Mr.Short-termMemory said:

---

I'm not Bob. But this is the map used for soccer and Strait.

---

Thank you. I'm on a renovation project and in a bad spot to go get it.

91_Aggie said:

---

I know I initially felt there was a "bubble" mentality but Mr Yancy has addressed those. He has answered questions here honestly and I don't believe he's trying to hide anything or be dishonest.

I would hate to see this "Paid for City Street" parking continue in its current form. Residents on the affected streets need to be given a method to park their own cars on the street in front of their houses for free or be able to opt out in some way. I would imagine this policy is being considered for Football Gamedays, and as others have said, people will gather at a single house for pre-game get-together and would need to park in front of a house on a street.



Bob, sorry if it was posted earlier, but can you share a map of the neighborhoods where this is parking policy is being implemented.

Thanks,

---

Thanks for the feedback.

So what is the result of this?

Are the people going to get listened to and this is dead on arrival or is the money so great that it should be continued?

It probably didn't achieve the goal of relieving parking congestion.

The question of how much does it cost the city for an event like this never got answered even though it was exclaimed it cost a lot and all hands were on deck.

whoop1995 said:

---

So what is the result of this?

Are the people going to get listened to and this is dead on arrival or is the money so great that it should be continued?

It probably didn't achieve the goal of relieving parking congestion.

The question of how much does it cost the city for an event like this never got answered even though it was exclaimed it cost a lot and all hands were on deck.

---

I don't know the cost yet. These two events were unique and many visitors didn't know the city. That interjects change and we await a detailed staff report. Generally speaking I know everything went smoothly for such large, unique events. Council did receive an email this week from a resident of the Southside neighborhood, who has not given permission for their name to be released, so I will not, but I'll paraphrase later in this response.

I have also reached out a second time to the neighborhood association to ascertain their position. How did it go? Are you opposed? They have no position at this time. Here's the paraphrase, from a member of the group speaking for themself only:

"…wanted to write to you to show my support for the paid street parking initiative…It was generally quieter in the southside area than it has been for football games in the past…At the same time, I saw enough street-parked cars to guess that it brought in significant revenue. I hope it was viewed as a successful trial…"

"…Regarding the concerns that residents have…maybe we can find a system to permit resident parking for free in the future…I hope you all viewed the trial as a success and will move forward with an expanded version of this program in the near future."

The above is paraphrased from a much longer, in-depth email received by council on paid parking. I personally have also heard from folks opposed. On this forum and elsewhere. I have also heard from two other supporters of the pilot program. Of those that support it, all would like to see a resident exemption.

It's not on tomorrow's agenda so I can speak on it here. We'll get the facts, to the penny, and see if it's worth it. Does it really offset public safety expenses in a meaningful way? Did it, as I expressed publicly might be a benefit, mitigate parking in the neighborhood during events? Was anyone towed as a result of it? I've heard "no" as a result of the pilot but some were towed for parking in fire lanes, etc. I did hear from one out of town visitor from Ohio here for a 4H event. She was towed from Northgate and I have issues with the circumstances and have followed up with staff. I'll be asking for an agenda item on our towing policy… I've heard too many stories about what appears to be predatory behavior by towing companies- but that's a different issue.

So no, no final decision. We have a lot of deliberation to do and discussion to have. As with all matters, no one person will decide it'll be your city council writ large.

Constructive feedback always appreciated.

Respectfully yours,

-yancy

If this was about safety where was the response to the complaints about parking on Eisenhower that were actually reported thru SeeClickFix?

Bob Yancy said:

---

whoop1995 said:

---

So what is the result of this?

Are the people going to get listened to and this is dead on arrival or is the money so great that it should be continued?

It probably didn't achieve the goal of relieving parking congestion.

The question of how much does it cost the city for an event like this never got answered even though it was exclaimed it cost a lot and all hands were on deck.

---

I don't know the cost yet. These two events were unique and many visitors didn't know the city. That interjects change and we await a detailed staff report. Generally speaking I know everything went smoothly for such large, unique events. Council did receive an email this week from a resident of the Southside neighborhood, who has not given permission for their name to be released, so I will not, but I'll paraphrase later in this response.

