East Campus Talking Points
May 1st, 2007 | by David Daddio | Published in East Campus, General College Park, Housing, On Campus Development | 15 Comments
In a highly unusual move, we’re reposting (unchanged) below our “10 East Campus Talking Points” from November 1st. While we were hoping to eliminate number 10 (about meaningful public input) we’ve decided to keep it here based on the University’s apparent botching of the marketing campaign for the three public information sessions taking place over the next week. Their poor efforts are reminiscent of a forum last semester that was so poorly advertised that only 5 students showed up. Needless to say, we are frustrated. The meetings are:
—>Thursday, May 3: 3 – 5 PM at the University Visitor’s Center (STUDENTS)
—>Friday, May 4: 12-1 PM at Tydings Hall, Room 0117 (FACULTY/STAFF)
—>Monday, May 7: 7-9 PM at Richie Coliseum (GENERAL PUBLIC)
Conceivably much of the project layout and design will be up for debate at these meetings. The mix of use and the magnitude of the project probably will not be negotiable.
> RSVP Now on the Event on Facebook
> See our post, “Raising the Profile of East Campus Redevelopment”
> See all our East Campus posts
10 TALKING POINTS
Rethink College Park has never questioned whether or not East Campus will be beautiful. Indeed, a brief walk around campus and a glimpse through the University’s illustrious Master Plan are proof enough that administrators can build world-class facilities and urban spaces. The intent of this exercise is to infuse some community ideas into what has so far been a highly insulated process. These suggestions should not be viewed as detailed prescriptions, but rather as an attempt to broaden the debate on the East Campus project. They are a work in progress and we’ll be sure the final community suggestions are heard.
We believe these 10 points will guarantee the vibrancy of the district (in no particular order):
1) Tie East Campus to the traditional downtown – start with the adaptive reuse of the Pocomoke Building
There is a huge barrier that exists today between traditional downtown College Park and the East Campus site. That barrier, oddly enough, is the open space that is Fraternity Row and the Chapel Field. It will become the dividing line between the two districts to the detriment of both. We have proposed in the past that the Pocomoke Building be retrofitted to include a specialty grocer. This would not only be the first step toward binding together the two districts, it would provide an amenity downtown that is sorely needed.
2) Connect Paint Branch Parkway with a road through East Campus and into Old Town
Anyone who has ever driven on Route 1 or through Old Town knows it’s a headache. Route 1 is constantly congested simply because it is the only north-south road through College Park. The Old Town road system has a confusing one-way streets grid that is clearly intended to eliminate outside traffic in the residential neighborhood. This setup pours traffic out onto Route 1 and has become a serious safety issue. Now that the university is advertising Paint Branch Parkway as a major thoroughfare to campus, we feel it behooves the entire community to connect at least one existing dead end road (we think Princeton Ave) in Old Town through Frat Row and the East Campus site all the way to Paint Branch Parkway. This connection would further the objective of point #1.The Route 1 sector plan provides for a connection of this sort and decision-makers must not shy away from it.
3) Integrate the Purple Line into the project
The State Highway Administration has proposed two similar alternatives for the Purple Line around East Campus. One is a median alignment on Paint Branch Parkway (directly through UMD’s North Gate) and the other goes through the East Campus (and next to the Armory). Since the former seems to go against the pedestrian purpose of the transitway, we feel the latter should be provided for in the site plans for East Campus and an onsite Purple Line stop should be pursued.
4) Minimize park (green) space
UMD’s campus has an ample amount of green-space and more on the way as the University continues to build structured parking and convert surface parking to pedestrian malls. Much of this space is already underutilized and we feel that providing any significant amount of it on East Campus would work at cross purposes to the emerging view of East Campus as an “Urban District”. We suggest that the university leave space to fulfill this high density vision if demand doesn’t yet warrant it. Many people have pointed out College Park’s lack of a town square. Our readers suggested that a town square like Madison’s (University of Wisconsin) is in order.
5) Maximize the diversity of residents
There has been much focus on the need for affordable graduate student housing. University affiliated housings provides 6.7% of UMD’s Grad Students with housing compared to 14% at peer institutions. East Campus is an opportunity to close this gap and the university has shown a clear commitment to do this. Still we don’t want to see College Park divided into turfs – East Campus should also contain undergraduate housing, faculty housing, and (dare we say) housing not earmarked for anyone in particular.
6) Make clear pedestrian and visual links to campus, trolley trail, and the metro
East Campus is not only the greatest single development opportunity in College Park, its central location is a great chance to connect the university’s sprawling facilities and tie together College Park’s existing pedestrian facilities. These include the promenade on either side of Mckeldin Mall, the City’s Trolley Trail (formally the Rhode Island Streetcar line), the College Park metro station, and UMD’s rapidly expanding research park. A major sidewalk from east campus and along the Purple Line alignment we proposed in #3 seems like a logical way to reduce the number of new stoplights on Route 1. A site plan committed to these connections will ensure that East Campus is part of College Park.
