Parking is a limited resource, like anything else, and paying for it makes total sense.

It would be nice to have better alternatives to getting downtown, though. Bicycle parking, safer roadways for pedestrians and cyclists, or scooter areas for the last-mile from Caltrain or VTA, would help push people outside of space-wasting cars.

Parking fee only to recover the parking equipment/operating expenses? This doesn’t make any sense.
City should have enforced the additional parking requirements for all new developments, but the city management embraced the idea that people would use public transportation. Ridiculous, the requirement for the builder can be as low as 1 parking space per apartment.

If the lots were paid and the streets remained free, that would reduce people simply parking farther away and walking in, which is the current way I usually access downtown.

Let's see.. I pay taxes to build a parking garage in my downtown area.

Now you want to charge me to use the parking garage I paid for?

Sounds legit.

@Otto_Maddox
No, they'll be charging non-residents since most of the locals will know where allo the good free spots to park are. This way those who have paid NOTHING for the garages will now pay when they use them as well.
You're totally free to pay and use the garages as a local though, so either way you're covered.

so parking free Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Palo Alto and MV wants to charge driving business to surrounding communities. stupid move. Short sighted.

"good free parking spots" - wake up new guy. You think paid parking will stop at this one garage? Sure.

Once you feed the addiction for "revenue" it only gets stronger. New revenue sources must be found.

How about permits for city residents? Let us park where ever we like in the garages I've already paid for.. that would be a good compromise.

Riding a bike into town is a great idea for many reasons, but bike thieves have already cut and stolen one of our bikes (in broad daylight). We need to make alternative options safe and worth it.

How about requiring all of the new developments that have been approved by the council to have adequate parking for each building? And opening these up to the city on nights and weekends?

Cities that have paid parking are doing just fine: Redwood City, San Mateo to name a few. We aren't talking quarters either. Most new systems allow credit cards, smart phone apps that notify when your time is running out, etc. Most well run systems also funnel excess revenue into the downtown area, which would be a great idea since the Downtown Revitalization District no longer exists. Oh, and your sales tax dollars and property tax dollars don't pay for parking garages, the Parking District pays for them. One other thing, people actually write the city and say they won't come back since they can't find a parking space. Dynamic pricing gets more expensive the higher the demand. Someone once said: If pizza was like parking and all pizza was free, there would never be enough pizza!

If MV were to start charging for parking, demand pricing AND staggered pricing would seem to make a lot of sense --- maybe. But before MV starts putting in meters willy nilly, the Council should thoroughly study the effect that imposition of paid parking has had in other cities similar to Mountain View. For instance, study things like whether it actually reduces traffic, its effect upon business revenues, and whether it shifts parking to free streets in adjacent residential neighborhoods. For once, we need more than just uninformed "good intentions". As the old saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with them.

If the Mountain View community shuttle ran into the evening hours, when I go downtown, I wouldn't need to drive and park. I do ride my bike when the weather is nice. I can also drive to Sunnyvale or Los Altos to avoid a "cover charge" for parking.

Great. Push the cars into residential neighborhoods, thanks. I see parking permits in our future.

No. Just no.

I hate finding parking downtown when it's FREE....I will despise it, and our City Council, even more when we have to pay for it. I try at all costs, if going downtown in the evening, to take a Lyft mainly because of the parking issue. But during the day, when I have a50% chance of scoring a spot for even a 30 minute duck into Books, Inc. or for a quick coffee, I would think again if I had to pay for my parking.

Council - think twice. Palo Alto doesn't charge and they have better retail options downtown than MV does. I would drive further for cheaper parking just to make my point to you all. McAllister, stay strong. Hicks and Abe Koga, don't recuse yourself because you have property "downtown". We know where you live. Put your big girl pants on and vote....or get voted out.

Limited parking is resulted by expanding of businesses, large tech companies. They hire lots of employees most of them are not from local, and they some time intentionally avoid hiring local because they argued that Mountain View local may not be as “HUNGRY” as outsiders. Did they pay for the inconvenience of Mountain View residents? Is their business tax paid to city enough to build more parking? As local resident, it is unfair to pay for the parking shortages resulted by tech companies.

