Campus Long Range Planning : Chapter Two : Perpetual Transformation

Series : Conceptual Vision Home : Table of Contents, Executive Summary : Chapter One : Chapter Two : Chapter Three : Chapter Four : Chapter Five : Chapter Six :

This Page : Human Settlement : Early civilization : Industrialization : Automobiles plus roads equals sprawl : Representative Fringe Development : Blurring The Boundaries : Fiscal Sustainability : Ethical Use of Public Land :

HUMAN SETTLEMENT

The creep of urbanization has defined the American landscape. Throughout recorded history, it has been human nature to push beyond the tamed, inhabited land into the unknown. Examples of this can be found in pre-civilized times when indigenous civilizations followed seasonal climate atterns
to survive; in the fifteenth century when explorers set off across land and sea in search of new trade routes; and in America, where moving outside of the village, town or city was considered stepping out into the wild frontier.

This chapter recognizes the influence automobiles have had on the pattern of urbanization, and build upon the three contemporary innovations identified in chapter one by exploring the concept of crossover communities. This chapter sets out to outline the changing university and college
paradigm.

Early civilization. In the long history of human settlement, people traveled to and from seasonal villages, following the patterns of subsistence in order to survive. Survival was a constant struggle due to fluctuation and dispersal of the population spread over large areas (Jenkins, Connelly, and Aikens 2004), climactic change, unpredictable food sources, and subsistence farming (Fagan 2005). As climactic settings became more favorable over longer periods of time, civilizations became more sedentary, allowing for increases in social and cultural complexities (Fagan 2005).
This, in turn, allowed population rates to rise and communities quickly outgrew themselves. Large segments of social groups moved to outlying areas, creating a network of new trade routes along the way. Can you imagine congestion on the trade routes of early civilization? By extrapolating this example of population growth and community expansion over the last hundred and fifty years, it becomes easier to visualize how city growth and transportation patterns formed in this country.

Return to top

Industrialization. The rapid industrialization of America in the late 1800s is one instance of this growth and expansion pattern. Trains and trolleys became more widespread, people began moving and living outside of the traditional city, to what later became known as sprawl and could be seen in the form of satellite cities. Satellite cities are defined as socially and economically independent cities that are physically separated by rural land (Davis 1965). In an attempt to circumvent the harsh conditions found throughout English cities in the 1840s, American industrialists like George Pullman (1880), and Walter Kohler (1913) developed entire cities, called company towns. By using a similar framework of European industrialist Robert Owens at New Lanark in Scotland and in New Harmony in the United States (Johnson 1971), Pullman and Kohler attempted to create towns that were, in fact, great social experiments (Benevolo 1967; Gillem 2001). But this was nothing new in America. Dutch Mennonites, French Labadists, and English Quakers left Europe for religious freedom in the New World, all preceeding the company town. Social experimentation is ynonymous with the New World and laid the foundation for the greatest of social experiments:America Benevolo 1967). These men were trying to balance the moral and economic instability that follows rapid industrialization. A common thread that runs between these men and their experiment is the development of a town, away from the city and rife with abundant resources, clean air and land. The nineteenth and twentieth century company town - found from St. Louis to Chicago to New York (Taylor 1915) is an example of a type of early satellite city that can now be seen on the outskirts of all American metropolitan areas (see figures 2-1 and 2-2). The UDL addresses company towns in this project because of the locational similarities they have with contemporary community colleges: sitting on the fringe of metropolitan areas with their single use industrial or educational focus; and the potential for community colleges of the future - where institutions
could meet the daily needs of the community on sites that are home to cafes and restaurants, housing, parks and recreation, along with other opportunities for retail and commercial supporting services.

Return to top

Automobiles plus roads equals sprawl. In the 1900s, the automobile provided individuals the means to travel long distances, away from constricting rail and trolley lines. Instead of coming together in city centers, people firmly grabbed hold of the autonomy the automobile afforded
them (LeGates 2007). The chance to get away allowed the automobile consumer to get out of the soot filled air of the urban realm; breath the fresh air of the wildness; and feel the proverbial wind in their hair, swept the countryside. The mass production of the automobile caught the collective
imagination of the nation, and the forces of urban development began to pick up speed. As quickly as roads were built, their capacity filled and level of service diminished. The roads were widened and again came to capacity (Pisarski 1989). By the 1950s, the unprecedented urbanization of the countryside was in full swing. With the help of veterans’ war savings and developments like Hicksville, New York and Levittown, Pennsylvania, the dream house replaced the ideal city with the spatial representation of the American Dream: the suburb (LeGates 2007; Hayden 1984; Brower 1989) (see figure 2-3). The phrase, “urban sprawl” became a household term between 1945 and 1980, due to the tendency towards scattered developments (Hayden 1984). Separation between uses, and the need to expand infrastructure networks to support the spreading urban
form consumed massive amounts of land otherwise available for farming, forests and open space. Many states have taken action to try to contain such expansion. One example can be found in the State of Oregon and its statewide planning goals and urban growth boundaries (UGB).

