Marymount College Improvement Program

Transcription

1 Marymount College Improvement Program January 27, 2009 RPV Planning Commission Hearing Dr. Michael S. Brophy, President of Marymount College

2 Where we ve been

3 10 years in the making Adjusted program: - green space - reduced # of residential students and facilities - view

4 Cost has increased: - A new capital campaign - Significant borrowing - Ambiguity about our future

5 Most significant impacts are addressed (ex: parking and traffic, noise) Small number of remaining impacts and variances remain Straw poll vote: Residence Halls

6 Our Future is in Your Hands

7 Consider: facts as presented by the EIR RPV s laws and policies precedent well-being of the neighborhood well-being of the College

8 For your consideration tonight: - Context - Validation of findings or claims - Case study analysis - Related Research

9 1/30/09 Living in Community

10 - The first universities - Centuries of experience - Modern Day

11 The Residential Catholic College Intellectual, social and spiritual development Bring our worship community together Faculty mentoring More attractive to prospective students Greater connection to campus Access to services (ex: health, library)

12 Marymount in 2009 Challenged by not having residence halls on the main campus More than 10 sites in the last 30 years

13 The Palos Verdes Drive North Campus as a case study

14 What happens now at Palos Verdes Drive North? Dry campus Work with LA County Sheriff Quiet hours

15 1 neighbor complaint in 10 years 0 Criminal offenses on private property in the last 4 years

16 Our Student Code of Conduct Works Well-established and enforced Code of Conduct Pledge regarding use of alcohol and drugs Philosophy

17 Working with year olds 2.3% of PV population This is our expertise Careful about assumptions: ex: 18% are 65 or older Take away privileges Dismissal from College Dismissal from residence halls Take away parking permits

18 Working with RPV - Special use Permits

19 Case Study Analysis Westmont (1984) Woodbury Pepperdine (1990, 1998, 2000) Mt. St. Mary s All 4 campuses: 0 criminal offenses on private property

20 We learned from our peers.

21 What we would change Limit cars Provide increased shuttle service in the evenings Drug testing for students who were suspected of drug use Community Advisory Group

22 Moving students out of the residence halls - Trespassing - Vandalism - Theft - Misuse of their automobile - Physical harm

23 Residence Halls made to order - Closed windows (sound) - More adult supervision - Better monitoring (two 24/7 check in desks) - 24/7 campus safety - One main entrance

24 Marymount Students Service to the Community

25 Ana Cardenas Loft Home Build

26 Liliana Mondragan Loft Home Build

27 Karen McNair Harbor Hills

28 Art Ortega Harbor Hills

29 Santa Monica Beach Clean-Up Ching Man Yeung, Yong Sung Choi, Hilar Poon

30 Nick Feenie Cabrillo Beach Clean-Up

31 Group Cabrillo Beach

32 Mary Taylor and Matt Peevler Operation Teddy Bear

33 Group Shot Habitat for Humanity Home Build

34 Habitat for Humanity Home Build

35 Deviani Wulandari and James Prananto Habitat for Humanity Home Build

36 Lauren Schlerf Harbor Hills

37 What the College has done for the Peninsula

38 Tens of thousands of residents have been part of our community since 1960 Undergraduates adult learners on the weekend summer programs arts and culture programs Pre-School

39

40

41

42

43 What kind of city does RPV aspire to be?

44 Richard Florida - Professor of Economics at the University of Toronto Florida s research identifies prosperous and thriving cities

45 The Three T s - Talent - Tolerance - Technology Key Finding: Higher education is a critical part of these types of communities

46 RPV Challenge: Affordable Housing - RPV needs 26 by Marymount can deliver 10

47 Case Studies: Real Estate Values

48 Housing/ Income Related Trends in 5 area "College-Towns"

49 Marymount as a property owner - 2nd property in RPV - 1st was/is residential - Relocation approved in 1975 by RPV - Approved four times for residence halls (for 200) between 1978 and City deemed us compatible with neighborhood. - 64% of RPV residents moved into their homes after 1980.

50 Precedent with Planning Commission Decisions Marymount College Trump Terranea Saint John Fisher

51 What factors beyond the EIR did the Planning Commission consider? Are the same principles being applied here with Marymount?

52 You can t say no because: - traffic - parking - crime The EIR doesn t support that.

53

54 You can t say no because: - the age of the students - our Catholic mission - Conjecture about behavior

55 Don t ask us to build these facilities in San Pedro: - It s not what we asked for - It s not what we need - San Pedro isn t in RPV s jurisdiction - It compounds traffic issues - It doesn t fit!

56 Potential Building Area in Blue Road Easement Crest Road Auditorium Residential San Ramon Drive Administration Bldg. Fine Arts Library Athletic Field Tennis/ Hardball Courts Maint. Athletic Facility Student Union Church Faculty Addition Faculty Bldg. Classroom/ Academic Bldg. Residence Hall #1 Residence Hall #2 Slope Area Palos Verde Drive East Residential Ganado Drive Master Plan With PV North Overlay

57 Listen to the community

58 Polling Highlights - 64% have a positive image of Marymount - 62% have a positive image of the Land Conservancy - 61% have a positive image of the PVPUSD Educational Foundation

59 Polling Highlights 80% of RPV residents favor our plan to build 58% of RPV residents from the local precincts favor our plan to build

60 Marymount has been a good citizen - add to RPV s quality of life - need these facilities to present our students with the best possible experience - need to enhance our market position and to thrive