The Subcommittee held an Open Forum meeting on Monday, November 18, at 7:00 PM in McCullough. David Wallace and David Burson of Wallace Floyd joined us to present aspects of the master plan related to circulation, parking, safety, and aesthetics.
We received many comments and suggestions at the meeting and some additional ones in writing both before and after the meeting. These comments were taken into account when writing our report to the administration.
The attached report is submitted to the Council for final approval. It is our opinion that the campus is as ready and supportive of these ideas as it will ever be and now is the time to act. It will be particularly important to lobby for these initiatives to be included in the upcoming Facilities Plan, as this will institutionalize them.
Respectfully submitted by Jen Hazen, 3 December 1996.
For several years the Environmental Council has been discussing issues of parking, driving, pedestrian safety, and aesthetics on campus. It has become increasingly clear that there are many areas that could be improved. In this report we intend to outline the overall goals that we would like to acheive, and then put forth specific recommendations to fulfill these goals.
The process of discussing these issues began in the fall of 1994, when the Environmental Council distributed a memo to the College Community expressing concern about parking and driving on campus. The Council's preliminary recommendations were discussed with the Faculty Council, Staff Council, Community Council, and Student Government.
Feedback from these groups was incorporated into a "Pedestrian Campus Proposal" in the May 1995 "Pathways To A Green Campus" report. (pp. 61-63)
As a result of a series of correspondence beginning last fall, the Wallace Floyd architects incorporated some of the Council's proposals from the "Pathways" report into the campus Master Plan. The Council is encouraged by this effort to move towards a more pedestrian friendly campus.
The Council felt the need to bring these issues forth to the College Community a second time to discuss them in the context of the Master Plan and the forthcoming Facilities Plan. An initial memo was sent to the Community Council, SGA, Staff Council, Faculty Council, and Campus Security. Their comments helped the Council facilitate an open discussion meeting on November 18, 1996 with David Wallace and David Burson of Wallace Floyd.
At the meeting, Faculty, Staff, and Students asked questions and commented on elements of the design that related to parking, driving, pedestrian safety, and campus aesthetics. After receiving these comments, we feel that the college community is ready and willing to move toward a more pedestrian-friendly environment.
The Wallace Floyd architects have presented us with a physical framework and some possible physical improvements. Now the College is charged with deciding our own course of action. We now must look at the physical changes we need to make as well as policy and systematic changes necessary to move towards a pedestrian friendly, low driving, beautiful campus.
We recognize that all change is initially met with resistance. Despite this, we see a growing acceptance of our goals and a willingness to make certain sacrifices for the betterment of life at the Middlebury. We believe that the most effective way to make changes should be incrementally. All of these recommendations are necessary, but we recognize the importance of prioritizing and moving slowly as the college approaches its latest phase of development. We recommend continuous assessment of the success and impacts of each initiative, so that we do not waste energy on thinks that are made obsolete by previous successes.
The Environmental Council's recommendations are based on acheiving the following goals:
1) Reform Parking Registration System
We strongly recommend returning to a system of assigned lot parking permits. The puropse of doing so would be to discourage intra-campus driving. Faculty and staff, who tend to keep their cars in one place all day, would have spots in lots and along streets in close proximity to their places of work. Students would be assigned to lots close to their dorms, when possible, and farther from academic buildings. Exceptions to single lot assignment could be made for people with special needs.
We need to recognise that there is a need for short term parking for visitors and deliveries to central buildings on campus. It is not realistic to assume that there is never a need to drive into the central area of campus. Fifteen minute short term parking spaces should be created near Old Chapel, McCullough, the Service Building, Proctor, and College Street buildings.
In order to make this system work, we will have to improve the system of vehicle registration. We know how many parking spots are in each lot, and we should never assign more cars to a lot than there are spots. The registration system needs to be brought up to speed so that we continuously have an accurate count of vehicles. Currently many students show up as having two or more vehicles registered, when they actually only have one because previously owned vehicles were never taken off the roster. It would make sense to incorporate vehicle registration for students into room draw so that parking would correspond to residence halls. It should not be difficult to develop a computerized system for keeping track of this.
Similarly, we will have to provide Campus Security with the necessary resources for enforcement. Part of the problem with the current situation is that studnet cars are often found parked in faculty/staff spots, with minor consequences for the offense. Additional time should be spent patroling parking areas in the center of campus as well as lots by campus houses. These areas are College lots and under an assigned lot system should not be driven to by students living in residence halls.
We also need to implement more effective ticketing procedures, with higher fines or a gated pound for illegally parked vehicles. A fee for parking permits could provide the necessary money.
2) Route 125 & Route 30 Crosswalks
We endorse the proposals in the Master Plan to improve safety and visibility along Rt. 125 (College Street.) While it is unrealistic to completely eliminate parking along this route, we should reduce the total number of spaces, moving them farther away from connecting roads and crosswalk areas to improve visibility. Similarly, we should create more spots that are short term for visitors and service access.
