One thing I remember about my visits to other universities was the quality of their recreational facilities.

The University of Maryland’s Campus Recreation Center is a larger than life all-in-one facility that meets the needs of students seeking weight training, cardio workouts or recreational sports, while still being keen to the eye. Northeastern University’s Marion Recreation Center blends sleekly into the city campus and provides students with a gym that adheres to their physical needs and allows them to be proud of the building. But then we come to Syracuse University’s Archbold Gymnasium, a modest brick building. We are said to be in an age of growth and expansion at Syracuse University, but why are we moving leaps and bounds in other directions while leaving our heavily used recreation facility in the dust?

Mitch Gartenberg, director of Recreation Services, understands the plight of the student seeking a quick workout.

‘We know the state of the facility,’ said Gartenberg. ‘Sometimes we can control that and sometimes we can’t.’

But we must take control of the situation and pressure senior administration to make a new recreation facility a priority.

Archbold Gym is open 116 hours a week and on average serves 1,200 students, faculty and staff members who use the facilities (this average includes the summer and is much higher during the school year). Because of its popularity, Archbold has trouble accommodating the high number of people looking to work out. During its busiest hours, around 3 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., the gym is packed. Most of the weight training equipment requires a wait, and unless you participate in the terribly flawed treadmill sign up system, it is unlikely you will be able to go for a run indoors.

While Gartenberg did not indicate a new facility is on the immediate agenda, he did say that there have been ‘very preliminary discussions about what kind of things might happen in a full-blown fitness center.’ He added, ‘Things are in the works.’

The source of funds for a gym renovation is another issue. Newhouse III for example had the benefit of a $15 million donation courtesy of the Newhouse family. It is unfortunate that a lack of donors with related agendas causes the recreation center to be overlooked.

The latest addition to the recreation facilities was Flanagan Gym, built in 1989. Flanagan is just a constant reminder of a missed opportunity for a state of the art rec center. While at the time there was a demand for more basketball and racquetball courts it would have been better in the long run to modify Archbold to meet those needs and make Flanagan the dream workout facility.

To ease the traffic at the main Archbold gym, there are other facilities available. Marion, Brockway and Goldstein each have their own workout centers, however small. Also, the Carrier Dome and Manley Field House both reserve time in the middle of the day for indoor running. Unfortunately, these opportunities are generally underutilized. Gartenberg has been asked to submit plans for three differently sized facilities to possibly be included in the new residence hall. With hope, the new residence hall’s gym will be large enough to ease congestion at Archbold.

Despite the Recreation Department’s best efforts to maximize the potential of all available space, our recreation facility is just too ancient and crowded to be acceptable.

If we don’t prioritize our recreational facilities, we will continue to fall behind not only other universities, but private gyms as well. Students at SU deserve the same quality that Maryland and Northeastern students enjoy.