends to vote.

“I’ll still be a part of a positive change for the university,” Aley said. “I would have wanted people to vote yes if this were up four years ago, so why should I deny it to students four years from now?”

With the roughly $25 per semester students already pay for fitness centers, students would be paying more than $80 per semester for the new facility, Mullaney added. In contrast, Ohio State students pay $300 dollars per semester for their fitness facilities.

Student Service Finance Committee Chair Brandon Williams said the initial money for the project would be provided through bonds. After the doors open, the increase in segregated fees would go toward paying back the bonds.

Nat Up members said they were not too worried about the passage of the referendum. Mullaney mentioned the last large-scale student referendum — the Union South renovation — as a potential challenge.

She said she is worried students might not be willing to promise a large sum of money to a project while construction is still underway on Union South and has yet to start on Memorial Union.

Williams said getting the student referendum passed would be a challenge. He recalled the referendum process for Union South, the last referendum to draw a large portion of the student body, which required three elections before funding was finally approved.

When the funding was approved, six Associated Students of Madison members filed a complaint with the Student Judiciary, saying the results of the election should be voided because of misleading campaigning by the referendum’s supporters.

ASM’s Student Judiciary heard the case and denied both the case and the appeal.

Nat Up member Mike Bernatz said getting the referendum passed is only the beginning. He said Nat Up would stay involved in the design and building process.

12 Comments | Leave a comment

user-pic

I’ll vote no. Students who pay their own way can’t afford the increasing burden of seg fees.

user-pic

“…all have newer facilities than UW-Madison.” What, we always have to have the “newest”? What we have now isn’t that bad. So what if it isn’t the shiniest building on campus or in the surrounding area; why can’t we be satisfied with what we have? The building isn’t falling down, nor does it have many (if any) ADA non-compliances, like a few other buildings on campus. It also isn’t bursting at the seams in popularity either.

“Nat Up members said they were not too worried about the passage of the referendum.” Right. If it’s anything like how the Union South “vote” went, they’ll keep throwing out the results until they get it to pass.

user-pic

Agreed. The spending habits of this University when it comes construction is absurd. The Nat is a fine building, which at most needs a few renovations.

The increase on Seg fees for any one of the projects like this may not be much, but the sum total of all these pet projects is helping to shut people out of this university.

user-pic

Our exercise facilities are a joke. Have the two of you EVER set foot in them? Have you ever tried to work out during the semester? There is not enough space to even get a simple work out in. For $80, I am in.

user-pic

Yes, on a regular basis. There is a ton of wasted space in the locker rooms that could be better used elsewhere. For some of you, if you had the indoor space equivalent of Lot 60, you still wouldn’t have enough room. Remodel a little, maybe. But we don’t need the Taj Mahal that the rendering depicts. Lest you forget, that with the exception of weightlifting, all of your work outs could be done for FREE, outside, with all the space you could ever want.

I’m guessing you’d also like all the other dorms to be torn down and rebuilt like the new Ogg. After all, the rest of the dorms are old, small, and haven’t seen major updates since they were built, (many pre-dating the Nat). It’s so easy to spend when it’s someone else’s checkbook you’re using.

user-pic

UW-Oskosh’s new facility is legit. Just sayin’.

user-pic

Students cannot afford another capital purchase hit to the seg fee levy. Simple as that. If they wanted this, then perhaps the Union should have looked for more ways to decrease the cost to students, that way we could afford both.

user-pic

Sometimes I wish I were a marketing major. Maybe I would see the benefit to this then.

user-pic

The increase in Seg Fees is not really that much. You are making way too big of a deal out of this. The increase of $54.19 is barely that of half the cost of the average textbook on campus. Also, that increase is not going to be enough to turn away any students who really want to come here regardless of whether they are paying their own way or not. Do you honestly think this $54 is going to be a student’s final deciding factor in whether or not they want to come to UW Madison or not? No!! However, the new NAT could be a final factor.

user-pic

Understand the facts before you judge these facilities. If you go here, you’re already paying thousands of dollars. Does an extra 50$ really matter after thousands? These renovations aren’t being suggested lightly- the Nat is literally crumbling, the electrical circuits at capacity, and the building is not efficient or sustainable. The renovations will change all of that- it’s not just more weights being added or a new paint job. We’re voting to ensure future UW students a clean, functional, green facility that will last much longer than the current Nat. Don’t let your negativity interfere with future Madison students’ rights to recreational progress.

user-pic

University of Iowa is just now getting a new facility. The current one was built before 1930.

user-pic

I am on the Women’s Swimming and Diving team at UW-Madison. We practice both at the Nat and at the SERF. All of our meets are hosted at the Nat, which is not a great way to try to bring spectators and potential athletes in with the crumbling facility: small diving well without a full set of platforms and out of date skeleton diving boards and only the 25 yard swimming pool that cannot keep up with other Big 10 school’s 50 meter pools, 5, 7, and 10 meter diving towers and ample seating capabilities. UW is simply unable to compete with the Big 10 due to our facilities. Recruiting is a hassle because no decent swimmer desperately wants to practice at a poorly built, unrenovated pool for 4 years when they could go anywhere else in the Big 10 with a much nicer facility. Our teams will keep falling behind because we are unable to bring in new classes of swimmers to add to our team. This renovation must be done, or else our swimming and diving program will fall to the standards of Iowa or even Illinois

Leave a comment

To comment anonymously or if signed in, leave name and e-mail blank.

Donate