HEALTH,
WELLNESS &
RECREATION
STUDY
HISTORY
• In 2010, the debt service on the HEC was paid off
(approx $11 per student). It was continued for an
extra year, 2011-12 to fund a study on recreational
needs.
• This study recommended a renovation to the Allen
Center to expand recreational offerings on campus.
• Legislation came to SGA in spring 2012 to referenda
the students that spring if the building should be
built.
• Cost per student would have been:
$60 year one; $120 year two; $197 year three
for a 20 year bond.
• This legislation was tabled indefinitely by a
unanimous vote.
WHY ADDITIONAL STUDY?
• Cost to students was significant when taking into account factors such as
differential tuition, tuition increase, etc.
• Delzell as a facility is inadequate in meeting students needs (student health
services, counseling services, child care services)
– State would not address the issue until 2023-2025
• In an attempt to find a solution that meets students health, wellness, and
recreational needs in a fiscally responsible manner, the study was expanded, by
unanimous vote in Spring 2012.
• This study expansion builds off the recreational needs study to assess the
viability of a total wellness center on the Allen site.
TIMELINE
• 2011-2012: Recreational needs study phase I
• Spring 2012: SGA Vote, commissioning of phase II
• Fall 2012-Spring 2013: Study ongoing with periodic meetings with
architects, University Administration, SGA representatives, UW
System Representatives, Delzell Hall representatives, and University
Recreational Sports (URS)
• Fall 2013: Study completed, findings presented to University.
• Spring 2014: Options submitted to students for referenda vote
• 2015: Approval by state in biennial budget
• 2016: Construction begins (estimated 18-24 months construction)
COMMON FAQ’S
• Does phase II invalidate the phase I?
– No. It builds off of what is already finished and paid for.
• Do studies expire?
– Yes, after 3 years. Phase II ensures that the initial phase I will not expire.
• Who are the architects?
– The design firm, Kahler-Slater. They are the same firm, and the same
architect who did the first study.
– One of Kahler-Slater’s specialties is university health, wellness and
recreational buildings.
• Why is the first study not being sent to the students as referenda now?
– A referenda is binding, and would invalidate the study currently in
process.
– At this point, no building (either just phase I or the expanded phase II)
can be built until 2016, due to the state biennial budget process.
• How will this new building be paid for?
– The primary funding source will be segregated fees, though there is a
chance for additional funding from the state.
COMMON FAQ’S
• How is the expanded study paid for?
– Through a Student Health Services budget savings
• Will the expanded recreational facility mean free strength and cardio
center memberships?
– It would still be a charge to students through segregated fees,
however there will not be an additional user fee.
• Will this expanded building option be a greater expense to the students?
– That question cannot be answered until the architects submit their
proposal, however they have been instructed to offer the students
a low, medium, and high cost option.
• Does it have to be the Allen center site?
– That site is not set in stone, however was determined as the best
possible site for the phase I study. The architects may propose an
additional site, we will have to wait until their recommendation.