1. In case you missed it, late yesterday afternoon Erica published a troubling story—confirmed by Mayor Mike McGinn’s office—about McGinn adviser Chris Bushnell: In his work as a chief economist at King County and at his polling firm Constituent Dynamics, Bushnell falsely claimed he had a PhD. Bushnell went as far as to print the false information on his business card.
Weird stuff.
2. Just one day after she “secured a comittment” (she says) from her adversary, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, to fast track $30 billion in repaid loans from bailed out Wall Street banks to community banks, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) is continuing to push her populist putsch.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Today, Cantwell is holding a press conference in the Capitol to promote a bill she’s proposed to close loopholes that allow “dark market derivatives trading.” More specifically, she wants to lower the standard of proof for government regulators to prove that investment companies are cheating the market.
Joining Sen. Cantwell at her proleteriat press conference? The President of the National Farmers Union and the President of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America.
3. Surprising number on the latest Survey USA poll: McGinn’s approval rating is lowest among younger voters. 41 percent of 18-to 34-year-olds disapprove of the job he’s doing (34 percent approve and 25 percent are unsure.) The age group that likes him best is 35-to-54-year-olds at 44 percent.
His highest approval rating comes from Liberals—46 percent approve.
Overall, the poll says he’s at 40 percent approve, 34 percent disapprove, and 27 percent aren’t sure. (Although, that adds up to 101 percent, so take all polls for what they’re worth.)
4. And now, some first person Morning Fizz from our new BarNerd, David Meinert:
Seattle City Council Member Sally Clark has an interesting idea—close down a portion of E. Pike Street Thursday through Saturday nights making it pedestrian only. It’s similar to what Austin does on on its famous 6th Avenue (and recently what New York City does on a stretch of Times Square.)
The concept isn’t just about the war on cars, it’s about creating a more social environment, giving people more space to mingle safely, and appreciate their city. It hasn’t been totally vetted yet, but it seems like an idea that deserves discussion.
In fact, I like it, and I think it could be expanded to other parts of the City. I could definitely see Ballard Ave. being pedestrian on certain nights between NW Lone PL, about where Conor Byrne’s is, and up to NW Market, just past the Sunset. There are several bars and live music venues in between, including Hattie’s Hat, King’s Hardware, and The Tractor. The idea is also possible along 1st Ave in Pioneer Square between Yesler and S. King St, home to the new J&M Cafe, The Central and The New Orleans.
I floated this idea by then-candidate Mike McGinn back in October, and he seemed to like it, saying he’s proposed something similar in the past. (And he got PubliCola’s endorsement at the time for talking about woonerfs—a Dutch word for spots like Pike Place Market where pedestrians and bicyclists share the street with motorists.)
Another one for the To Do list, Mayor McGinn.
Tweet
Re #4, closing such streets for such events could indeed be a great idea but please consider the impacts it has on public transit. Pike St. and First Ave. have bus routes that would be disrupted. If its gotta be a bus street that’s closed, please make sure there’s a viable alternative route for the bus to take, and that bus riders are notified ahead of time about the change.
Why is McGinn’s approval being polled after a single month? How can people have already formed a strong opinion about him? Who paid for the poll for that matter?
Too bad no one reported on Bushnell’s lies and fraud before the vote.
“Slightly troubling”? “Weird stuff”? Is it me, or is that minimizing the story that someone may have habitually lied to get into government, had been doing so for a long time, and was convicted of felony bank fraud to boot? I would venture to tell it like it is: “deeply troubling”. It find it to be “wierd stuff” that a bank fraud conviction did not get the lede and was buried in the story. What kind of bank fraud? Kiting checks? Embezzlement? Let’s drag that skeleton out kicking and screaming, since we are talking about someone that is supposed to be in a position of public trust.
TPN,
Good call. I’ll split the difference between “slightly” and “deeply” and just go with “troubling.”
But I’ll stick with “weird stuff.”
Am I the only one with a huge crush on Timothy Geithner (despite his lack of taking appropriate action on AIG and derivatives)?
Inside some baseball….probably….I hope so.
