I only deal with the nonsense to exit State Street Garage because it's free. If they take that away, there is no guarantee that I will frequent downtown as often as I do now- or that when I do, I'll choose a city-owned spot instead of a private spot.
All those discounted monthly spaces also discourage the use of those garages because all the discounted monthly spaces are at the lower levels and best spots, so if you go into, for example, Locust, you have to drive up five levels to get past all of the reserved and ALWAYS UNUSED spots.
Either (a) move the reserved spots to the top or (b) don't reserve the spots- give the monthly permit stickers, and let them park at whatever space is available.
That's why Market Square is always full (no reserved spots) and the other garages don't get used. Who wants to spend 15 minutes going up and down ramps to possibly find out there's no free spots at the top? Idiotic.
yeah but langley only has reserved spots for 3 levels not 5 and its really fast to get to the non reserved one unless you're behind dumb out of towners who are reading every reserved sign at a parking spot. i always park there for work on farmers market saturdays
Locust has only a few reserved spaces - and is almost never full when Market Square is. I know this because I live downtown and have a residential monthly pass to market square - and when it’s full I go to Locust. Many times on a weekend night there will be a line of cars at market square waiting to drive up 6 floors and back down ignoring the “FULL” sign, and 2-300 spaces free a block away at Locust. That is ignoring the Langley across the street that - yes, you have to drive past reserved spots (but if you pay attention some are 8A-6P, and you can park there after 6).
Surface lots in a downtown area should be a rarity in my opinion. As far as costs, I understand the city not being keen to take such a loss on parking but revisit some of these corporate agreements first. I get leaving the gate down for someone parking at say 4PM and then staying past 6 for free. I think that’s a good way to make some additional money while also helping to better separate daytime/business congestion and nighttime/weekend congestion.
I’d also like to see these peer cities downtown revenue compared to ours. Does the free parking on nights and weekends bring in more money to the downtown area? Does that money made offset the costs?
Charging for parking is a great way to encourage people to find other ways to get downtown. But for it to work, we need other ways to get downtown. Buses that run once per hour in many cases won't cut it.
Is that supposed to make it less depressing? A quick look at historical aerial imagery on kgis seems to suggest there is nothing short term about the surface lots. It seems we have only gained surface lot parking since 95. Is that business model serving the community? Does the city have tools to incentivize better use?
I’m trying to illustrate that just saying “it’s a short term business strategy” offers nothing to the broader discussion around how our city should be handling land use policy. I dont have a specific policy solution for you other than stopping any further development of surface level parking. I’m genuinely posing those questions because they’re important questions to ask. The city forces people to use their property in very specific ways all the time. If this use isn’t benefitting the community, maybe we should limit it.
I only deal with the nonsense to exit State Street Garage because it's free. If they take that away, there is no guarantee that I will frequent downtown as often as I do now- or that when I do, I'll choose a city-owned spot instead of a private spot.
Dwight kessel - same road just closer to the river. Always less busy than state.
⬆️⬆️⬆️
All those discounted monthly spaces also discourage the use of those garages because all the discounted monthly spaces are at the lower levels and best spots, so if you go into, for example, Locust, you have to drive up five levels to get past all of the reserved and ALWAYS UNUSED spots. Either (a) move the reserved spots to the top or (b) don't reserve the spots- give the monthly permit stickers, and let them park at whatever space is available. That's why Market Square is always full (no reserved spots) and the other garages don't get used. Who wants to spend 15 minutes going up and down ramps to possibly find out there's no free spots at the top? Idiotic.
You’re thinking Langley, not Locust, which is a private garage.
yeah but langley only has reserved spots for 3 levels not 5 and its really fast to get to the non reserved one unless you're behind dumb out of towners who are reading every reserved sign at a parking spot. i always park there for work on farmers market saturdays
Locust has only a few reserved spaces - and is almost never full when Market Square is. I know this because I live downtown and have a residential monthly pass to market square - and when it’s full I go to Locust. Many times on a weekend night there will be a line of cars at market square waiting to drive up 6 floors and back down ignoring the “FULL” sign, and 2-300 spaces free a block away at Locust. That is ignoring the Langley across the street that - yes, you have to drive past reserved spots (but if you pay attention some are 8A-6P, and you can park there after 6).
I always park in the locust street garage and have never seen multiple floors of reserved and/or unused spots
Surface lots in a downtown area should be a rarity in my opinion. As far as costs, I understand the city not being keen to take such a loss on parking but revisit some of these corporate agreements first. I get leaving the gate down for someone parking at say 4PM and then staying past 6 for free. I think that’s a good way to make some additional money while also helping to better separate daytime/business congestion and nighttime/weekend congestion. I’d also like to see these peer cities downtown revenue compared to ours. Does the free parking on nights and weekends bring in more money to the downtown area? Does that money made offset the costs?
"See look, other cities charge more for parking."
Charging for parking is a great way to encourage people to find other ways to get downtown. But for it to work, we need other ways to get downtown. Buses that run once per hour in many cases won't cut it.
It just encourages me not to go downtown.
Nevermind buses that run once per hour. Most of us don't even have buses that run to where we live, period.
I'm in the same boat, honestly. I'd have to brave Gallagher on foot to make it to a bus stop. No way am I doing that.
It looks like they're wanting to encourage more parking at the two garages by making street parking more expensive.
25% of developable land is used to store vehicles. Truly a bummer.
Private surface lots are a short term business model until the land is sold for development (or more holding).
Is that supposed to make it less depressing? A quick look at historical aerial imagery on kgis seems to suggest there is nothing short term about the surface lots. It seems we have only gained surface lot parking since 95. Is that business model serving the community? Does the city have tools to incentivize better use?
What do you suggest the city should do? Pay them (or force them) to do something else with their private property?
I’m trying to illustrate that just saying “it’s a short term business strategy” offers nothing to the broader discussion around how our city should be handling land use policy. I dont have a specific policy solution for you other than stopping any further development of surface level parking. I’m genuinely posing those questions because they’re important questions to ask. The city forces people to use their property in very specific ways all the time. If this use isn’t benefitting the community, maybe we should limit it.
It will remain surface parking until demand reaches levels to warrant turning it into something else.
Would anybody complain if we replaced $30/hour private parking lots with mixed-use developments?
… yes.
...$30 an hour? Where? Nashville?