Parking Meter Rate Increases (Pittsburgh, Taylor: house, theater, living in)

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I can only speak for the circle of people that I know, but I can 100% say that they would have no problem dropping $200 at the bar, but will not go to a location that they cannot park for free at in the evening. So its either go somewhere where there is residential parking available close by to steal a space, or avoid an area altogether. Such people exist and such draconian parking laws will therefore hurt local business at least in some measurable ways.

It isn't rational, but I do know some people who think like this. But it really isn't worth arguing over which line of thinking is the most common, all that matters is whether or not parking spaces are being used efficiently. We should be shooting for a price that achieves a target percentage of spots filled and available. Unfortunately our outdated meters in much of the city don't allow us to do that.

[wrcousert]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I agree with you. I'm fine with a rate increas if it means I can find daytime parking more easily...but the spaces downtown at night are already empty enough that a price increase is just a cash grab.

Don't like it? Vote the idiots out of office.

[BrianTH]

The best way to handle something like Phipps is to enable easy parking validation. Phipps could give a credit on admissions, or with the right technology could actually put time on the meter.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

We should be shooting for a price that achieves a target percentage of spots filled and available. Unfortunately our outdated meters in much of the city don't allow us to do that.

Exactly. And we turned down a deal that would have gotten us money to upgrade the meter technology (note that a private operator also has an incentive to price things to ensure the spots are actually being used).

[squarian]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

The best way to handle something like Phipps is to enable easy parking validation. Phipps could give a credit on admissions, or with the right technology could actually put time on the meter.

I agree but the actual technique is tricky - even with their own spaces around Mr. Bigelow, it's always been a pain to drop Auntie off, park, escort Auntie inside, get the parking token, go back to the car, return and find Auntie in the giftshop. Extra fun if you've got four kids along.

There's no doubt a high-tech solution involving wireless notification from the ticket counter to an electronically-metered space, but until then....

[hornet67]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Precisely. Washington, DC is a nightmare when it comes to parking in terms of enforcement, hourly meter rates, and, well, just finding a spot in general; however, their nightlife continues to thrive because (most) major suburban areas have easy transit access into the heart of the city. The Metrorail system may be plagued with problems, but I'd frequently drive from my home in Reston, VA to Falls Church, VA, park at a FREE garage (on weekends and non-peak weekday hours) and then take the Orange Line into the heart of the city in about 20 minutes. One thing I will admit missing about the DC Area was the extensive rail system. Granted the Silver Line to major areas like Tysons Corner, Reston, and Dulles Airport was LONG overdue, but at least it's finally being worked on.

That's not the case in Pittsburgh. Yeah, if you live in Dormont or select parts of Mt. Lebanon you can just hop the "T" to get Downtown via light rail. If you live near the East Busway that works, too, but then again that only terminates in Swissvale, if I'm not mistaken. The vast majority of our area's largest suburbs---Penn Hills, Robinson Twp., Moon Twp., McCandless Twp., Ross Twp., Scott Twp., Upper St. Clair, Hampton Twp., and Shaler Twp., to name just a few---don't have easy and direct access from most areas to Downtown Pittsburgh. Like it or not most people decided to settle in these urban sprawl zones in our region, and until we figure out a way to better serve them via mass transit it's NOT in the city's best interest to make it more heinous for them to drive into the city to spend their discretionary income. Applebee's suddenly looks more attractive than trying NOLA to a suburbanite when they have to pay more for parking and keep an eye on their wristwatches all the time to run back to feed the meter if need be. I can say from personal experience, too, that you'll receive a ticket nearly immediately after your meter runs out.

I live in USC, 5 minutes from the beginning of the T line at South Hills Village, which I rode most days when I worked downtown. Problem is, it's slow as molasses, regardless of time of day. I also can be in downtown, non-rush hour, in 15-20 minutes via I-79 & the Parkway West.
Regarding the parking meter increases,along with many other idiotic decisions by those solons on Grant St;, you city residents keep electing these clueless, incompetent, corrupt bozos!

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by hornet67

I live in USC, 5 minutes from the beginning of the T line at South Hills Village, which I rode most days when I worked downtown. Problem is, it's slow as molasses, regardless of time of day. I also can be in downtown, non-rush hour, in 15-20 minutes via I-79 & the Parkway West.
Regarding the parking meter increases,along with many other idiotic decisions by those solons on Grant St;, you city residents keep electing these clueless, incompetent, corrupt bozos!

What was the T commute time vs driving commute time during rush hour?

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by squarian

There's no doubt a high-tech solution involving wireless notification from the ticket counter to an electronically-metered space, but until then....

That is a fair point. I'm just frustrated we turned down extra money we could have used to enable these solutions.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

What was the T commute time vs driving commute time during rush hour?

Unfortunately its not much different, I briefly lived about a hundred yards from one of the stops near the end of the line and there was virtually no difference in the time it took to get downtown on the T versus driving and sitting in traffic. The reason mainly is that 1. the T is pretty slow (and very noisy for whatever reason compared to any other like type of transport ive used), but more importantly, there are way too many stops....literally I could stand at my stop look right and see the people at the next stop; look left and see people at another stop. Just look at a T map and it is dotted with stops all over it whereas the route as a whole isnt that long.

I don't know if the speed can be upped (if not, when it was built maybe they should have thought of a higher speed solution - a metro this is not), but they definately should look at somehow reducing the amount of stops to just a few (and have parking there too), if this is at all feasible.
That being said, it was still better then sitting in a car for the same amount of time.

[BrianTH]

The trains they use have a reasonable cruising speed for a local transit service. The problem is really the large number of stops.