Speaking of weird, must be really weird for Beth Goldberg to now have to work with Bushnell when they clearly had such strong policy differences regarding the source of King County’s budget deficit – and the fact that Bushnell took on Sims so publically (this is after Bushnell left the County.)
@Andrew
-
Lest we forget, Obama had the same poll less than a week into office (and came away with very high approval numbers). There is room already to form an opinion of the mayor, based on his hiring decisions, some of his first acts (park and ride lots near light rail, a ballot measure for the sea wall, beginning the process of laying off 200 people, stopping the process of laying off 200 people, Bushnell, etc.).
-
Re: #4 – I would wonder what all of the parameters would be of such a move. Meinert also floats the idea of closing E Pike between Broadway and 12th, which on the one hands sounds like a good idea (and wouldn’t affect transit), but would this mean the bars and restaurants would be able to go out to the street with outdoor seating and drinking (which would be good), or would it just be closed to vehicle traffic?
Michael – outdoor seating for bars and restaurants hasn’t been discussed yet. Definitely an idea to through into the hamper. Probably more likely to be food than alcohol, but some seating in the street would be great
re: item 3
You guys are really, really innumerate, aren’t you? Why would you “warn” us that the approve/disapprove/don’t know values sum to 101% … have you never heard of “rounding”?
Simply stated, 40+34+27 could easily be, say, 39.8+33.6+26.6. Which add up to 100.0. You were supposed to have learned this sort of stuff in elementary school.
More important, but ignored in your report, is the 4.5% margin of error in this 500-person survey.
How many parking spots would be eliminated in Ballard for the closure of Ballard Ave.? Go check out the area on a Saturday night. I think the owners of bars and restaurants would have an issue with the idea.
Austin closes E. 6th. because it has to for crowd control. They have six city blocks of bars and music joints that became so full of people spilling out in the street, that the city had no choice but to close it off to cars. One other problem with Austin’s E. 6th, its not real family friendly. Just don’t think of Austin as the ultimate example.
@Meinert
). This also raises the question – what about the north-south streets? On the one hand, as fizzy points out for Ballard, on Cap Hill there is definitely the parking issue. On the other hand, those N-S streets also house various bars/restaurants (that fish and chips place, Purr, Odd Fellowes) that may also do well with a proposal as such. Again, I’m just thinking out loud. As Christi S. would point out, I have no filter between my brain and mouth, which tends to also be the case between brain and fingers 
.
-
I think on it, and with no cars on the street, Quinn’s, for instance, should totally be able to seat out to the curb, and rope it off (and in my opinion, allow drink, but I’m a lush
-
All around a great idea, though. Fizzy brings up a point, but that’s the joy of ideas – you have to start somewhere, and then fill in the gaps as you go along.
if you close the steets like that to enhance walkability and vibrancy yes yes yes !!! I will drive over there to hang out more!
BTW this is the first time anyone’s admitted there is in fact a war on cars. Good! Honesty is always the best policy.
So when you create this vibrant walkable zones, are you going to prohibit people from driving in to access them, or are they only for people who live there, who bike there, and like to drink and party at night and then go home 5 miles away by bike? Because there is no fast bus service anywhere at night.
Oh, and obviously this will draw in suburbanites too, they’d love it if there was a bit more action in different parts of the city!
good idea.
Josh- You said that you were going to modify the website to provide # for comments. When will that happen?
transit voter: good call, but do not be concerned about Pike Street east of Bellevue Avenue as Route 11 was shifted to Pine Street several years ago. The Pioneer Square concept could be applied to east-west South Main and Washington streets instead of 1st Avenue South that carries transit.
Curious SE,
Haven’t forgotten. It’s still on the (long) list of fixes.
Developer is hard at work as we speak, cleaning things up.
Closing the streets to pedestrians in the evenings on Pike st. is a great idea. Not only Austin, but Memphis and New Orleans also have streets like this. It can truly enliven the nightlife. A few points about it though:
- At max you would be removing 60 parking spots, with literally thousands within walking distance. The idea that it would limit driving is absurd. (although if people are driving then hopefully they aren’t driving anyway).