I have also reached out a second time to the neighborhood association to ascertain their position. How did it go? Are you opposed? They have no position at this time. Here's the paraphrase, from a member of the group speaking for themself only:

"…wanted to write to you to show my support for the paid street parking initiative…It was generally quieter in the southside area than it has been for football games in the past…At the same time, I saw enough street-parked cars to guess that it brought in significant revenue. I hope it was viewed as a successful trial…"

"…Regarding the concerns that residents have…maybe we can find a system to permit resident parking for free in the future…I hope you all viewed the trial as a success and will move forward with an expanded version of this program in the near future."

The above is paraphrased from a much longer, in-depth email received by council on paid parking. I personally have also heard from folks opposed. On this forum and elsewhere. I have also heard from two other supporters of the pilot program. Of those that support it, all would like to see a resident exemption.

It's not on tomorrow's agenda so I can speak on it here. We'll get the facts, to the penny, and see if it's worth it. Does it really offset public safety expenses in a meaningful way? Did it, as I expressed publicly might be a benefit, mitigate parking in the neighborhood during events? Was anyone towed as a result of it? I've heard "no" as a result of the pilot but some were towed for parking in fire lanes, etc. I did hear from one out of town visitor from Ohio here for a 4H event. She was towed from Northgate and I have issues with the circumstances and have followed up with staff. I'll be asking for an agenda item on our towing policy… I've heard too many stories about what appears to be predatory behavior by towing companies- but that's a different issue.

So no, no final decision. We have a lot of deliberation to do and discussion to have. As with all matters, no one person will decide it'll be your city council writ large.

Constructive feedback always appreciated.

Respectfully yours,

-yancy

---

So y'all don't think there is any padding the stats by adding up costs after the fact? Seems kinda backwards from a cost analysis? Also Please define why these were different, unique or unprecedented from a cost perspective relative to say an Alabama game.

Bob Yancy said:

---

whoop1995 said:

---

So what is the result of this?

Are the people going to get listened to and this is dead on arrival or is the money so great that it should be continued?

It probably didn't achieve the goal of relieving parking congestion.

The question of how much does it cost the city for an event like this never got answered even though it was exclaimed it cost a lot and all hands were on deck.

---

I don't know the cost yet. These two events were unique and many visitors didn't know the city. That interjects change and we await a detailed staff report. Generally speaking I know everything went smoothly for such large, unique events. Council did receive an email this week from a resident of the Southside neighborhood, who has not given permission for their name to be released, so I will not, but I'll paraphrase later in this response.

I have also reached out a second time to the neighborhood association to ascertain their position. How did it go? Are you opposed? They have no position at this time. Here's the paraphrase, from a member of the group speaking for themself only:

"…wanted to write to you to show my support for the paid street parking initiative…It was generally quieter in the southside area than it has been for football games in the past…At the same time, I saw enough street-parked cars to guess that it brought in significant revenue. I hope it was viewed as a successful trial…"

"…Regarding the concerns that residents have…maybe we can find a system to permit resident parking for free in the future…I hope you all viewed the trial as a success and will move forward with an expanded version of this program in the near future."

The above is paraphrased from a much longer, in-depth email received by council on paid parking. I personally have also heard from folks opposed. On this forum and elsewhere. I have also heard from two other supporters of the pilot program. Of those that support it, all would like to see a resident exemption.

It's not on tomorrow's agenda so I can speak on it here. We'll get the facts, to the penny, and see if it's worth it. Does it really offset public safety expenses in a meaningful way? Did it, as I expressed publicly might be a benefit, mitigate parking in the neighborhood during events? Was anyone towed as a result of it? I've heard "no" as a result of the pilot but some were towed for parking in fire lanes, etc. I did hear from one out of town visitor from Ohio here for a 4H event. She was towed from Northgate and I have issues with the circumstances and have followed up with staff. I'll be asking for an agenda item on our towing policy… I've heard too many stories about what appears to be predatory behavior by towing companies- but that's a different issue.

So no, no final decision. We have a lot of deliberation to do and discussion to have. As with all matters, no one person will decide it'll be your city council writ large.

Constructive feedback always appreciated.

Respectfully yours,

-yancy

---

When you determine the marginal increase in cost due to the increased traffic to the the two big events, can you also give us an estimate of the increase city receipts to the city from an increase in hotel occupancy for two days from an average of 70% to 98+% and the increase in sales tax receipts to the city as a result in the increase in restaurant and other spending by those persons visiting our city?

You are charging to park in a couple of thousands city parking spaces, but an additional 100,000+ persons are paying sales tax in the city. I would bet that the increase in city sales tax receipts far exceeds the actual increase in out of pocket costs to the city for the two days.

