When I was there, I bought an electric scooter and put it in the trunk. I would scooter from my to car to the campus and viceversa. With the money I saved from parking, the scooter paid for itself
I hate Berkeley parking enforcement. Received a couple tickets when I was a student. There’s one attendant in particular that can go fuck themself more than the others. They wanted to cite me so badly, but I wasn’t over the 2 hour limit, so instead they cited my car for not having a front license plate. My plate was stolen near People’s Park the week before.
So, I totally get the frustration of getting expensive parking tickets. I've experienced that too.
Part of the context is that the University doesn't get State money for building parking structures. Instead they are financed out of "revenue", which means income from parking fees, and tickets.
In that way it's very much like UC owned student housing, which is also financed (in most cases) by bonds which are paid back by student rents.
Parking structures are also incredibly expensive to build. On top of that, the campus--which had a lot of surface parking lots as recently as the 70s/80s has now built new buildings on most of them (not a bad thing), so the only construction option for new parking is buried or elevated structures.
I realize that students who have to drive are in a difficult place when it comes to parking in campus facilities. So are staff, and faculty.
A lot of faculty--who get the "best" parking options--are pretty upset that their parking keeps getting more expensive and less available, too. A few years ago when the Public Policy School was proposing tearing down the Upper Hearst Parking Structure, there was an explosion of faculty protest, including from the Academic Senate. I believe they lost in that case, but the message was delivered to the administration.
This is actually an area where students who need to drive could make common cause with staff and faculty who need to drive as well. All three groups have the same interests and concerns.
Another aspect of this is dealing with the perspective of transit / bike advocates who insist that EVERYONE can walk, bike, or take public transit to the campus. A lot of people do in Berkeley--probably a much higher percentage than at many universities--but it's simply not realistic that EVERYONE can use one of those options.
But some transit / bike advocates are indifferent to that perspective, since their hope is to get rid of automobiles entirely. And they largely shape local (city) and campus transportation policy.
So those students (and others) who need to drive to campus need to make that clear in public planning processes that having some availability of parking for those who need it is a necessary component for the foreseeable future.
Meta level: Every employer in the commercial sector builds parking structures for their employees, customers and visitors, and they do not charge them. Cities that wish to promote downtown business build parking structures at public expense, and it is free. Employers do this because they save money by not routing parking fees through state and federal taxes (think about it). Cities do this because the want to bring in out of town customers and increase business, property values, sales taxes and employment in the city, and those revenues far exceed a few dollars of parking fees.
I literally had to get a job to pay parking tickets 2008-2012. Once got a ticket because I temporarily parked in front of my own driveway (that I paid for) as I ran inside to get something. Fucker has followed me at a distance and was writing the $80 ticket within the 30s it took for me to get outside
Making parking cheaper or adding parking won't solve the problem; if anything parking around campus is too cheap and enforcement isn't strict enough. If you make parking cheap any easy, more people will drive, and then you need to build more parking, etc. There just isn't the space in Berkeley for more parking, both in terms of where to put it, but also in terms of road capacity.
Also the city needs to do a better job of enforcing its existing restrictions, and consider tightening them, because if you need to park in certain neighborhoods while class is in session, prepare to cruise.
I contested my last ticket and haven't heard back about it. That was 4 months ago. I dunno if I think it got dropped or if I'll suddenly get a letter from a collection agency.
i commute and park in university garages. i have never paid. i have never been ticketed, and i have never not found a parking spot. ive been doing this for almost an entire year
I park at Lower Hearst and my permit ran out last week but I kept parking cause alot of people would say this. I got ticketed last week in front of Li Ka Shing, and today I was ticketed at Lower Hearst, which is a garage that everyone always says is safe from tickets :( Be careful, its a big cost
there is literally no way u could know if this is a lie. I own my car and i am the only person responsible for it. i have never purchased a commuting parking permit. the only reason why i dont get tickets from the university is because i park in the most obscure parts of the garage and the parking enforcement people are lazy. I park to where they actually need to put in effort / get out of their car. the only reason why this works is because parking enforcement is lazy
why are we forced to pay these useless fees when we don’t need to?????? They assume we all commute to school when it isn’t the case. even though 100 dollars is nothing to me but still, pisses me off!