- You would really need to make drinking on the street legal. This really shouldn’t be all that hard. You would still have to show idea to enter a bar and get a drink but if you asked for it “to go” then they put it in a disposable cup, you bring it outside, its all good. Even Portland allows this in portions of their Saturday Market.
In one month as mayor — his approval numbers stink!!!! He is losing support faster and faster. Its called a honeymoon for a reason. Remember he won by the skin of his teeth and has lost nearly 25% of the people who voted for him in only one month. He should be at least in the 60% range if he had a normal honeymoon. If he doesn’t get his act together, he might be recalled.
Do you think Patty Murray or other Democrats want to be seen any where near him? Wait to the first Republican trying to tie him around the necks of D’s. Doing a hell of a job Bushnell….
Inside Baseball: No, you aren’t.
Since he’s closing streets, how about Westlake like it was when they opened it.
I think closing the streets for bars is a good idea, but let’s make sure that we’re not just focusing on only hipster-related activites…we have farmers’ markets, and those are great. Let’s try to encourage more family family friendly stuff like that as well!
@pl Of course Austin’s Streets o’ Amazingness aren’t “family friendly” – that’s not what “nightlife” IS.
sarah68:
Closing down Pike St is a great idea. Go Sally!
While you are at it how about closing down Pike Place Market for pedestrians, bicyclists and delivery trucks only?
go cups!
then….bars open all night!
this stuff isn’t easy as it requires state liquor monopoly prudery control nanny board approval….good luck with that.
Sorry, David, but as a CapHill resident, I can in no way support this. I’ve lived and had to park on the streets here for 15+ years, and I’ve witnessed the pressure on available, free parking increase steadily with time. And that’s not even taking into account Thurs-Sat nights, when it becomes a parking nightmare around here. More and more parking restriction signs go up all the time, and I mourn every single, last spot lost to this trend. Eliminating parking for a two-block stretch will only serve to increase the radius of parking congestion on weekends. Result: quality of life for CapHill denizens will decrease as a) the need to get home from driving errands before early evening increases, making our schedules even more beholden to the influx of partiers, and b) these visitors find even more inane spots to illegally park (and believe me, they’re already pretty good at this), blocking even more alleys, driveways, bus stops, handicapped spots, etc. Hearing the comments of friends who’ve visited me here on weekend nights over the years, I can tell you trying to find a spot is already an issue with these folks, and daresay it might lead more of them to abandon the idea of coming here to spend their money altogether.
In principle, I do like the idea of a pedestrian-only mini-mall for the weekends. But without balancing the decreased parking opportunities with any or a combination of increased lots/garages, public transportation, or residential-friendly parking restrictions (similar to how, in the residential neighborhoods surrounding LA’s club-heavy Hollywood strip, vehicles parked on the street at night must display a residential sticker or the car gets towed; although again, this doesn’t help the folks trying to drive in to patronize the bars), I can only come down squarely against the idea. Sally Clark will be hearing from me.
Younger voters began abandoning Obama as soon as he started to fight to accomplish what they previously supported him for. They thought he’d just walk into the White House, wave a magic wand and Congress would pass healthcare. They seem to not have the patience necessary to stick around and get the job done.
In McGinn’s case it’s probably a good thing that young voters have no attention span, because the less of McGinn’s fuzzy agenda gets accomplished, the better off Seattle is in the long run.
inside some baseball and sarah68: for me, his really terrible decisions and nasty influence on Obama since he was appointed totally give him that “bad boy” thing that works so well for me!
I love the idea of closing down some more streets for more farmers markets and such. This seems to work great in Ballard. Love to go to Senor Moose for breakfast and then walk over to shop at the market.
As to the parking issue, I agree it might need to be addressed. But there wouldn’t be many spaces lost in those two blocks. And the side streets would stay open for parking and access to condo parking lots etc.
And like I said, this idea is in it infant stage, it would need a lot more input from the community. Don’t freak, just give some input. But let’s consider the success this type of idea has had in other cities and consider it here.
How about doing this permanently on 3rd Ave. Create a pedestrian mall with perhaps a streetcar and maybe some buses on much smaller lanes. Allow for street vendors and performances and make it like a long urban park.
