Jump to content

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


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts


 

From everything I've seen about the Laker Line, this lot and perhaps another one on the west side of LMD are definitely in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Interesting. City ditches the lot planned for Market Ave near the strip club and goes for the park-n-ride lot out on LMD. Beginning of a new trend?

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/02/lot_near_founders_rejected_in.html

 

Spectrum will be leasing 100 spaces in this new lot. For park-n-ride participants, parking = free, bus ride to downtown = free. For now anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it in principal, and I think it would work great for larger employee parking, as a general strategy, park n rides don't seem like a viable solution, You need parking and plenty of available parking. I think the Market lot as a garage would have been a better option then a surface lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. City ditches the lot planned for Market Ave near the strip club and goes for the park-n-ride lot out on LMD. Beginning of a new trend?

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/02/lot_near_founders_rejected_in.html

 

Spectrum will be leasing 100 spaces in this new lot. For park-n-ride participants, parking = free, bus ride to downtown = free. For now anyway.

 

This will only be appealing if someone will just go stand outside today and realize that you NEED to have an actual climate-controlled facility for people to wait in if you expect them to park 4 miles out of DT and wait for a bus.

 

51b76a9cb3fc4bb50700005d_2013-burnham-pr

 

figure7.jpg

 

 

It doesn't have to be super elaborate, but it has to be sheltered from the cold and heat or else people simply arent going to willingly use it outside of your employer forcing you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. City ditches the lot planned for Market Ave near the strip club and goes for the park-n-ride lot out on LMD. Beginning of a new trend?

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/02/lot_near_founders_rejected_in.html

 

Hope so.  This was a dumb idea. Dirty little secret:  The top floor of every downtown ramp runs about 90-100% empty 8AM-5PM, every day.  Why pay to relocate facilities and pave more dirt when so much parking is empty?  I previously suggested a half-price "double swipe" card and access control gates for these "elevated surface lots" that are underutilized (and in better locations).  That still makes far more sense.

 

(By "double swipe" I mean you have, say, a 10 minute window during which you must swipe out of a top floor gate or card scanner and then the bottom floor gate, or you cannot exit the ramp--easy system along with window stickers to prevent cheating by parking on lower, covered floors. Someone should be able to set this up in about a week in the 21st century...)

Edited by x99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope so.  This was a dumb idea. Dirty little secret:  The top floor of every downtown ramp runs about 90-100% empty 8AM-5PM, every day.  Why pay to relocate facilities and pave more dirt when so much parking is empty?  I previously suggested a half-price "double swipe" card and access control gates for these "elevated surface lots" that are underutilized (and in better locations).  That still makes far more sense.

 

(By "double swipe" I mean you have, say, a 10 minute window during which you must swipe out of a top floor gate or card scanner and then the bottom floor gate, or you cannot exit the ramp--easy system along with window stickers to prevent cheating by parking on lower, covered floors. Someone should be able to set this up in about a week in the 21st century...)

 

I really like the comments by the parking consultant they hired. Common sense. The other thing to consider, and I've pointed out the math on here, is that land downtown is pushing upwards of $2 - $5 Million an acre. Add to that the cost of parking ramps running about $25,000/space and the economics are out of control. Find lots out in the near dirty burbs for $100,000/acre and $12,000/parking space on a surface lot and you could provide free rides for life with the savings you realize. Ann Arbor has gotten this down to a science. and provides park-n-ride passes to employers that they can purchase at heavily discounted prices. The city hasn't built a new ramp downtown in 20 years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will only be appealing if someone will just go stand outside today and realize that you NEED to have an actual climate-controlled facility for people to wait in if you expect them to park 4 miles out of DT and wait for a bus.

 

51b76a9cb3fc4bb50700005d_2013-burnham-pr

 

figure7.jpg

 

 

It doesn't have to be super elaborate, but it has to be sheltered from the cold and heat or else people simply arent going to willingly use it outside of your employer forcing you.

 

There's a much simpler and no cost solution. The bus makes multiple stops if necessary in the lot. Riders sit in their cars until the bus drives in. Riders get out of their cars and walk to the end of the aisle. The aisle-ways would need to be laid out with this in mind so the bus can navigate the lot accordingly.

Edited by Raildudes dad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a much simpler and no cost solution. The bus makes multiple stops if necessary in the lot. Riders sit in their cars until the bus drives in. Riders get out of their cars and walk to the end of the aisle. The aisle-ways would need to be laid out with this in mind so the bus can navigate the lot accordingly.

 

To lots of people, that's going to just look so rinky-dink.

 

They have to sit in running cars (wasting gas), craning their necks looking for the bus. Then they have to get out, grab there stuff, and run to get to the stop, which will be all outside.

 

Many of these people will be required to use this lot for work or school. This would almost add insult to inconvenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To lots of people, that's going to just look so rinky-dink.

 

They have to sit in running cars (wasting gas), craning their necks looking for the bus. Then they have to get out, grab there stuff, and run to get to the stop, which will be all outside.

