Comments on: Unnecessarily pitting visitors vs community: MacInnes field parkade http://ubcinsiders.ca/2017/09/unnecessarily-pitting-visitors-vs-community-macinnes-field-parkade/ Separating the wheat from the chaff. Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:50:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: maayan http://ubcinsiders.ca/2017/09/unnecessarily-pitting-visitors-vs-community-macinnes-field-parkade/comment-page-1/#comment-18545 maayan Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:52:20 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11549#comment-18545 "That would be intolerable" lol. Darren, can you give us the gist of your calculation? “That would be intolerable” lol.
Darren, can you give us the gist of your calculation?

]]> By: Charles Menzies http://ubcinsiders.ca/2017/09/unnecessarily-pitting-visitors-vs-community-macinnes-field-parkade/comment-page-1/#comment-18542 Charles Menzies Thu, 14 Sep 2017 01:43:34 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11549#comment-18542 By all accounts I am the only person on the finance/property committee that is concerned about the building of an expensive old fashion underground parking lot. The argument in favour is a kind of business case model that says despite being built from internal loans it will be cost revenue and ultimately revenue generating. I don't think the business modelling for the parking lot is really fitted to the university's long term best interest. Rather we need to focus on sustainable (ecologically speaking) modes of transport that doesn't encourage additional on to campus car traffic. However, the goal of this parking lot (and similar parking lots on south campus, is to facilities selling services to off campus customer. There is only a need for short term parking if the University continues to market to off campus customers. By all accounts I am the only person on the finance/property committee that is concerned about the building of an expensive old fashion underground parking lot. The argument in favour is a kind of business case model that says despite being built from internal loans it will be cost revenue and ultimately revenue generating. I don’t think the business modelling for the parking lot is really fitted to the university’s long term best interest. Rather we need to focus on sustainable (ecologically speaking) modes of transport that doesn’t encourage additional on to campus car traffic. However, the goal of this parking lot (and similar parking lots on south campus, is to facilities selling services to off campus customer. There is only a need for short term parking if the University continues to market to off campus customers.

]]> By: Darren Peets http://ubcinsiders.ca/2017/09/unnecessarily-pitting-visitors-vs-community-macinnes-field-parkade/comment-page-1/#comment-18541 Darren Peets Thu, 14 Sep 2017 00:14:00 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11549#comment-18541 As far as I could tell, the real reason for building parkades was that the parking rates were matched to twice the one-zone bus fare at some point around the late 1990s, as a matter of central policy, which forced Parking to make money hand over fist. While they're servicing debt, everything's fantastic. But if they run out of debt to service, they start running colossal profits which would be stolen from their fiefdom and tossed into general revenue. That would be intolerable. Thunderbird parkade was approved around 2006-07, so it bought them 10 years, for ~$45M as I recall. (I actually would have guessed 5-7 years -- maybe demand is falling or they've been holding the parking fees down?). If my numbers are right, this new one doesn't buy them much time. As far as I could tell, the real reason for building parkades was that the parking rates were matched to twice the one-zone bus fare at some point around the late 1990s, as a matter of central policy, which forced Parking to make money hand over fist. While they’re servicing debt, everything’s fantastic. But if they run out of debt to service, they start running colossal profits which would be stolen from their fiefdom and tossed into general revenue. That would be intolerable.

Thunderbird parkade was approved around 2006-07, so it bought them 10 years, for ~$45M as I recall. (I actually would have guessed 5-7 years — maybe demand is falling or they’ve been holding the parking fees down?). If my numbers are right, this new one doesn’t buy them much time.

]]>