UCLA Transportation shouldn’t raise parking fees to go green
Rundown
THE ISSUE:
UCLA Transportation is raising parking fees for students in an attempt to reduce traffic on campus and encourage the use of vanpools and public transportation.
OUR STANCE:
A parking fee increase is not the right way to go green, especially when so many students are dependent on commuting to UCLA. A more practical solution is needed.
By Editorial Board
Nov. 3, 2010 11:55 p.m.
The Green Initiative Fund has provided our campus with a practical avenue for UCLA commuters to get around.
Recently, TGIF granted $24,300 to the UCLA Bike Shop, creating a program that allows students to borrow bicycles for a period of time.
Meanwhile, UCLA Transportation raised parking fees by $6 per quarter for commuters and $9 per quarter for residents.
What’s the difference?
Constructiveness and consideration.
While TGIF has given us a way to be more environmentally friendly, the university has driven up parking costs and tried to discourage parking on campus and encourage people to utilize vanpools, public transportation and carpooling.
If UCLA Transportation is operating at a loss, then they need to find a way to fill the 1,200 empty parking spaces around campus. Even though 700 of those spaces are tied up because of construction, there are still 500 parking spots that students would purchase were it not made so expensive and difficult to obtain.
It makes no business sense to raise the price of a product that isn’t selling.
Students seeking a parking permit are often faced with long lines in the transportation office, not to mention having to shoulder hundreds of dollars in fees per quarter.
Over the past five years, UCLA Transportation has steadily raised permit prices while the number of permit applicants has correspondingly gone down over the same time period. There were about 5,440 applicants in 2010 compared to more than 8,000 in 2005.
In the midst of these impractical moves, there has been some voice of reason. Jasmine Hill, president of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, suggested more flexibility in where students are permitted to park throughout the week, which may encourage more students to purchase a parking permit.
The university said that while it makes sense economically to fill the spots, that plan does not align with the university’s environmental plan.
“Going green,” however, is a poor way to justify a parking fee increase.
Many students either commute or have an off-campus job and have no choice but to drive to campus, and to force them to pay more is simply unfair and inconsiderate. While UCLA Transportation wants to leave the spots empty in order to keep in line with their goals of reducing traffic and pollution, students who need parking have to shoulder the cost of UCLA Transportation underselling its product.
Instead of forcing students who are burdened with plenty of expenses already to pay more for a much-needed parking spot, the university must follow TGIF’s example in finding practical ways to help the environment.
