Send As SMS

Friday, May 19, 2006

Paradise City Forum Statement

Naomi Graychase is Alumnae President of the Smith College Class of 1994 and SACRED co-founder. She has been a Northampton resident for most of the last sixteen years. As a representative of SACRED, she sat on a panel at the Paradise City Forum, “Sustaining Community at the Campus Edge: Exploring Creative Long-term Planning Solutions For The Growth of Northampton Non-Profits” on April 24th, 2006 in Northampton, MA. Below is the statement she read. It was met with enthusiastic applause.

Good evening. Thank you all for coming; thanks to Paradise City Forum for making this night possible, and for allowing me the opportunity to participate.

I am here tonight as a representative of SACRED, the Student Alumnae Coalition for Responsible Expansion and Development. We are a group of students and alumnae who are concerned about the approach our college is taking to its expansion. We are not sanctioned by the college or the Alumnae Association, and we cannot speak for all students and alumnae.

The members of SACRED believe that what the college is currently endeavoring to build, and the ways in which it has conducted its planning process, represent a serious departure from the stated mission of the college, and that the choices being made by the Christ administration go against the intention of the college’s founder, and against the wishes of a majority of students and alumnae. We are dismayed by the ways in which the college has neglected to inform students and alumnae about its true plans for long-term development in the Green Street Area. And we are disturbed by the way the members of the neighborhood have been left out of the process.

Many of our concerns are best addressed to the college itself. But in this public forum, we want to make it known that there is a determined and ever-growing movement among alumnae and students who want to see our college do a better, more socially and environmentally responsible job of planning and expanding.

Our topic of discussion this evening is “sustaining community on the campus edge.”

We believe that in order for community to be sustained at the campus edge, the college must first acknowledge two things. First, that sustaining community is worthwhile; and second, that its campus does, in fact, have an edge. An edge that should not continue to encroach without limit into the surrounding residential areas.

As the college and the city move forward with plans to cope with Smith’s expansion, we would like to ask the college to do the following things:

1) Stop comparing this small, cozy, urban campus to larger, more rural campuses when crafting plans. For example, when justifying the current plans for 400,000 square feet of new science buildings, President Christ and other college representatives have repeatedly compared the Smith campus to the campuses of other “peer institutions,” most frequently Amherst and Mount Holyoke, each of which boast campuses with roughly a thousand more acres than Smith. We believe this is an inappropriate comparison, and that it does not ethically further the process of decision-making regarding land-use.

2) Stop abusing its privilege. Because the college has so many resources at its disposal, we believe that it bears a correspondingly large responsibility to its hometown and neighbors who do not have a billion dollars in resources or the protection of legislation like the Dover Amendment.

3) Genuinely engage the community and actually listen to their input. The college waited too long to invite community members to the table. And the situation was exacerbated when the input provided by residents at the ad hoc working group and the Goody/Clancy charette was effectively ignored.

4) Do a better job of using its existing resources before planning any future expansions.

5) And last, but not least, make a pledge to always consider the town of Northampton its equal when making decisions that affect the future of both the college and its hometown. As Smith alumna Madeleine L’Engle taught us, “like” and “equal” are not the same. While the needs of the town and the college may not always be alike, they should always be considered equal.


Thank you.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Letter to the Planning Committee

May 15, 2006

An Open Letter to Ruth Constantine, Chair of the Campus Planning Committee
For distribution to all members of the committee

In August, 2005 the President of Smith College, on behalf of the Board of Trustees, and the Mayor of Northampton signed a Development Agreement (copy enclosed). Since that time three public meetings of the City of Northampton’s Planning Board and the City Council’s Ordinance Committee and one public forum have taken place. All gatherings were attended by many neighborhood residents who are opposed to the Agreement. The issues raised by the Development Agreement are all about planning; however, the College’s Campus Planning Committee has not been heard from.

The current divide between town and gown clearly requires further cooperation and negotiation between the parties in order to avoid a deeper split. Creative planning that will preserve the campus as a beautiful gem surrounded by vibrant city neighborhoods is essential. We would like to hear the views and proposed solutions expressed by members of the committee responsible for planning.

