Guest column: The road to green

On July 17, the university closed Campus Drive to all vehicles, including Metro buses and Shuttle-UM buses, until Aug. 13. Prior to this closure, from June 19 until July 16, Campus Drive was closed solely to private vehicles, allowing for buses, bikes, scooters and pedestrians to use Campus Drive. However, for these next four weeks, all vehicles (except emergency vehicles) are restricted from accessing Campus Drive. All buses are being diverted to Regents Drive Parking Garage, which will serve as the temporary bus hub.

Originally, there was only going to be the latter pilot program lasting all eight weeks. However, the Student Government Association conveyed to the administration that restricting public transit from a vital part of the campus is not in the best interests of students, staff and faculty. Thus, the two four-week pilot closures were eventually settled on and implemented to determine the impact of the proposed Facilities Master Plan, which calls for a "greener, more pedestrian-friendly" campus center.

However, the university has failed to advertise these additional changes, creating a lot of confusion. Just this Monday, as I was strolling up the double yellow lines of Campus Drive, I noticed more than 20 students waiting at the Stamp Student Union bus station and informed them Campus Drive was now closed to buses as well. Neither they nor I were aware of any signs indicating the change. Even the buses themselves were confused, as I noticed three buses mistakenly drive up Campus Drive within the next 15 minutes. Those expecting their normal commute were both surprised and frustrated by the change.

Yet, the core issue at stake is the sustainability of the university. Public transit, when properly planned, is more sustainable than private vehicles. Having it as a viable and convenient option encourages ridership both in the present and the future. Our current energy usage is unsustainable, and public transportation can provide both an economically and environmentally sound alternative while also reducing private vehicular emissions and traffic. By restricting the access of public transportation to Campus Drive, there becomes less of an incentive for students, staff and faculty to utilize the public transit opportunities available, especially when you can park in the Regents Drive Parking Garage — the same place where Metro and Shuttle-UM buses will drop you off anyway.

Furthermore, though two options are being tested, the administration has a clear favorite. On the Campus Drive Pilot webpage (http://www.facilities.umd.edu/CampusDrive/), Vision 2, the one allowing for public transit, coarsely describes Campus Drive as a "traffic cut-through for the larger community" with the "flavor of an urban street." On the other hand, Vision 1, the proposal with almost no vehicles, portrays Campus Drive as "a beautiful, nearly traffic-free pedestrian mall" where people can "walk, meet, sit, surf the net, enjoy entertainment and much more in a space that is virtually traffic-free and environmentally friendly". Two comments: 1) I can already do those activities on a much nicer McKeldin Mall, and 2) Eliminating public transportation is the opposite of being "environmentally friendly." That traffic will simply be compensated for elsewhere on the campus. Why "America's Greenest Campus" favors the less sustainable and less green option is beyond me.

With regard to the Campus Drive closure plans, there are many discussions well worth having, as long as all the parties affected can debate them to their fullest and most accurate extent. Transportation and sustainable development issues are extremely complex, so let's present all the options without blatantly distorting considerations that will greatly impact the entire university community.

Matthew Popkin is the director of sustainability for the SGA. He can be reached at mpopkin at umd dot edu.