Part 5: Final Recommendation - SUNY Cobleskill

GCOMMUNITY ISSUES
SUNY Cobleskill Facilities Master Plan – Phase 5 Report
November 2011
G – COMMUNITY ISSUES
H – HOUSING
I – SITE UTILITIES
ROUTE 7 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY CONCERNS
SUNY Cobleskill has long been concerned about safety issues regarding
Route 7 and the ability of students to safely cross between the two sides
of campus. The road, however, is the main thoroughfare through the
Village and many motorists would like to get through the campus quickly.
The College continues to work with the Village and County to improve
pedestrian conditions along Route 7, including the implementation of a
recent grant from the federal government for traffic calming. This modest
grant, however, will only result in sidewalks and some bike lanes and will
most likely not significantly improve conditions.
The College and numerous consultants (both as part of the FMP process
and before) have suggested a traffic island, but alterations to Route 7 must
be approved and coordinated with the New York State Department of
Transportation which can be a lengthy process. Additionally, the College
does generate some pedestrian traffic along Main Street between the
campus and the center of the Village. Continuing dialogue between the
College and the Village should be maintained to ensure both the safety of
students, and to swiftly address any associated community complaints.
ECONOMIC DEPENDENCE
As one of the largest employers and generators of economic activity in
the area, the College needs to communicate and coordinate major policy
shifts to the broader community. This includes everything from pool and
library hours to land acquisition and major construction projects.
The College also has a unique economic leadership opportunity and
can help set the tone of economic development through the various
partnerships and continuing education programs its offers.
LAND USE & STEWARDSHIP
As one of the largest owners of developed and agricultural land, the
College is in a very influential position regarding land use and stewardship,
particularly in regard to storm water runoff from its many parking lots,
roofs and fields. The College has been aggressive in pursuing sustainable
strategies in its new construction and renovation projects. It should take
advantage of these measures and turn them into teaching tools when
possible, teaching local farmers about on-site water treatment, no till
planting methods, etc.
Existing residential environments are not in the scope of this FMP, but
planning for future housing and the possible replacement of existing
housing stock particularly impacts initiatives that may be recommended
for the 2018-2023 funding cycle. Currently, SUNY Cobleskill is in the
early stages of planning for new apartment-style housing, but without a
specific location selected. Section K recommends that the new housing be
located adjacent to the Lower Quad, between Curtis Mott and the CANR.
This location will help to activate that side of campus, frame the Lower
Quad and reduce social divisions. This location also can accommodate
parking and is not subject to odors from the nearby farm more so than
the rest of the campus.
The final FMP includes the demolition of a single residential building,
Porter Hall, to clear the site for the proposed Student & Community
Center. In the long term the College is considering replacing much of
its “Cement City” housing, however, there is no plan in development to
accomplish this goal.
Regardless of the College’s final decision, the FMP strongly recommends
that future housing be located on land contiguous with the existing
academic core and within close proximity to the center of campus.
In comparing information provided by the FMP sub-consultants for work
performed as part of “Phase 2 – Assessment of Existing Conditions”
and the “2011 C&S Infrastructure Study,” there were considerable
differences in factual information. The FMP Phase 2 Report is based upon
anecdotal material and partial campus representation collected in the
winter of 2011. The study conducted by C&S Companies of Syracuse,
NY, is more comprehensive and involved investigative study of greater
depth than the FMP material. Upon review it was determined that the
C&S recommendations did not differ significantly from the FMP team’s
recommendations and that the FMP would defer to the C&S study’s
recommendations in the interest of consistency and accuracy. Regarding
such recommendations, most of the C&S study’s initiatives yielded projects
that are individually too small to be covered within the scope of an FMP,
and that when considered in aggregate are part of critical maintenance
funds and generally excluded from the FMP. When appropriate, significant
initiatives called for by the C&S study are included in the FMP’s Phase 5
report, but such items are sparing. Generally, most of Cobleskill’s building
are in a physical state that the FMP recommends complete renovations
and the initiatives are priced as such (see Cost Estimate in Appendix 1).
Technical building performance expectations must meet Executive Order
111 and be LEED Silver qualified. If the College should elect to grow
significantly beyond the projections considered by the FMP, it is unclear to
what extent the infrastructure or the Village could support such growth.
At current enrollment, the existing utility infrastructure does not require
significant modifications to meet the needs of the final FMP out to 2023.
As discussed in the Phase 2 report, the utility infrastructure is generally
in acceptable condition with capacity available to meet current needs.
While significant changes and transition are anticipated through 2023,
the impacts on the campus utilities will be minor. The campus population
and building footprints are projected to grow only modestly, and the
programmatic changes are not likely to result in significantly altered
utility use. The emphasis on incorporating LEED® concepts into new
and renovated buildings will reduce the per-capita and per-square-foot
usage of water, energy, and generation of stormwater and wastewater,
resulting in a very limited net increase, and possibly a reduction, in utility
requirements, which will allow existing utilities to extend their service life.
Where significant building or landscape renovations are proposed, the
opportunity should be taken to upgrade nearby utility infrastructure.
Cost savings may be realized by bundling improvements; while the
initial disruption to the campus may be larger, the need for subsequent
disturbance of that area is significantly reduced. Detailed information is
available in C&S’s 2011 SUNY Cobleskill Infrastructure Study.
26