The crosswalks along these major roads need to be safe. If we are going to have cars parked along Rt. 125, we should create the neck-downs that Wallace Floyd proposes to shorten the actual crossing distance and provide a safe, visible spot to stand before crossing. Crosswalks and the sidewalks leading to them need to be reconfigured so they serve the needs of pedestrians. Signs reading "Stop for pedestrian in crosswalk" that stand in the middle of a crosswalk are also very effective. It is also recommended that we improve lighting in crosswalk areas.
We understand that some parking will be lost to these alterations. However, this need not result in a parking crisis. There is excess parking available in the lot behind Johnson and faculty and staff who work in Sunderland & Carr should be encouraged to park there.
3) Entrance to Campus
An improved entrance and definition as a college campus would also contribute to safety along Routes 125 and 30. An attractive entrance sign with appropriate landscaping at each major corridor entrance would notify drivers that they are coming into a populated academic area.
4) Hepburn Road Plaza
We endorse the Wallace Floyd proposal to turn Hepburn Road into a pedestrian zone/plaza, with a new road-surface that distinguishes it from the asphalt of Route 125. The area would also allow for service and emergency vehicles as needed. This would create a much more effective outdoor festival area and would serve to beautify this area as it becomes more central in campus life.
5) Old Chapel Road
We endorse the concept of reducing parking on Old Chapel Road and urge that pedestrians not have to share this area with through traffic. This area is central to the Old Stone Row and main quad, and according to the goals laid out in the Master Plan, should not be dominated by vehicular traffic.
Our first priority should be to improve accessibility and safety for pedestrians in this area. One possible way to do this is by extending the walkway in front of Old Chapel the entire length of the road.
At this time it is questionable whether we can practically eliminate all parking on Old Chapel Road, but we should begin to reduce the number of vehicles that park there. Removal of parallel parking on the east side of the road would go a long way towards improving service vehicle access. The next step would be to remove parking spaces from the area near Old Chapel and work out towards the ends.
These changes need to correlate with increased parking alternatives elsewhere. As identified in the Master Plan, increased parking within a reasonable walking distacnce to central campus buildings can be created by reconfiguring the Service Building parking lot. Another opportunity for parking would be a new lot near the current Science Center along Storrs Rd.
Eventually, the goal should be to resurface Old Chapel Road as a pedestrian plaza, eliminating through traffic as on Hepburn Road, and only allowing for service and emergency access. One option would be to physically alter the path of the road by ending it with a cul-de-sac instead of allowing it to connect routes 125 and 30. It could also be gated as Hepburn Road is, however it is possible that changes in parking policy will so dramatically cut down on the amount of through traffic that these physical alterations would not be necessary.
While this is probably the most difficult of our proposals, we view changes in this area as essential. It will bring the main quad back to being a beautiful central area and will discourage through driving across the center of campus.
6) Lighting and Safety
As we move towards more peripheral parking, it is essential that we consider the safety of members of the College community. We need to recognise that Middlebury is not a 9 to 5 workplace, and that people must travel to and from work and residences at all hours.
While no one wants to see the center of campus lit up like a city, pathways to parking lots and the lots themselves need to be well lit at night, especially crosswalks. One option would be ground level landscaped lighting that would be directed on the pathway only. Each lot shoud also be provided with a visible and accessible "red emergency phone" in case there ever is a problem. If we ask members of our community to walk farther to work or to their residences, the least we can do is provide for their safety as much as possible.
7) Gated Areas
The two gate systems we now use are not effective and shoud be improved. It is necessary for our campus to have areas that are closed to vehicular traffic most of the time, but the chains are cumbersome and the one gate by Hadley/Milliken is always breaking down. Middlebury should look into other alternatives to improve effectiveness, aesthetics, and accessibility.
As we develop new parking and access roads, we need to examine which should be gated most of the time. We endorse the proposal that the road leading through the Ridgeline Development be gated and encourage the College to look for other opportunities as new roadways are utilized.
Gated access areas must continue to be opened for access at move-in/move-out.
8) Alternative Transportation
We endorse the student "Middcycles" proposal. This program of free-use bicycles has been popular and extremely successful at many campuses and small cities. It would serve as a symbol of our efforts to provide alternatives to a vehicle dominated lifestyle and facilitate transportation between classes and into town.
We recommend a shuttle-van that runs between the extremities of the campus on a regular schedule. This will be especially important in Winter Term and the first two months of Spring Semester.
In addition, we recommend providing for transportation to the downtown areas, as well as to the Snow Bowl and to Burlington on weekends. It is possible that we could work with the Town of Middlebury to utilize the Shuttle better. Many people have expressed an interest in travelling on the Shuttle and we can certainly encourage this.
