Men's Tennis Earns Third at ECAC Invitational

By wpengine | October 7, 2003

The men’s tennis team put together an impressive showing this weekend with a third place finish at the Division I ECAC invitational tournament at the USTA National Tennis Center in Flushing, New York. The Red reached the semifinals for the first time in its history before being ousted by Harvard on Sunday. The Crimson went on to defeat Penn State in the finals and win the tournament.

“We were really excited about making it to the semifinal and we are optimistic about the prospects for the spring,” said senior Scott Spencer.

In the opening round on Friday morning, the fifth seeded Red went up against No. 12 seeded Rutgers. The Red easily dispatched the Scarlet Knights 7-0 to advance to the quarterfinals, where they would meet Ivy League rival Princeton. The Tigers defeated No. 13 seeded Navy 7-0 in the opening round. The Red had no difficulty defeating the Tigers in the quarterfinal match, doing so in dominating fashion by a score of 7-0. The Red were well overdue for a victory over Princeton, as the team has not done so since 1950.

“It was great. We accomplished two real milestones,” said head coach Barry Schoonmaker. “We finally beat Princeton, which is a long time coming. And we made it to the semifinals, which we have never done before.”

The win over Princeton also moved the Red to a semifinal match with another Ivy League foe, Harvard. But, the Red were eventually ousted from the tournament at the hands of the Crimson with a 7-0 defeat on Sunday. Harvard was the tournament’s top seeded team and they lived up to their title, dominating the entire field of competition.

“Harvard was really tough,” said Spencer. “At every position they seemed to be a little bit better than us. Even though the scores don’t indicate it, we were really close in all of the matches and we kept it very competitive. They seemed to just tough it out in the end.”

Despite the eventual outcome, the Red put forth a valiant effort. At the No. 4 singles, Cornell’s freshman Nicholas Brunner forced Harvard’s Cliff Nguyen to a dramatic third set tiebreaker. At the No. 2 doubles, the Red inflicted the Crimson’s only tournament loss as Spencer and fellow teammate Zach Gallin defeated Mark Riddell and Cliff Nguyen 8-4.

“I was really impressed [of Gallin and Spencer],” said Schoonmaker. “They haven’t played together all fall because of Scott’s ankle injury and they went undefeated in the tournament.”

As a team, the Red will look to further improve upon its performance at the ITA Regional Championships in Ithaca from October 17-21.

“This tournament [ECAC invitational] tells us a lot,” said Schoonmaker. “It shows us how much harder we have to keep working if we want to challenge for the title. We have been fourth place in the league for the past few years and hopefully we will be able to move up this year.”

Archived article by Bryan Pepper

WCRI Eliminates Transfer Center

By wpengine October 8, 2003

Decisions concerning the West Campus Residential Initiative (WCRI) do not come easily, even to members of the West Campus Planning group, who decided to eliminate a transfer center from future housing plans. The decision was a controversial one, but the committee, made up of students, faculty and administrators, ultimately came to the conclusion that transfer students would transition more quickly and fully into the community through integrated living conditions, rather than separated in an isolated building. In “A Vision for Residential Life,” written on May 9, 2000, the committee stated its decision to eliminate a building housing only transfer students, saying, “the committee believes that upperclass transfer students have special needs that can best be addressed within the House system, rather than in a separate transfer center. We therefore recommend that the needs of transfer students should be met through programming in the living-learning houses.” The current transfer center in the Class of 1917 houses about 190 of the 400 transfer students who live in university housing each year. Those not assigned to the transfer center live in program houses on North Campus, traditional residence halls on West Campus or in Collegetown. The transfer center will remain intact and functioning until January 2009, when the Class of 1917 building will be demolished as part of the final phase of the residential initiative. Under the new housing system, which will be complete in 2010, transfer students will be assigned in smaller groupings, such as a suite or cluster of transfer students within a house. According to Jean Reese, WCRI project leader, “we are not dismantling the transfer center. We’re distributing the transfer center and integrating it within all five houses.” Reese stressed that transfer students will continue to have access to programming exclusively for transfers, including the well-established orientation program currently offered each year. “When West Campus is completely up and functioning, transfers will be dispersed in all five houses,” said Susan H. Murphy ’73, vice president for student and academic services. Murphy expressed the idea that none of the new program houses scheduled to be built on West Campus would have a particular predetermined theme. “Through the house system, there is an opportunity for smaller communities to develop,” she added. Edna R. Dugan, assistant vice president, student and academic services and co-chair of the West Campus council, agreed that the services currently in place for transfers will still be available. Because the structural plans were laid out two years ago, she explained, they can work to develop the more specific needs of students while the initial plans are being carried out. “We have time to work out the issue in that we can make sure the needs of the transfer students are met in a holistic way,” she said. Don King of the campus life management office said that many of the services currently available to transfer students will be in place under the new house system. An assistant dean will develop programming for transfer students, and a room will be made available for students to use as a gathering place and as a resource. King said the programming will be both “educational and social, helping them adjust to the Cornell community.” Students have a variety of reactions to the planned living arrangements for future transfers. Jackie Bernstein ’04, said that her Cornell experience has been strongly influenced by the friendships she made in the transfer center, and the community that it created for its residents. “I think that living in [the transfer center] was the greatest thing I possibly could have done. I had all of these other people who were going through the same experience as me,” Bernstein said. She worried that mixing the transfer students with upperclassmen would not provide these students with the same sense of community that she experienced. Brian Schartz ’04 had a very different experience. He chose to live in Risley Residential College instead of the transfer center because he did not want to feel like a transfer student, but like a Cornell student. He became involved on campus and was able to make friends and become a part of the community through his activities and personal interests. “I think I’m a better student for not having lived there,” he said. He acknowledged the importance of the center, however, for others who might have a greater need for transition and an immediate sense of community, such as those coming to Cornell from a community college. Even more controversial than the elimination of a transfer center is the plan under the WCRI for a parking lot on West Campus. The parking lot, which would occupy the block below Stewart Avenue and above University Avenue, has been strongly opposed by Cornell students and Ithaca residents, many of whom will be affected by any construction, traffic and lighting brought about from future developments. Earlier this year, Cornell sued the City of Ithaca Planning Board under Article 78, when the planning board did not approve the WCRI’s proposed parking lot. Under the article, the case could be brought to the New York Supreme Court if necessary and gives a judge the opportunity to reverse the government’s decision after reviewing the case. The status of the proposed lot is currently up in the air until a Supreme Court judge notifies the Planning Board of a decision. There is no deadline for the judge’s response. The judge issued a statement in August and gave the city of Ithaca until Sept. 15 to respond in writing if they chose to make a stronger case for their concerns and objections to the project. According to Reese, the Planning Board rejected the plans for the parking lot with “continued concern over whether Cornell University effectively mitigated the environmental impacts on historic resources, lighting and vegetation.”Archived article by Stephanie Baritz
Bicycle Safety An Issue At C.U.

