----- Original Message -----
From: "Dorie Rae Gallagher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Mpls] RE: LRT Parking


> I understand the Park's concern about what would happen if too many people
> started to park in the lots...however, I go to the park every weekend and
> maybe 2-3xs during the week. The dog lot is the only lot packed most of
the
> time all of the time.  The Patron lots are empty. They are empty when
there
> are several large groups of people enjoying the park.; so obviously those
> people do not have permits. The permit cost is way too low for someone
> wanting to park consistently but that could/should  be changed. During the
> winter, most of the lots are not used at all. ..What about the space being
> available then?
>
> I believe this idea should be looked into since there are parking problems
> and the park is not utilizing space which could relieve some of the
problem.
> I suppose the LRT people should have planned for all this parking
> stuff...perhaps the park should have thought ahead when they sold the land
> for a buck.  Blame can be all consuming.... and we won't
> get into where the money comes from that supports commissioners and park
> land alike. Just keep an open mind to workable solutions.
>
> dorie rae gallagher
> nokomis...where we had a yard sale to make money for a library...
>
>
>
>
>
> > http://www.tlcminnesota.org/parking/mythoffreeparking/index.html
> >
> > One way to mitigate this impact -- and a familiar concept, I presume, to
> > most of those reading this -- is shared parking between/among land uses
> with
> > complementary peak parking demands (e.g., the church and the taproom).
It
> > would seem intuitive (and perhaps even true) that peak demand for MPRB
> > parking -- presumably weekends -- and commuter parking for LRT
(weekdays)
> > would coexist nicely if we get past the "worst case scenario" parking
> > capacity paradigm.  It also might be a moneymaker for the MPRB -- with
> > higher daily parking rates for commuter parking than at present for park
> use
> > and an attendant to collect them.
> >
> > Chuck Holtman
> > Prospect Park
> >
> >
> >
> > Oh goodie! Let's have LRT users fill up the space so that the day the
> > family of 50 who is having a picnic has nowhere to park...that isn't
what
> > the lots are for.  While it may be true that they aren't particularly
full
> > during the week that is not there purpose.  The LRT people should have
> > planned for all of this parking dilemma stuff at the time.
> > Poor idea but at least thanks for saying "that we do check" the lots.
> > Annie Young
> > citywide Park Commissioner
> >
> >
> >
>
>

REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to