7) Limit parking – don’t let garages dominate the district
A College Town is a resoundingly pedestrian place. When you hear people rave about Charlottesville, Ann Arbor, or Berkeley it isn’t for their great parking garages. We can’t deny that College Park is in a suburban area or that the vast majority of people move around in cars. Still a College Town provides a unique opportunity for people to work and live in the same place and university officials should not ignore the huge burden that parking lots (and cars by proxy) place on developers, renters, and the community at large. Cities that have reduced or eliminated parking requirements like Ann Arbor, Michigan and Ithica, New York have seen an increase in new projects designed to house students. Eliminating parking can also make projects more affordable by reducing their overall cost.
8) Provide for independently owned businesses
Because of the limited amount of retail spaces in the city, rents are exorbitant and only ‘sure thing’ business models like national burrito and sandwich chains seem to be able to survive downtown. More net retail space in College Park should alleviate high rents, but still we think some sort of provision for independently owned businesses is in order. This could take the form a strict percentage requirements like those in the Washington Convention Center and other cities or the intentional inclusion of small and odd size spaces in building designs.
9) Require LEED Certification
The university continues to tout its environmental successes, but actions do truly speak louder than words. If the university is really committed to protecting the environment it should require LEED Certification on East Campus. The recent approval of NOAA’s Center for Climate and Weather Prediction is a great example of the application green building practices to a university-affiliated building. Some degree of LEED certification on East Campus is necessary and reasonable.
10) Show a commitment to meaningful community input
The university’s attempts to include the larger community in the East Campus have fallen short thus far. Their East Campus website, while providing a good overview of the project, is geared towards developers and Rethink College Park is left as the lone organization trying to engage the public. University administrators must 
follow up on their commitment to meaningful community input on East Campus. Other universities have done the same for similar projects (see case studies in UMD’s market research for East Campus (PDF)). We suggest they start with large displays in prominent locations on campus once site plans and building designs are underway. When plans begin to materialize the university should host several events to gain community input and support.
Of course the university can build an expansive and beautiful east campus, but they need the university community to build a truly great college town.
As always we encourage comments!
May 1st, 2007 at 4:09 pm (#)
5) Maximize the diversity of residents:
Grad, undergrad, and faculty housing as well as housing not earmarked for anyone in particular.
Are you unaware that there is another group of people on campus? Yes, I mean staff. They do not perform high-status jobs like teaching and research. They don’t make a lot of money and probably never will. They clean toilets, sweep floors, cut grass, repair plumbing, paint walls, prepare food, etc. And they do have to live somewhere.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 1st, 2007 at 5:26 pm (#)
An excellent point Jane Doe, one I’m embarrassed to say that I didn’t even think about.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 1st, 2007 at 5:35 pm (#)
Jane, you make a good point.
BUT, there are also the mid-level and admin staff that work at UMCP. They don’t have that faculty prestige and they don’t receive the universal support of custodial/facilities staff. But, they do need to live somewhere (besides MoCo and Howard County).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 1st, 2007 at 7:39 pm (#)
Sorry for the slip up. Doug Duncan explicitly told me the Friday meeting is targeted to faculty AND staff. That being said, one of the goals of this project is not low-income housing of which there is quite a bit of in the area. They can’t specify who gets to live in the housing (unless its student housing for legal purposes) so therefore whoever can pay the market rate will move in.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 1st, 2007 at 9:58 pm (#)
1. Isnt there economically disadvantaged housing surrounding Berwyn House (behind town hall and the firehouse)?
2. Wouldnt the purple line provide easy access between campus and some of the moderately priced housing markets to the east and south east of college park?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 2nd, 2007 at 9:24 am (#)
Thanks for another terrific and important post. In conversations that I have had with neighbors and students this week, I found many people who were unaware of this project — but who also became VERY excited about it once told. Advertisement for these meetings seems to have been terrible, and this is a difficult time of the academic year to attract many students and faculty away from school work. Consequently, Vice President Duncan and others shouldn’t take attendance at the upcoming meetings as an accurate indicator of community interest. That said, I encourage strongly everyone to attend the meetings, and I encourage the University to continue reaching out to the community, including through direct outreach, such as the recent meetings with “Greek” student organizations. In addition to organizing fora of your own, please consider attending the normal meetings of key local stakeholders, such as surrounding town councils and major university faculty/staff/student organizations. This blog is a perfect example of the kind of good ideas that can come out of asking people for their ideas, and the comments above mine are a perfect example of the kind of simple but terrific improvements that can come out of consultation with more than one person.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 am (#)
There a some low income townhouses in Lakeland
and I wouldn’t call east and southeast moderately priced any longer
and lets face it – if you have children, do you live here and pay for private school or live in Montgomery or Howard County and commute
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 am (#)
If they wanted to get students to come to this, they’d think of a better meeting location than the Visitors’ Center, and a better time than during the afternoon, when many (such as myself) will still be in class. Why not the Union? Or a space in McKeldin? Or one of the dining halls?
