By Andrea Gregory
Davis Square has always been a hot spot to take in dinner and a movie. However, after enjoying a night on the town some people would return to their cars only to find an orange parking ticket strapped to their windshield.
The problem was a two-hour parking constraint in the metered lots.
Thomas P. Champion, spokesman for the city, said sometime people come to enjoy Davis Square nightlife, but just don’t run back out to the meters.
In the parking lots the meters last until 8 p.m. The city has adjusted the meter lots to take three hours worth of quarters, which should allow people who want to enjoy longer stays in the city not to face penalties.
“This will make sure people don’t get into that bind. They can buy three hours of parking It is in effect now,” he said.Champion called it a minor change in policy aimed at pleasing local business owners and Davis Square patrons. The issue first came to the city’s attention when a few local business owners informally raised concerns over the meters’ two-hour limit.
The meters have all been reset to except three-hour payments. New stickers are expected to be applied soon. The parking meters on the street will remain at two hours. Those meters run out at 6 p.m.
The parking meters will accept three-hour payments -- not except them. These words mean very different things!
Posted by: Ron Newman | April 28, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Ron,
Again, this is what I'm talking about. This is why nobody takes you seriously. Stop being a dick and trying to outsmart everybody. I'm quite certain no one is impressed with your wit or intelligence.
Posted by: They're Free | April 28, 2007 at 05:44 PM
Meters will now take 12 quarters...while Somerville drivers still take it in the shorts.
Posted by: Fool on the Hill | April 28, 2007 at 06:14 PM
This is a newspaper article, and the place for commenting on the article. A copy editor should fix such things before they get into print (or on the web).
Posted by: Ron Newman | April 28, 2007 at 07:12 PM
Here's a novel idea. How about shutting the meters off at 6:00PM all across the city. That way patrons in ALL the city's commercial centers can enjoy their dinners, movies, drinks, strolls, and ice cream. That way EVERYONE can enjoy Cambriville's nightlife and not just Jimmy Tingles patrons.
What a bunch of needledicks.
Posted by: Dr. Mrs. McCarthy | April 28, 2007 at 07:41 PM
Ron,
You have so much time on your hands why don't you volunteer to prrof read their work? You don't seem to understand that you contribute nothing to this site. I'm well past the point where I feel sorry for you. You're obviously a smart guy but you are clearly exhibiting the signs of mental illness. Get checked out and start making a real contribution here.
Posted by: They're Free | April 28, 2007 at 07:45 PM
Sorry Ron,
I think you're a bright guy and very well meaning. I just think you have a lot more to offer this site than snide comments, minutia, and correcting typos.
You're better than that.
Posted by: They're Free | April 29, 2007 at 12:06 AM
I'm with Ron. The accept/except error is a pet peeve of mine. In fact, I jumped over from my blog reader to this site specifically to post the same comment, before I saw that Ron had beat me to the punch. Readers shouldn't have to volunteer to do a job that a newspaper's employees should be doing on their own. And copy editing errors should be allowed to be pointed out (and corrected!) graciously, without snide anti-intellectual comebacks.
Posted by: Jon B. | April 29, 2007 at 01:10 PM
"Readers shouldn't have to volunteer to do a job that a newspaper's employees should be doing on their own."
Jon,
It's a free paper and website. It's not like you're being shortchanged in any way. Most working people get a bit indignant when they're told how to do their job by those who don't pay the, to do it.
Posted by: They're Free | April 29, 2007 at 01:39 PM
"It's a free paper and website. It's not like you're being shortchanged in any way. "
By that argument, facts shouldn't be corrected either. Oh please. If a journalist gets indignant whenever someone corrects them, then they're in the wrong business.
Posted by: Jon B. | April 29, 2007 at 04:45 PM
Funny how the "Director" of Traffic and Parking (JK) doesn't make this anouncment. Don't any department head's have the authority to speak for the department they supposedly direct? I know JK is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but does city hall need to feed the media every story in the city?
Posted by: brickbottom | April 29, 2007 at 04:59 PM
Spell Check is the curse of this generation!
Posted by: Accept/Except, etc. | April 29, 2007 at 06:41 PM
Brick,
Yes. It's called spin control, Dear.
Miss You,
Dr. Mrs. McCarthy
Posted by: Dr. Mrs. McCarthy | April 29, 2007 at 06:50 PM
I'm also with Ron on this. It's clear many articles posted here go through very little, if any, proofreading. It's not like Ron criticized some minute grammatical error. The author of the article used the wrong word which means something entirely different.
I like Ron.
Posted by: Derek | April 30, 2007 at 02:17 PM
Perhaps the "Director" of Traffic and Parking (JK) should look into some new tech and replace all the slanted and bent meter poles and meters with a pay station and clean up the pedestrian walkway, just lQQk at the picture. Check out www.metricparking.com and there are many others. Clean it up and get into the 21st century, and get a lot more parking friendly features like; paying with coins and dollars and stop spending money on old meters.
Posted by: jay o'neil | May 01, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Proper grammar, syntax and spelling are the cornerstone of The American Dream. Viva la Newman!
Posted by: Bob Dole | May 01, 2007 at 05:56 PM
...Make that cornerstones.
Posted by: Bob Dole | May 01, 2007 at 05:56 PM