Minutes Exhibit C  i
Port Commission Regular Meeting
of March 8, 2016
,.

To: Port of Commissioners

From: Damon Darley
9736 1St ave. nw
Seattle Wa, 98117

Commissioners meeting 3/8/2016

I am not sure that the Port has taken into account that the Shilshole Bay/ Golden Gardens
area is a complex multiuse recreation area, and as such is a Seattle area treasure.

The Marina tenants already are paying high fees. Even
a 30' slip costs enough to lease a nice
Lexus. Our guests or racing crews, which are an integral part of boat ownership, would be
impacted and also reduce the value of our moorages.

In addition to the Shilshole tenants there are the Guest Moorage
users Including area Yacht
Clubs that have organized cruises to Shilshole, national Sailing Regattas, boat
ramp users,
Golden Gardens park patrons including weddings and parties at the Beach House, The
Dog
Park, runners and walkers, bikers, the occasional Car Club, and tourists who just come by to
look at the boats and the sunset.

At this time area parking includes lots at the Port, Boat Ramp, Golden Gardens, the
Dog Park,
and a significant amount of on street parking. It should be noted that at this time there is no
"Parking Problem" as such that needs to be solved. At times all the available lots and
on
street parking are near full. Some days with park users, or Sailboat racing crew, and others
with pickup trucks and trailers for sport fishing, or with Park overflow.

The probable outcome of the Port converting to pay parking would be
many potential users
would opt out by parking in the street, Boat Ramp, or Park lots. The City would likely
see this
as an opportunity to discontinue free parking on Seaview Ave. which would move overflow
parking even further afield filling the Dog Park lot and moving into the residential
neighborhoods at both the north and south ends.

it should also be noted that there is no public transportation to this
area including Golden
Gardens further complicating the issue.

As for using pay parking to increase revenues it is a poor tool at best as
a significant portion
of the fees charged would be used to collect those fees and
as profit for the contractor and
flow to Texas or where ever. if more income is required by the Port, reducing the subsidy for
tenants of Fisherman's Terminal would be more effective.

The bottom line is that the small additional income would not be worth the bad publicity and
disruption of this important recreational area.