Return to top

REPRESENTATIVE FRINGE DEVELOPMENT

Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goals (OSPGs), adopted in 1973, provide state-mandated guidelines for local development policies. Goal 14, of the OSPGs, deals with Urbanization: requiring incorporated cities to establish an urban growth boundary “to identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land [with a] 20-year supply of land for future residential development inside the boundary (Oregon Land Conservation and Development).” While the rules governing the Oregon planning system are rigid and refer to “efficient” and “compact” development, it does not legislate
strict standards or specific development patterns.

This is where Lane Community College comes into the picture. A majority of community colleges were constructed on the edge of metropolitan areas and near highway interchanges across the country (Parker and Smith 1968). This pattern reaches back to early American colleges (Turner
1984). Many schools continue this pattern and now either sit on the urban fringe of these developments or have been completely encircled by development. The identification of
an alternative pattern for urban living starts with the suitable and appropriate location of a site. Such newly created communities use land efficiently and employ environmental technologies to maintain a healthy flux between ecological and human habitat.

This section focuses on land that is located at the edge of a metropolitan area and adjacent to a major interstate highway. This site typology, which is pervasive throughout America, is developed at the edge because of the low cost of land. It is primarily designed to support vehicular access
and, to a lesser extent, public transit; its focus is towards a single industry and is oriented around large parking lots (Parker and Smith 1968). In fact, the location of many community colleges highlights a suburban focus. As Andrew and Fonseca note, many community colleges are located
near high volume roadways at the fringe of metropolitan American communities (1998). These campuses have poor connectivity to the metropolitan fabric and they typically do not integrate industries that support their mission on their land. These fringe developments enforce inefficient land use patterns, contribute to time lost due to congestion, and restrict transportation options. In light of the current economic downturn, increasing transportation costs, a growing percentage of full-time students, and a parallel growth in full-time support faculty and staff at community colleges, the locational advantage these fringe sites provided could now be considered a disadvantage unless they adopt a new model for land uses and transportation access for the 21st
century.

Return to top

BLURRING THE BOUNDARIES

Representative metropolitan fringe single-use landholders are realizing their opportunity to capitalize on their landholdings. Four-year institutions have been linking teaching hospitals to their educational mission for years (University of Michigan, Georgetown University). More recently, fouryear institutions have been coupling academic programs with outside or incubator businesses. Presently, over 60 campuses nationwide have links to retirement facilities, including Cornell University in Ithaca, New York; Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, as do smaller schools, such as Lasell College in Newton, Massachusetts outside of Boston. These schools are taking advantage of their value as academic institutions to heighten the quality of their users experience and create an additional revenue stream (Freedman 2002; Harrison and Tsao 2006). So why haven’t community colleges grabbed on to this model of crossover development? Harrison and Tsao (2006) assert the opportunities and possibilities of blurring the boundaries between “the corporate and the academic world ” are ripe. They outline four catalysts that can help create crossover developments:

1. a mutual interests between college and private/ public entities;
2. straight up property development to expand their revenue stream;
3. demand from developers looking for land;
4. response to fulfill an imbalance in the housing- to-job ratio.

When formulating plans to develop a crossover community, it is important to address the level of involvement a community college will have with the linking industry, business, or use. Some examples of crossover communities separate the educational mission from the incoming business, while other academic programs integrate the community, generating a mutually supportive environment where community members can integrate with students in open spaces, through academics, and through recreation. Businesses can also link with academic programs like restaurants and hospitality schools; retirement communities and nursing programs; theater and the performing arts; and renewable/ alternative energies businesses and other academic programs.

Return to top

FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY

Ingenuity is everywhere, and community colleges are not immune. Many schools are pursuing business-like approaches to improve efficiencies, trim costs and implement nextgeneration
ideas to produce alternative revenue streams while keeping the mission of education in the forefront. Harrison and Tsao (2006) identify factors that allow universities to “capitalize on existing property to earn revenue.” Again, this study only highlights four-year institutions and
fails to mention the missed opportunity at two-year institutions.

Two examples of how contemporary community colleges are approaching funding issues follow. The first example looks at Collin County Community College’s Spring Creek campus, where the school sold a parcel of land to a construction company who then bore all the cost for a new 296-bed complex (see figure 2-4). Through the schools fundraising foundation, the college shares in the profits that could be as much as $250,000 a year, depending on its occupancy rate. In this example, the complex is 98 percent occupied (Lords 1999). The second example looks at a self-funded capital project at New Jersey’s Brookdale Community College (BCC) (see figure 2-5). BCC had capital needs and the state had no funds to meet them. Capital bonds were sold for construction of two new buildings that are both used as on-campus revenue generators. The construction of a new bookstore and student life facility was built with flex space that the campus could rent out when not in use. The additional revenue stream covers the debt service on the bonds, saving money for taxpayers. Other schools have found that start-up costs are nominal, because private developers are courting the college market (Lords 1999).

Return to top

Ethical Use of Public Land. While there is a sufficient amount of literature for on-campus housing and crossover communities, most of it covers four-year institutions. Recently, some community colleges are looking into a divergent model of development. But, without adequate data on the topic, schools are hesitant to take action. Acting proactively, the creation of a living/learning/working environment on-campus would help to solve the age-old challenge of commuter colleges. Students will not just drop in to attend classes; they will linger, interact with peers and community members, and learn through collaboration and life experience, all while helping to mitigate the economic challenges that schools are presently navigating.

Return to top