UPDATE II: Fire Services - UPDATE
"The Council Workshop on fire services has been postponed by the City Administrator to give more time to work on the staff report," according to City Council Member Jason Burnett.
UPDATE I:
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 5:00 P.M., City Hall Council Chambers: Paid-Parking Discussion
PARKING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Downtown Paid Parking Program
Notes: In an effort to improve parking, traffic and circulation the City is considering the development of a paid parking program in the downtown. Cities across the country have used paid parking as an effective management tool. Some of the benefits of paid parking include:
• An increase in the availability of conveninient downtown parking for visitors and residents
• Allow visitors and residents to stay as long as they wish without fear of receiving a parking citation
• An increase in City revenues that can be invested into the community
Comments and/or suggestions regarding paid parking may be submitted by email to paidparking@ci.carmel.ca.us
PUBLIC NOTICE
Downtown Paid Parking Program Workshop
Carmel Paid Parking Program Workshop
Public Workshop
27 January 2011
5:00 p.m.
Draft AGENDA:
1. Introductions/Overview 5 min
2. Staff Presentation 20 min
-Program Goals
-Program Approach
-Paid Parking Technology
-Employee & Resident Parking
3. Group Discussion 20 min
a. Free form discussion
_____________________________________________
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 (Time TBD): Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Paid-Parking Discussion
(Source: January Town Hall Meeting, Jason Burnett, December 28, 2010)
Factors to Consider Regarding Paid Parking in the Commercial District:
"The question of whether to implement or increase charges for on-street parking usually arises when demand exceeds supply (charging for parking when there isn't high demand is generally a bad idea - pricing should be used to manage the parking supply efficiently, not simply to raise revenue)."
Comment: Motiviaton for instituting paid parking should not be “simply to raise revenue,” but rather to manage parking.
"If there are free parking areas that are less convenient, some people may choose to park a bit farther away rather than pay for parking (see "shuttle service and offsite parking" on this page for more information). If there are nearby neighborhoods where on-street parking is unregulated, spillover parking may become more of an issue (for information on potential solutions to this issue, see addressing spillover)."
Comment: “Spillover parking” into the residential areas should be considered; is it advisable to post "No Parking” signs everywhere in the neighboring residential district?
"A large part of whether charging for parking will negatively impact businesses depends on how attractive the district is relative to other options. If there is a popular mall a short drive away providing many of the same goods and services with free parking, that can increase the likelihood that people will go elsewhere. On the other hand, if the downtown provides enough amenities and attractions - such as restaurants, bars, and appealing outdoor spaces - that cannot be replaced by a mall or isolated shopping center, the downtown is more likely to succeed."
"Parking rates that are wildly out-of-sync with the rates charged in similar locations in nearby communities can increase the risk that the cost of parking will encourage people to take their business elsewhere. This does not mean that rates must exactly match those of the surrounding communities, especially if those places have less demand for parking, but it is advisable to factor in the rate structures that drivers encounter in other similar places."
Comment: With free parking and many other equivalent shopping opportunities at the Barnyard and the Crossroads Shopping Center, for example, people may “go elsewhere.”
(Source: Charging for On-street and Public Parking, January 29, 2010)
6 comments:
Don’t kid yourself. This is all about politics. Sue has been salivating over paid parking downtown since 2002. Her consolation was her imposition of paid bus parking on those least able to afford it. It would be a sick twist of fate if Jason and Ken were to become Sue’s most visible enablers in her blatant “I can do it, so I will” move and go along with paid parking. Sue McCloud has been playing us for over 10 years now. Either some do not have the sense to realize they are being played or they enjoy being played and get something out of it.
Why do Carmelites demand an exploration and discussion of all fire service possibilities, but do not demand a discussion of all city revenue increasing measures, not just paid parking. A discussion on only paid parking only is like a discussion of only a contract with Monterey. What is really going on here?
The City should be doing EVERYTHING to encourage people to go downtown. Hassling people who want to go downtown with paid parking could result in lost tax revenue and closed stores. Have people thought this through? The lost sales tax revenue could be much greater than the amounts the City could collect from parking fees and tickets. As it is now, the mayor has told us about the angry letters she gets from visitors who receive a parking ticket and tell her they do not plan to return to Carmel because it left a bad taste in their mouths. Wise people will put themselves in the shoes of business owners and visitors and realize a recession/slow economic recovery phase is no time to pass paid parking, if ever.
I am disturbed by the intoduction of the premise that the city needs more revenue. The city needs a competent city administrator. A competent city administrator would have budgeted for the 50% match to Pebble Beach Company regarding the San Antonio pathway and the Carmel Beach stairway and boardwalk and anything else which the council unanimously voted to expend taxpayers monies for after the budget was adopted.
Taxpayers and visitors should not be expected to forfeit more of their money to subsidize a city and city council which tolerates a morally bankrupt and incompetent city manager. Our mayor and council members might as well have "We tolerate sexual harassment" tattooed on their respective foreheads. The council's business-as-usual attitide is disturbing. They just do not get it.
Proposition: Instead of using city government to enact a policy not universally endorsed by business owners, residents, guests and visitors, why don’t those individuals advocating city revenue enhancements donate to the city the monetary amount equivalent to the amount they expect their preferred revenue enhancement scheme or schemes will generate?
Addendum:
Support Mary Ann Carrigg (Carrigg’s of Carmel, Ocean Av. & San Carlos St., S.E. Corner) and like-minded business owners – NO PAID PARKING DOWNTOWN!
chutzpah, hutzpah [ˈxʊtspə] n
Informal shameless audacity; impudence
Utter nerve; effrontery: unbelievable gall; insolence
Approving paid parking now with City Administrator Rich Guillen still at city hall is like the city council voting to approve a retroactive increase in salary to Guillen just months after the members had knowledge of Jane Miller’s harassment complaint. Because this council did not vote to remove Guillen or pressure him to resign, this council is now the embodiment of Carmel’s corrupt city administration. A corrupt administration, by definition, does not deserve more money to manage incompetently.
There are people in Carmel who think the city government never has enough money. So if the annual budget was $15 million, they would advocate for $20 million and so on. Instituting paid parking or any other politically correct revenue enhancement in a slow economic recovery phase post-recession is stupid and crazy.
Post a Comment