I have lived here for 20 years. When I moved here, they tore down trees, replaced them, created an amazing vibrant downtown. I remember 10 years ago sitting outside at Amarin Thai and hearing a gentleman say to his party “Mountain View has soo much better parking and just a much better feel than Palo Alto, that is why we don’t go there anymore!” And now you have lost sight that those evil people in cars, on bikes, Uber delivered are called customers and actually spend money in those restaurants and shops. Turns out they would not survive if those evil people that drove those cars didn’t spend that money with our merchants. Levi’s Stadium was when I first noticed that there must not be a Chamber of COMMERCE in MV. Instead of passing out coupons to everyone parking in those city lots on game day, we decided those evil people should be charged large sums to park there. Maybe, just maybe we should have been encouraging people to come back after the game and have dinner or a coffee. Charging for parking will be the last straw that will now have people sitting in Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Menlo Park, Palo Alto having dinner to say, “We used to go to Mountain View, until you had to pay for parking that didn’t exist”. All we ever did was drive around in circles instead of having dinner and drinks with our friends.” Get over the fact that cars exist, put out less pollution than before and build more parking to encourage the “customers” who live in surrounding cities to actually visit our town and spend money with us. Anybody seen the Mountain Chamber of COMMERCE anywhere?

Our family bikes downtown regularly, but there are very few places to properly park one's bike. If we want to reduce MV's reliance on cars, we need to make MV, starting with downtown far more friendly for people to bike and walk. More bike parking and more distinctly and beautifully marked (and lit) paths for walking/biking. The bike stations by the library (that include a tool station) should be all around downtown.

Has the Downtown Precise Plan been updated yet/recently? Shuttles - paid by a consistent government revenue source (like paid parking income) and better bike access & parking would sure help the transportation situation a lot.

But - please new Councilwoman Hicks - City PLAN iT! The PLANit needs an integrated plan, and needs it quick. Transportation is one of the biggest category of fossil fuel use / and an integrated, 21st century Downtown transportation plan is important.

But - not with the Palo Alto Process (meetings forever). How bout - size the planning for a Silicon Valley alpha test. Try something - three years. See how the Apha test words, then Beta test confirm and Then Full Launch. It's Rocket Science - because it is not at all clear how it all works together. (But the metrics are clear - parking happiness, 1-5 scale, and retailer (COC) happiness 1-5 scale, and RETAIL SALES TAX income from the 16 block former Castro/Downtown redevelopment area.

@Otto - actually the Redevelopment District, from 1969 paid for the building of the Long Drug Store multi-level garage. That specific RDA, and all others, were closed during the term of Gov. Brown (and would have run it's 50 year course anyway).

The School District helped pay for that garage - property tax money was withheld from the districts. Now, over $1,000,000 a year in general property tax revenue goes to just the MVWSD, that formerly would have been diverted. Plus - part of the lease revenue for Longs goes to the MVWSD. SO - I guess even part of the PARKING REVENUE would belong to the two school districts, that helped pay for that garage. YES! The public schools deserve that ROI.

Uh.. and where did the Redevelopment District get the money?

Yep.. the taxpayers.

Sick of paying to use things I've already paid for.. I'm allowed to feel that way.

We're all just revenue streams these days.

The school will piss away that $1 million just like every other dollar they get.

Let's build a new school we don't need, but that's a different topic.

Redwood City has free parking after 6pm. That keeps business at night. Also garages are free for the first 90 minutes always. BUSINESSES CAN VALIDATE. MV is no San Francisco or San Jose.

With Fishscapes closed, Bierhouse cheated by their landlord, and now paid parking, I guess there is no reason to come to downtown Mountain View anymore.

First check if all the existing spots are really full and utilize. Google and Yelp do not list all the parking garages available. This includes the two large multi level spaces those are city owned? 2nd Can we park in city hall spaces after hours? Can we park in the Wells Fargo lot? Kaiser? Those would free up late night space. Perhaps Cal train parking can be open to pay parking for $1 after 6 PM 3 hour limit, that's already an options for us?

So there isn't enough parking on Castro - could it have something to do with all those restaurants that have moved their patios into parking spots? You know, those FREE patios, that restaurants don't have to pay rent for? Yeah, those ones.

