Parking problem downtown - too much of it? Not enough?

[GRDadof3]

25 minutes ago, GRLaker said:

What is Salon?

It's a Facebook group of GR urban hardcore enthusiasts. They used to have meetups where they would have speakers and such, but that ended years ago. Now as far as I know it's just the FB group. 

 

[thebeerqueer]

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

I kind of heard a sad trombone in my head at the end. 

I dunno, I find it peculiar that Third Coast Development put this video out on April Fool's Day and posted it on the Salon page.  In every bit of humor is an element of "truth" from the comedian's standpoint. It's an obvious attempt to poke fun at the people who are saying that there is a parking problem. And TCRE is trying to build and has built projects with little to no provided parking on-site, pushing that responsibility/headache onto the surrounding neighbors.  Plus the owners of TCRE all drive big cars and live in suburban-ish enclaves....   Not that there is anything wrong with that, many city of GR enthusiasts do.  They've also built massive park-n-ride lots for Spectrum employees all up and down Michigan Street and Plymouth. 

But to make a bold political statement like this video is trying to do seems counter-productive in this whole debate. No one wants the parks paved over for parking, or really any more land paved over for surface parking if at all possible. But it's one of the reasons I left the Salon, a whole lot of criticizing people who don't agree with the group-think. 

End rant.

It's disingenuous of TCRE to poke fun at a 'supposed' problem that they are actively participating and profiting from. Smacks of entitlement. 

Also, their projects are highly unattractive. 

[jonrapley]

Their projects may not be the best looking to some people, but I am happy to have them investing money on the Michigan street corridor.

[GRDadof3]

Now this:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2018/04/grand_rapids_down_580_parking.html

Recognizing the loss of downtown parking, city officials point drivers to smartphone apps like myStop Mobile, GR Park and Parkmobile.

MyStop provides bus schedules and location information, while GR park shows available parking nearby. Parkmobile allows mobile users to pay for time at the city's metered parking spaces.

 

Pretty sure all of those 580 spaces were monthly permit spaces.  MyStopMobile and Parkmobile won't help with that. In fact, the city will tell you they don't want you using the meters and Park Mobile for long term parking. That's why you can't renew your parking time on it, you have to reset it after it expires, and hope you don't get a ticket in that short timeframe (I have). 

 

[x99]

There are officially zero available parking spaces east of the Grand River.  Wait times are from 4 to 16 months.  If you own office space and do not own your own parking, it is now officially virtually worthless.  This also (obviously) makes any sort of retail impossible given that it means most of the parking is, in fact, rather un-accommodatingly full.  I'd call all of that a serious problem.

[GRDadof3]

1 hour ago, x99 said:

There are officially zero available parking spaces east of the Grand River.  Wait times are from 4 to 16 months.  If you own office space and do not own your own parking, it is now officially virtually worthless.  This also (obviously) makes any sort of retail impossible given that it means most of the parking is, in fact, rather un-accommodatingly full.  I'd call all of that a serious problem.

Gee, I wonder why DTE picked the West Side for their 250 employees instead of downtown. 

I'm starting to feel like giving up the fight. At least the city has a site with fun graphics (because fun graphics pays the bills ya know). 

https://www.grandrapidsmi.gov/Services/Request-a-Monthly-Parking-Permit-and-Placement-on-Waiting-List

Sorry, fun graphics:

https://www.grandrapidsmi.gov/Government/Departments/Mobile-GR-and-Parking-Services

 

[wingbert]

On 4/3/2018 at 1:33 AM, WMrapids said:

Couldn’t find the old topic but...

*cringe*

 

Hahahaha!  Hooooo boy!  That's hilarious.  Everyone knows the problem is people trying to park their second and third SUV downtown.  Why, if everyone just stopped trying to do that, everything would be fine.  Hahahaha, they sure hit the nail on the head there.  

