OCR Text |
Show ASUU studies U parking, discusses alternate plans along the malls, rentals', ary two-story parking sr. take over part of tie gi': permit only cars with ; more students in tta: in the Union parking ki Dixon also mentioned: pus planners want pari: ters and at one point g closing the Union pit the Thanksgiving tolidiii meters might be installs: Dixon said that M:: could be made to a k consisted of five studefc faculty members with e member not having a cs BY NOREEN OKLBO Staff Writer Pete Dixon, member of campus affairs board said in a report to Associated Students of the University Univer-sity of Utah Executive Council that campus parking was the University's number one problem. prob-lem. He said it affects more students stu-dents to a greater degree than any other problem. He said "the first three days netted 7,000 warning warn-ing tickets and 500 tickets socking students between $2,000 and $3,000 in fines." As of October 1, 100 percent per-cent of all student spaces were filled with the exception of Merrill Mer-rill Engineering which was 95 per cent full. Adjacent streets were filled and city police ticketed ticket-ed the overflow. This is the year of change, the transition of peripheral parking, Dixon said. Right now, he explained, ex-plained, there the 1,090 faculty spaces, 918 staff.,1855 upper and 2845 lower spaces. This totals to 8,584. "If we are lucky, by Christmas Christ-mas we'll have 3,000 more parking park-ing spaces. These spaces should have been done by fall but due to bad planning, among other things such as strikes, a 'bid' foul up, contractor not having enough equipment to do all lots at the same time, some tearing down of temporary buildings, completion dates were missed Dixon said. The present ticket moratorium which is being fought by the Security Se-curity Department will stay in effect until the weather clears sufficiently to allow completion of the Annex lot. This means that you can park anywhere you want, within rational limits Dixon said. Some traditional arguments for our parking system, Dixon said, are: (1) compared to other campuses cam-puses our parking is great! What they fail to overlook is that we are largely a commuter com-muter school. (2) Parking would be great if the students What options are open? Dixon suggestions offered the following alternatives: (1) Elimination of upper classmen parking. Arguments Argu-ments in favor say it is politically feasible, it would eliminate upper-lower upper-lower cheating, and save student tickets. Arguments against: reluctance re-luctance of upper class, slight increase in-crease in traffic, loss of ticket revenue. (2) Elimination of Staff Parking: Arguments against are: political problems, staff unrest, a few problems with part-time staff finding space, more 20-minure spaces necessary for couriers, and loss of revenue. Arguments for: no real problem for staff since they are here by 8 a.m., elimination elimina-tion of tickets and cheating, more room for the students to park, ing, Dixon said is politically impossible im-possible but it would be nice if professors were limited to two stickers each. This would be a minor inconvenience to professors with three cars. Dixon also suggested that ending end-ing faculty parking at 2 p.m. would give professors time to get back from lunch and get their places and would give students better afternoon parking. Raising Rais-ing staff suckers to $7.50, the staff has always argued that because be-cause of low salaries compared to faculty, lower prices are fair. But this argument quickly falls when comparing student ability to pay $7.50 with staff ability to pay $7.50. Other proposals made were central underground lot and high rise with daily charge, shuttle service that could be operated |