Sounds to me the city with charging for street parking is double-dipping on this.

BTW, I live in the historical area and in speaking to at least a dozen residents here over decades, I have not heard of one concern other than one owner made the comment that although a car was parked about a foot and a half across the front of his driveway that it didn't really matter as he could still get out.

Decisions to charge or not charge for parking on the public streets should not be made based on a comment or two that the streets were quieter for the day. Guess what owner, you live two or three blocks from a major event of 100,000 persons attending and another 30,000 or more live, the traffic and possible noise might be a little more and higher for a day or two.

maroon barchetta said:

---

It's absolutely double dipping. The whole thing is a money grab disguised as a solution for a "safety" problem.

---

Yep.

There are about 5,900 motel/hotel rooms in BCS and probably another 500 or so A/B&B in the area. Lets say half are in College Station...3,200.

An increase from 70% to 98% would be an increase of 800 rooms rented for one day and 1,600 for a two day stay. If the average room rate is $200 and with a HOT tax of 7%, the city INCREASE in tax receipts would be about $11,200 if one day and $22,400 for two day stays. If half the guests stay two days, the increase in HOT tax for the two days would be about $16,800.

Add to that the increase in sales tax collected by our restaurants and other businesses. 100,000 persons milling around for a day or two are going to generate a lot of sales tax receipts. , I suspect the increase in $$$ to the city coffer from a two day event would approach $40,000 to $50,000 or more.

That would pay for a lot of overtime traffic control officers (which aren't really needed).

woodiewood said:

---

That would pay for a lot of overtime traffic control officers (which aren't really needed).

---

The venue has to pay for the police officers for traffic. The city outlines the requirements in the permitting process.

Then the ticket prices (and fees) cover the police officer requirements. So they wouldn't need that money to pay for police.

Koko Chingo said:

---

woodiewood said:

---

That would pay for a lot of overtime traffic control officers (which aren't really needed).

---

The venue has to pay for the police officers for traffic. The city outlines the requirements in the permitting process.

Then the ticket prices (and fees) cover the police officer requirements. So they wouldn't need that money to pay for police.

---

I assumed that the venue would pay for security and police to control the event on campus, but does the venue actually pay the city for traffic control three to five blocks off campus? Is that correct? Bob?

woodiewood said:

---

Koko Chingo said:

---

woodiewood said:

---

That would pay for a lot of overtime traffic control officers (which aren't really needed).

---

The venue has to pay for the police officers for traffic. The city outlines the requirements in the permitting process.

Then the ticket prices (and fees) cover the police officer requirements. So they wouldn't need that money to pay for police.

---

I assumed that the venue would pay for security and police to control the event on campus, but does the venue actually pay the city for traffic control three to five blocks off campus? Is that correct? Bob?

---

The city receives nothing from the venue, the artists, or the event management company. The city receives no permitting or any piece of ticket sales. It's pretty much sales tax, hotel tax, and Texas A&M splits the traffic control signage expense with us for the company that puts them out and takes them down.

Respectfully yours and… it's Friday! Have a great weekend all!

Bob Yancy said:

---

woodiewood said:

---

Koko Chingo said:

---

woodiewood said:

---

That would pay for a lot of overtime traffic control officers (which aren't really needed).

---

The venue has to pay for the police officers for traffic. The city outlines the requirements in the permitting process.

Then the ticket prices (and fees) cover the police officer requirements. So they wouldn't need that money to pay for police.

---

I assumed that the venue would pay for security and police to control the event on campus, but does the venue actually pay the city for traffic control three to five blocks off campus? Is that correct? Bob?

---

The city receives nothing from the venue, the artists, or the event management company. The city receives no permitting or any piece of ticket sales. It's pretty much sales tax, hotel tax, and Texas A&M splits the traffic control signage expense with us for the company that puts them out and takes them down.

Respectfully yours and… it's Friday! Have a great weekend all!

---

That's what I thought but wasn't sure. Thanks and you also have a great weekend.

Wouldn't that make establishing a price system to encourage judicious use of the scarce resource even more important?

Mute?

maroon barchetta said:

---

Mute?

---

Guessing he meant, "moot"

AggieBaseball06 said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

Mute?

---

For all intensive porpoises, you knew what he meant.

---

I wonder if his job has French benefits.