Trustees delay Proctor renovation decision until 2008

Author: Derek Schlickeisen

Renovations to Proctor Dining Hall will be delayed for at least one year while the College reconsiders whether to invest in updating the building or start over with a new facility. Though planners ultimately balked at the $10 million price tag of the "bare bones" design developed last summer, they promised the delay would represent only a short pause in a planning process that has been revisited many times over the past fifteen years.

President of the College Ronald D. Liebowitz made the decision to hold off on renovating Proctor amid concerns that even with expensive renovations, the facility would only remain functional for at most another 10 years.

"Is [renovating now] the best use of that money, or should we be thinking instead about building a new facility that would last another 50 years for $20-25 million?" asked Susan Personette, associate vice president for Facilities. "It is critical to invest with the confidence that whatever we do is the very best use of those funds."

Personette explained that in addition to budget concerns, planners are trying to determine exactly how many dining facilities the College needs in the long run - and where to place them.

The Strategic Plan approved by trustees last May identifies the construction of dining facilities for each Commons as a secondary priority, behind the completion of modern dormitories for Cook, Brainerd and Wonnacott Commons. The same plan, however, does not anticipate that these facilities will be finished before 2015, pushing the dining hall objective far into the future.

"A complete renovation would cost $20 million or more, at which point we need to talk instead about a brand new dining hall as a better long-term investment," said Personette. "Given the priorities of the Strategic Plan, however, there will not be funding for new dining halls for a number of years. Hence, our dilemma about Proctor."

Personette and others stressed that whatever final decision is reached regarding Proctor, planners hope to accomplish the needed updates - including improvements to the aging kitchen and bringing the structure into compliance with building codes - without impacting the building's unique atmosphere.

"We place a very high priority on student opinion about Proctor's future," Personette explained. "Input from students forms the basis of the written program that will guide the final design of the renovation. The ultimate goal is to update and modernize the physical facilities while retaining what is most cherished about Proctor."

Personette said that although she could not confidently predict what course of action the College would take a year from now, the design team hoped to incorporate this input into the final product.

"We heard loud and clear from the students who attended the programming sessions that they did not want Proctor to become another Ross or Atwater," she explained. "After exploring that notion with them, we started to define the new facility as a sort of "Vermont vernacular" design that was warm, comfortable and homey, with a strong emphasis on being able to assemble one's own meal from fresh ingredients."

Students seemed unsurprised by news of the delay, stressing the controversial nature of the debate surrounding Proctor.

"Obviously they're delaying it cause they think it's kind of a big deal for people," said Nick Ballen '09. "But there's nothing wrong with that if they need more time to decide. In a way, it does show that they are listening to the students and want to take student input into consideration."

Fellow sophomore David Meschke agreed.

"It seems like the College is trying to delay a decision on a potentially hotly debated topic," he said. "But if they do take the necessary time to consult with students on the topic and not base the decision only on financial considerations, then the one-year delay is a wise move."