Deseret News | Reader comments: Parking again in line of fire

Reader comments
Parking again in line of fire

Long Time Provo Resident | 8:25 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

Hooray for Provo!!! It is finally taking care of the people who work and live here! We've paid for our home and for taxes in the Joaquin area for almost 20 years. Students don't own the streets. Parking on the streetor in my drive way or on my lawn is not a student right. Thank you Provo!I'm tired of landlords who rent to too many people and then think they own the streets and the city owes them parking places. Its a business cost! Students need to look at what the landlords offer when they sign a lease. Parking on the street is not a right.

Shuttle Bus | 8:42 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

I'm wondering if a shuttle bus service would encourage students to park in the parking lots that are out of the way. They would then be able to park in a legal, and courteous parking spot and get a ride to the south end of campus.

Anonymous | 8:51 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

I have owned in the Joaquin area for almost 20 years and am thrilled that a parking program is near vote. It is long overdue. I have two other concerns that I wish to present to the city council. Because the streets in our area are always lined with cars, we do not get our streets properly cleaned. Instead of sweeping the curbs on our streets, the street cleaners simply drive down the middle of the road because they can not get close to the curbs. In others towns I have lived in, there are signs posted that will not allow parking at certain times so that the streets can be swept and plowed. Possibly the city can add some instructions on those expensive signs to prohibit parking altogether when the street is scheduled to be swept or plowed? One good reason to prohibit overnight parking is to do just that. Secondly, many residents including me, find it very inconvenient to have city employees only working four days a week.

Comments continue below

Corky | 9:27 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

It is true that having students in our town results in some inconvenience. However, they also boost our economy with their buying power therefore adding many jobs for our residents, provide added income for our senior citizens by renting the apartments in their homes, and give our area a vibrant and bustling environment. The majority of the students are innately good and provide quiet service and concern for residents in a myriad of ways. Without our students our Happy Valley would not be nearly so happy! I am thankful for them and appreciate a well-written article to keep us informed.

Thank you Corky | 10:16 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

Corky's comment was very welcome. Most students don't intend to be inconsiderate. If most people will remember back to their own college days, they might be a little more sympathetic. Many students work one or two jobs (given the low pay and costly living expenses here) and the days are usually hectic. It can be difficult trying to get to class on time when you are exhausted from work & studying, parking on the other side of campus makes it even harder. Shuttles are not as convenient as they sound. Hopefully this can be resolved in a way which is convenient for all.

Daniel | 11:22 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

While the parking program should decrease parking congestion by BYU commuters, it will not kick students out of the Joaquin neighborhood (to the relief of some and the disappointment of others). It will, however, impose unnecessary burdens on neighborhood residents, especially those who cannot afford homeownership. No other city in the nation (according to Provo's research) has dared impose such a discriminatory program, and Provo shouldn't be the first to try.

Daniel | 11:26 a.m. Nov. 12, 2007

While the parking program as proposed may decrease parking congestion by BYU commuters, it will not evict student residents from the neighborhood (to the relief of some and disappointment of others). It will, however, impose needless burdens on neighborhood residents, particularly those who cannot afford homeownership. No other city in the nation (according to Provo's research) has dared enact such a discriminatory program and Provo shouldn't be the first.

Wyoming Cowboy | 2:25 p.m. Nov. 12, 2007

I did not go to BYU, but rather the U of Wyooming.
Its parking lot was on the far side of campus also.
THe solution I and many of my friends found, was to use a bicycle around campus. End of day, ride back to campus, load the bike back in the trunk and drive home.
Maybe it work at BYU also.
Just a thought.

Dave | 2:35 p.m. Nov. 12, 2007

"Discriminatory." Try owning a home in the Joaquin neighborhood. It isn't the easiest place to live in the world, despite its character, convenience, etc. It is so enjoyable to come home and park a block away because of student cars lining the streets. And of course, we are always thrilled when they light bonfires in their front yards, or trample across our flower beds, or drive down their driveways going 30 mph despite the plethora of young children on the block. You see, we stay here, they don't. We take care of our property, we improve it. They rent. Every fall, a new pack fills the various houses around us that are rentals. Good kids, but civic duty, and neighborly responsibility aren't skills they seem to come to school with.

Alisha | 4:19 p.m. Nov. 12, 2007

The proposed program would cost $350,000. Yet they're not looking at the easiest solution sitting right on their own doorstep. BYU has plenty of parking during the day at the marriot center and at the stadium. Why don't they provide a shuttle and start promoting the idea of parking over there. UVSC has a shuttle help their students who park far away. Why isn't BYU smart enough to do something like that. It may not completely solve the problem over in the Joaquin neighborhood but at least it'd be a start.