Oh and the street in front of the market, but then that fight goes back decades.
I like the idea of creating more free flowing spaces downtown where people can more easily mingle and socialize. Ideally though we would be able to drink in these spaces.
New York has closed several stretches of roadways beyond Times Square, for various reasons–many look like what we are going to get on Bell Street, where there is enhanced ped space with traffic lanes remaining. In midtown, much of the rationale had to do with pedestrian safety. Those areas had some of the highest numbers pedestrian/vehicle accidents in the city. No one can argue that Pike doesn’t get packed on weekends with people enjoying the Hill’s parks, coffee shops, restaurants and bars. This doesn’t need to be an all or nothing cloisure. I live on the hill and can find parking in Pike/Pine when I need to–if Robin wants a 3-car garage, she picked the wrong neighborhood–it was tough to park up here 15 years ago too.
Giffy, Agreed. Although, 3rd is a sad stretch–it might work if there was anything on that avenue that would add street life other than Benaroya Hall. I think there are lots of other opportunities in places where you will get more bang for your buck.
Joe,
That is certainly true. I think something like this might help to create such a culture. Plus I think people are already accustomed to Third being bus only for part of the day that it might be an easier sell.
Broadway would probably be near the top of my list with the new street car.
ILG, first (minor point) I’m a he, second, where did I say I want a 3-car garage? We can debate this w/o resorting to strawmen.
Parking issues aside, I love living on the Hill, in part because of the vibrant nightlife within walking distance, but also because of the great diversity and other of the local businesses. But City Hall has been steadily encroaching on available on-street parking over the years I’ve been here, and I sincerely believe cutting further on available parking on already-congested weekends will negatively impact the quality of life for much of the neighborhood. You may not concur, but my concerns are hardly unreasonable.
Robin – maybe the solution is to stop that encroachment on other street parking, making some load only zones and 3 minute parking zones opened up as free parking when the street closures happen. And then do more zones parking in the neighborhoods for residents.
I think there are solutions. No reason to kill a great idea over the loss of just a few parking spaces
David, well, again, on paper I like the idea (I remember how great if felt as a pedestrian to “own” Pike St. on the night of Obama’s election), so I’m quite open to working on solutions that would mitigate an already-growing parking-congestion problem. I’ve honestly wondered over the years if the steady erosion of available street parking was just a means to collect more violation fines (I’ve got a pretty clean record when it comes to these, although I’ve had my lapses; also, back when I lived on a section of Bellevue Ave. where a parking zone for residents was not assigned, I’d spend literally 20 or more minutes circling around some evenings, trying to find unzoned, unrestricted parking.) One of the things that doesn’t make sense to me is why prohibitions on parking within 30 feet of non-busy intersections seems so much more prevalent here than in other neighborhoods where single-family housing is the rule. Ditto double-sided parking on narrower streets. There seems to be a distinct bias w/r/t these issues. Also, how much would it cost the city to slap some red paint on curbs featuring the 30-foot rule and fire hydrants so we don’t have to guess if we’re gonna find a ticket on our windshield in the morning? There’s also the loss of spots due to efforts to extend curb ramps for wheelchairs, although these extensions of course are on balance good, as they improve safety and accessibility. Yes, I’ve had a lot of time circling around in my car over 15 years to consider these things.
=0 )
I know I should take public transport and rely less on driving, CapHill’s gonna have a transit tunnel sometime before the 2020′s, yadda-yadda, but the fact is right now Seattle’s infrastructure doesn’t induce becoming less car reliant. And I say this as someone who would sell his car in a heartbeat if he found himself living in NYC. To some my comments may seem petty, but I really think it’s a neighborhood-quality issue when you have to dread either driving anywhere at night because all available spots are gone after 8:00, or working a little late on a Friday because you know when you get home past 6:00, you’ll be greeted by a lack of spots and an entire fleet of fellow rovers inching up one block and down the next. And the visitors that the nightspots rely on for weekend receipts can’t find this any fun, either, which is why so many resort to spots where you just know they’re not gonna find their cars still at when they try to go home a few hours later.
/mini-rant
Time to get lathered up about loud commercials (heh).
