Graduate students object to new shuttle plan

The route reduced shuttle frequency and efficiency, she explained, adding that administrators did not share the plans for the new routes with the committee until less than 12 hours before the changes went into effect.

The new green line, a precursor to the redesigned shuttle system that will be implemented next fall, led graduate students to fear that the “system was crumbling out from under us rather than getting better,” Bergsieker said.

When the University released plans for the redesigned shuttle system in February, Bergsieker joined with Parking and Transportation Committee members Kevin Collins GS and Jeffrey Dwoskin GS to lobby against what they saw as a counterproductive plan.

The revised shuttle system, part of the 10-year Campus Plan, is designed to reduce the need for personal vehicles for commuting around Princeton, University Services General Manager Paul Breitman said, explaining that the new plan features more stops around town and replaces three independent routes with four routes connected by transfer stops.

These are “enhanced, improved routes” that will “provide an efficient, effective way of getting around campus,” Breitman said.

The committee, however, believes the system will have the opposite effect. A survey of nearly half of enrolled graduate students confirmed its beliefs.

The committee has finished tabulating the results of the survey, and a report on the survey’s findings will be released by May 14.

Meeting graduate students’ quotidian needs

Graduate students’ “primary need is to get from work to home and home to work because the core of what grad students do is work,” Bergsieker said.

The new plan, as it stands, will require students to transfer shuttle lines to get from the majority of University-provided graduate housing to the center of campus, thus “doubling, give or take, the total travel [time], with some uncertainty thrown in there,” Collins said.

As a result, personal vehicles have become more appealing. According to the survey, if the plan were to be implemented in its current form, there would be a net 30 percent increase in the number of graduate students who use cars to commute. Respondents also said that moving off campus would become more appealing since it gives eligibility for commuter parking.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Bergsieker said she believes that the ultimate problem with the route proposal is that it emphasizes new services over day-to-day convenience.

“It’s not just us saying this,” Collins said. “It’s the data [showing] current graduate students’ reaction to the current plan. That data strongly suggests that we need to find something else if the University’s goals are to be realized.”

Though he had not yet met with the committee to discuss the survey when interviewed on Monday, Breitman said that he did not share survey respondents’ fears about the negative effects of the new routes.

“The system is designed to make [shuttle use] less cumbersome and more efficient,” Breitman said, noting that he expects the travel time from the Graduate College to the E-Quad to be cut from 20 minutes to 10.

Breitman also said he doubts that a large fraction of graduate students will switch from using public transportation to personal vehicles for getting around Princeton, even if they do dislike the new plan. “What are they going to drive and where are they going to park?” he asked.

He emphasized that he has been working with the GSG for two-and-a-half years on route revisions, and graduate student input has been incorporated into the plan.

While graduate students were included in consultant-run focus groups on revisions to the shuttle system, Collins said he believes that graduate students “were very fundamentally talking about different things” than the consultants, since graduate students envisioned minor changes to the system rather than an overhaul.

Konstantinos Aisopos GS, who lives in the Graduate College and works in the E-Quad, said she wouldn’t like the changes “even if it takes less time” because of the need to transfer shuttles. Aisopos noted that one concern is the prospect of waiting for transfer buses in inclement weather.

University Director of Community and Regional Affairs Kristin Appelget said that she is “confident that we have the support of the Borough and the Township in making necessary modifications such as installing shelters” to address this concern.

Route efficiency

Collins characterized the proposed plan as featuring a pattern of “overall inefficient routes” that slow shuttles by increasing travel on Nassau Street and other main roads.

Breitman noted, however, that there were a number of reasons for moving shuttles to major roads. Diverting blue line and green line routes to Nassau Street now allows shuttle users to connect to NJ Transit buses, he said.

Breitman added that the green line’s new stop at Lot 21 is essential to providing shuttle access to the increased number of staff who have been assigned to the lot to accommodate construction projects, such as the new chemistry building.

“Changes have to be made in the best interest of the entire University,” he said.

Going forward

After meeting with University Services Director of Parking and Transportation Kim Jackson last Thursday to present the survey’s findings, the committee learned that despite its initial fears, the new shuttle routes are not “set in stone,” Dwoskin explained.

Jackson, who assumed her position in January, said her main goal is to “make sure that we have a reliable service that meets the needs of the majority of users,” noting that “there will be revisions [to the proposed routes].”

She plans to continue communication with the committee until plans are finalized. She added that she admired the committee because while “they’re trying to make sure that the needs of grad students are served, they are very interested in what’s best for everyone.”

The administration’s goal is to have shuttles operating on the new routes by Sept. 1, Jackson said.

Collins is optimistic about finding “an optimal system.” He noted the importance of “not hastily rushing into an ill-considered plan but taking the time to thoroughly analyze the data.”

Bergsieker said the survey provides a model for how the University can incorporate student opinion into policy implementation. “On issues that have a profound impact on campus, there is a need for systematic data,” she said. “We are trying to advocate a scientific method for a [home of] scientific innovation.”