Comments on: A New Seahawks Parking Option

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:27:28 +0000

Sorry, I just saw a string of trollish comments roll in over the RSS feed and felt I had to respond.

As I really can’t complain about the moderation job being done at STB I’ll just be quiet and leave the comment moderation to those with moderating privileges.

By: Martin H. Duke

Martin H. Duke — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:49:22 +0000

Jeff,

That’s called feeding the trolls. It doesn’t help.

But both of you, please leave comment moderation to us. If you think someone is trolling simply ignore it. The internet won’t collapse if a dumb comment goes unchallenged.

By: Jeff Welch

Jeff Welch — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:22:32 +0000

Forgot to also not that a lot of us work split shifts, meaning not just one but two commutes per day.

By: Jeff Welch

Jeff Welch — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:17:07 +0000

Only if you lack some sort of intelligent response, such as “How in the world would mass transit *cause* overflowing parking garages? What would the parking situation be without mass transit?”

But that’s just wacky old me, wanting to actually respond to outrageous claims with rational information rather than calling for a “ban hammer” at the drop of a question mark. Call me foolish, I guess.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:09:07 +0000

I call “troll”. Time to break out the banhammer?

By: Blue Swan

Blue Swan — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:29:31 +0000

Hilarious — the result of ‘mass’ transit is overflowing parking garages.

Could Seattle become more of a laughing stock?

By: Jeff Welch

Jeff Welch — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:07:26 +0000

Actually there’s only one parking garage that services Central, Atlantic, and Ryerson bases for Metro employees. All operators are actually required to own a reliable personal vehicle to ensure we can get to work.

We don’t always have a lot of choice over which base we work at. Why should there be free parking available at 4 out othe seven bases, but not the 3 downtown?

As Oran pointed out, there is extremely limited – or even nonexistent – transportation available at times, particularly prior to the first and after the last run. In order to get to my own shift (sign in at 5:07 am) I’d need to take the Owl from Ballard about 3:15. Full-time folks working late shifts wouldn’t have any way to get home.

Note that we also get free transit passes like all County employees, and a lot of us make extensive use of public transportation as well.

By: Oran Viriyincy

Oran Viriyincy — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 10:03:58 +0000

Sometimes buses don’t run at the time employees need to be at work. If you drove the first or last bus of the day, how do you get to the base or home?

And all the bases outside downtown surprisingly have poor transit access.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:16:30 +0000

Not to veer off topic, but why is Metro giving free parking passes to employees? Especially at bases practically in downtown? Doesn’t make sense to me.

And to your point on the post-game traffic: yes, it can be bad, but I doubt you’d save much time with the 38-minute ride to the airport, 5 minute walk to your car, and several minutes winding your way down the garage, paying, and getting back onto the freeway.

By: alexjonlin

alexjonlin — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:49:33 +0000

The way I see it, if they’re gonna building the rental-car facility, at least build an outside-of-security APM from the terminal to the Link station to the facility!

By: VeloBusDriver

VeloBusDriver — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:32:03 +0000

Have you ever tried to get through traffic after a sold-out Mariners or Seahawks game? I’d take Link in a heartbeat, even at that price. That said, I’ve got a pass so it’s even less expensive for me.

Heck, I could cheat and use my free parking pass at the Metro base right next door, but I wouldn’t. There’s no way I’d wade into that traffic with a car if I could use Link.

By: archie

archie — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:04:07 +0000

Admin, could you delete the first of these two above posts? And this one. Thanks

By: archie

archie — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:03:11 +0000

Yeah the rental car facility is self-sustaining, but this doesn’t take into account the fact that they will not be utilizing the existing parking garage. The way I see it, the existing parking garage could easily absorb the extra spaces needed to house all the rental car companies at the cost of some spots in the existing garage that are currently available to the public (for which ther is already a massive oversupply). Essentially we are missing out on a much more efficient use of our parking garage. Instead, the new garage will open up a few more thousand unneeded spots to the public in the existing garage.

By: archie

archie — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:01:27 +0000

Yeah the rental car facility is self-sustaining, but this doesn’t take into account the fact that they are not utilizing the existing parking garage. The way I see it, the existing parking garage could absorb the extra spaces needed to house all the rental car companies at the cost of an some spots in the existing garage that are currently available to the public (for which ther is already a massive oversupply). Essentially we are missing out on a much more efficient use of our parking garage. Instead, the new garage will open up a few more thousand spots to the public.

By: Carl

Carl — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:55:46 +0000

Many of the airport fees are paid directly by travelers – e.g. the Passenger Facilities Charge added to airfares, the airport concession fee added to rental car charges, the facility charge for rental cars, etc. Other fees are paid by merchants and airlines.

But I agree that the port property taxes are primarily (maybe exclusively) spent on the sea port. But I don’t think it is justified to spend $73.5 million of public tax money on the port each year. It doesn’t create sufficient benefit to the public, and it should be prioritized against other public needs.

By: Chris Stefan

Chris Stefan — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:27:06 +0000

FWIW the airport portion of the Port’s operations is supposedly self-sustaining and funded by fees to the airlines, rental car companies, and other tenants.

By: Kaleci

Kaleci — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:21:23 +0000

Unless you have a monthly pass – for parking at the Port or for transit.

By: Carl

Carl — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:44:31 +0000

PS: With the deficits that are facing King County, does it really make economic sense that the Port will collect $73.5 million in property taxes in 2010 and spend it on things like rental car facilities? Why can’t the port be self-sustaining (both airport and shipping) and this taxing authority be spent on more important government services, including health and transit?

Our port commissioners will never do this because the shipping companies love this subsidy from property tax payers.

By: Carl

Carl — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:36:26 +0000

The way it works is that 99% of the population is not interested in the port commissioner races, and the two groups that really care are the unions and the shipping companies. They donate essentially all the money in each race, and the commissioners are largely accountable to the people who donate to them. In most port commissioner races there is one labor candidate and one shipping candidate. Sometimes candidates can bridge the two constituencies, at least on some issues.

By: Jeff Welch

Jeff Welch — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:20:40 +0000

Actually port commissioners are elected by the voting public. Not sure how that translates into “selected”.

Democracy is grand – if you participate.