Comments on: Oakland government’s woes reflected in parking proposal http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/ Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:03:16 +0000 hourly 1 By: dto510 http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-877 dto510 Mon, 04 May 2009 00:04:11 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-877 Robert, I am sensitive to the fact that not all parts of Oakland have good transit options, and that there is a need for parking downtown. But I don't think that $8 (the market price for parking in Uptown) is an unreasonable amount of money to pay for temporarily storing a car. There are about a thousand parking spaces within a few blocks of the Fox Theater. There needs to be more study before the Redevelopment Agency can conclude that there is a parking shortage in Uptown, and that parking is the best use of a subsidy. Robert, I am sensitive to the fact that not all parts of Oakland have good transit options, and that there is a need for parking downtown. But I don’t think that $8 (the market price for parking in Uptown) is an unreasonable amount of money to pay for temporarily storing a car. There are about a thousand parking spaces within a few blocks of the Fox Theater. There needs to be more study before the Redevelopment Agency can conclude that there is a parking shortage in Uptown, and that parking is the best use of a subsidy.

]]> By: Robert http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-876 Robert Sun, 03 May 2009 23:03:14 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-876 Its not about a subsidy for driving, from where I live in Oakland, there is NO public transit option to get to that area in the evening. And if you want to attract folks from other neighborhoods beyond the immediate area, there needs to be parking. And I am pretty sure that Flora does not exist just on people in the area. Its not about a subsidy for driving, from where I live in Oakland, there is NO public transit option to get to that area in the evening. And if you want to attract folks from other neighborhoods beyond the immediate area, there needs to be parking. And I am pretty sure that Flora does not exist just on people in the area.

]]> By: dto510 http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-879 dto510 Sat, 02 May 2009 17:49:26 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-879 Robert, the city has a memorandum of understanding with the union that does not allow significant changes to employees' compensation or work rules without a new contract. I think that's pretty standard. It's not clear if business owners really support the parking lot. At a meeting on it for local businesses, several vehemently objected to blighting the neighborhood. And if $10 is the market price for parking, then that's what the new lot will charge - Oakland is not in the business of subsidizing people's driving. Robert, the city has a memorandum of understanding with the union that does not allow significant changes to employees’ compensation or work rules without a new contract. I think that’s pretty standard.

It’s not clear if business owners really support the parking lot. At a meeting on it for local businesses, several vehemently objected to blighting the neighborhood. And if $10 is the market price for parking, then that’s what the new lot will charge – Oakland is not in the business of subsidizing people’s driving.

]]> By: Robert http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-878 Robert Sat, 02 May 2009 01:05:43 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-878 Speaking just for myself, I can understand why business owners in the area what more parking. I made one, and only one, attempt to go down to Flora for dinner one night when there was a Fox Theater show going on. No where to park other than a couple of lots charging $10 for the night. Not what I was willing to do. Are there other, better options? Maybe, but they appear to be theory and not reality. Speaking just for myself, I can understand why business owners in the area what more parking. I made one, and only one, attempt to go down to Flora for dinner one night when there was a Fox Theater show going on. No where to park other than a couple of lots charging $10 for the night. Not what I was willing to do. Are there other, better options? Maybe, but they appear to be theory and not reality.

]]> By: Robert http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-882 Robert Sat, 02 May 2009 01:02:14 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-882 Can you explain why, if the union contract expired last year, it is still in effect and the work rules are still binding? Can you explain why, if the union contract expired last year, it is still in effect and the work rules are still binding?

]]> By: V Smoothe http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-881 V Smoothe Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:07:03 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-881 It's also worth noting that Oakland's inability to manage its public safety problems (but real and perceived) contributed to the decision. At Tuesday's meeting, Councilmember Pat Kernighan used as an example of the necessity of the parking lot a couple who might want to check out the neighborhood and eat dinner at Flora, but would feel unsafe walking a block and a half to the restaurant from their car. It is highly unlikely that one would be victimized on the short walk from the garage to Flora, but if the City believes this is a legitimate fear, they really have no one to blame but themselves for their complete failure to manage Oakland's crime problem, and the associated image issues. Similarly, the failure to provide adequate street lighting and graffiti abatement downtown contributes to perceptions of the environment as unsafe. It’s also worth noting that Oakland’s inability to manage its public safety problems (but real and perceived) contributed to the decision. At Tuesday’s meeting, Councilmember Pat Kernighan used as an example of the necessity of the parking lot a couple who might want to check out the neighborhood and eat dinner at Flora, but would feel unsafe walking a block and a half to the restaurant from their car.

It is highly unlikely that one would be victimized on the short walk from the garage to Flora, but if the City believes this is a legitimate fear, they really have no one to blame but themselves for their complete failure to manage Oakland’s crime problem, and the associated image issues. Similarly, the failure to provide adequate street lighting and graffiti abatement downtown contributes to perceptions of the environment as unsafe.

]]> By: Mike d'Ocla http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-880 Mike d'Ocla Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:13:50 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-880 Very thoughtful reportage and analysis. Thanks. Very thoughtful reportage and analysis. Thanks.

]]> By: CED Committee approves surface parking lot, but changes overall outlook on parking and transit « Living in the O http://futureoaklandblog.com/2009/04/oakland-governments-woes-reflected-in-parking-proposal/#comment-883 CED Committee approves surface parking lot, but changes overall outlook on parking and transit « Living in the O Wed, 29 Apr 2009 19:35:16 +0000 http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/?p=470#comment-883 [...] out Future Oakland for another taking on the hearing and the structural causes of the committee’s decision. [...] [...] out Future Oakland for another taking on the hearing and the structural causes of the committee’s decision. [...]

]]>