Student | 10:06 a.m. Nov. 13, 2007

Hey Dave, If you don't like living in the Joaquin neighborhood then move. Things are NEVER going to change - it's a student area and always will be. We're required to live within a two-mile radius of BYU, and guess where most of the approved housing is? In your backyard. A permit parking program won't stop 18-25 year olds from driving a little fast, playing loud music or doing the same things you did as a college student. If you didn't know what you were getting into when you bought your house you didn't do enough research. You probably would like to kick out the hispanic people in your neighborhood as well but no one will say that. It's okay to discriminate against "renters" when people assume we're caucasians, but there's an uglier side to the issue people aren't talking about.

Patrick | 11:53 a.m. Nov. 13, 2007

Great comment Dave. By the way, how long have you lived here? Was BYU around when you bought your house? Or maybe you think that since you bought a house here the university should pack up and move out. There are always going to be some good renters and some bad renters, but the fact remains that charging renters for permits and not charging homeowners is discriminatory.

Jake | 2:51 p.m. Nov. 13, 2007

As a matter of fact its not "discriminatory". Homeowners are permanent fixtures contributing equity and property taxes. Oddly enough renters don't. Additionally many cities including Salt Lake require parking permits for certain areas of the city. My own experience at the U leads me to believe there are just too many students who are too lazy or selfish to appropriately plan ahead.

Hey Dave... | 3:33 p.m. Nov. 13, 2007

I'm sorry that it's inconvenient for you to not be able to park your third and fourth vehicles on the street because your first and second vehicles are parked in your driveway/garage. But why do you think it's fair to charge a renter $25 to park his or her one vehicle on the public street while you get free permits for your third and fourth vehicles?

And yes, forcing those in Provo who can least afford to fork over $25 (i.e. renters) to pay for permits while giving free permits to those who can most afford them (i.e. homeowners) is a very discriminatory practice. You should know that as the self-declared "civic duty and neighborly responsibility" chairman.

CEMc part 1 | 12:18 a.m. Nov. 14, 2007

It is nice to think the City Council is trying to improve parking, however, they admitted Monday night to have approved a 900 bed complex (Joaquin Village) to be built where the Joaquin school used to sit. They require only .62 parking stalls per bed, meaning that about 350 students will not have off-street parking. King George said they allowed this because "we trust the developer" not to rent those 350 beds to students with vehicles. Out of the approximately 100 persons attending the meeting Monday night, conveniently scheduled during BYU students' FHE activities, there was only one resident, besides Mr. Peterson and the City Council in favor of the proposal. The other owner residents are completely opposed to the plan. They are also opposed to allowing the Joaquin Village to be built without the legally required parking spaces. Money talks and, since college students donï¿½t have money, it seems their words donï¿½t count. If the numbers are representative of the owner-residents feelings, that means less than 2% of Joaquin residents are in favor (1 out of 7 owner residents in favor, 107 out of 2000+ units are owner-residents, 99.99% of renters and landlords oppose).

CEMc part 2 | 12:20 a.m. Nov. 14, 2007

The interesting thing is that the city council has already approved, by vote, a parking restriction ONLY DURING NIGHTTIME HOURS in the University Gardens neighborhood, where there currently is no parking problem. It will go into effect 1 January and residents have yet to hear how to get the permits or even that it has been approved. One can only assume that parking will be a problem during the daytime hours as those students who cannot park in Joaquin will now park in University Gardens. It is interesting to note that the City Council is not implementing a parking restriction around King Henry, the Centennials and other complexes behind and around Gold's Gym where it is hard to find parking or even navigate the road due to its being so narrow, especially with cars parked on both sides.

THE FOLLOWING IS HEARSAY:
I have heard George Stewart has business interest in those particular complexes as well as the condos that are also not going to have permit parking around them. I would like to know if this is correct. If this newspaper could find that out, it would be very nice to know.
END OF HEARSAY

CEMc part 3 of 3 | 12:21 a.m. Nov. 14, 2007

If these motions do pass there will be petitions going around BYU campus as well as the neighborhoods to get enough signatures to force this onto the ballot. This will bring out student voters and will cause a great turnover in the current city council seats. George stated Monday night that he will not seek re-election, for this I personally am grateful. After 20 October, if approved, you will find me on your doorstep asking for your signature.

BYU student | 12:26 a.m. Nov. 14, 2007

I too am a long time resident, approximately 11 years minus my Mission. I have worked hear longer than I have been a student hear. I have always rented. My rent pays my landlords property taxes. My taxes pay for these streets, what makes you think that my money and my rights are inferior to yours. I ride my bike to school as often as I can, but I keep getting flat tires, so I have to walk. If you want the perks of a university community go back to the UofU neighborhoods, get some permits and enjoy life without cars on your street. You knew what you were in for before you move here. You are free to act, you are not free to choose the consequences of your actions.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.