Well Robin, you won’t get much sympathy from me. I don’t believe there should be such a thing as “free on-street parking” any time of day or night. Every on-street spot should be metered or require a permit priced at market-clearing rates.
While this may be a bit radical to do city-wide all at once, I think Capitol Hill and First Hill are great places to start.
If you want guaranteed parking go rent an off-street space somewhere.
Oh no!!! You’re not getting sympathy from Chris Stefan!!! That is the worst fate ever!!!! (calm down, just having some fun).
-
Mr. Stefan’s ideal is a bit radical, even for FH and CH, but that’s just my opinion.
-
However, back onto the big point here, Meinert – is Sally C. going to start drafting some sort of legislation, or is she soliciting input? It is an interesting idea, and one that very well may work in certain areas. Hell, we manage to find parking just fine during the Capitol Hill Block Party, I’m sure we can do the same with a few blocks cordoned off on the weekends.
Chris: Innerstin’ proposal. You should run for City Council on that platform.
;0 )
All seriousness aside, your idea is all stick and no carrot, always a winner with the voters. I’d venture you’d wind up with plummeting rental values in those neighborhoods, which wouldn’t bode well for local merchants, or crime rates, for that matter.
…
Sadly, we had a nice carrot in the works with the monorail extension. I voted for that thing however many times it took. And now look — where’s my friggin’ CapHill monorail? Yeah, there’s that — when it comes to addressing mass transit, this city/county/whatever-municipality is as feckless as a Democratic supermajority in the Senate.
…
And light rail? Still in the works, and I’ve been reading about that since I first got here from Denver in the early ’90s. And ya know what? Recently I went back to Denver, and found they got a freakin’ awesome light-rail system built and operating in the time it’s taken us here to agree on where to put the darn thing and kill off a few extended-monorail plans while we were at it. It’s sad, I tells ya.
Robin,
I understand your concern but the fact is, there is actually abundant parking in the Pike/Pine and Capitol Hill areas. A study by SDOT a few years back found that many off-street parking lots or garages were maxing out at 50% utilization (http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/pdf/cnps.pdf)
So what I think you are really saying is that you are upset about the subsidized street parking which has historically been given to parkers for either free or cheap. Unfortunately this is a terrible system. It means that demand is way larger than the inevitably limited supply, forcing drivers like yourself to get upset when you can’t find a spot and adding more traffic to the streets from people circling around for parking. The truth is, making parking work means increasing the price so that demand and supply are equal again (also known as market-rate parking). Another benefit of this system is that any proceeds (and there would be ALOT) could go into improved transit, pedestrian, and cycling infrastructure.
Also, you’re LA example is terrible. LA just recently announced that they will be selling many of their public garages off to private firms. This is because they need to pay off massive debts from these garages and also, because they know it means prices will sky-rocket and it is politically easier to have a private firm do that increase.
http://www.planetizen.com/node/42735
I think this is a great idea to close up the streets. Discourages drunk driving, since parking would be shortened, encourages other transportation options, and finally starts putting Seattle in the right direction to catching Seattle up to much of the world as far as nightlife goes. It is one thing seattle lacks, is fluent nightlife. Great for the local economy, and promotes positive progress.
Cantwell is so hot.
Oh and I quickly want to respond to the assertion that somehow increased parking fees would lead to,
“plummeting rental values in those neighborhoods, which wouldn’t bode well for local merchants, or crime rates, for that matter.”
The benefits of market-rate parking have been shown time and again to not only maintain commercial district business but enhance them in terms of economic prosperity, safety, and visitor attraction.
Also, right now I can imagine that one thing keeping rental values DOWN on Capitol Hill is the fact that parking sucks in most of those old apartment buildings and there is absolutely nothing that the property owner can do about it. If you implemented market rate parking then living in a parking-less building would be great because you could find parking on the block EVERY TIME. Guaranteed rental prices would go up.
Check out this interview with Dr. Donald Shoup for more on the awesomeness of market-rate parking:
http://www.streetfilms.org/dr-shoup-parking-guru/
A` parking expert should be referred to as Doctor – what has this world come to?
