Council: Raise Maximum Meter Rates to $4, Do Citywide Parking Study

Hey, I know where they can save more money: defund marijuana investigations. All they’re doing is conducting illegal home invasions of disabled veterans, anyway.

And i assume that now we’ll see a collapse of downtown retail. Motherhood and everything else, too.

•••

btw, what happened with McGinn’s Parking Rate proposal? On Cctober 7 Publicola said “Mayor Mike McGinn’s proposed new parking rates—between $1.25 in some neighborhoods and $4 downtown…”

When he did go to $5? So the Council could look tough and say “Ok to $4hr?”

I saw no mention of stories on that maneuvering.

Where’d you find the old coin-op meters for your photo? So few of them around anymore. Hate to imagine loading $4.00 of nickels, dimes, and quarters to get just one hour of parking.

“The council will also fund an annual citywide study of parking occupancy rates throughout the city to find out what the best rate is for each neighborhood (the rate that keeps occupancy at about 85 percent). That could prompt the council to raise the ceiling in the future, if it turns out that $4.00 an hour isn’t enough to keep spaces free downtown, council transportation chair Tom Rasmussen said.”

That could also decrease rates, specifically in neighborhood businesses districts during early-mid morning hours.

Why not call this a bailout for parking lot owners? People will be better off at lots now, not withstanding the constant misinformation provided by ECB, as many of the lots charge less than $4 an hour when you get to 2-3 hours. Don’t believe me? Check Republics online information and the Pacific Place Garage’s rates. The latter is $7 for 2 hours and you can get it reduced by buying something there. Btw, SF has numerous public garages and grade separated rail so please don’t compare Seattle to them.

Also, well off, busy people will now be able to find street parking and not have to pay the high 1/2-hour rates they now do for the convenience.

It would be a little better if they dedicated the revenue to retaining bus service for now and expanding it when (if) Metro gets its revenue back.

I prefer shopping in the CBD, but now Northgate and Alderwood are looking much more appealing.

Seattle’s core is already hurting with a 20% vacancy rate.

David Sucher: When he did go to $5? So the Council could look tough and say “Ok to $4hr?”

This was precisely my question when I first got word of this, and the answer was that McGinn had allegedly proposed a ceiling of $5/hour, never mind that for all the reports I’d read of the mayor’s proposal prior to the council’s response, not once did I read the $5 figure.

What’s disconcerting to me is how, when Mike McGinn proposed this parking rates increase, we heard all this anguish about “war on cars” and killing downtown. But now that the city council is essentially adopting just what he asked for, suddenly all the fearmongering quiets down.

Aside from the possibility that Richard Conlin has perfected some eerie Jedi mind control on the entire city populace, can anyone seriously explain to me, what’s up with this?

Yup.
The facts are a bit odd.
I am not personally troubled by the substance of the parking rate increase. But what happened? In fact if you go back to earlier stories in Publicola I believe that McGinn was proposing $3.50/ hr in downtown.

ECB, Josh, please enlighten us.

The “war on cars” is a canard, it’s a sham, it’s a fraud, all pushed by the DSA and their allies in journalism and networked blog commenters like MrBaker, tpn and Sandman (the former being someone who was ostensibly anti-tunnel on his blog and changed his stance the week the DSA began its pro-tunnel assault on McGinn, post-primary). Seattle, as you may remember, was a city that overwhelmingly shot down Roads and Transit for being too car-oriented. The “war on cars” is not a war, it’s a preference.

Lacking true consensus, the DSA and their buddies are all rallying around this cute little idea of this all-out assault on cars solely to play “sour grapes” with the proper functioning of government and stamp their feet because their guy didn’t win. They’ve swamped places like PubliCola and Crosscut with typical blogswarm tactics (note how MrBaker, tpn and Sandman, among others, will comment within minutes of each other and “like” each other’s staggeringly similar comments almost every time) so we’re led to believe, if we read blogs, that the city is up in arms over this war on cars. Combine that with stacking council meetings and public comment and you get what sounds like a losing battle for true progressives in a majorly progressive city.

I think a protest of this crowding out of the Seattle electorate from making sensible and green choices for our future is called for before this “war on cars” BS throws more new lane miles and concrete than any modern green city should have.

We need an Enviro-Revolution.

“But now that the city council is essentially adopting just what [McGinn] asked for, suddenly all the fearmongering quiets down.”

That’s because McGinn has so far been a lousy advocate for his agenda, and people don’t separate the message from the messenger.

Raising parking rates is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and it won’t, in fact, have any negative impact on downtown businesses or anywhere else.

However, when it’s proposed by a single-minded anti-car activist who makes a big, self-righteous show about riding his bike everywhere and hasn’t bothered to conceal his disdain for people who use motors to get where they need to go, the proposal, reasonable as it may be, becomes an critical battle in a war on cars.

I think that if you’re worrying about who “likes” website comments it’s time for a new hobby.

Anti-car activists pushed the “war on cars” meme at the Washington Bus event when they asked candidates to take the pledge to support their little war – now they get to own it.

Lectures to adults from a smug, pompous high-school snot don’t do much for any cause, green or otherwise.

So in fact the council doesn’t need the mayor to tell it how to do its work? All that whining about the mayor was just bs.

Bottom line is mcginn is getting most of what he proposed, and that’s a win for him. Maybe having a clear position and not backing down from it immediately and without any quid pro quo is like, um, duh, I dunno, how you negotiate or use your power ‘n’ stuff? The anti mcginnites likely will chime in and whine about how he didn’t go call conlin, they whine like a mopey jilted lover, he doesn’t call, boo hoo, suggesting that had mcginn ONLY told them this or called them in private etc. etc. they would have given him MORE of what he wants, right? That’s the complaint. What malarkey. They’re saying they’re incapable of judging merits of the budget and making their own decisions, they need all kinds of speciall communications with special rites and customs or else mcginn is way out of the mainstream blah blah blah but here he is getting most of what he proposed. Good job mcginn.

Wait, you “prefer shopping” in the CBD and you point out that you could park in a garage for less than $4/hour, but you want to drive to Alderwood now? I don’t get it. Unless you live in Lake City. If you want to slog through traffic to drive up to Alderwood and get free parking and slog back, that seems more like an illogical choice to me. But, like I say, I don’t know where you live. I think for most of the city, heading into the CBD is still a pretty easy option.

From what I gathered, reading between the lines, was McGinn had proposed a “ceiling” of $5, but only raising actual rates to $4. The ceiling would mean they could later raise rates as far as $5 without revisiting legislation. I believe that council and mayor were both aiming for the same place for the actual increase. McGinn just wanted to avoid having to go through council again if a further increase was needed.

seandr: However, when it’s proposed by a single-minded anti-car activist who makes a big, self-righteous show about riding his bike everywhere and hasn’t bothered to conceal his disdain for people who use motors to get where they need to go, the proposal, reasonable as it may be, becomes an critical battle in a war on cars.

Sean, I’ll allow that, on the continuum of transit/environmental activism, Mike McGinn wouldn’t necessarily be plopped in the moderate end. But really, show me any statements he has made that indicate he’s an “anti-car activist” or has “disdain for people who use motors.”

This “war on cars” rhetoric that McGinn is being accused of reminds me a lot of the recent Andrew Sullivan Atlantic post about how the conservative punditocracy took a quote by Barack Obama out of context and tried to make it seem like the president had dismissed the ideal of American exceptionalism.