 

Many of these people will be required to use this lot for work or school. This would almost add insult to inconvenience.

 

 

Looks rinky dink to who? Who cares if functions satisfactorily and gets the job done?

 

I'd rather sit in the comfort of my own car listening to my tunes and checking my smart phone than stand or sit in a shelter. Crane your neck looking for the bus? You back in a space or pull in facing the driveway (again it must be laid out properly)

 

Run? why, the bus will wait for folks walking to the end of the aisle. The driver's goal is to pick up everyone waiting, not get thru the lot in as little time as possible

 

Outside? Duh, you will have to walk to the shelter OUTSIDE, more likely quite a bit further than to the bus at the end of the aisle.

 

Wasting gas? The little bit of gas would be miniscule compared to the energy bill for heating a shelter full time regardless of whether there is anyone there or not, not to mention cleaning and lighting expenses etc.

 

It wouldn't operate much different than the MDOT Car Pool lots except you get on a bus rather than in another car or van.

 

You are making this much more expensive and complicated than it needs to be. It's a 330 car lot. (yes I know it can be expanded to 1000)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks rinky dink to who? Who cares if functions satisfactorily and gets the job done?

 

I'd rather sit in the comfort of my own car listening to my tunes and checking my smart phone than stand or sit in a shelter. Crane your neck looking for the bus? You back in a space or pull in facing the driveway (again it must be laid out properly)

 

Run? why, the bus will wait for folks walking to the end of the aisle. The driver's goal is to pick up everyone waiting, not get thru the lot in as little time as possible

 

Outside? Duh, you will have to walk to the shelter OUTSIDE, more likely quite a bit further than to the bus at the end of the aisle.

 

Wasting gas? The little bit of gas would be miniscule compared to the energy bill for heating a shelter full time regardless of whether there is anyone there or not, not to mention cleaning and lighting expenses etc.

 

It wouldn't operate much different than the MDOT Car Pool lots except you get on a bus rather than in another car or van.

 

You are making this much more expensive and complicated than it needs to be. It's a 330 car lot. (yes I know it can be expanded to 1000)

 

 

To the people that are expected to use this, it just seems goofy.

 

Expect workers and students to drive to some lot in Walker, but then also expect them to wait in their cars for the bus to arrive? Why? You might as well just drive the last few miles in a few minutes and pay the money to park if you are going to be running your car, and burning gas. What if the bus is late? Are people just supposed to keep the car going so they don't freeze? It will get real old, real quick.

 

If people want the average non-mass transit user to take this stuff seriously, the first step ought to be not expecting them to use their cars as part of the infrastructure. Since these places are paying to lease spaces, and likely requiring staff to park there, they had might as well make a commitment to the concept by putting something permanent.

 

It's the difference between making the experience worth it so that people will gladly want to use it, or just assuming that because they have to be there, that they will just take it as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the people that are expected to use this, it just seems goofy.

 

Expect workers and students to drive to some lot in Walker, but then also expect them to wait in their cars for the bus to arrive? Why? You might as well just drive the last few miles in a few minutes and pay the money to park if you are going to be running your car, and burning gas. What if the bus is late? Are people just supposed to keep the car going so they don't freeze? It will get real old, real quick.

 

If people want the average non-mass transit user to take this stuff seriously, the first step ought to be not expecting them to use their cars as part of the infrastructure. Since these places are paying to lease spaces, and likely requiring staff to park there, they had might as well make a commitment to the concept by putting something permanent.

 

It's the difference between making the experience worth it so that people will gladly want to use it, or just assuming that because they have to be there, that they will just take it as it is.

 

 

I tend to agree. To have 100 people sitting in their cars waiting for a bus seems like a problem waiting to happen. Even a semi-enclosed shelter can have heaters blasting warm air, to at least make it warmer than the outside air. I've seen some Metra stations like that, not necessarily completely enclosed but warmer than being outside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an article floating around recently about installing solar panel arrays over parking lots. That way, you generate some power while also shielding vehicles from the weather (which saves additional energy, since the vehicles don't need to be cooled down or defrosted).

 

There's one of those at the MDOT carpool lot at E Beltline and I-96. Doesn't cover the entire lot but about 20 or 30 spaces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the people that are expected to use this, it just seems goofy.

 

Expect workers and students to drive to some lot in Walker, but then also expect them to wait in their cars for the bus to arrive? Why? You might as well just drive the last few miles in a few minutes and pay the money to park if you are going to be running your car, and burning gas. What if the bus is late? Are people just supposed to keep the car going so they don't freeze? It will get real old, real quick.

 

If people want the average non-mass transit user to take this stuff seriously, the first step ought to be not expecting them to use their cars as part of the infrastructure. Since these places are paying to lease spaces, and likely requiring staff to park there, they had might as well make a commitment to the concept by putting something permanent.

 

It's the difference between making the experience worth it so that people will gladly want to use it, or just assuming that because they have to be there, that they will just take it as it is.

