When the city increased parking rates in key neighborhoods around Seattle in the spring including Broadway, Pike/Pine and First Hill, the goal was to ensure that high demand areas have one or two parking spots open on each block. Early results show that the first attempts at changing how Seattle manages its paid parking didn’t do enough to change people’s habits. Meanwhile, CHS has learned of an audacious plan to turn three sections of on-street parking on Capitol Hill into parks — for one day this Friday. It’s Park(ing) Day. More on that and the study below.
At the time of the studies, Broadway had overall utilization rates below the target number during paid parking hours. Rates then jumped beyond 100% at 6p, when paid parking ended. Pike/Pine, however, had occupancy rates within the desired 80% occupancy rate (one or two parking spaces per block) for most of the day. Then, like Broadway, rates jumped beyond 100% after 6p.
The data sets used for comparison were collected in November 2010 and June 2011, so they may not really be directly comparable. But, assuming they are, Pike/Pine occupancy rates hover more closely to the city’s desired levels than Broadway.
But habits may already be changing. Both studies were completed before paid parking was extended to 8p. With the extra two hours of paid parking reaching the Hill, it’s probable that SDOT’s “occupancy” problems in the area are improving.
Here’s a map of occupancy before and after (in case you want to know where to find an open spot).
More change is coming. The city is considering a variable parking rate system where rates would change at different times of day. Currently, the pay stations on the Hill are not capable of the programming required for such a system to work so are due for replacement.
Here’s more on the parking data, from a memo to the City Council Transportation Committee. If you want even more data — including a 168-page report that demonstrates minute changes in parking occupancy rates neighborhood-by-neighborhood across the city — see the city’s performance-based parking study webpage.
In the meantime, Friday is the annual Park(ing) Day event that celebrates public space and the transition to a less car-based, fewer-parking spot future. Below are the locations across the city and on the Hill where groups will create small pocket parks and, temporarily, displace on-street parking spots. You can learn more about getting involved in Seattle at Feetfirst.info
Parking Day 2011 Site Location Map (Page1)
Perfect. Just what we need! Since we do such a great job of managing the parks we have now! Right. Make sure to stock up on drug users,canvassers,and hostile gangs of our youth and it will be great!
Does Capitol Hill Seattle really think that the City of Seattle raised parking rates to ensure that every block has two open and non-revenue generating spaces for us to use? Don’t be silly. They raised rates for the same reason private parking lots raised their prices when I worked there and a major lot closed. They did it to rake in more money. And they’re no doubt secretly delighted that, despite the price increase, all those spaces are still staying filled and generating revenue.
At least the private parking companies don’t conceal their motives. I grow tired of government bureaucrats pretending their shady schemes are public spirited. And when I visit Capitol Hill, I get disgusted by all the nasty little tricks the city uses to increase parking ticket revenue. A few years back, while volunteering at a hospital, I got ticketed for parking in what I thought was a ‘safe’ place. I’d failed to see a sign facing into a large tree that was about two-feet in front of it. When I drove away that day, disgusted by that ticket, I saw four ‘meter maids’ busily ticketing those tricked by similar schemes.
In short, if I’m going to be ripped off, I’d rather it come from someone who’s honest about their motives. Earlier this year, on Capitol Hill for a doctor’s appointment, I deliberately parked in a private lot.
Oh it’s still very cute to me that McMoron and team are still pushing ‘parking churn’ over revenue as their revenue. Everyone I know sets alarms on their mobile phones when we are out now to remind them to feed the parking meters, but we can still say it’s all about ‘churn’ now isn’t it? Again, cute.
That we as a city have embarked on this effort to utilize our resources (street parking)to raise the revenue in an “all cuts” budget is, in my humble opinion, smart stewardship. That we as a city can respond to a shortage of supply in the face of an abundance of demand surrounding this and other neighborhoods on street parking is prudent government decision making. We live in a popular neighborhoood, well served by public transportation which makes moving around it in a private vehicle a premium experience. We as a city are wise to capitalize on these market forces. Though this might notbe the stated motivation it appears to me nothing like a malevolent or unethical approach. Charge what the market will bear! Also: Many other outcomes are desirable to the majority of citizens in this neighborhood and city at large; increase the availabilty of parking (as stated) and it discourages private auto use while encouraging the use of the public investment in public transportation.
residual,
i couldn’t agree with you more … i think it’s great that the city is taking advantage of the increased nightlife in the neighborhood, heck I think there should be paid parking until 10 or 11pm .. if you can afford to have a car, drive to Cap Hill & eat at Poquitos, you should be able to afford to pay for parking.
