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

[organsnyder]

4 minutes ago, temporary.name said:

How long has it been that GR has had bike lanes? Something like 5+ years. And yet, vehicle traffic is increasing faster than bike traffic. How much more efficient could our roadways be if those bike lanes were removed and lanes or parking were added back. I think people are waking up to the fact that Aunt Mildred, who has a bad knee, is not going to bike five miles into work. Neither is the 20-something nurse who works 12 hour night shifts because she is new and needs to pay her dues. Neither is the doc who has cushy day hours because he can afford not to and its not practical; "Ma'am, I know you are going into labor, but I'll be a couple more hours because my derailer is loose and I have a ten mile bike ride. Can you just wait?

Alternative transportation is never going to fit 100% of use-cases—there will always be people who need to drive due to physical impairments, life/work requirements, etc. However, I'd venture to say that 75% of commuters could utilize other options if their usage patterns were better aligned with what the system is able to provide. This would require adjustment both on the part of the individuals (such as the realization that a 25-minute bus commute isn't really that much worse than a 10-minute car commute), and a system better equipped to serve them (better reliability, frequency, etc.).

Regarding bike lanes: For them to really be effective, we need a comprehensive network; I'd say we're 30% there. Furthermore, they need to be maintained to the same level of service as the rest of our transportation network (what's the city's response time for clearing road debris from a bike lane compared to a normal vehicle lane?).

[wingbert]

Balancing parking availability, parking rates, mass transit, etc. in conjunction with managing and encouraging positive growth trends for employment and residential opportunities takes a deft hand.  Not to sound like a wet blanket, but between the entrenched provincial mindsets of some (let's put the ownership of the private downtown parking monopoly on the board of the city parking commission) and the Pollyanna-like optimism of others (bike lanes will fix our traffic problems!) it seems like a foregone conclusion that the city of Grand Rapids will continue to find ways to screw the pooch until all the steam is finally taken out of the current resurgence.  I mean, this city sits by passively accommodating a property squatter like Azzar and closes a public sidewalk to "protect" pedestrians from his lack of investment in a crumbling building but when the owners of McKay Tower invest in some lighting that does nothing but add vibrancy to the downtown skyline the city can't move fast enough to jump all over them and shut that down.  When your priorities are that screwed up it's difficult not to think the city is doomed.

[x99]

10 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

I do not agree with @x99 on his assessment of The Venue Tower being a Clusterf*ck though. I'm pretty happy with the way it turned out and I'm sure they'll find parking. Maybe a tiered, "how far do you want to walk to park?" price for the apartments?  

Well,  It's only a cluster really if the rumor I heard about the parking spaces "reserved" actually being double-booked spaces is true.  Otherwise, it's turning out well and apparently on time.  However, Ottawa/Fulton is a very busy ramp that also needs to service the Arena, so it will be interesting to see how that all works out.  Went downtown at night a few weeks ago and parked in Pearl/Ionia -- it was full up 3 floors up!  The last time I was there at night, it was basically empty.  I'm assuming it's all residential parkers.  Lots of filled spaces at night just wouldn't work at Ottawa/Fulton.  

12 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I do not think more ramps downtown are the answer, except those that are directly attached to a specific project. I truly believe they have to find a way to get more people to NOT drive downtown for work. Getting 10% of the 6000 monthly parkers (600) would be a reasonable goal to start with I would think. 

That won't change anything.  The waitlist right now is so long that no one will let go of a parking card even if they don't use it.  It can take YEARS to get one back.  The only way business growth downtown is not dead in the water is added parking.  I cannot imagine you will see announcements of any new employers coming in unless they come into a building with captive parking.  Even setting up a small 4 or 5 person office would be rather complicated without parking.

10 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

That is another good idea Joe. Apparently the smartest people in GR are on this board and not serving on the parking commission.

No, no.  If you're the city you need to pay six figures to a "consultant" to tell you what you want to hear or what should be obvious.  

[thebeerqueer]

2 hours ago, organsnyder said:

...  I've found I have a different perspective after busing/walking to work for the past 1.5 years: I notice a lot of things—crosswalk timings, plows pushing snow up onto sidewalks, construction blocking sidewalks for a year at a time...—that I didn't notice before; most of these are minor annoyances, but some of them can be hazardous. If we're truly serious about effecting a mode shift, our city's leadership needs to experience it personally.

I couldn't agree more. For a city that is trying to diversify its transportation mix and increase it's walkability scores these are major hindrances. Additionally, it sends the message that pedestrians/visitors are less important than a property squatter, construction project, plow efficiency, etc ... 

[GRDadof3]

5 hours ago, temporary.name said:

Lifestyles sell. Reality is boring. 

