New Mexico Daily Lobo
URL: http://www.dailylobo.com/index.php/article/2010/09/more_parking_lots_underminegoal_of_climate_neutrality_
Current Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 20:16:39 -0600
Possibly Related:
More parking lots undermine goal of climate neutrality
Shortly after becoming UNM President, Dr. David Schmidly signed UNM onto the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment. The commitment is to achieve “climate neutrality as soon as possible.”
Given that transportation creates about a quarter of our carbon emissions, one would think decreasing UNM’s transportation-oriented carbon footprint would be a high priority. So why does Parking and Transportation Services, the department charged with transportation planning, continue to build more parking structures?
Everyone agrees that the streets and available parking in and around UNM are often burdened.
There’s a theory in transportation and land use planning that different housing densities lend themselves to different modes of transportation. The lower housing densities, like most of Albuquerque, lend themselves to single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel.
Ultra-high densities, like the island of Manhattan, lend themselves to more human-scale transportation modes like walking, taxi and transit. The middle densities, like the UNM, Nob Hill and Downtown areas lend themselves to transportation modes that reduce congestion, but can get you further faster than walking. In this middle ground transportation options like transit, bicycles, in-line-skates, skateboards, scooters and motorcycles work best.
Just watch Central Avenue at noonday, four-lane de facto parking lot or ask the Frontier owner if he has enough parking for the lunch crowd for proof of how car un-friendly middle density land use can be. Conversely, the congestion brought to the University area by more cars than the area could comfortably handle makes it less pedestrian and bicycle friendly for those of us who know better than to drive a car around here during peak traffic hours.
If you live in those lower densities, up in the heights or on the west side, you need a car. But when you bring your car into town you’re coming into an area that, by its very nature, is not car friendly.
John Dewey once said, “A problem well-defined is a problem half-solved.” The thing is that not everyone agrees on the solution(s) because not everyone agrees on how to define the problem. Whereas I have always seen this situation as a transportation problem, UNM has always seen this situation as a parking problem.
Therein, as they say, lies the rub.
Part of the reason for our disparate views is mindset. I’ve always lived in high– to-mid-density areas and use bicycles, motorcycles and mass transit as my main transportation modes while (I’ve always presumed) the people who run parking have more of a car mindset. The fact that the department was called “Parking and Transportation Services” is a giveaway.
The other reason for our disparate views is the fact that PATS funds its operations and some of its capital improvements with the parking and permit fees it collects from you. Successfully dealing with the transportation problem means fewer cars, which means fewer revenues. Anyone else see the conflict?
But there’s more.
Over the years, PATS has contracted a company called Walker Parking Consultants to solve its parking problem. If how you define a problem defines its solutions, then which consultant you hire further defines those solutions. Walker designs, builds and recommends parking structures as a solution to parking problems. With “transportation” twice removed, it’s no wonder that every Walker study recommends more parking structures to be built on the UNM main campus.
The thing is that more parking structures may alleviate, but not solve, the parking problem, but more parking structures will exacerbate the transportation problem by attracting more cars that will continue to overburden the streets in surrounding communities and reduce the bicycle and pedestrian friendliness of the area while increasing UNM’s carbon footprint.
So why is UNM continuing to build more parking structures?



14 comments
Position Player
Flag this comment
Many Parking Consulting firms with strong national reputations, this includes Walker, also do work in alternative transportation, shared parking to reduce the need to build as much, and creative ways to meet parking problems. While the campus may have a master plan to build more structures, many Walker studies reject new structures for other solutions. Like many firms in this arena Walker studies and designs, but does not build.
Casey
Flag this comment
Anyone who claims that UNM does not need more parking structures clearly has their head shoved way up their ass. When I was an undergrad, I had no problem walking to school and never had to deal with any parking issues. When I became a grduate student that all changed however. Now I have to drive across town (from work) to get to campus, and I as well as many others, depend on finding a parking spot in the visitor parking garage so we can get to class in a timely manner. Sometimes this is a nightmare due to the congestion. Cars are not going away anytime soon, so the best thing UNM can do right now is to accomodate it. Unless they don’t want any working students or students that don’t live on/near campus.
Staff
Flag this comment
Public transportation in this city is a cruel joke. I rode the bus for years – until they changed the routes. Now I would have to take 3 different busses and lose over 1.5 hours each way to get here. Even with the free bus pass it isn’t worth the hassle and lost time.
Dan Schultz
Flag this comment
As Mr Hernandez wrote, how you define the problem defines the solution. If the starting viewpoint is “we have too many cars and cars are bad,” it’s a pretty short race to the conclusion (even if it’s a foot race.)
Mr Hernandez appears to advocate that we succumb to yet another social-engineering “nudge,” and forsake our choices. That so many in the UNM community choose to drive indicates that such an accommodation would be distasteful to many, or most.
Read more
Given a choice between stacking cars in a deck, and stacking humans in a Manhattan-style hive, I would stack cars. Is it truly desirable to model Albuquerque after NYC, Philly or Boston?