The real story is not a "paid parking decision" article in the MVV. The issue is shenanigans involving OMV, the downtown parking committee and the MVCC. The new headline by Mark Noack should be working is "No parking available paid for or not" in or near downtown Mountain View. MVCC will soon rubber stamp again the newly resuscitated RPP program. All available city street parking will quickly disappear. MVCC will reward their most staunch supporters (OMV NIMBY's) with a brand new, more lenient Residential Parking Permit (RPP) program. While you're worried about paying for street meters, what you don't know is the downtown parking committee is back with a previously failed and not improved RPP program. Residents of OMV are still not happy competing for street parking in front of their homes. They know they could petition the city for time restricted streets that would dissuade commuters and workers from "hogging" valuable street all day long continually edging out visitors, service providers and delivery drivers. Those new time restrictions would allow for continual day and evening access for other residents and visitors who wish to park near downtown a few hours at a time. That would mean that folks lucky enough to be walk-able to downtown would have to abide by the same time restrictions and put their cars back in their driveway or re-purposed garages and park within their own footprint. I keep hearing from OMV that people need to walk, bike and Uber downtown , the reality is OMVer's believe the space in front of their homes is theirs in perpetuity and exclusively. I can only imagine the luxury of a single family home withing walking distance to downtown and having the city grant me restriction free parking in front of my home for my vehicles and those of my friends. That will be a pretty sweet deal. They already have shuttle and RV blockades installed throughout OMV with running water and electricity (sold to MVCC as traffic calming Roundabouts:) OMVer's are a crafty bunch.

The first RPP proposal excluded apartments, condo's, PUD's and TOD dwellers, as the downtown parking committee had previously sold the city on the idea that folks in apartments were not in need of free parking permits because they had more off street parking available than single family homes had available- they said.... (because, that would mean more free permits issued than street parking available). The good news is the State Attorney General said that action would be discriminatory. So now, for example, the 200 block of View Street could petition for 4 permits per household (2 residents and 2 guests) under the original proposal. That would be 22 condos and 9 single family homes on a single block or 31X4=124 ~free permits (our block on a good day can hold 25 cars, surely we'll take the 62 guest permits if we must, because they are free or really cheap). Then we can all jet off to Paris for the week, park within a color coded area around the downtown parking district. That's insanity. The new transit center coming and additional housing with no on site or bare minimum parking requirements near Cal Train (because no one has/assumed to have a vehicle:). MVCC should argue 2 hour time restrictions enforced 24 hours per day is the best option and paid parking is the 2nd best option for Mountain View. Only visitors to our vibrant downtown 2-3 hours at a time would require street parking or city lots. 2-3 hour parking restrictions would also dissuade those with multiple vehicles moving into TOD areas - imagine 5 story buildings along the tracks with no on-site parking. Please, MVCC, try the street restrictions first and paid parking second. Every resident must learn to park within their own footprint or have a pretty good darn reason why they can't.

The new proposal calls for time restricted streets and permits for residents that would provide unfettered, around the clock, street parking access!. We also know the silly 72 hour requirement to move locations cannot be enforced with a piece of chalk. The 72 hour restrictions are only for abandoned vehicles and that's why the city continually punts on the RV issue because RV's are occupied, excepting health and safety issues. But that is an issue for another time because Lenny has now adopted the "Vehicle Overnight Sleeping Program" within his "Tenants Coalition". The city will have to step up with a new ordinance to ban overnight parking (like Berkeley) for any vehicle type. It would be nice if the city could partner with a campground/mobile home operator to provide city hook ups at a reduced rate for instance. That would be PC.

Paid parking may be okay, time restrictions for nearby streets is a great idea. Certainly, there should be no free or cheap residential multiple vehicle permits given to residents who already live on time restricted streets and can walk down town. If your home is missing a driveway, then a permit should be issued of course. Boats, trailers, re-purposed garages, new homes with a 1 car city approved garage, folks too tired to shuttle cars in and out of the driveway should not be rewarded with 2,3,4 ~ free permits. Reminds me of "I love living near downtown but I don't like the noise at night" or "I like being able to walk downtown but there is no street parking in front of my single family home even though I have a driveway, I would prefer to park on the street".

Small piece of good news, with all the car window smashing, OMVer's should spend more time petitioning for time restricted streets and RVHVOSP (RV Homeowner Vehicle Overnight Sleeping Program) parking areas off street. That would be good news for all residents of Mountain View and the downtown merchants association.

The original RPP was discriminatory and the new RPP program is deceptive and corrupt. Making a case for paid parking while giving away free parking to friends in OMV is irresponsible. Where is Lenny when I need him? Oh, he lives in OMV with RV Blockades:) Pandering is a science.

Why is there free parking anywhere? So long as there is free parking, I don't see why residents of streets besides Castro should have parking for customers of a business on Castro. There should be fees for parking in the garages and parking on residential streets should be strictly limited to residents of that street. But the garages could give the first hour free to entice customers and the businesses could validate the parking for customers too. Someone's got to pay. The real problem is the all day parking by employees of office businesses in the area, using parking which was not meant for them. A single business could fill up 199 spots in the garage from 8am till 7pm. WOW!