Interesting that he would have Power Broker behind him – after all Moses is more responsible for the horrible traffic in Manhattan than anybody else.
How the magical 15% would always be available is not explained and the transit situation there in Gotham can’t be compared with anywhere else – now the Pasadena example is more interesting and it has been established that things like parking and tolling will be supported if the revenue goes to local projects.
Without transit it would seem that these kinds of efforts will make harder for non-locals to take advantage but perhaps that’s the direction we’re heading in.
here’s a paper I was referring to vis a vis local money going to projects >>>> http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/PoliticalCalculus.pdf
low and behold it is co authored by Shoup but he doesn’t call himself doctor on the front page.
anyway interesting read on tolling and how to get support for fees etc.
oops lo not low
@Josh: Thank you for engaging me with some detail and in good faith (truthfully, I wouldn’t know what the heck to do with a 3-car garage, except maybe use 2/3 of it as a hobby studio or somesuch).
…
First, I think Dr. Shoup’s ideas about re-investing meter revenues into the neighborhoods from where they’re generated is *awesome*, and – not to toot my own horn – in line with what I was kind of thinking. As in, why not run CapHill meters till midnight on the weekends and reinvest the proceeds locally. FSM knows Broadway could use that kind of investment. I like how this guy thinks.
…
But I do have some differences in what you seem to be proposing or on how you seem to be reading my take on things. For instance, my citing LA wasn’t about their garages, but about parking zoning in residential areas surrounding the Hollywood strip.
…
Also, Shoup seems to be talking about pricing for visitors to neighborhoods. Citizen Stefan seems to be talking about also charging residents for all on-street parking privileges. My argument that the latter could depress housing rates is based on my impression that due to CapHill’s proximity to the downtown business district and immediate business corridors, rates here are actually higher than areas featuring a greater percentage of SFH. Imposing mandatory residential parking fees on top of that could induce CapHill’s many students and low-income earners to flee to a part of the city without such fees rather than convince them to part with their cars. Hence, my thinking that vacancy rates would skyrocket, and values go down.
…
In the end, I would support running the meters later on weekends (especially if fees were locally reinvested) and restricting non-resident parking on residential streets on weekend nights if we could be assured it would not affect the receipts of local nightspots. Believe me, I understand that the influx of patrons on Thurs-Sun goes a long way to underwriting those businesses in being able to operate Sun-Weds (and pay employees on those nights). But given our lackluster public transportation system, I’m not sure how we’d balance providing the allure of a Pike St. mini-pedestrian mall and better-maintained streets, the need for locals to have access to on-street parking within a reasonable distance of their residences, and the ability for non-locals to drive in and have easy access to weekend parking. Is this where the out-of-neighborhood visitors find themselves encouraged to increase utilization of available pay-for-park lots and garages?
…
Thoughs? Corrections?
@morning fizzy: I see we’re thinking along the same lines.
A mass of drunks on the street at midnight!!! And still drinking. God, what a thrill.
Are most of you all bar owners? I think so.
If the 15% vacancy rate is to be maintain the meters would be changing rates at all times and could go to $5 – $10 – per hour which would cause many to keep driving perhaps even to another meter area. Some people would give up and drive to another neighborhood. It would make it very hard for people to visit friends in these market rate parking areas.
Would there be subsidies for low-income gas guzzle drivers?
What about disable drivers?
Will we allow parking garages to be added in these areas?
Not sure if anyone is actually on this thread still but I’ll respond anyway.
@Robin: First and foremost I do not agree that currently public transit to and from Capitol Hill is inaccessible. I have lived here going on three years without access to a vehicle and I have had little trouble getting to my destinations. Yes, rail and streetcar will improve that but I do not think it is a valid to say our transit here is not good enough yet.
Also, market rate parking is market rate parking, on commercial strips or not. If there is too much demand for on-street parking, and not enough spaces then prices need to rise. This is a major problem in the neighborhood West of Broadway. The city will not impose a RPZ (residential parking zone) because the prices for those are set at about $15 a year and up to 4 or 5 per household. Thus, demand would still be far more than supply so it would be useless. Fees need to rise so that the demand shrinks to a reasonable amount. If you jack it up so everyone leaves and vacancy rates go up, well obviously then the price is too high because demand is too low.
