Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Parking meters in West Seattle?
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 9, 2009 at 4:44 pm #591489
maplesyrupParticipantIf things go the way they did in Fremont, looks like we’re in trouble.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009436366_westseattleparking09m.html
July 9, 2009 at 4:49 pm #671661
flowerpetalMemberSay more please. Why would we be in trouble? My strong preference of course is that we don’t get meters, but I would be surprised if it didn’t happen. It seems to be the direction that this is taking.
July 9, 2009 at 5:04 pm #671662
maplesyrupParticipantTrouble as in I sure as hell don’t want to pay for parking if I go to any of the various places I frequent in the junction.
July 9, 2009 at 5:22 pm #671663
flowerpetalMemberAgree with you 100%! I never “want” to pay for parking. If it comes to the Junction, I will pay the parking fee or ride the bus. I love the junction and no parking fee will keep me away.
July 9, 2009 at 5:58 pm #671664
JustSarahParticipantI live just over a mile from the Junction, so I usually walk, but ride my scooter or take the bus otherwise. I don’t have an issue with metered parking, but I was thinking that it would be great if there were some kind of validation system – i.e., 2 hours free with validation (available from Junction merchants for purchases of $10 [or $5, whatever]). I know this won’t happen because of how expensive the system would be, but I think it’d be a happy medium.
July 9, 2009 at 6:49 pm #671665
flowerpetalMemberNot a bad idea! It would take some thinking outside of the box; but why couldn’t it work? Businesses that wished to participate could have credit-like cards to lend to customers for a single swipe at the meter. The card then is returned to the merchant and reloaded for the next use. I’m sure this isn’t technologically impossible. Some people might choose to whine and say there isn’t a way to do this. But with the right approach, it could look do-able.
July 9, 2009 at 6:49 pm #671666
swimcatMemberI read that article in the Times this morning and it is completely aggravating. The DOT is saying it ‘listens’ to what the neighborhood wants, which is complete BS. I work in Fremont, and no one here wanted metered parking, so what did they get? Pay parking on the street.
If we have to pay for parking on California, more people will park in the nearby neighborhoods or just avoid the junction. I know I wouldn’t go as frequently.
Oh, and can the city buy some pay stations that actually accept dollar bills instead of coins??? Who carries around $5 in change to park for 2 hours??? So, so stupid. And when I go downtown, I never park on the street anymore because it doesn’t cost much more to park in a garage to have your car protected.
July 9, 2009 at 7:39 pm #671667
JulieMemberI am reading a fascinating book about traffic, and by coincidence, I am just reading a section about parking and its effect on traffic. One observation reported is that free parking can generate extra traffic, for the following reason: If free parking is available, people will cruise around until they find a free parking spot, rather than pay to park in a lot (or a metered parking spot). Apparently, the percentage of cars in traffic looking for parking can range from 8 percent to 74 percent. (I assume this depends very much on the amount of free parking available in relation to the demand.) Average time spent cruising for a free parking spot ranges from 3 to 13 minutes. So, if a free parking spot “turns over” 10 times a day, it generates from 30 to 130 minutes of cruising. Assuming the cruising is 10 or 15 mph, each free spot can generate 5 to 25 extra miles of driving. Multiply that by the number of free parking spots in the Junction, and that’s quite a bit of extra driving/pollution/traffic/aggravation. And the author points out that this cruising behavior affects the traffic around the cruising car, as it reduces the street capacity by half (on a two-lane street) during the time it is slowed or stopped. Furthermore, the activity of parking is responsible for increasing crashes–the author cites a 2000 study showing that it accounts for almost 1/5 of urban traffic collisions.
On the other hand, I’m not sure the worst case scenario described here applies (yet) to the Junction. I’m not sure if drivers to the Junction really cruise much, or just go around to the free lots behind if they don’t find a free spot on the street. And I certainly don’t notice traffic backed up too much slowing behind or going around cruising or parking cars. But that might change as our population increases.
Also, none of this quite addresses the question of how the free parking or lack of it will affect or not affect our Junction businesses. Does the previous experience with removing the metered parking several years ago apply to the very different Junction we have now, and the even different one we will have in 5 years?
I’m not advocating either position, by the way–just adding some possibly relevant information to the discussion.
The book is “Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (And What It Says About Us)” by Tom Vanderbilt. I checked it out of the Seattle Public Library.
July 9, 2009 at 7:51 pm #671668
WSBKeymasterJust so you all know, the Times story is nothing new at all – nothing in this story (which I read last night) is news. This study has been under way for a year and we have covered it here extensively – it’s a case of a citywide media source deciding to jump into something happening in a neighborhood.
So if you want to read the actual details about what’s been happening, since we first reported this was proposed in February 2008:
https://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=5885
… please check the Junction parking review coverage category (where the 19 WSB articles on the subject are archived, newest to oldest):
https://westseattleblog.com/blog/?cat=92
They have had meetings, tours, requests for public involvement, ALL of which have been reported here, with previews and followup articles. If you have missed those somehow and have not provided your feedback, Dante Taylor, manager of the Junction review, can be reached at:
And if you are interested in the topic, bookmark that coverage category (or find it from the CATEGORIES list in the lower sidebar) because anything additional we publish on this – next thing I expect is when the study data is made public – will appear there, in addition of course to being new on the main page when it’s published. Thank you.