9) Pathways
Looking at the maps of the Master Plan, it is easy to identify two main corridors of pedestrian and bicycle travel. Obviously, people travel myriad different pathways, but we have identified two major areas of improvement. The corridor running east/west from Twilight to Proctor carries a great deal of traffic. The other corridor is represented by the notrh/south academic building arc from FIC to the Center for the Arts.
These two areas should have an appropriate pedestrian pathway and a corresponding bicycle path. Bicycle and pedestian traffic is not always compatible and separating the two in heavy corridors of travel will go far in improving safety.
We recognise that these pathways will run alongside and cross Routes 125 and 30. Appropriate measures should be taken to ensure the safety of pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers at these areas. Well defined crosswalks are essential, as is good signage for pedestrians and cyclists.
1) Response
The Environmental Council will present these recommendations to President McCardell, Ron Liebowitz, David Ginevan, Randy Landgren, Community Council, SGA, Staff Council, Faculty Council, and Campus Security. We would appreciate discussion of them and written responses.
2) Incorporation of proposals in the facilities plan
This document is interesting but meaningless if never implemented. We see the next step as incorporation of these initiatives as appropriate in the facilities plan, which will be submitted for final approval to the Trustees in May. It is our opinion that capital project proposals need not only apply to building renovation and construction, but also to landscape and paving alterations.
Many smaller physical changes, such as pedestrian crossing signs, could be implemented through our normal facilities budget, and not necessarily be included in the facilities plan.
3) Internal Changes
Many aspects of these recommendations will involve policy and procedural changes. The Environmental Council would like to work with the Administration and the appropriate departments to bring these changes on line. The changes we have suggested will be simple if they are implemented with the active support of the Administration and the departments responsible for carrying them out.
4) Follow-Up
The Environmental Council will continue to be involved in the implementation of these initiatives and will review their success. The recommendations made here are what we feel are necessary based on present knowledge, however, future developments may lead us to believe that further changes are needed, or that some points are unnecessary. The Council hopes to work with the Administration and other interested parties to ensure that we acheive the best possible results.
The Subcommittee is proceding with the timeline for discussion of issues related to parking, driving, safety, and aesthetics.
Our list of problems and possible solutions was presented to Campus Security, the Community Council, theSGA, Faculty Council, Staff Council, and Environmental Quality. To date, responses have been received from Security. These responses will be reviwed and incorporated into our list for discussion with Wallace Floyd at the following meeting.
A meeting with David Wallace and David Burson of Wallace Floyd Associates has been scheduled for Wednesday, November 13, at 5:00 PM, with dinner to follow at 6:00 PM in the Redfield Proctor Room. All members of the Council should attend, and invitations have been sent to President McCardell, Ron Liebowitz, David Ginevan, and Professor Rockefeller. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss plans for the Òopen forumÓ meeting with Wallace Floyd.
The "open forum" meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 18, at 7:00 PM in McCullough. It will include a brief presentation of our purpose and methods, a presentation of the revised list of problems and suggestions, and some discussion of possibilities from the architects. The main portion of the meeting will be a comment and question structure with audience participation the main focus.
This meeting will be heavily advertised and we expect it to be well attended. An article will be run in the Campus describing the meeting and its purpose, along with an ad space. We will also use posters and possibly table tents to advertise.
The Subcommittee will prepare a final report following the meeting, to be presented for approval to the Council, and then to the Administration by early December.
Respectfully submitted by Jen Hazen, 6 November 1996.
The Subcommittee met on September 27 to discuss a plan of action for creating a proposal to reform Middlebury's traffic and parking systems. We created a plan of action along a timeline as follows:
PEDESTRIAN CAMPUS TIMELINE
The Subcommittee brainstormed the attached list of problems, possible solutioutions, and points of concern. This list is intended to be a starting point for the Council to engage various interests on campus in discussion about these issues. It will continuously be revised along the way as input is gathered. The revised form of the list will be presented at an open College meeting where Wallace Floyd Architects will be present to offer possible scenarios and receive public commentary along with the Council. It is hoped that the meeting can be scheduled at a time when David Ginnevan can attend.
The Subcommittee believes that the purpose of this process of information gathering is to create a proposal formed from the real interests of the College community, to serve as an example of a successful community action, and to attempt to improve communication between the College community and Old Chapel, as well as to implement the reforms we feel are needed on campus. The only way for us to be successful in these goals is to do our best to keep the members of the College community informed along the way and be as receptive to comment as possible. The following is our plan of action regarding publicity.
PUBLICITY AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION PROCESS
LIST OF PROBLEMS, OPPORTUNITIES, AND CONCERNS
PROBLEMS RELATED TO TRAFFIC & PARKING AT MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE
POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITIES TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS
CONCERNS THAT WILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED
Respectfully submitted by Jen Hazen
10 October, 1996
Return to Minutes List Page
Return to Circulation and Parking 1
Return to Environmental Council Homepage