Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
As noted though, they appear to actually be costing themselves money via this stupidity.
It will be very interesting to see the results of the next ridership survey relative to the last one, and to see if the city really has shot itself in the foot.
|
I don't see how it could be costing them money.
I think a conservative estimate would be to say that every empty spot in the parking lot equates to one person no longer taking transit.
So with that assumption, for every empty spot the City is not taking in $5/d (this of course assumes no one has transit passes, and in the case of brentwood, the spots weren't used by students looking for free parking, both of which we know aren't true and skew it even more in the city's favour)
But for every full spot the city is taking in an additional $3/d.
So unless the parking lot is less than 63% full, then it's a break even proposition. Brentwood seems to be >80% full most of the time.
And that's ignoring a few of things that would skew it to an even lower % required such as:
1) Some people no longer parking at the pay stations are either parking where it is free, or taking feeder busses, either way the city isn't losing their $5. Nor are they losing that $5 from students that park at Brentwood to avoid paying for parking at the university as I did for the better part of 2 years.
2) As mentioned transit passes mean that not everyone is paying $5/d. Granted it's close, but that would still skew the % even lower.