Pardon my French, but this smells like Third Coast is totally trying to kiss a whole bunch of ass at city hall in an attempt to grease the skids for any future projects they propose that don't provide sufficient on-site parking as part of the design.  "Hey look, we're on your side.  We're totally making fun of those people who might want to drive into the city to work at a job, attend an event, or patronize a downtown establishment.  What a bunch of jerks, eh?"

[x99]

39 minutes ago, wingbert said:

Hahahaha!  Hooooo boy!  That's hilarious.  Everyone knows the problem is people trying to park their second and third SUV downtown.  Why, if everyone just stopped trying to do that, everything would be fine.  Hahahaha, they sure hit the nail on the head there.  

Pardon my French, but this smells like Third Coast is totally trying to kiss a whole bunch of ass at city hall in an attempt to grease the skids for any future projects they propose that don't provide sufficient on-site parking as part of the design.  "Hey look, we're on your side.  We're totally making fun of those people who might want to drive into the city to work at a job, attend an event, or patronize a downtown establishment.  What a bunch of jerks, eh?"

I am not sure Third Coast is guilty of this, but many of the developers working on the fringes often work in close proximity to neighborhoods.  Developers who do that intentionally want to go "short" on the parking in order to use the "free" neighborhood parking in front of everyone else's house.  I'm not one to demonize developers, but when they pull stunts like that they deserve a tremendous amount of grief.  That city policy continues to permit this is disgraceful.  I recall my calculations on one micro-unit project were along the lines of ten acres of street parking being required to service the project if it were built with zero parking and no nearby ramps, and residents had one car per unit.   How the numbers work out is location-dependent, but it can get pretty obscene.  

It's worth noting that the current parking scenario is not going to help bring more residential online downtown, either.  Not every tenant can leave every morning and return at night.   The lack of available parking also puts an end to residential re-utilization of existing buildings which do not have owned parking.  I do not understand how the city things this is sustainable for continued growth over the long term.

[GRDadof3]

16 hours ago, x99 said:

I am not sure Third Coast is guilty of this, but many of the developers working on the fringes often work in close proximity to neighborhoods.  Developers who do that intentionally want to go "short" on the parking in order to use the "free" neighborhood parking in front of everyone else's house.  I'm not one to demonize developers, but when they pull stunts like that they deserve a tremendous amount of grief.  That city policy continues to permit this is disgraceful.  I recall my calculations on one micro-unit project were along the lines of ten acres of street parking being required to service the project if it were built with zero parking and no nearby ramps, and residents had one car per unit.   How the numbers work out is location-dependent, but it can get pretty obscene.  

It's worth noting that the current parking scenario is not going to help bring more residential online downtown, either.  Not every tenant can leave every morning and return at night.   The lack of available parking also puts an end to residential re-utilization of existing buildings which do not have owned parking.  I do not understand how the city things this is sustainable for continued growth over the long term.

It was actually told by a "don't build any more parking" advocate that the world was not going to end with all of this parking going away downtown. I thought to myself that it must be nice to live in a world where customer service and being the best you can be doesn't matter and that creative solutions to problems is "not my problem" and "You figure it out, it's not my job" is the mantra.

I reminded him that office vacancy downtown was still in the double digits...  and retail is still struggling (which relies almost entirely on downtown workers).

[whitemice]

On 4/3/2018 at 10:45 AM, GRDadof3 said:

It's a Facebook group of GR urban hardcore enthusiasts.

I would describe it much more as a group for centrist progressives in the GR metro-area; it's focus on "urbanism" is dubious.

[whitemice]

On 4/5/2018 at 3:11 PM, x99 said:

I do not understand how the city things this is sustainable for continued growth over the long term.

It isn't complicated.  Not everyone drives;  however much people want to refute that claim.  Non-automotive mode share in 2010, in downtown GR, was 39%.  That is before the 7-minute DASH and before the Silverline was operational.  Heritage Hill was 26%, Monroe North was 22%, and Midtown was 12%.

The Third Coast video is funny because it recognizes the reality that poking fun is probably the only reasonable response to the current "discussion" about parking.  Why carefully construct a reasonable response to unreasonable claims?  Nothing is ever going to convince the parking-crisis crowd that there is not a crisis, and nothing anyone can build will ever satisfy the need they perceive - their crisis is eternal and existential [and does not, in truth, have anything to do with parking].