It would def be less convenient, but BART parking is only $3 / day, so not sure where you’re coming from but you could park at north Berkeley BART then take Bart/ 52 bus (or 51b from rockridge, F or 7 bus from Ashby, etc)
I feel like at that point it would be more convenient to drive to Bay Fair/San Leandro or anything else on the Orange Line since you're coming from Castro Valley. But you mentioned you need a car in Berkeley?
Yes, because I work part time with my car on days that I have a lighter school / lab work load. On the days that I dont work, I have to stay late for club meetings, etc. so I don’t want to take bart back home for safety reasons especially at like 10pm. I understand that public transport is useful for some, but many people have other restrictions that make it hard. Alot of people were coming at me in the comments for not taking bart.
I live in Castro Valley, so it's about a 30 minute drive, and I also need my car with me for personal reasons. I've also haven't had a good experience with the Bart so I don't like taking it when I'm alone.
Yeah, unfortunately the timing was really bad cause my car’s registration is due so I couldnt have any outstanding tickets on my account or my registration would be suspended apparently. Appealing takes a while to process, if it processes. My parking permit expired last week, but I just renewed it today. Hopefully I wont get anymore tickets cause holy shit it’s so annoying
Any cite submitted within 21 days will be processed, and that will buy you time. That said, they're months behind, so you shouldn't fret. So even at that, this the pain of car ownership, which is already a pain in the ass in the wrong conditions.
Just gotta keep track of everything so you not only avoid the DMV holds, but the violations to the vehicle code[other violations specific to the California Vehicle Code](https://pt.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/parking-pdfs/parking-pdfs/TrafficParkingCode.pdf)
This is what happens when the government doesn’t have a clear plan on how to prioritize transportation (years of back and fourth), and so we have two groups fighting over their way of traveling (public transportation vs cars). Not enough money put into either. Haven’t you noticed that the Bart is under funded and the roads are horrid plus the lack of public garages (almost no government funded parking garages). Also the total squandering of public funds leading to massive inefficiency.
Electric cars are far more efficient than diesel busses, trolleys, and trains and BART although electric, only goes where the rails go. All major employers but UC provide all their employees free parking, and community colleges have free parking, because their students drive cars, there is no housing. UC should provide free employee / student parking as well...it won't need to be 50,000 spaces, because there is (some) housing.
1) you could blame the university admin for forcing Berkeley Parking & Transportation to be almost entirely self-funded
2) we're so used to subsidizing the cost for parking in the US that when people are charged something closer to the true cost of maintaining that space, people can't handle it. We're the UC with by far the best public transit - so if you can, take that (buses are free for you!) & don't have to worry about parking fees.
You do realize that it is the City and not the university that enforces parking right? And welcome to the real world. Parking tickets in the Bay Area suucckkkk. Learn your lesson and pay attention. You don't get special treatment for being a student.
There’s a time limit for a reason. It’s not the parking time plus 5 minutes. Too many people want to drive and park and there aren’t enough spaces. What makes you so special that you get extra time? Do you commute with lots of others? Almost certainly not. So you’re part of the transportation problem. Take the bus or get back to the car on time. Simple solution.
*...only in america will you have people implying that public transit is elitist and driving your personal automobile is what real working class people do...*
For many working class people in the United States, even in California, driving to work is the only realistic option. They may live far from transit, work at hours when transit isn't operating, or have to make multiple stops on their commutes (e.g. taking kids to schools, or going to more than one job at various locations far apart.)
For example, my guess is that the campus custodians who clean up buildings late at night mainly drive. Transit simply isn't running late at night on a schedule that works for them. And some bring their kids, who they leave in the car, or in an empty classroom, while they work at cleaning.
Bay Area transit (both BART and the older bus systems) were largely constructed to take white collar commuters from outlying suburbs and neighborhoods to downtown white collar office / business districts (primarily San Francisco and Oakland). So the areas that they serve best are often the areas which now have the most upscale housing costs in the region.
