Parking?the Gordian knot?is the illegitimate child of American commerce.
Like the weather, it’s easy to hate and rally against, but it’s hard to do something about it. That’s because the “parking problem” is different depending upon whom you ask.
When Associated Students of the University of Utah leaders recently presented a petition to President Bernie Machen, people were excited about the potential for solving this persistent and perplexing problem.
Let me give you a couple of historical instances.
About eight years ago, there was a student petition presented to parking services calling for the construction of a multi-level garage on the practice field west of HPER.
The Daily Utah Chronicle decried this proposal as selfish and shortsighted. The editorial board concluded that the solution lay not in more parking, but in fewer students driving to campus.
When that controversy died down, the Campus Parking Advisory Committee spent a great deal of time studying the feasibility of constructing a garage on lower campus.
After several months of work, they suggested several possible sites for an 800 space garage. I took that proposal to a campus committee composed of students, faculty and staff. In order to proceed with this structure, we needed their approval.
The garage would be built on a parking lot and would result in the net gain on campus of 600 spaces. The committee agreed to support the location and construction of the garage, only if we removed 600 spaces from somewhere else and turned them into green space. That meant we could spend $8 million to construct a garage, several hundred thousand more to restore asphalt to lawn and realize no benefit to the students.
Many people on campus oppose the construction of additional parking lots due to the impact that vehicles have on the environment. They don’t want the beautiful campus to be surrounded by a giant K Mart parking lot.
Even more people off campus are opposed to the construction of parking. They believe that additional parking will bring more vehicles through their neighborhoods and have a negative impact upon the community.
The people who feel we need more parking want it to be inexpensive, plentiful and convenient. Unfortunately, achieving all three is impossible.
It costs money to build parking places?lots of money. Inexpensive parking is never convenient, and it’s rarely plentiful. If people really want more parking, they have to be willing to pay for it. They have to pay for it environmentally, politically and financially. The cost in dollars is more than most people care to imagine.
Campus parking is an auxiliary of the university. That means that it has to pay its own way. It isn’t subsidized by tuition or tax dollars. Parking facilities are paid for out of parking fees?permits, meters and tickets.
That’s the economic reality. If we were to build a garage of 1,000 parking spaces, it would cost $15 to $20 million. The amortized cost per space in such a garage is $134 per month! That doesn’t include lighting, cleaning, security or anything more than construction.
If you have to pay for it, a parking garage is always a bad idea.
I believe that the students will get what they really want. If they want more parking, they’ll be able to get it; but they need to recognize that there are real costs attached to that parking.
If it supplants green space or programs, the university suffers a loss. If it involves building a multi-level garage, someone, somewhere, will have to pay for it.
Based on the current system of how we generate income, students couldn’t withstand the financial burden. That’s why for more than 10 years we have tried to reduce the demand for parking through our partnership with the UTA.
The benefits that have come to the university, when weighed against the costs, have been extraordinary. Every day, 5,000 more people commute to the university on the bus than did 10 years ago.
The savings in money, gasoline and pollution have brought national recognition to the university. This is also the equivalent of having constructed more than 3,000 parking places?at a fraction of the cost.
This program was the result of extensive work here on campus by conscientious administrators, faculty, staff and students as they worked on committees charged with the responsibility of finding the best solutions to parking problems.
When we have to build more parking facilities on campus, it will be because every other viable option has been thoroughly explored, with the needs of the students carefully weighed against the costs.