A little more than six months ago, The Daily Bruin’s Editorial Board published an editorial outlining its concerns about the never-ending process of repair, renovation and expansion that has come to dominate the operating procedures of UCLA’s on-campus housing facilities on the Hill.
In that editorial, we wrote about the inconvenience that the construction projects would pose to students living on the Hill. We wrote about what seem to be unrealistic, if not recklessly ambitious projections of eventually guaranteeing four years of housing to all UCLA undergraduates.
We discussed the heavy congestion that was sure to come from limiting or eliminating foot and vehicular traffic on Charles E. Young Drive and De Neve Drive. We also wrote about how more expensive housing, albeit state-of-the-art and quite shiny, does not make much sense for students grappling with rising fees and shrinking resources.
We were right. Construction on the Hill is a huge inconvenience.
With blockage on the aforementioned streets, it’s a major pain ““ particularly in a car ““ to traverse the already inconvenient hilltop upon which our handsome dormitories are perched.
The sound of UCLA dollars at work is music to our ears, but is surely just unbearable industrial noise to the thousands of students who still live in buildings adjacent to the construction areas.
And although they have become as much a part of the UCLA aesthetic as the brick cross-hatching found all over campus, the green construction fences are just unsightly.
We are especially upset about these fresh but familiar inconveniences because we feel that UCLA has done little to mitigate the negative effects of the construction projects on the Hill’s current residents.
It has become painfully clear to this board that campus administrators consider tomorrow’s UCLA students a much higher priority than today’s, and as much as we want to share this commitment to the future, we are baffled by UCLA’s flagrant disregard for its current students. We are also concerned that this pattern of abuse will continue to burden the new guys as badly as it has us.
At the very least, we would like to see UCLA Housing arrange for current residence hall fees to be prorated to compensate for the disservice caused by the construction.
We are still skeptical about how feasible or necessary it is to make the dorms available to fourth-year students. Despite the three years currently guaranteed, the majority of on-campus residents are first- and second-year students. If so few students elect to live in the dorms their third year, why does UCLA Housing want to offer them a fourth?
Before offering a fourth guaranteed year of housing, UCLA should first ensure that the existing rooms designed for two people are not cramped into accommodating three, as many currently are.
This board hopes that UCLA Housing will keep the Hill’s current residents in mind when planning construction.