 

I tend to agree. To have 100 people sitting in their cars waiting for a bus seems like a problem waiting to happen. Even a semi-enclosed shelter can have heaters blasting warm air, to at least make it warmer than the outside air. I've seen some Metra stations like that, not necessarily completely enclosed but warmer than being outside.

 

 

Really?  The parking is going to be free and the bus ride free. Why would I drive into town and then either hunt for a parking spot or a meter? If my employer is paying for my parking, probably yes I would, but if it's coming out of my pocket, I'm using the free lot / free bus.

 

Your illustration shows a BRT shelter. That got me thinking about the Silverlline. There's a free parking lot at 60th, full everyday. No heated shelters on the Silverline. A co-worker has a friend who works at Spectrum Downtown. She parks in the lot for free and  gets a free pass from Spectrum for the BRT. She could park downtown but either has to pay and walk a ways or park in a Spectrum shuttle lot out at Plymouth and Michigan. She loves taking the BRT and guess what, she waits in the car burning little gas when it's cold and watches for the SB bus which goes behind the BMW cycle dealer on the other corner to turn around. GVSU is going to make it financially attractive for the students to use the lot also.

 

As for a 100 people at a time waiting, that's 2 1/2 full size buses or 3 1/2 shorter Dash style buses.  I'm guessing they will have to run DASH bus headway's or close to it at peak times to handle both the commuter needs and student needs. It's about a 10 mile round trip to hit both GVSU and Spectrum. By my calcs, 4 or 5 buses could do 10 minutes headway's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Bad idea. Until a comprehensive fast shuttle system direct from the burbs into downtown is established, the rate increases only hurt people and business owners who have no other alternatives available. Office vacancies are still in the mid 20% downtown, no need to give business owners one more reason to move elsewhere (like the West Side)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with GRDadof3.

When we were in Grand Rapids last week for a meeting, all of the other business owners/future business owners were going on and on about how they would never put their business downtown/in the city because it was too expense and there weren't any better options for mass parking/mass transit. Now, all of my own thoughts on that aside, it was a wake up call for us when we saw how visceral their response was to downtown parking. However informed or enlightened we might all be re: these issues, a lot of people are still extremely resistant. I don't think they're ready for this kind of transition. Gah.

So yes, I agree, some other things need to be addressed before GR can really jump in to something like this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with GRDadof3.

When we were in Grand Rapids last week for a meeting, all of the other business owners/future business owners were going on and on about how they would never put their business downtown/in the city because it was too expense and there weren't any better options for mass parking/mass transit. Now, all of my own thoughts on that aside, it was a wake up call for us when we saw how visceral their response was to downtown parking. However informed or enlightened we might all be re: these issues, a lot of people are still extremely resistant. I don't think they're ready for this kind of transition. Gah.

So yes, I agree, some other things need to be addressed before GR can really jump in to something like this. 

 

 

The article also states that parking revenue has reached an all time high. So it's not like the city is hurting for parking revenue. 

 

"The city's year-to-date parking revenue is up 13 percent from the previous fiscal year, bringing in $1.4 million more."

 

Also, a parking consultant from Chicago might have different mindset than what is applicable for a Tier II city like GR. Using the stick here instead of the carrot will only cause businesses to move to low cost nearby suburban office parks. Chicago you can use the stick because it's a world-class international city. A company like Boeing can absorb an extra $50,000 to pay for its executives' parking spaces. The Grand Rapids downtown branch of a bank maybe not so much.

 

My recommendation is that the city tread carefully with the fragile office market downtown, especially with opportunities for office space opening up near downtown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...

Interesting editorial from the Business Journal. I assume the opinion is written in response to the city being asked to pay for a car-share program in the Arena South project? 

http://www.grbj.com/articles/83293-city-proposal-to-start-its-own-business-is-a-waste-of-taxpayer-dollars

http://www.grbj.com/articles/82953-arena-place-closing-in-on-projects-last-retail-tenant

I agree, why is the city being asked to provide this car sharing business? 

Edited by GRDadof3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a common practice for launching car-sharing in mid-size markets.... I have not seen the details here, but often Zipcar requests a revenue backstop for the "proof of concept" period. For example, as a condition of entering the market, $xxx,000 of revenue needs to be generated in the community, or the contract holder (i.e. the local government) needs to make up the shortfall. Yes, this is private company but car-sharing is also a valuable tool to lower car ownership and use....not by requiring it, but by giving the choice. Zipcar offers some fairly compelling statics for societal impacts in other communities as far as increases in transit, walking and biking, lowered car ownership, etc after they enter a market. 

I'm hoping though that GR is not actually getting into the carsharing business, but is contracting with Zipcar....it is so much more convenient to be able to tap into a brand and a platform that is already shared by the majority of other cities in the US....including Chicago and Ann Arbor. 

Edited by Jippy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the deal is with Enterprise. I must've missed this article back in early August:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/08/where_car_share_service_may_be.html

When I read that article, it doesn't seem like they're "entering into the business" of car sharing, but are acting as a major partner. The city partners on a lot of things.

 

Edited by GRDadof3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.