Then again, I guess, the University assumes that everyone here will be gone in four years, so they won’t care what happens over there anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:42 pm (#)
To Paul and The Courtyard
What amazes me is how people become so excited when they hear about this and then sites like this tell them “Get Involved” – “Speak Up” – “Contribute Ideas” – and too many just dont follow through and actually do it.
I know lots of folks who are leaving town after their 4 years (or in my case 5-6!!!) but they still care. I know a guy in Germantown and one in Baltimore that are passionate about this because they recognize the fact that improving the surroundings will improve the image, make the area more desirable, increase the cache of a Maryland experience, drive up applications, raise the quality and stature of the student body and the faculty/staff etc etc etc.
Its up to us to push and prod and spread the word. If a person cares about The University of Maryland or College Park or Prince Geoge’s county or even the STATE, then they should care about this and get involved.
The University has taken such great strides in its rise to the top in so many other facets (we are demonstrating to the world our commitment to excellence in academics, athletics, our campus), and now its time to show that commitment to excellence in our community starting with this project.
Everyone will benefit from this. We will all win. Every Maryland taxpayer benefits when their state’s flagship university is recognized internationally for its excellence. This project (as well as others along the Rte 1 corridor) will have a significant impact IF EXECUTED CORRECTLY.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 2nd, 2007 at 6:48 pm (#)
The quality of the University
It’s hard, even for me, to be against quality. But there is one question about quality that I’d like to ask: how do you measure quality?
DO you measure it by the US News rankings? Do you measure it by the number of applicants who are turned down? Do you measure it by the SAT scores of each incoming class? Do you measure it by increases in tuition?
What was the quality of the University when A. James Clark attended it?
Or Robert Smith?
It costs a lot of money to go to UMCP. If I were going to send my kid(s) to the University I would want some assurance that the cost is worth it.
I’d like to see some metrics like earnings of alums, or the results of standardized test given to seniors in their last semester.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 am (#)
I’m concerned about point # 4, Minimize park (green) space. The intersection of Rte 1 and Paint Branch Parkway is in very close proximity to the Paint Branch, a fairly important waterway in the Anacostia River watershed. Significant development around the stream without adequate riparian (i.e., streamside) buffer and attention to storm water runoff will seriously degrade the Paint Branch and add to problems downstream in the Northeast Branch and the Anacostia River itself. Low impact development techniques such as rain gardens adjacent to all impervious (i.e., non-porous)surfaces will be an essential aspect of any development at this site to minimize the quantity of water running off during storms and slow its pace. Millions of dollars are being spent by local, state and federal governments to restore the Anacostia watershed. Any future development must be sensitive to the impact on natural areas if this investment isn’t to be for naught. [Get more info about the watershed at http://www.anacostia.net.
Elizabeth Arnold
member, Anacostia Watershed Citizens Advisory Committee
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:10 pm (#)
The project will abide by rather stringent storm water restrictions. Also keep in mind that we are talking about an area that is basically a industrial brownfield completely covered with impenetrable surfaces. I can’t imagine that the storm water runoff would be worse after the project. Indeed, it will probably be much much better. No riparian areas exist on the project site (they are across the road).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pm (#)
I talked to some of the attendees of the Greek-hosted info. session at Sigma Phi Epsilon, and I was pleasantly surprised to see such a high level of interest, excitement and support for this project. The developers are offering something revolutionary that the university desperately needs and everyone I’ve talked to wants to see this happen as soon as possible.
However, the Administration could do a better job publicizing the project. Posting signs on the site itself would do a great deal to raise awareness. But perhaps that is for another post!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 4th, 2007 at 11:32 pm (#)
I attended todays event – this is a class outfit. After explaining the project they turned and asked the participants questions. They want to know what we like and dont like and what feels good about it as well as what concerns us.
You need to go if you have not already.
The project is going to be very cutting edge. Storm water will be captured and used to irrigate the landscaping.
These guys really get it. They understand the importance of village greens and vistas/view connections to the campus (ie Chapel) and how this will create a true sense of place. A place where people want to be.
GREAT POST (Up above) ABOUT A LIVE MUSIC VENUE – that did not come up today but Rob / David / Eric – you may want to make sure it gets mentioned on Friday.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 5th, 2007 at 11:59 am (#)
Elizabeth, thank you for your comment. It makes me think that one potential solution could be to explore green roofs for the project. We must also remember that compact development near the university on already impervious land will re-direct inevitable growth from greenfield development farther out in the county, were sprawl continues at a rapid rate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0