Disturbing comments from the City of Somerville on Boston.com

[atriplex007.livejournal.com]

Was anyone disturbed by City of Somerville spokeswoman, Jackie Rosetti's, comments about the city's parking policy on Boston.com?  I found this comment particularly disturbing: "...the ban discourages commuters from leaving their cars on city streets for several days while they turn to public transportation."

I understand the need for an enforceable parking policy that discourages residents from using city streets as their own parking lots/driveways--oh wait, don't residents already do that by throwing trash in the street to save spaces?  That any city, let alone "The Model City", discourages residents from using public transportation in any way is a crime.  In fact, it should be a crime for a city not to encourage the use of public transportation.

I think the 48-hr parking policy is unreasonable for residential streets.  Instead, I'd like to see something like a 7-day policy, whereby residents that use public transportation to commute, but still own a car, have the weekend to use, and therefore move, their car to avoid being ticketed or towed.  Am I way off base here?  I'm new to the community and have lived in a city without a car for years.  I share my current car with my partner, who also commutes via the T.  I know that it's a privilege, not a right, to park on a public, city street.  That said I don't think the current parking policy is benefiting our community.  There are healthier ways for the city to generate income.

Comments

[craigindaville.livejournal.com]

But at the same time, it is a good tool for neighborhoods to use to get rid of essentially abandoned vehicles. The 48 hour rule is so rarely enforced (at least on my street) that it isn't a concern for those of us who actually live here. However, more than once in the time we've lived here we have had to cal 311 because a car had been left untouched for weeks. In the end it was 3 months before it finally disappeared (not sure if towed or sold) but it was obvious that the cars were just being stored, for free.

That meant that those of us who actually use our cars are down one space, so that a non-neighbor could store their car for free. If there weren't a 48 hour rule, there would be no incentive for that to change. At least now we can ask the city to ticket them until it isn't worth it for them to keep it around, or it gets towed as abandoned.

Just had to share one positive aspect of the law!

[junesrose.livejournal.com]

I know you're talking about parking "for free" in this snow-pocalyse we're having, but seriously, I almost got a ticket parked in front of my mom's house when I was moving her out last year, whilst showing a resident parking ticket. (giant moving truck in her driveway-I had no place to go but street).

I dunno, maybe my mom's house just has a giant bullseye on the roof (see comment below) for getting parking tickets even when parked legally.