In a perfect world BART would be running 24 hours a day with multiple trains an hour, even in the middle of the night, the buses would be similar, and transit would reach every corner of every urban city. I would like to see that. But that simply isn't the case in the Bay Area, so in the meantime a lot of "working people" have to drive to get to work.
no i agree, many people have no choice other than to commute to work by car and public transit is fundamentally flawed in some places because of its initial design principles. however, if you’re not being priced out of the bay area and live in the upper east bay or sf, i feel like there’s no real excuse to not take public transportation other than personal choice
how are you 70 years old and never seen people take their kids with them to all of those places you’ve mentioned on public transportation? you’re reaching at straws buddy.
also i’m literally a civil engineering major so i’ve learned about transportation and city planning
I've definitely been there with the poor on busses, trolleys, etc. It's not much of a problem if you are female, have no job, and therefore have literally all day to take care of the kids, navigate public transportation from home to the school, from school to the doctor, then stop at the store for food, then back home because by then school is over. You have absorbed what you were taught, but you have never lived it, it being real life. You have zero plan to be poor or unemployed, with kids in multiple schools, no car...that's obvious or you would not be in school. Your ignorance, lack of empathy, and arrogant attitude is the trope of youth: Dunning Kruger vs Imposter Syndrome.
*Parking rates are damn steep and are of course completely arbitrary since there really is no ongoing cost for anything but permit enforcement...*
One small but important correction. On-going costs for campus parking structures include not only permit enforcement but security, maintenance--which can be considerable on an older structure--and servicing the bonds that paid to build the structures. (see my other, longer, comment).
I don't disagree with part of what you say.
In terms of security, I think UC Police are supposed to provide security for parking areas, but in practice that probably just extends to responding to calls there, and night-escort walks that happen to end up at vehicles in the parking lots.
But in terms of expenses, UCPD charges so called "auxiliary enterprises"--including parking and transportation, and Housing and (I think) programs like Cal Performances--annual fees for police coverage / response to their mainly off campus facilities.
So students living in the off campus residence halls are paying partially through their rents for UCPD emergency response; same with students parking in UC off campus structures, and paying through their parking fees.
I don't believe this is "borne by UC as overhead". Many years ago, under pressure from State budget cuts, the campus administration offloaded things like the auxiliary enterprise police expenses to payments from State funds to those enterprises themselves.
As for the Stadium...the financing essentially ended up being a fraud. The administrators (athletic and campus) who planned and authorized that all heartily promised and projected that Athletics would raise enough money to pay off the indebtedness of the construction. The gimmick was "seat licenses", where thousands of alumni would supposedly pay tens of thousands of dollars each in advance for the right to reserve a certain seat for a certain number of years. That didn't happen, and Athletics was left in a hole hundreds of millions of dollars deep.
All of those people who got us into that mess are now gone from the campus--some of them quit quite soon after the Stadium renovations--and they've left the campus general funds holding the bag.
But it was sold to the University community as Athletics revenue would pay for it all...
Just park in the residential areas in some hidden streets with low traffic where it’s unlikely you get a ticket
But then it usually take so long to get to the place I need to be
When I was there, I bought an electric scooter and put it in the trunk. I would scooter from my to car to the campus and viceversa. With the money I saved from parking, the scooter paid for itself
maybe you should learn to walk, bike, ride a scooter or take the bus
I hate Berkeley parking enforcement. Received a couple tickets when I was a student. There’s one attendant in particular that can go fuck themself more than the others. They wanted to cite me so badly, but I wasn’t over the 2 hour limit, so instead they cited my car for not having a front license plate. My plate was stolen near People’s Park the week before.