There has been a singular lack of transparency concerning the entire educational overlay proposal. At the April 24th forum, Ruth Constantine indicated that at least three additional buildings, each comparable in size (140,000 sq ft) to building A (the proposed Science and Engineering building to be located on Green Street), would be constructed in the same area over the next 20 to 30 years. Why these buildings would be necessary was not explained. Yet Carol Christ’s letter of March 7th, addressed to Members of the City Council and Planning Board, states that the College is “not growing.” If the College is not planning to expand its student body or to demolish more college owned rental housing or other buildings at the edges of the campus, then why does it need this overlay?

Despite the public meetings and the Paradise City Forum, the Development Agreement remains a package wrapped in opacity and tied up in knots. In addition to the zoning issues of setback (a mere 30 feet from the edge of the overlay area) and building height (ranging from 45 to 85 feet, the latter an eight story building, immensely out of scale by Northampton standards), the Agreement also raises the question of parking and parking lots, see item number 7 of the Development Agreement.

On the subject of parking lots, clearly a planning issue involving this committee, there is considerable current confusion. William Letendre, Parking Supervisor for the City, has said, on the radio and in a following conversation on May 9, 2006, that he was told at a meeting a few months ago, held in City Hall with Bill Brandt, Director of Campus Operations, and Gary Hartwell, Project Manager Physical Plant, that a 90 car parking lot will be built this summer between Mandelle Road and Dryads Green and that the College plans to add at least 250 parking places in all. However, Kristen Cole, Media Relations Director at Smith, said in a telephone conversation, also on May 9, that the College has no plans to build any lots this summer and that a consulting firm is now examining the parking question. Asked if there would be public meetings with local residents, she said that no time lines for such meetings have yet been set. In her remarks at the Forum, Ruth Constantine said that the College does “expect to put parking in that [the quad] area.”

What is the connection between the new building on Green Street and parking on the back side of the Quadrangles? How many more cars will this new building bring to the campus? As is obvious from past experience on campus and in the City, the more parking is provided, the more cars materialize to fill the lots – consider how many parking spaces have been added over the last 20 years. Parking is a supply that generates its own demand. Buildings remove green space and apparently necessitate parking lots; large trees are cut down and further green space is covered with blacktop. But is it in the best interest of the College for this to happen? Is it in fact necessary?

What about the opinions of neighborhood residents who live on all edges of the campus where parking lots would most likely be constructed? Are there thoughts of using the Capen Gardens for parking instead of planting? We assume and hope that there are no plans to pave the Burton lawn, the green area in front of the Neilson Library or other islands of green on the central campus.

Surely creative solutions to the basic problem of too many student cars around the campus can be found. Smith is an educational institution and the ramifications of dependence on cars, beyond the increase in the price of gas, should be part of each student’s education. Students should be made aware of the fact that they live in the midst of a unique botanic garden. They should also be reminded not to drive recklessly, endangering children and others on neighboring city streets, and not to park on lawns or leave trash. Students should be effectively discouraged from bringing cars to Smith, perhaps by financial disincentives and/or incentives. Staff could be encouraged to carpool, and perhaps be compensated for doing so. More van service and College rental cars, or “Zip”cars like those in use at Wellesley, could be offered. Ask the students! Ask alumnae. Ask neighborhood residents. Ask yourselves. We all know that people, including students, don’t like to live in the shadow of tall buildings and they don’t like to live next to parking lots with their traffic, noise, all-night lighting, runoff problems, heat absorbing asphalt, and general ugliness.

If there are plans for more buildings comparable to building A, would each of them require an additional 250 or so parking places? Where would these parking garages or lots be located? If indeed the College plans such expansion – plans ‘to grow’ in this way – then perhaps it is not too late to consider buying land on Hospital Hill, a very short and scenic walk from the central campus, no further than the quad.

We look forward to your prompt response and to working in any way we can to ensure that good relations will exist between the College and the surrounding neighborhoods.


Helen R. Haddad ’63
65 Kensington Avenue
Northampton, MA 01060
hrhaddad@juno.com

The following individuals, most living on the western edge of the campus, have asked to have their names added to this letter. Many more could be added.