We are getting some big improvements in transit this year as well as yet more parking capacity.  Something like 4,000 parking spaces are under construction. 

[Allison Slater]

5 hours ago, whitemice said:

I would describe it much more as a group for centrist progressives in the GR metro-area; it's focus on "urbanism" is dubious.

I agree, except on the "centrist" part. I'm slightly left-of-center and yet in that place I feel like everyone's much further to the left.

[organsnyder]

12 hours ago, tSlater said:

I agree, except on the "centrist" part. I'm slightly left-of-center and yet in that place I feel like everyone's much further to the left.

There are a few people on the Salon that I'd call "fundamentalist progressive"—they refuse to acknowledge that people with differing viewpoints may have any valid points. But, in my opinion, most people are very reasonable (and the outliers usually don't go unchallenged).

I'd label the Salon as more "community organizer" than "urbanist"—there's a lot of overlap between the two, but the priorities and perspectives aren't always fully aligned. I find value in both the Salon and UP communities for the differing perspectives.

[GRDadof3]

20 hours ago, whitemice said:

It isn't complicated.  Not everyone drives;  however much people want to refute that claim.  Non-automotive mode share in 2010, in downtown GR, was 39%.  That is before the 7-minute DASH and before the Silverline was operational.  Heritage Hill was 26%, Monroe North was 22%, and Midtown was 12%.

The Third Coast video is funny because it recognizes the reality that poking fun is probably the only reasonable response to the current "discussion" about parking.  Why carefully construct a reasonable response to unreasonable claims?  Nothing is ever going to convince the parking-crisis crowd that there is not a crisis, and nothing anyone can build will ever satisfy the need they perceive - their crisis is eternal and existential [and does not, in truth, have anything to do with parking].

We are getting some big improvements in transit this year as well as yet more parking capacity.  Something like 4,000 parking spaces are under construction. 

I already picked that "4000 new parking spaces" claim apart a few pages ago.  The great majority of the parking spaces under construction, nearly all of them actually, are for private use only for the company or project building them. They're not open to the other employers downtown. Even the Studio Park project is a net loss in parking, even though it's adding a parking ramp. 

Most of the employers downtown are small-scale, probably less than 50 employees, and not able to build their own parking ramps or parking lots. They are the #1 user of city-owned (and Ellis-owned) parking downtown.  We're talking tech firms, law firms, accounting firms, financial advisers, foundations, non profits, architecture firms, design firms, marketing and advertising firms, consulting, media, engineering, planning, etc.. With highly paid workers being recruited from all over the country. 

I disagree with your premise that the "crisis" will never be satisfied. It was fine 2 years ago, 3 years ago, 4 years ago, 5 years ago. That was back when the city and DDA knew that investments in infrastructure paid dividends in economic growth downtown. The economic multiplier of an employer downtown is huge compared to pretty much any other inhabitant of downtown other than a resident downtown (retail shopper, tourist, event-attendant, convention-goer). And even many of the residents being added downtown are low income so their economic impact is pretty small. Probably half the units added in the last 5 years. For a city that is still struggling financially, this should be an issue.

I looked it up and there's still a 12+% vacancy rate in office space downtown (in the CBD). That equates to nearly 450,000 square feet, or basically the size of Bridewater Place. That's during an economic boom in the metro area. What happens when the next downturn comes? At least we won't have a crisis to complain about.

BTW, where did you get the mode share data from?  And I'm interested to hear what improvements are coming to transit soon...

I'd personally love to see not one more downtown worker have to drive downtown for work, but no large-scale viable alternative has been put in place yet, that works for most of them. 

* I merged the two parking discussions

[whitemice]

5 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

And I'm interested to hear what improvements are coming to transit soon...