The low-income/poor people issue comes up a lot, but I believe it is a straw man. If you work in any major employment center (downtown, capitol hill, fremont, bellevue) chances are you have to pay for parking. Already at about $2/hour this is far more than the bus. This also doesn’t include the other costs such as gas, insurance, etc. So if you are a low-income worker, then already the cost effective choice is public transit (and metro does offer low-income programs as well). I have been confirmed in this situation by employees of Capitol Hill Housing. When they build low-income housing they don’t even consider parking and usually only include some because it boosts their chances for a loan.
Yes, increasing meter times to midnight is a good idea…if utilization rates are too high at that time, if not then no need. Instead it would probably mean increasing paid parking and increasing the price during peak times. The goal, as Dr. Shoup points out is to get to about 80-85% utilization.
@morning fizzy: Yes, some people would drive to other neighborhoods, but if everyone was doing that then you have set the price too high! Again, the point is to MAINTAIN 80-85% utilization. I highly doubt this would mean increases of $3-7. At this point, likely under $2.
You also say, “it would make it hard to visit friends in market parking areas”. Absolutely not, in fact, the whole point is to make it easier! Right now there are parts of Capitol Hill where it takes you upwards of 20min to find a parking spot. Many people avoid Capitol Hill because parking is such a hassle. By implementing market-rate parking you alleviate the parking hassles. This is great for business because then people with cars dread coming up to shop at your store.
In terms of residential areas, changes would be minimal. Some parts of Capitol Hill and streets near major commercial areas would need to be pay areas, but most SFH don’t have enough demand to warrant any more price.
On low-income drivers, see above.
On disabled drivers, I would not propose any changes or fees for disabled parking. If demand is too high, then convert more regular spots to disabled spots.
For parking garages: One of the benefits of implementing market-rate parking is that you would reduce the amount of excess off-street parking and hopefully minimize the amount of new parking that developers build, especially if you did it in tandem with unbundling.
In the major urban centers, developers build tons and tons of parking in their garages. The reason is, if they can guarantee you a parking spot in your building, then they can charge you a premium on your home because they know how frustrating finding a spot on the street is. If you implemented market rate parking and then forced developers to sell their spaces separate from the units (unbundling) then the price of on-street and off-street parking spaces would have to be relatively equivalent (off-street would still be a little more because it is secure). Since building a parking garage is very expensive developers would want to make sure that they only built spaces that would be used.
To reiterate this point, market-rate means public and private parking would be relatively equivalent. This does not mean that on-street parking would shoot up to the price of pay lots, but rather that pay lots would come way down because currently they are charging a premium for convenience. This would make pay lots far less lucrative. Ultimately by implementing market-rate parking we could better manage and more efficiently use our parking, which although some is necessary, does take up valuable space for people.
Yikes, that was pretty long. And I am sorry about the formatting, the publicola comment threads are terrible at that.
Market rate sounds a little too much like supply side economics.
Currently the meter rate is $2.50 per hour. To get the meter spots down to 85% use clearly the rate will need to go up significantly. People will park in nearby residential areas and I don’t just count SF but also apartment areas. Already tight parking will only become worse and that makes it harder for people to have visitors over.
Disabled parking is not just a spot but the ability to park for free for several hours. Many places are dominated by disabled parkers now.
Raising parking costs will make it better for parking lot businesses – I don’t often park in lots – sort of a religious thing or anti blood Diamond – but if I was looking at $4, $5 or more per hour what would my choice be? I could drive to another place, park in a nearby residential or bite the bullet and go to a lot. If a substitute good goes up in price that will reduce the sales for that good and increase the demand for the alternative good. If Mangos go to $10 a piece, people will buy more papayas until they too go up in price.
Your low income discussion is very weak. first of all few pay $400 per month – low income downtown workers can car pool, van pool, use transit, or walk from low cost lots but most importantly just because DT is hard to drive to doesn’t mean that they should now also have find non car ways to do other things. The $100,000 worker can easily pay the $5 to park for an hour and it will be so much more convenient for them.