Regarding the parking issues written about in the Herald (the courthouse debacle and Everett Community College): I am disabled and if I am unable to find handicap parking or parking very near where I need or want to go, then I just don’t go to that location. I would not be able to do jury duty, and I could not take any classes at the college. Nor could I do any business with any shops or services if there is not decent parking.
I do not understand why any building(s) is not required to provide enough parking spaces, especially handicapped parking. If they don’t accommodate for the disabled and the elderly, I thought this was against federal law?! (By the way, two spots of handicap parking to 50 spots of regular parking are just ridiculous at this point, since there seems to be a lot more handicap people than in past years. This is my own observation, of course.)
It’s just like with the development of homes, apartments and condos (and businesses, mind you). Developers seem to be exempt from providing more than just a minimal amount of infrastructure, including parking. That’s how our cities’ and counties’ governments treat their citizens with their requirement for permits. There’s no regard for the needs of the communities. It’s all about what they can do for the developer because a larger tax base is better than no development, right? So they let them get away with minimal improvements, and then they will deal with the traffic/parking issues “later.” For Pete’s sake, how long are we as voters going to put up with runaway governments that have requirements that do not meet the communities’ needs? The sheep mentality is all I can say. Think about it.
Cindy Shobe
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.