Pau Atela
Jane Bowne
E. Michael Brandt
Mary B. Brandt
Ben Braude
Jay Breines
Susan Breines
Carolyn Dashef
Jerry Dennerline
Michael di Pasquale
Lois Dubin
Barbara Fink
Lawrence Fink
Jenny Flemming
Naomi Graychase ‘94
Robert M. Haddad
Janice Irvine
Peter B. Ives
Jennifer Jacobson
Daryl G. LaFleur
Diana Larkin
Rebecca Loveland ’88
Sherry Marker ’63
Deborah Marks
Suleiman Mourad
Catherine Newbury
Emily Powers
Melvin Prouser
Lynn Posner Rice
Richard Rice
Joel Russell
Neal Salisbury
Margaret Sarkissian
Peter Whittredge
Robert Wilson


cc: Carol T. Christ, President of Smith College; Mary Patterson McPherson, as Chair of the Board of Trustees of Smith College; Laurie Fenlason, Exec. Director College Relations/Public Affairs; Mary Clare Higgins, Mayor of Northampton; Michael Bardsley, as Chair of the Northampton City Council; City Planning Committee; William Letendre, Parking Division

Rebecca Loveland '88

[in support of Helen Haddad's ('63) letter to the Smith College Planning Committee]

May 15, 2006

Dear Helen,

I agree with your points entirely, and I especially liked your critique of Smith's style of development in general. Its approach is wrong in a number of areas, not just in the expansion for academic buildings.

For example, I was horrified at the (lack of) public process and the result of Smith's building of the parking garage on West Street. This not only displaced people and naturally occurring affordable housing, but also paved an historic garden and put a monstrous modern eyesore at
the edge of an historic site (the H.H. Richardson-designed ForbesLibrary).

I have been similarly disgusted, over the past fifteen years, at the way Smith has destroyed its inherited national treasure - a core landscape and built environment designed by Frederick Law Olmsted. The area centered around the new student center is just the most blatantly ruined area - from intimate density to post-modern flat - but sadly, not the only one. This squandering of Smith's resources is but the visible cue of a development policy gone wrong. The hidden story is even more difficult for me to handle. I have watched for fifteen years as my alma mater engages in strategic, privileged dealmaking to buy affordable housing at its edge. In the process it outcompetes middle and lower-class homebuyers, potential taxpayers, in the surrounding neighborhoods. I cut my Smith alumnae giving in the late 1990's due to this behavior. Keep in mind that I, being a proud alumna at graduation, had scrimped and saved to pay for a lifetime alumna membership. Now - as Smith uses arrogance and unlimited power to bulldoze this 'property' - these neighborhoods - down, I have evolved into an angry and disgusted antagonist to the college and all it currently stands for. I'd rather support my public university, with its fine engineering program for women and men, and forego support for this style of women's college development. I have become a bitter daughter.

Thank you for your efforts.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Loveland
Masters of Regional Planning, 1998, Department of Regional Planning and Landscape Architecture, University of Massachusetts
Smith College Class of 1988
Northampton, MA

Friday, May 05, 2006

First Action a Success

During the last week of April, SACRED's field team collected nearly 100 signatures in just four hours of tabling on campus.

Many students expressed concern about the ways in which the administration has gone about its planning process, and dismay over the plans themselves.

Emily R. ('09), who plans to major in biology or biochemistry, was especially flabbergasted by the college's unwillingness to better utilize its existing resources. She also lamented the lack of information being distributed to science students, as well as the lack of information being gathered from science students. She offered six solid suggestions that she feels are more practical and more responsible than the administration's current plans. We hope that the administration will tap into the brilliant pool of ideas Smith students have to offer.

Julie G. ('07) was shocked to discover the college's plans to obliterate Green Street. "I love Green Street," she said. "It's so beautiful! And Green Street Cafe? It's Smith's restaurant. I understand our need for new buildings, but we have to stay true to what makes us special--this is akin to knocking down Northampton's downtown and building a Wal*Mart."

SACRED will continue to gather signatures from students and alumnae through the month of May.