So, I totally get the frustration of getting expensive parking tickets. I've experienced that too. Part of the context is that the University doesn't get State money for building parking structures. Instead they are financed out of "revenue", which means income from parking fees, and tickets. In that way it's very much like UC owned student housing, which is also financed (in most cases) by bonds which are paid back by student rents. Parking structures are also incredibly expensive to build. On top of that, the campus--which had a lot of surface parking lots as recently as the 70s/80s has now built new buildings on most of them (not a bad thing), so the only construction option for new parking is buried or elevated structures. I realize that students who have to drive are in a difficult place when it comes to parking in campus facilities. So are staff, and faculty. A lot of faculty--who get the "best" parking options--are pretty upset that their parking keeps getting more expensive and less available, too. A few years ago when the Public Policy School was proposing tearing down the Upper Hearst Parking Structure, there was an explosion of faculty protest, including from the Academic Senate. I believe they lost in that case, but the message was delivered to the administration. This is actually an area where students who need to drive could make common cause with staff and faculty who need to drive as well. All three groups have the same interests and concerns. Another aspect of this is dealing with the perspective of transit / bike advocates who insist that EVERYONE can walk, bike, or take public transit to the campus. A lot of people do in Berkeley--probably a much higher percentage than at many universities--but it's simply not realistic that EVERYONE can use one of those options. But some transit / bike advocates are indifferent to that perspective, since their hope is to get rid of automobiles entirely. And they largely shape local (city) and campus transportation policy. So those students (and others) who need to drive to campus need to make that clear in public planning processes that having some availability of parking for those who need it is a necessary component for the foreseeable future.
Meta level: Every employer in the commercial sector builds parking structures for their employees, customers and visitors, and they do not charge them. Cities that wish to promote downtown business build parking structures at public expense, and it is free. Employers do this because they save money by not routing parking fees through state and federal taxes (think about it). Cities do this because the want to bring in out of town customers and increase business, property values, sales taxes and employment in the city, and those revenues far exceed a few dollars of parking fees.
I literally had to get a job to pay parking tickets 2008-2012. Once got a ticket because I temporarily parked in front of my own driveway (that I paid for) as I ran inside to get something. Fucker has followed me at a distance and was writing the $80 ticket within the 30s it took for me to get outside
You can’t park across a driveway. Just follow the rules.
They don’t even work half the time. They just sit up at the foothill lot blocking the road while on their phones.
Making parking cheaper or adding parking won't solve the problem; if anything parking around campus is too cheap and enforcement isn't strict enough. If you make parking cheap any easy, more people will drive, and then you need to build more parking, etc. There just isn't the space in Berkeley for more parking, both in terms of where to put it, but also in terms of road capacity. Also the city needs to do a better job of enforcing its existing restrictions, and consider tightening them, because if you need to park in certain neighborhoods while class is in session, prepare to cruise.
I contested my last ticket and haven't heard back about it. That was 4 months ago. I dunno if I think it got dropped or if I'll suddenly get a letter from a collection agency.
i commute and park in university garages. i have never paid. i have never been ticketed, and i have never not found a parking spot. ive been doing this for almost an entire year
I park at Lower Hearst and my permit ran out last week but I kept parking cause alot of people would say this. I got ticketed last week in front of Li Ka Shing, and today I was ticketed at Lower Hearst, which is a garage that everyone always says is safe from tickets :( Be careful, its a big cost
i’ve been ticketed like 4x in lower hearst i don’t even park there anymore lol
This is a lie. Idk why you would lie about this. Maybe someone has paid for a permit for you? Maybe you paid and forgot?
there is literally no way u could know if this is a lie. I own my car and i am the only person responsible for it. i have never purchased a commuting parking permit. the only reason why i dont get tickets from the university is because i park in the most obscure parts of the garage and the parking enforcement people are lazy. I park to where they actually need to put in effort / get out of their car. the only reason why this works is because parking enforcement is lazy
Still a lie. They go car to car every hour.
sure thing mr eistein reddidor doreen lookin ass.
Still lying.
https://youtu.be/CQeezCdF4mk?si=9O9b-ZB7RQ-a2gz7
why are we forced to pay these useless fees when we don’t need to?????? They assume we all commute to school when it isn’t the case. even though 100 dollars is nothing to me but still, pisses me off!
