darin
06-28-2017, 12:46 AM
More evidence those who run the city of seattle are incompetent and malicious and borderline fascist. That city needs a revolution.
http://mynorthwest.com/675054/rantz-sdots-insulting-money-grab-lacks-creativity/
Last week, I told you about their decision to replace free parking with paid (http://mynorthwest.com/668314/rantz-seattle-to-profit-off-of-parking-nightmare-theyre-creating/) parking on a small side street in South Lake Union. Their reasoning, presented at the time, made little sense. They argued that there was so much demand, the only way they could truly and fairly accommodate people, is to charge you for the spots; it creates “reliable, convenient parking.” That way, the implication is, there would be more cars cycling in and out of the spots, making it a bit easier for folks driving to the area to eat at three restaurants or two local coffee shops near the spots.
Of course, there was already plenty of turnover for different drivers. I know this because I live nearby and saw it frequently.
But let’s just go with SDOT’s reasoning for the sake of pretending they’re being honest. Ah, we can’t go with their reasoning. SDOT lied. This wasn’t about opening up spots for different drivers.
The new paid parking has been installed (they’re very quick to tackle projects that hurt drivers) and it permit drivers to leave their cars in the spots for 10 hours.
Let me get this straight: the way to provide reliable and convenient parking on a street you tell us the demand is so high you need to install paid spots to limit the amount of time people can camp out in a spot … is to allow for 10-hour long occupancy where rates expire at 6pm? What a crock.
http://mynorthwest.com/675054/rantz-sdots-insulting-money-grab-lacks-creativity/
Last week, I told you about their decision to replace free parking with paid (http://mynorthwest.com/668314/rantz-seattle-to-profit-off-of-parking-nightmare-theyre-creating/) parking on a small side street in South Lake Union. Their reasoning, presented at the time, made little sense. They argued that there was so much demand, the only way they could truly and fairly accommodate people, is to charge you for the spots; it creates “reliable, convenient parking.” That way, the implication is, there would be more cars cycling in and out of the spots, making it a bit easier for folks driving to the area to eat at three restaurants or two local coffee shops near the spots.
Of course, there was already plenty of turnover for different drivers. I know this because I live nearby and saw it frequently.
But let’s just go with SDOT’s reasoning for the sake of pretending they’re being honest. Ah, we can’t go with their reasoning. SDOT lied. This wasn’t about opening up spots for different drivers.
The new paid parking has been installed (they’re very quick to tackle projects that hurt drivers) and it permit drivers to leave their cars in the spots for 10 hours.
Let me get this straight: the way to provide reliable and convenient parking on a street you tell us the demand is so high you need to install paid spots to limit the amount of time people can camp out in a spot … is to allow for 10-hour long occupancy where rates expire at 6pm? What a crock.