I BLOG most of the transit related news @ http://urbangr.org/

And I will have a post up about the upcoming meeting on Thursday [2018-04-12].  There really is some big improvements on the docket - including Grand Rapid's first commuter rail project.  And we will, for sure, get two important improvements to transit this year: a Michigan St crosstown, and a redesign of the DASH (making it far more useful to residents and visitors, not just commuters). 

This fall, finally, if someone is lost in a sea of taillights trying to go to an Arena event . . . that will, legitimately, be entirely on them.  There will be late night frequent transit to out-lots.
This is what Grand Rapids will have very soon, all of these are as close to a sure thing as you can get -

I started the BLOG  - which contains the mode-share date @ http://urbangr.org/gettingaroundmichiganst2015 - because there is no Urbanist community/constituency in Grand Rapids, and information on transportation and other urban topics is very hard to find; the local media won't cover it.   I feel people do not realize how rapidly our transit system is evolving - http://urbangr.org/therapid

[joeDowntown]

@whitemice - Pretty interesting site and stats. While I perspective balky think we have a parking problem, especially with the monthly parking shortage and (perceived?) inertia, it’s great to see an opposing view. 

I see that your numbers are from 2014-2015. How have they increased/decreased in recent years? Would be interesting to see the trend. 

Joe

[GRDadof3]

4 hours ago, whitemice said:

I BLOG most of the transit related news @ http://urbangr.org/

And I will have a post up about the upcoming meeting on Thursday [2018-04-12].  There really is some big improvements on the docket - including Grand Rapid's first commuter rail project.  And we will, for sure, get two important improvements to transit this year: a Michigan St crosstown, and a redesign of the DASH (making it far more useful to residents and visitors, not just commuters). 

This fall, finally, if someone is lost in a sea of taillights trying to go to an Arena event . . . that will, legitimately, be entirely on them.  There will be late night frequent transit to out-lots.
This is what Grand Rapids will have very soon, all of these are as close to a sure thing as you can get -

I started the BLOG  - which contains the mode-share date @ http://urbangr.org/gettingaroundmichiganst2015 - because there is no Urbanist community/constituency in Grand Rapids, and information on transportation and other urban topics is very hard to find; the local media won't cover it.   I feel people do not realize how rapidly our transit system is evolving - http://urbangr.org/therapid

Good info. And I do feel that people going to a concert or sporting event downtown have the uber and Lyft option. In fact, everyone going to those events tend to carpool together even if they drive. Same with bar-hoppers: uber, lyft or pack 10 people in 1 car. Their cries about parking, to me, are reasonably solved. And communication of options is key. 

It's the struggles of small business owners and retailers downtown that bothers me, because I know many. A greatly expanded DASH to me seems like a good way to ease a lot of the pain. Commuter rail: bring it! 

 

[GRDadof3]

I finally got a chance to look at your data table whitemice, based on mode share by census tracts. 

Census tract 20

Downtown

26.7 % walk

2.1% bike

10.8% transit

39.6% total non-auto

The only problem with this set of data is it's only taking data from people who "live" in census tract 20 downtown. Someone who works downtown would never fill out a census survey for where they work, only where they live. So while 39.6% of people who LIVE downtown use some mode of transport other than the automobile (a completely believable data set), what about the great majority of people who work downtown who don't live downtown? Has anyone every conducted a survey of downtown workers and employers to find out where people are coming from? I bet you could even find out what zip codes feed the greatest majority of downtown workers and set up a shuttle service from said zip code.   Even if you got 10% -15% of those people to leave their car in a lot out in the burbs, you'd greatly reduce demand on downtown parking spaces. 

I'm really shocked that it hasn't been done in all of this mode-shift strategy by the city. I hate to say it but I feel like the people working on all of this don't even really understand transportation systems and mobility. Or even economics. ie, do people at the city understand what a monthly permit is and who uses them? Sometimes it seems like the city lumps in monthly permit users to people who complain about lack of parking for arena events. Or lack of parking on the West Side. Although they are all interconnected, it's not at all the same and the solutions are not the same.

Just like the planning commission does not require that you have any planning experience to serve, the parking commission does not require that you have any parking/mobility/transportation experience to serve...

