Report outlines transportation needs
Environment and Development Clinic urges UB to recognize "moral responsibilities"

By CHRISTINE VIDAL
News Services Editor

The university's policies governing transportation have damaged the campus' quality of life and its environment, and UB needs to develop and implement a coordinated, sustainable transportation plan in order to correct the mistakes of the past and help preserve the future, according to a report presented last week to the Land Use Committee of UB's Environmental Task Force.

Titled "Past Failures and Future Opportunities: The Need for UB to Adequately Plan for its Sustainable Transportation Need," the report calls for the university to "recognize its legal and moral responsibilities to ensure that current and future transportation needs and options are fully explored. Failure to do so will mean that the university will continue to suffer the consequences of an inefficient and environmentally unfriendly transportation policy which diminishes the attractiveness and quality of life on the campus for students, faculty, staff and visitors."

The report was prepared at the request of the Environmental Task Force by the Environment and Development Clinic in the Law School.

Among its recommendations, the report calls for UB to take a leadership role in a proposal that would extend Metro Rail service from the South Campus station to the North Campus, to integrate a sustainable transportation plan into the Landscape Master Plan and to take greater advantage of funding available from the federal government for transportation planning and implementation.

The report, compiled by Robert Berger, professor of law, and law students Jason Stanek and Matthew Yusick, looks at commuter travel to and from the campuses, as well as travel between the North and South campuses and travel within the North Campus.

Calling the original, 1960s proposal for the North Campus "grand," the report describes an almost Disney-like university of the future: a campus of 45,000 students with shopping centers; residences for faculty and administrators, as well as students; a monorail system of transport between the Ellicott Complex and the academic spine, and two-story underground parking lots that would prevent the campus "from appearing like a sea of cars."

"Ultimately," the report notes, "the monorail and other transportation plans were quietly forgotten as shrinking funds were redirected to other construction projects," a reality that began to emerge even before the North Campus' groundbreaking in 1968.

The report also draws on the 1995 UB Environmental Audit, which called UB "a monument to the wasteful, polluting and inconvenient institution of private-vehicle commuting" whose drivers "demand even more parking lots, which spread out further and further, increasing storm water runoff and decreasing greenspace....(S)tudents, faculty and staff are atomized and diffused, leaving little sense of meaningful community."

Among the problems facing UB's transportation needs, according to the report, is the lack of a single person or department with the authority to pull together a transportation policy. Noting that the Office of Campus Parking and Transportation recently was organized under the supervision of the chief of University Police, it notes that the office lacks the resources to become the central planning office for sustainable transportation policies.

But more critical is the university's failure to obtain input from the campus community on transportation needs. "Decisions on vital transportation-related issues usually are made with little or no input from or explanation to the larger university community," an omission that not only shows "poor planning" and "ineffective environmental stewardship," but one that might be against state law as well, the report notes.

Other transportation problems are related directly to the nature of the institution, particularly the number of students who live off campus.

"Future planning should recognize that students will continue to drive themselves to campus if the university provides no reasonable alternatives," the report states.

One of those alternatives is public transportation, a little-used option because service to the North Campus is limited, with only one bus route to campus operating on a weekday-only schedule. The public-transportation problem is compounded by the duplicate service offered by Blue Bird buses between the campuses.

At a cost to students of $1.3 million for the 1999-2000 academic year, Blue Bird buses are criticized as providing "inadequate and unpredictable" service using buses that are 20 years old, and neither fuel-efficient nor economically friendly.

"We question why the university continues to renew this million-dollar contract rather than explore alternatives," the report states. "The $1.3 million in student fees that is paid annually on this contract might be used toward the purchase and operation of newer, fuel-efficient and reduced-emission alternative-fuel buses or could be used to help cover the operating costs of a light-rail extension between the campuses."

The report also encourages the university to take another look at extending the Metro Rail to the North Campus.

"UB is in a position to make a difference. The university must recognize the enormous benefits associated with linking the isolated North Campus with the rest of the city. It is easy to envision the day when students and residents could travel quickly downtown...and campus commuters and visitors would worry less about finding a parking space." It's also possible that a direct link between campuses could serve as a substitute for some or all of the Blue Bird bus transportation, according to the report.

Transportation on the campus itself also could use improvement, says the report.

Although the new apartment-style housing being built is resulting in less commuter traffic, it points to a growing need for "an environmentally friendly and energy-efficient intra-campus transportation system."

Student input on transportation issues is vital, especially since "the transportation component of the comprehensive fee, which is charged to students in addition to tuition, provides the funds to support the surfacing of new parking lots, the campus shuttle service and the Blue Bird buses."

The North Campus shuttle service needs to be re-examined with respect to the "aging fleet of vans" that drive a continuous loop around campus and to the various housing complexes, including Flickinger Court. The contract with Blue Bird that provides buses fueled by compressed natural gas (CNG) to shuttle between the Ellicott Complex and the Student Union also should be re-examined in light of the 33 percent premium UB pays for the low-emission buses compared to conventional diesel buses, especially since CNG costs less that gasoline.

The low shuttle ridership volume also is an issue, and the report recommends the university increase ridership by restricting the parking privileges of students living on campus to discourage them from taking their cars from their campus housing to class. The university also needs to take steps to encourage pedestrian and bicycle traffic.

Calling an energy-efficient campus transportation system "the progressive norm at major universities around the country," the report says UB must step up its efforts to obtain funding on both the state and federal levels.

The report also encourages UB to incorporate its transportation efforts into the Campus Landscape Master Plan to form a plan "encompassing an entire framework for the long-term development of the campus," including the circulation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic around the campuses.