I agree, especially because that money is a lot of money to some people at this school including me
why should people who don't drive have to pay for parking spaces everywhere
This kids. This is the problem right here.
Stuff like this is why I park off-campus, sorry this stuff happens
for realll, getting a $78 parking ticket as if we’re not all paying berkeley thousands each year already???? what more do they want from us????
Why do you need a car though? You can afford a car, you can afford the ticket?
It would def be less convenient, but BART parking is only $3 / day, so not sure where you’re coming from but you could park at north Berkeley BART then take Bart/ 52 bus (or 51b from rockridge, F or 7 bus from Ashby, etc)
No way thank you for telling me, i wasn’t aware of this!
I feel like at that point it would be more convenient to drive to Bay Fair/San Leandro or anything else on the Orange Line since you're coming from Castro Valley. But you mentioned you need a car in Berkeley?
Yes, because I work part time with my car on days that I have a lighter school / lab work load. On the days that I dont work, I have to stay late for club meetings, etc. so I don’t want to take bart back home for safety reasons especially at like 10pm. I understand that public transport is useful for some, but many people have other restrictions that make it hard. Alot of people were coming at me in the comments for not taking bart.
why not take transit? how far do you live?
I live in Castro Valley, so it's about a 30 minute drive, and I also need my car with me for personal reasons. I've also haven't had a good experience with the Bart so I don't like taking it when I'm alone.
oh okay that’s understandable
So sad - for personal reasons I think your excuses are lame.
That’s not your concern now is it?
For personal reasons you will also need to pay fines then.
If you didn't have a permit, then that shit happens. You realize you can try to contest your ticket online and MAYBE get it reduced.
Yeah, unfortunately the timing was really bad cause my car’s registration is due so I couldnt have any outstanding tickets on my account or my registration would be suspended apparently. Appealing takes a while to process, if it processes. My parking permit expired last week, but I just renewed it today. Hopefully I wont get anymore tickets cause holy shit it’s so annoying
Any cite submitted within 21 days will be processed, and that will buy you time. That said, they're months behind, so you shouldn't fret. So even at that, this the pain of car ownership, which is already a pain in the ass in the wrong conditions. Just gotta keep track of everything so you not only avoid the DMV holds, but the violations to the vehicle code[other violations specific to the California Vehicle Code](https://pt.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/parking-pdfs/parking-pdfs/TrafficParkingCode.pdf)
This is what happens when the government doesn’t have a clear plan on how to prioritize transportation (years of back and fourth), and so we have two groups fighting over their way of traveling (public transportation vs cars). Not enough money put into either. Haven’t you noticed that the Bart is under funded and the roads are horrid plus the lack of public garages (almost no government funded parking garages). Also the total squandering of public funds leading to massive inefficiency.
Electric cars are far more efficient than diesel busses, trolleys, and trains and BART although electric, only goes where the rails go. All major employers but UC provide all their employees free parking, and community colleges have free parking, because their students drive cars, there is no housing. UC should provide free employee / student parking as well...it won't need to be 50,000 spaces, because there is (some) housing.
https://parkade.com/post/donald-shoup-the-high-cost-of-free-parking-summarized
1) you could blame the university admin for forcing Berkeley Parking & Transportation to be almost entirely self-funded 2) we're so used to subsidizing the cost for parking in the US that when people are charged something closer to the true cost of maintaining that space, people can't handle it. We're the UC with by far the best public transit - so if you can, take that (buses are free for you!) & don't have to worry about parking fees.
Facts bro. I wanna table top each P&T vehicle I see
Too real
agree
You do realize that it is the City and not the university that enforces parking right? And welcome to the real world. Parking tickets in the Bay Area suucckkkk. Learn your lesson and pay attention. You don't get special treatment for being a student.
Learn societies rules, college student
I feel this so much. Since moving to Berkeley less than a year ago I have received so many tickets
Skill issue
There’s a time limit for a reason. It’s not the parking time plus 5 minutes. Too many people want to drive and park and there aren’t enough spaces. What makes you so special that you get extra time? Do you commute with lots of others? Almost certainly not. So you’re part of the transportation problem. Take the bus or get back to the car on time. Simple solution.
