also consider that these are 4 year programs that will require you to attend grad school if you want to pursue licensure. Ask yourself which school is better positioned to advance your goals if that is the case. I don’t mean choose the alleged “better undergrad program”, I mean choose the right match.

Good luck with the decision.

to be honest, I haven't heard anything about Columbia's undergraduate program. I also think it is not directly applied via portfolio during the high school/ college admission. However, the name is big and I believe the faculty is pretty decent for grad school, so I am assuming some quality environment in the undergrad. It is strange I don't hear about it that often. When I talk about the four year programs with my friends, we don't usually think about Columbia's. UVA on the other hand, is discussed a lot. i would like to have some insights in the ivy undergrad architecture too. 

go to columbia the city culture is great

UVA is a really great school. The faculty there will help you pinpoint your interests, and get you to a great MArch program. The culture is definitely unique and can be hard to navigate. Find your group of people and you’ll be fine. 

Something to note (and to diffuse assumptions): undergrad studies in architecture at Columbia is really administered by Barnard College. Do you have access to the same people and comparable facilities to UVa?

Attended Columbia undergrad

If you are solely basing it on the quality of the architecture program, I would stay at UVA. I had a great time studying architecture at Columbia, but since it is a liberal arts program its very weak in teaching you the technical skills you need to practice. Its a lot of "architecture talk" and not a lot of architecture. That being said, it is in New York City and you really do meet amazing designers and find opportunities you wouldn't anywhere else. To the above comment, the architecture program is administered by Barnard (Columbia U's women's college) but its for the entire university so all classes are co-ed etc. Facilities are nice, but definitely lacking compared to the graduate school (one laser cutter, no 3d printers etc). Professors are very impressive and you won't find another environment in which there are so many women practicing and teaching architecture. GSAPP is also right there so there are great guest lecturers/ you can take some graduate-level courses. I would say if Columbia is your dream school but you want to be in a better undergraduate arch program, stay at UVA and go to GSAPP for graduate school since you'll have to eventually go anyways (or alternatively go to Columbia then GSAPP afterwards - undergrads definitely have an admissions advantage). Just be ready to write a massive check...GSAPP does not have a good reputation for giving financial aid :/

In tangent with many of the comments above, I believe UVA's undergraduate program is much stronger than Columbia's.  I applied to grad school this past year and UVA undergrads were at nearly every open house I visited (not to mention UVA's graduate open house also made a great impression).  If you think you will be pursuing an MArch or MLA after your undergrad, staying at UVA might give you an upper edge with the application process. 

However, I do understand the context of UVA outside the A-school and Charlottesville as being a legitimate concern, it's why I ultimately decided not to go to UVA for grad school.  But then again regardless of undergrad or grad school you're going to be in studio most of the time...

I would also look at your studio peers and faculty.  I was fortunate to have some amazing classmates and faculty at WUSTL (my undergrad) that ultimately made the experience really wonderful there, even though the students at WashU can be rich snobs and St. Louis is far from an "ideal city" to live in. 

Best of luck! A good problem to have...