By Nathan CohenStaff writer
University senators yesterday blasted the state’s plan to run a light-rail train down Campus Drive, using rhetoric that appeared to rally behind university President Dan Mote’s opposition to the plan.
Faculty and student senators raised concerns that the trolley-like trains that the Maryland Transit Administration would send through the campus would hit pedestrians, clutter the campus’ landscape and disrupt their research experiments as the trains vibrated along the rails.
Although the senate declined to take a formal position on the plan this year, the faculty senators’ comments raised the profile of what has already developed into a conflict over the future of regional transit. The fundamental disagreement is over whether the rail planned to connect area Metro stations should travel along the state’s preferred Campus Drive or Stadium Drive.
Graduate students have already announced support for the Campus Drive alignment because of its easy access to Stamp Student Union and its more direct route; the Student Government Association has not announced plans to take a position on the matter.
History professor Gay Gullickson made it clear at yesterday’s meeting where he stands on the issue.
“If the light rail comes to campus it will fundamentally change the ambiance,” Gullickson said. “We compete with university students at our peer institutions. I don’t think we’ll compete well.”
While the trains would run at 16 mph on the campus, Mote has said the Purple Line would pose a threat to pedestrians on Campus Drive and has instead supported a line that would bring it down Stadium Drive, where there is less foot traffic.
Senate Chair William Montgomery steered the issue away from a formal vote, but Kenneth Holum, a history professor set to become Senate Chair next year, said he would like to see the senate make a recommendation when he takes over.
The university administration, historically, has followed the senate’s recommendations, and Holum was among the majority of senators who sided with the administration’s stance on the project.
“I’m very much in favor of mass transit,” he said. But he added, “I think there’s an issue with routing.”
Many other senators were even more critical of the MTA’s proposal, which includes an above-ground light rail that would connect Bethesda Metro to New Carrollton Metro, with stops along the way at the university, Langley Park and Silver Spring. On the campus, the Purple Line would stop at Stamp Student Union, East Campus, University of Maryland University College and the M-Square Research Park.
“I think this is an ongoing invitation to disaster,” said James Harris, Dean of the College of Arts and Humanities. “We’ll end up with two campuses split by what was originally a good idea, going underground.”
Those in attendance at the meeting, which included the senate and many top members of the university administration, seemed most concerned about MTA’s plan to reduce the number of walkways on Campus Drive from eight to four.
“The culture on campus is that pedestrians rule here,” said Duncan. “The question is what do you do when students ignore the crosswalks. The answer [from MTA] was, I hope the train would stop.”
Despite what appears as a united front in the university’s upper echelon against the Purple Line, Vice President for Administrative Affairs Doug Duncan recognized the light rail train would be running on state land and politicians in Annapolis would make the final decisions on its route.
“As it was put to me, it’s state land and [they] could do whatever [they] want with it,” said Duncan. “If University of Maryland is the obstacle to the Purple Line, there would be retribution.”
Not all the members spoke against the Purple Line, however. Graduate Student Government President Laura Moore said she likes the line exactly where MTA wants it.
“I’m kind of dismayed by what I’m hearing right now,” Moore said. “We have [mass transit] on Campus Drive, and somehow they run on schedule. Nobody’s died.”
cohendbk@gmail.com