Phillip Howel
Flag this comment
^This is another of the ongoing nonsense ideas of the environmental left; people who are disconnected from reality.
UNM, UNMMC and the city would have ample parking and public streets except for the DANNY HERNANDEZ clones. NO mass transit is $$$ or energy-efficient except at the hight of rush hour. Nor is it reflective of the needs of the people. UNM’s employees and non-residential student base come from 3 counties. It is fiscally impossible to provide mass transit for most of these people. Parking is needed.
Read more
UNMMC draws patients from across the state because it is the Level 1 Trauma Center. Families whose loved ones are patients there must have parking, must have the way to be with their family 24/7. Mass transit cannot help them.
UNM is home to PopeJoy Hall and sports facilities that attract visitors from 3 counties, mostly on the weekend.
Meeting these three needs of the people means ignoring the Pollyanna ideas of Danny Hernandez and his fellow small thinkers. They are small minds because every study shows the inefficiency of mass transit, yet they demand it be built and funded with the tax dollars of families who are struggling even though those families will never use it because it does not address their needs.
UNM is cutting corners and increasing fees and tuition while the legislature and counties are funding the $25/million deficit to keep Richardson’s stupid toy train running. That was another idea that was pushed by the environmental left who kept saying it will probably pay for its self and will save the taxpayers of NM millions for new highway construction. When the train stops running the highways will have to be built.
Fellow readers, $500/million of the $14/trillion debt our nation has is the train. You and our children are saddled with this debt because of the foolish thinking of politicians and the left-wing. Toss both out in November.
obama bin farteen
Flag this comment
“David Schmidly signed UNM onto the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment. The commitment is to achieve “climate neutrality as soon as possible.”
For this reason alone schmidt should be fired. As for hernandez, the community agitator, buy a vowel and get a clue: NO MORE PUBLIC BOONDOGLES.
Nick
Flag this comment
The university as a whole is not approaching recycle/reuse in a positive manner. We need more recycle bins for plastic bottles, etc. We should approach climate warming and our ability to affect it in a much more positive manner. However, as the number of students increases and crosses larger geographical boundaries, we need to accomidate drivers and students from further away. In addition, the enrollment at UNM continues to increase and we should expect more students having to drive to UNM. Personally, I arrive at UNM an hour early to ensure that I have parking close to campus. Eliminating services (parking lots) will not decrease our carbon footprint; it will just make things more difficult for students.
slowhike
Flag this comment
UNM has much bigger fish to fry than becomming a “Green” campus.
Lawrence
Flag this comment
Casey: There is plenty of parking in the G, O, and T lots. That’s where many of us who here at UNM must park (there’s a waiting list for the sacred C permits).
Of course, you have to walk for ten minutes or take one of the crummy shuttles. Personally, I would rather that UNM spend money on upgrading the converted school buses with no shocks — unless you’re very short, they are uncomfortable ride.
Read more
Full disclosure: you may consider this a personal ax of mine I’m grinding. I had a J permit, behind ROTC or the shared parking with C permits in the big dirt lot at Yale and Lomas. It was dirty but close to where I work, and close to a lot of classrooms. But we got kicked out to make way for the new parking structure – which is supposed to “pay for itself” thus the rates will be high. What’s wrong with this picture?
So, there you go Casey, a new and very expensive parking structure. Hope you’re happy!
docsavage
Flag this comment
Heck, I’d settle for just more rack space in front of Johnson Gym!
Eugene
Flag this comment
You can count on ol’ Phil Howel to jump on any chance to use the dailylobo.com for his personal neocon, tea party blog. Here he is weighing in on parking garages at UNM. As usual, most of his rant is filled with errors:
>> every study shows the inefficiency of mass transit
Read more
Bull. First of all define “inefficiency.” Then find ONE study that proves what you claim.
>> who kept saying it will probably pay for its self
Baloney. No responsible person ever said that. Mass transit, like most public goods, cannot “pay for itself.” Neither do public roads and highways, Howel.
If you had to pay a toll that completely covered the cost of building and maintaining the roads (and the highway patrol, etc.) – or pay a fee at the pump, you’d yell and scream about that too. The automobile transportation infrastructure is – and has always been – very heavily subsidized by taxpayers.
>> Richardson’s stupid toy train
The Rail Runner is regional commuter mass transit. Real cities in modern, industrialized nations have mass transit. Why do you want to keep NM behind, Howel?
But maybe you’re right Phil. Why should struggling NM families pay for something they don’t use? Why should I have Social Security taken out of my paycheck to support retirees like you? (Just kiddin,’ Phil, ol’ buddy).
btw, since you always correct others spelling and grammar, you might want to tell your pal Mr. Farteen that he misspelled “boondoggle.”
