Comments on: Parking, Parking, Parking!!

By: David Rice

David Rice — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:52:40 +0000

Nancy, I would recommend you attend the HBDRA’s parking meeting and voice your concerns as they are definitely valid. It is worth noting that HB Neighbors (us) and HBDRA are not affiliated in anyway. The HBDRA has publicly stated they do not support our CEQA law suit which has been created with the goal of increasing safety, reducing density, improving parking, limiting the number of bars and restaurants with alcohol, and protecting the environment.

By: nancygwilliams

nancygwilliams — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:12:09 +0000

I just took a look at a flyer from the HBDRA. It shows the proposed parking zones on the numbered streets going out to 15th street!! Guess how far they go out on the state streets? The North side of Alabama.

This is pretty simple. Put a dot on the map at the center of “Party Central” the intersection of Main and Olive. Now draw a circle with that point as the center. That’s where the drunks park now. They don’t just park on the numbered streets. Guess how many weekends it will take before they start spreading the word in the bars that the State Streets have unrestricted parking. I’ll bet 2 weekends tops!

So not only will we get the repercussions of the Pacific City parking and traffic, but we will also get the parking problem pushed over from the numbered streets.

Nice work,
Nancy

By: Angela Rainsberger

Angela Rainsberger — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:26:50 +0000

Hi Nancy,

My understanding is that Joe Carchio and Devon Dwyer will both be at the parking meeting. They both voted in favor of the DTSP that will maximize the development potential of the downtown area, but without a built -n limit on the expansion of the bars. They lost a golden opportunity to reign in one of the key problems with the rapid expansion of the entertainment district that contributes to the parking and crime downtown. They gave our shared concerns lip service, but, when it came time to vote, they voted with the developers, not with the citizens. They can still fix their mistake. They can open up the DTSP for vote again and address the areas that need to be fixed in order to protect our neighborhoods. The DTSP, the way it is written, will make the current parking problems worsen. Naturally, the people on the numbered streets want a solution now!

Angela

By: Karen Heidt

Karen Heidt — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:41:21 +0000

Nancy, the difficulty here is semantics. Labeled a “town meeting,” the meeting is not sponsored by the city at all, but by another residents’ group trying to “work” with city council to gain privilege for a limited few. Because the meeting is set up to promote permit parking for numbered streets, it is to the advantage of all who can make it to attend to dispute that solution.

By: nancygwilliams

nancygwilliams — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:59:38 +0000

Richard, You hit the nail on the head. Sure push your problem into my neighborhood. That’s a great solution! City Hall clearly isn’t staffed with the sharpest folks. Do they drug test as an employment screen?

Frank, Your point was made. Why hasn’t the city notified our area that this meeting is taking place as clearly our area will be impacted if this parking plan is adopted? I don’t have time to ask for that evening off so I can attend. And NO! as the mother of a 20 year old daughter I feel it is imperative that we DO NOT adopt your plan of PCH DUI people pong. I do want to keep my child safe. I don’t even want my daughter to go downtown.

Nancy