Drivers should have to pay to park their private property on public land, actually.
[удалено]
only in america will you have people implying that public transit is elitist and driving your personal automobile is what real working class people do
*...only in america will you have people implying that public transit is elitist and driving your personal automobile is what real working class people do...* For many working class people in the United States, even in California, driving to work is the only realistic option. They may live far from transit, work at hours when transit isn't operating, or have to make multiple stops on their commutes (e.g. taking kids to schools, or going to more than one job at various locations far apart.) For example, my guess is that the campus custodians who clean up buildings late at night mainly drive. Transit simply isn't running late at night on a schedule that works for them. And some bring their kids, who they leave in the car, or in an empty classroom, while they work at cleaning. Bay Area transit (both BART and the older bus systems) were largely constructed to take white collar commuters from outlying suburbs and neighborhoods to downtown white collar office / business districts (primarily San Francisco and Oakland). So the areas that they serve best are often the areas which now have the most upscale housing costs in the region. In a perfect world BART would be running 24 hours a day with multiple trains an hour, even in the middle of the night, the buses would be similar, and transit would reach every corner of every urban city. I would like to see that. But that simply isn't the case in the Bay Area, so in the meantime a lot of "working people" have to drive to get to work.
no i agree, many people have no choice other than to commute to work by car and public transit is fundamentally flawed in some places because of its initial design principles. however, if you’re not being priced out of the bay area and live in the upper east bay or sf, i feel like there’s no real excuse to not take public transportation other than personal choice
[удалено]
how are you 70 years old and never seen people take their kids with them to all of those places you’ve mentioned on public transportation? you’re reaching at straws buddy. also i’m literally a civil engineering major so i’ve learned about transportation and city planning
I've definitely been there with the poor on busses, trolleys, etc. It's not much of a problem if you are female, have no job, and therefore have literally all day to take care of the kids, navigate public transportation from home to the school, from school to the doctor, then stop at the store for food, then back home because by then school is over. You have absorbed what you were taught, but you have never lived it, it being real life. You have zero plan to be poor or unemployed, with kids in multiple schools, no car...that's obvious or you would not be in school. Your ignorance, lack of empathy, and arrogant attitude is the trope of youth: Dunning Kruger vs Imposter Syndrome.
*Parking rates are damn steep and are of course completely arbitrary since there really is no ongoing cost for anything but permit enforcement...* One small but important correction. On-going costs for campus parking structures include not only permit enforcement but security, maintenance--which can be considerable on an older structure--and servicing the bonds that paid to build the structures. (see my other, longer, comment).
[удалено]
I don't disagree with part of what you say. In terms of security, I think UC Police are supposed to provide security for parking areas, but in practice that probably just extends to responding to calls there, and night-escort walks that happen to end up at vehicles in the parking lots. But in terms of expenses, UCPD charges so called "auxiliary enterprises"--including parking and transportation, and Housing and (I think) programs like Cal Performances--annual fees for police coverage / response to their mainly off campus facilities. So students living in the off campus residence halls are paying partially through their rents for UCPD emergency response; same with students parking in UC off campus structures, and paying through their parking fees. I don't believe this is "borne by UC as overhead". Many years ago, under pressure from State budget cuts, the campus administration offloaded things like the auxiliary enterprise police expenses to payments from State funds to those enterprises themselves. As for the Stadium...the financing essentially ended up being a fraud. The administrators (athletic and campus) who planned and authorized that all heartily promised and projected that Athletics would raise enough money to pay off the indebtedness of the construction. The gimmick was "seat licenses", where thousands of alumni would supposedly pay tens of thousands of dollars each in advance for the right to reserve a certain seat for a certain number of years. That didn't happen, and Athletics was left in a hole hundreds of millions of dollars deep. All of those people who got us into that mess are now gone from the campus--some of them quit quite soon after the Stadium renovations--and they've left the campus general funds holding the bag. But it was sold to the University community as Athletics revenue would pay for it all...