Don’t be such a drama queen
Or you will just go elsewhere with your business because you think paying for parking is a waste of money. Even if you can afford to have a car and eat out, it doesn’t mean you are running around throwing money on the sidewalk.
You are so spot on Olive. Car owners have ENDLESS amounts of cash (or at least according to you, we ‘should’) to keep up with the city and their now monthly increases on car ownership through parking fees, tab increases, and gas tax. It’s not like it’s even a free for all yet with penalizing car owners, but hey I CAN AFFORD IT right? whatever.
Please stop shoving this nonsense about “forcing people out of their cars” down our throats! Harassing people who have cars does not make anyone’s life better, nor does it do anything to improve the environment or funding for, or quality of transit. Making quieter, less polluting cars helps, and making transit more usable helps, so let’s focus on those goals, shall we?
I’d like to criticize the parking plan, but it’s actually pretty well engineered. My biggest gripe is the way it’s implemented. The broad elimination of street spots, deliberately obscure signage and dramatically increased enforcement are all designed to harass people who have the audacity to use a car rather than standing around for an hour waiting for buses and lugging their shit half a mile every time they leave the house.
I just wanted to take a minute and say thanks for a really great post. It’s such a pleasure not to have to go digging around on the city web site to read the parking plan. If only the Seattle Times or the city web site did it half as well!
Hahahahaha……
I hope you realize that parking(ing) day parks are the size of a parking space.
Also, I completely agree with James.
God, I love riding the bus, biking, and walking. Life is sweet.
Yay transit! I can go out and not potentially smash into someone with my vehicle after consuming large amounts of alcohol. :)
@ hmm
I really am looking forward to your threat coming true.
*crosses fingers*
You silly, it doesn’t take alcohol to smash in to someone, I can do that completely sober, because I own a car, and apparently can afford to. Transit in this city SUCKS ROCKS. If it were faster, less connections and more reliable of course I would use it.
Not.
For both the pre- and post- they took a single date/time sample of the parking situation – ignoring the variability. I have approximately zero faith in the stability of the numbers they came up with. They might as well have not bothered and just stuck to “I think it get’s pretty crowded later and there’s more spaces early in the morning.”
Thanks! My eyes almost started to bleed around the 45-minute point of reading documents about parking occupancy rates… haha.
Residual,
Totally agreed. People complain about how the city is just trying to increase it’s revenue and force them out of the cars, but if they were honest with themselves they’d admit that what they’re actually complaining about is a car-driving subsidy being pulled out from under them. Devoting public space to parking has real economic and environmental costs, and the previous parking fees came nowhere near covering those costs. Current fees don’t either in many areas, but they’re getting closer.
…. the very bad day effect … and I hate people and maybe puppies too …
Hmm hits the nail right on the head. Just because you have a car, and just because you COULD afford it, doesn’t mean you’ll pay it. I have no intention of paying for meters, whether the old rate, or the new rate, or the new time.
I don’t begrudge the city raising rates. I actually think this plan is well engineered. But it does have its unintended consequences.
Pushing paid parking back to 8pm just makes the business on Broadway (for example) happen later. Ever notice how there were plenty of spots right up till 6pm, then at 6:05 the street is full, and business at all the shops and eateries picks up? Now that happens at 8pm. Keep pushing it back, and a good bit of it just won’t happen at all. It’ll go elsewhere. I fully admit, I’m a cheap m*otherf*cker. I’m just not going to feed meters. I can’t afford to waste my money on that stupidity when I could be spending it on something else.
I know that’s fine with the city. I know that’s fine with everyone who walks or can more easily take transit or bike or whatever. They can smugly say “see ya later”. They or everyone else won’t cry for my lost business. I don’t expect them to. I’m not whining. I’ll simply take some of my business elsewhere. And nobody will care, and that’s fine with me. Nobody, that is, but some of the businesses on Broadway.