July 9, 2009 at 7:52 pm #671669
KBearParticipantIf there are meters on California, there will be even more “cruising” in the “free” lots behind the buildings. (They’re not really free–the parking is subsidized by the neighboring businesses.) Since this is already a problem on busy days, I imagine it will become much worse. There will also be more cruising up and down the side streets outside the metered area. That’s where I live, and it’s already a problem. Paid parking will only make it worse.
If the city needs more revenue, why not have more enforcement of existing parking regulations? How about ticketing people for parking in the wrong direction, or blocking driveways and sidewalks? I can find hundreds of dollars’ worth of parking infractions at any time, on any day, within a block from my house.
July 9, 2009 at 7:55 pm #671670
flowerpetalMemberM, I’m sure the City said that it took three aspects into account when making the decision about meters. One of these was listening to residents and merchants. Of course the community is going to say they don’t want meters. If the City made their decisions based on only what they heard there wouldn’t be parking meters anywhere. And there would be free garbage pick-up and free public utilities.
July 9, 2009 at 8:08 pm #671671
sam-cParticipantI don’t know personally how much it would affect junction businesses as I’m mostly there during the times that paid parking is free anyway. (after 6pm and on Sundays). If I go on Saturdays, I never see a spot on the street available anyway, and head to the ‘free’ lots. maybe now, there would be more opportunities to find parking on the street Saturdays, and I’d propbably pay for it. the pay parking doesn’t keep me out of Capitol hill when I want to meet a friend for lunch.
and if the revised route 50 is ever funded yes I would probably take the bus to the junction.
July 9, 2009 at 8:21 pm #671672
CMPParticipantI just wonder how pay meters (if installed) would affect the free parking lots at the Junction? I’m cheap and will either walk, park far away where it’s free or troll around the free lots until I find something. Why ruin a good thing?
The fancy new meters are terrible to begin with. I swear half the time they won’t accept my credit card, they’re broken, I get double charged or they run out of stickers. Brilliant idea. I agree with KBear that we should hire more parking enforcement and ticket people that can’t read signs or park like a$$holes.
July 9, 2009 at 9:27 pm #671673
JustSarahParticipantYes, lowmanbeach, I think most of us know WSB has been covering the Jct. parking situation for a while.
Anyway, I forgot to add that my only real issue with the pay stations is that, like I said, I ride my scooter to the Junction occasionally. People can and will steal paid parking stickers off motorcycles/scooters, since there’s no “interior” like on a car. I’ve heard it’s difficult to contest tickets issued in situations like that; I’d hate to end up ticketed just because someone’s selfish enough to pull my paid sticker from my headlight.
July 9, 2009 at 9:35 pm #671674
swimcatMemberSarahScoot; I would hope any ticket you received if someone stole your parking sticker would be easy to contest if you paid with your credit card. There would hopefully be some way for the city to find that transaction. But knowing the city, I’m sure they would say that is impossible to do.
The pay stations are ridiculous- I’m not opposed to paying for parking downtown or on CapHill, but in WS it’s not necessary. I think this is a losing battle though, so all I wish is that if I have to pay for parking around here, it be through a meter, not those worthless, broken-down, expensive pay stations.
July 9, 2009 at 10:42 pm #671675
JustSarahParticipantm – one would think it would be traceable, but it seems to depend on who you talk to within the city. I know someone who was able to get the ticket rescinded after presenting a credit card statement and having the sticker purchase looked up, but someone else had no luck getting anyone to look at her proof of payment. Either way, it’s a hassle for the motorcyclist/scooterist who has to put up the fight, and it’s a completely lost cause if the transaction was in cash. :-(
July 10, 2009 at 2:32 am #671676
MerylAlcMemberHello all,
I’m Meryl Alcabes and I own a business in the Junction, Sleepers In Seattle. I think what angers many of the business owners is that the City of Seattle claims to want our opinion and invites our input, and then does whatever seems convenient to them, which is apparently what happened in Fremont.
The business owners and property owners in the Junction have said, time and time again, that we do not want paid parking in the Junction. Who does it benefit? Not us! It only takes one parking fine to convince a customer to head for Tukwila to shop next time. When there were meters in the Junction, over a decade ago, we had the experience of a customer spending more time than they anticipated shopping for furniture. All of a sudden they realized that they risked a fine–so they ran out of the store, found a ticket on the windshield, and left in anger. At the least, one has to cough up exact change, or a credit-card charge. At the worst, the customer gets a parking fine and doesn’t return.
We now have limited parking (2 hours) in the Junction, which is enforced by the City of Seattle–the beneficiary of any fines collected. I have spoken with several other Junction business owners today and our feeling is unanimous–don’t allow the City of Seattle to attempt to balance their budget on the backs of our customers!
If there is enough interest, I am willing to circulate a petition. You can reach me at:
meryl@sleepersinseattle.com if you think that is a good idea. I hope to hear from many of you!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.