 

[whitemice]

9 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

Has anyone every conducted a survey of downtown workers and employers to find out where people are coming from?

Yes, the survey was completed in February (2018).

By zipcode:

[whitemice]

Interesting factoids from the commuter survey.

• 61% live within a quarter mile of a bus stop.
• 34% already use a mode of transportation other than drive-alone at least once per week
• Only 46% report that having a personal vehicle at work is important due to obligations
• 68% say they could be incentivized to change their transportation choices. . . meanwhile 72% receive a parking subsidy from their employer

To me that looks like a whole lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of mode-share.

[whitemice]

9 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I hate to say it but I feel like the people working on all of this don't even really understand transportation systems and mobility.

I think they have very solid data to support their current policies and the direction of their planning.  There is a false perception that the center city is a long distance commuter destination; but you need ~5 zip-codes to have more than 50% of workers.  There are long commutes, but there is a huge number of short (intra-urban) commutes, which can be potentially shifted with fairly non-dramatic investments. 

[GRDadof3]

23 minutes ago, whitemice said:

Interesting factoids from the commuter survey.

• 61% live within a quarter mile of a bus stop.
• 34% already use a mode of transportation other than drive-alone at least once per week
• Only 46% report that having a personal vehicle at work is important due to obligations
• 68% say they could be incentivized to change their transportation choices. . . meanwhile 72% receive a parking subsidy from their employer

To me that looks like a whole lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of mode-share.

It is, and now greatly enhance the Rapid so it doesn't take 35 minutes and 25 annoying stops to get downtown and you're onto something. 

I completely agree with the 46% that say they don't need a car at work. If downtown could get a decent pharmacy and real grocery store (not way out on the West Side) I think most people would be completely fine without their car during the day. 

That must be a small sampling because there's at least 10,000 people working downtown, from what I remember. Not including Spectrum Health. 

As far as incentivizing, I've used the Ann Arbor example on here many times and told people at the DDA and the Rapid about it. The main difference though is that the AA transit system is chocked-full of park-n-ride stops, for those who can't walk to the bus stop. More heated sheltered stops would help a great deal around GR. Cut out the huge number of stops (the #7 on the West Side has 41 stops along the route, and in some places 5 or 6 stops in a mile). That's utterly insane.

 

[whitemice]

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

chocked-full of park-n-ride stops

There is current research to use church parking lots - which we are chuck-full off - as park-n-ride lots, as these lots are mostly empty during the week;  they would be for use by the churches on weekends.  There is obviously legalities to be worked out but that is one of the "creative" ideas everyone is always demanding.  There really is a crap-top of church parking in within the city.

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

Not including Spectrum Health

Spectrum Health is a principle player in changing the current RAPID#19 into a frequent - are fare-less - cross-town connector.  That project also includes improvements to pedestrian infrastructure at the east end of the Michigan St corridor where Spectrum has its large park-n-ride lots.

[jonrapley]

Unless Spectrum are looking to scale back on their commuter shuttles I can not see the number 19 being popular. I have ridden that bus a handful of time during peak work hours (I work for Spectrum on medial mile and am lucky enough to live close to a Michigan street stop) and there has not been more than 1 or 2 people on it at any given time. 

[Allison Slater]

I bet you'll see a lot more people using the 19 who live in Heritage Hill and along the Michigan St. Corridor once it connects to the West Side and the "Meijer" is open. I recall that was something I had recommended to The Rapid when the project was announced. (I was living in Heritage Hill at the time.) Currently one has to transfer at Central Station, and it's quicker to just walk (although certainly not pleasant with a bunch of groceries and that hill.)

As for monthly parking permits, I know an acquaintance who works Downtown and was told there is a 4-6 month wait on monthly parking permits. Regardless of mass transit, that's unacceptable. If she weren't also a student at GRCC ($3/day and a 5 block walk) she'd be having to put a punishing amount of her income into daily parking. That's going to make it hard for downtown businesses to keep employees, especially in the current employee-favoring market.

Edited April 10, 2018 by tSlater