Thomas Soteros-Mcnamara Send your pithy
comments to [email protected]
The BruinGo! Program remains on death row with all of its
biggest advocates pressuring Chancellor Albert Carnesale hard for
that elusive pardon. There is no doubt the “BruinGo!”
program is beneficial for students, staff and faculty, and that it
reduces the amount of motor traffic that surround the
university.
Certain forces within the administration, however, view the
program as teetering on bankruptcy with no support from the state.
Whether it lives or it dies, the current debate reveals a more
important point. UCLA’s transportation situation is deeply
flawed ““ a far more radical solution is going to be needed to
fully fix the problem at hand.
In its current state, “Bruin Go!” admittedly does
not solve every transportation problem. Since the Metropolitan
Transit Authority of Los Angeles has yet to sign on to the program,
students remain limited as to where they can take the bus. Also,
buses are largely reliant on traffic conditions, and while they
consolidate traffic, they will still be affected by worsening
conditions around the campus. Even so, students universally like
the program, even if they never step foot aboard the bus
itself.
What UCLA really should invest in for the long run is a mass
rail system. The “Blue and Gold Line” would connect
various underground stops on the campus in a U-shape and then run
toward a transit hub underneath Lot 32. The rail line would help
move people during the heaviest commute hours to more expansive
parking structures off-site as well as be unaffected by traffic
conditions on the street above. The extra benefit with putting the
terminal hub below Lot 32 would then be when the Red Line is
extended along Wilshire boulevard, the university can build sliding
glass doors to open during the daytime when the UCLA rail system
runs, and close these doors when it is not in operation.
With one of the highest population densities in Los Angeles, the
Westside has resisted building more mass transit. Politicians such
as Fifth District Supervisor Jack Weiss are against suggesting more
public transportation in the area because rich, white homeowners do
not want the noise, inconvenience or minorities wandering around
their previously remote neighborhoods. Nevertheless, there is good
reason for the university, no matter what one’s solution
would be, to support mass rail on campus and throughout the city of
Los Angeles.
For students, it provides more access to other parts of the city
and opportunities to be more fully involved in the Los Angeles
community. For professors and staff, it relieves the pressure of
having parking permits, and allows people who live closer to the
university the chance to “park “˜n’ ride.”
It then frees up more parking spaces on campus for other
individuals, and also lowers the traffic burden on UCLA’s
congested streets.
But out of everyone who will benefit from a mass rail system,
the administration has the greatest incentive to start digging.
County research already demonstrates that within the next 25 years,
the ambient speed on freeways throughout much of Los Angeles County
will drop to around 25 miles per hour unless massive changes are
made. Contrary to the image it holds itself to, most of the jobs
provided by a university are low-paying and unglamorous. For the
moment, these wages and other benefits are enough to convince the
proletariat of UCLA to suffer long commutes and broken
transportation systems. Once immigration declines and cheap labor
becomes harder to find, the university will be hard-pressed to woo
day workers unless they can at least provide them with a place to
park or a decent commute.
If Carnesale or Director of Transportation Mark Stocki do not
intervene, UCLA will be able to offer neither.