By wpengine October 8, 2003

In light of an accident involving a bicyclist and pedestrian on Ho Plaza last week, the issue of bicycle safety has become increasingly significant on the Cornell campus. Like nearly any city or town, interactions between pedestrians and motorists will always present problems, but the typical college campus must also be prepared to accommodate a significant number of bicyclists. As it becomes more difficult to find parking on campus and as students deal with classes that meet in a variety of locales, bicycles have become a popular means of transportation. “I wish bicycle riders would adhere to the rules of the road … because of my numerous run ins with bicyclists I wear protective gear to shield myself from bodily injury,” said Diana Cartwright ’06. Indeed, it is the “mix,” as Sgt. Chuck Howard of the Cornell University Police Department (CUPD) coins it, that causes the largest number of safety issues on the campus. A veteran of more than 30 years, Howard has seen the number of motor vehicles, bicycles and students all rise steadily. “Too many people, too many bicycles, too many pedestrians,” he said. “It’s the overall mix that causes the problem.” Sue Marrow, an administrator with transportation and mail services, who has dealt extensively with transportation issues on campus, agreed. “As the campus builds up,” said Marrow, “it becomes more difficult to get where you’re going.” “There’s no easy solution [to the size problem],” Sgt. Howard said. “Unless you have a total pedestrian campus, [eliminating transportation problems] just can’t be done.” In response to problems created by new people and new buildings, efforts have been stepped up in multiple areas to combat traffic problems. Dan Lieb ’89, communications and marketing manager for transportation and mail service, said “We do postering, we do newspaper ads, we have a brochure we produce.” Also, according to Marrow, her department teaches courses in bicycle safety that range from three to 12 hours and help people who are not experienced with riding in congested areas make that transition. Perhaps as significant of a problem as the sheer volume of students on roads and pathways is a lack of knowledge on the part of cyclists. “If a person wants to drive an automobile, they have to study, they have to practice and they have to pass a test,” pointed out Sgt. Howard. “Anyone can buy a bicycle and ride it on their own. You can be ignorant [about safety rules] and just start riding.” “One thing that quite a few cyclists don’t seem to realize is that municipal laws in most of the state prohibit cyclists on pedestrian walkways,” Marrow said. In New York state, cyclists are, with few exceptions, governed by the same rules as motorists. “If you run a stop sign,” said Sgt. Howard, “the penalty will be the same whether you’re on a bike or in a car.” Violations that occur on the shared walkways between pedestrians and cyclists, however, are referred to the Judicial Administrator, where fines and/or community service are the usual penalties. Marrow and Lieb agree that many of the bicycle accidents that occur on campus may just be a result of cyclists’ unwillingness to abide by the rules — whether they are aware of them or not. “The reality is that it’s not really dangerous if everyone follows the rules,” Marrow said. “The campus, as designed, is certainly safer than most areas,” Lieb added. “Because everything can’t be enforced at the same time, [safety] has a lot to do with cooperation.” Sgt. Howard is a strong believer that “enforcement should be a deterrent.” Though the CUPD has received grants from the State to increase traffic safety programs, it is simply impossible for them to catch all of the bicycle violations that occur on a daily basis. Sgt. Howard, Marrow and Lieb all agreed that these violations lie at the heart of the problem. Police department statistics provided by Sgt. Howard offer puzzling trends. On the one hand, the number of personal injury accidents involving motorists have decreased from 32 in 1999 to 22 in 2002. At the same time, accidents between motorists and cyclists have risen from three in 1998 to five in 2000, before ballooning to ten in 2002. Sgt. Howard attributed these numbers to improvements in vehicle safety that have coincided with an increase in traffic: while injuries are occurring less then, it seems that accidents are occurring more. Whatever the trends are, Sgt. Howard stressed that accidents involving cyclists account for a “relatively low” percentage of the overall accidents on campus, which are usually in the neighborhood of 225 to 250 per year. Without fail, the experts all seem to agree that the best piece of advice they can offer to cyclists is to wear a helmet. Lieb has spoken with many very experienced cyclists who all reported that, “It’s not a matter of if you’ll get in a crash someday, it’s a matter of when.” “If you don’t wear a helmet, you’re doing yourself a great injustice,” Howard said. “It’s absolutely ludicrous that people go out and buy a $700 dollar helmet and won’t buy a $35 helmet.” “If you’ve got a brain that got you into Cornell,” Marrow added, “it’s worth protecting.” Archived article by Billy McAleer