Phillip Howel
Flag this comment
EUGENE, is ad hominem always your starting point? You said, “As usual, most of his [Howel’s] rant is filled with errors:”
Ask you, “Bull. First of all define “inefficiency[in mass transit] ” Then find ONE study that proves what you claim.” Here are two: http://www.templetons.com/brad/transit-myth.html
http://www.masstransitmag.com/print/Mass-Transit/Maintenance-Matters/1$11621
Read more
The first shows the energy as measured in BTU’s per passenger mile for all forms of transportation, the second an idea formulated by those who think the LA transit system can reclaim some of the heat energy (BTU’s) used by their trains to reduce energy usage. It is based on technology that does not exist. The cost per passenger per mile is explained and show in the first. Cars are often more efficient. And they are far more convenient. Lost in the discussion is the value of a person’s time; time spent waiting for a bus, for a connection etc..
I listened to the discussion of Richardson’s toy train on KUNM and KOB with proponents saying it would be very popular and some claimed it would break even. BTY, the NYC subway system, the most heavily traveled in the world after Japan’s, makes money during the work week rush hours, about breaks even during the rest of the day and loses money for the other 12 hours of the day and on the weekend. This with a fare of $2.25 per rider. The energy and labor cost per passenger mile are very high.
You also said, “ If you had to pay a toll that completely covered the cost of building and maintaining the roads (and the highway patrol, etc.) – or pay a fee at the pump, you’d yell and scream about that too.” FACT: We drivers do pay for highway construction and maintenance at the pump with these NM state taxes: $0.36.4/gallon gas, $0.43.4/ gallon diesel plus federal of $0.18.4 and $0.24.4 per gallon for gas and diesel. All highway projects are funded from those taxes. Electric vehicles pay no taxes to use the highways and get special tax breaks. We who own fuel powered vehicles subsidize electric cars, and the RailRunner does not pay taxes on the diesel it buys. If it had to pay the same taxes a private bus company pays, the subsidy may be $35/million instead of $25/million.
EUGENE, fair question, “Real cities in modern, industrialized nations have mass transit. Why do you want to keep NM behind, Howel?” What cities, nations? The NYC subway system was built 100 years ago with private money, not tax dollars and was a money maker until the city forced price controls on the fares that could be charged. During a strike the city took over the system. It has lost money ever since. I lived there when that happened; I was a school boy. The NYC transit system runs express busses at a fare of $5.50/ride, and they loose money. Private companies charge $7-8/ ride and make money. The city limits the routes the private companies can run to ease the competition. The city does not pay fuel taxes for their diesel, or sales taxes for maintenance items like tires, private companies do. Road construction is paid for directly by the people who buy gasoline and diesel, not the general treasury.
Europe has an extensive mass transit system that is heavily subsided by road tax. Their systems are rather modern which is understandable when you consider they were re-built after WWII with our money after we destroyed them freeing the people from the scourge of Nazi Germany. The population densities of western Europe and Tokyo, like NYC, make mass transit sensible. Albuquerque to Santa Fe makes no economic sense nor does it make sense from an energy use consideration. The facts found in the links show that very clearly.
Social Security (SS) has been discussed here in the past. During the past 60 years proposals have been offered to change the Ponzi scheme called Social Security into a ‘forced to pay retirement system’ that allows the people ownership of their account and some control in how their money is invested. Every time such ideas have been offered the left wing & Progressives have demonized those people and their ideas with lies. SS has long been referred to as the third rail of politics and in fact lies are being told now about candidates in some congressional races about it. You EUGENE have attempted to show that people do not use the highways but have to pay for it (implying that is not fair) and they do not use SS but have to pay for it- including mine.
Lets take apart that cute trick you tried to play. Everybody uses the road system. Everybody uses goods that are delivered by trucks that drive on the highways and local roads. Milk and oranges and bread do not mysteriously appear. Medicine is deliver to the pharmacy by trucks. The taxes paid for the fuel to run those trucks pays for road construction and maintenance.
I paid into Social Security since I had my first job at age 13. I always worked, and for 54 years paid. I long ago wanted SS changed to a plan like Galveston County, TX – see http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba514 – where the worker owns his account and leaves it in his estate to his heirs and the monthly payout is far greater than a SS check for the same earnings. At the insistence of Congressional Democrats the ability of local governments to NOT be part of SS was ended in 1983. It is a shame Reagan signed onto that legislation. EUGENE, your SS taxes are paying for me because the government has spent the money I paid in those taxes; there never was a savings or lock box for that money.
Maybe you are bright enough to read about the Galveston project and see how you have been had by the left wing people in both mass transit and Social Security. The Libertarian thinkers have real ideas that can save this country for my grand kids. The Progressive have ideas to destroy the country.
Phillip Howel
Flag this comment
EUGENE, I do not correct spelling, I point out the rule of grammar is a sentence begins with a capitol letter. That proper usage also make it easier to read.
obama bin farteen
Flag this comment
All you losers that want to ride teh bus, have at it. Me, I park at the presidents house.
Comments are closed for this item.