How long has it been that GR has had bike lanes? Something like 5+ years. And yet, vehicle traffic is increasing faster than bike traffic. How much more efficient could our roadways be if those bike lanes were removed and lanes or parking were added back. I think people are waking up to the fact that Aunt Mildred, who has a bad knee, is not going to bike five miles into work. Neither is the 20-something nurse who works 12 hour night shifts because she is new and needs to pay her dues. Neither is the doc who has cushy day hours because he can afford not to and its not practical; "Ma'am, I know you are going into labor, but I'll be a couple more hours because my derailer is loose and I have a ten mile bike ride. Can you just wait?

It's a cute idea that people bought; that with a few gallons of paint and a couple Huffys, GR is going to magically become the Netherlands. 

I think I've mentioned this before too, the former head of the Greater GR Bicycling Coalition said that the BEST cities in the country for bicycle commuting are getting about 5% of the population bicycle commuting. The BEST ONES, like Portland and Minneapolis.  GR is like around 1.5 - 2.0%.

I'm not saying bicycle infrastructure is a bad idea per se'.

80% of Ann Arbor downtown workers take transit into work, and AA hasn't built a ramp in 10 or 15 years? Why? Because they basically pay people to ride the bus. Same with Grand Valley students on the #50. 

If I could ride the bus for free to downtown I might do it. Actually scratch that, only if it was a straight shot to downtown and not 29 aggravating stops along the way.

[GRDadof3]

4 hours ago, organsnyder said:

Alternative transportation is never going to fit 100% of use-cases—there will always be people who need to drive due to physical impairments, life/work requirements, etc. However, I'd venture to say that 75% of commuters could utilize other options if their usage patterns were better aligned with what the system is able to provide. This would require adjustment both on the part of the individuals (such as the realization that a 25-minute bus commute isn't really that much worse than a 10-minute car commute), and a system better equipped to serve them (better reliability, frequency, etc.).

Regarding bike lanes: For them to really be effective, we need a comprehensive network; I'd say we're 30% there. Furthermore, they need to be maintained to the same level of service as the rest of our transportation network (what's the city's response time for clearing road debris from a bike lane compared to a normal vehicle lane?).

There's nothing I'd like to do more than spend 55 minutes every day on a bus. I don't know if there's an eye roll emoji strong enough for that one. 

[Sparty97]

People in suburbs are not going to take a bus to work.  They will just select jobs outside of downtown where they can drive to.  Time is precious and people move to Grand Rapids in part because "everything is only 20 minutes away".   

This seems like a disaster waiting to happen.  There will be less parking spots when some of these construction projects take off (example: Celebration Cinema and Lots 4/5).

Edited February 7, 2017 by Sparty97

[Sparty97]

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

80% of Ann Arbor downtown workers take transit into work, and AA hasn't built a ramp in 10 or 15 years? Why? Because they basically pay people to ride the bus. Same with Grand Valley students on the #50. 

 

 

Not sure that Ann Arbor is the best example.  Ann Arbor built a new ramp (677 spots) in 2013 and still have a multi-year wait list for almost all of the lots.  

They are now worried about growth and considering more parking.

 http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2016/07/dda_might_build_more_public_pa_1.html

The fact there are 40,000 students attending UMAA and living in downtown Ann Arbor does skew the public transportation numbers a bit...

[x99]

1 hour ago, Sparty97 said:

People in suburbs are not going to take a bus to work.  They will just select jobs outside of downtown where they can drive to.  Time is precious and people move to Grand Rapids in part because "everything is only 20 minutes away".   

This seems like a disaster waiting to happen.  There will be less parking spots when some of these construction projects take off (example: Celebration Cinema and Lots 4/5).

It is.  We never hit the point where downtown is now a viable multi-use destination since it includes no meaningful retail opportunities, apart from a few scattered restaurants.  It is still basically an office park that now has a full parking lot.  The disaster is no longer "waiting to happen" in terms of growing past an office park. It's here.  

Beyond that, though, it's worse:  When the office users start figuring out the situation (and when those surface lots close, it won't take long...), all hell is going to break loose.  You flat out cannot do business when you have to tell customers and clients to take a bike.  You have to leave.  And so what if enough leave that there is a little breathing room?  Well, with a 5 to 7 year lease term, do you really want to risk being stuck with zero ability to serve clients?  After all, the city has already proven it basically does not care.

Edited February 7, 2017 by x99

[GRDadof3]

I didn't mean to call people to arms with their pitchforks and torches.  I don't think it's too late either. 

Does anyone see any value in an expanded shuttle bus program from the burbs? Straight shot from say... Meijer parking lots... to downtown. No stops in between? 

The Meijer in Cascade has a big corner carved out with MDOT that's a park-n-ride lot, Southeast corner to be specific. Could other Meijer stores be partners? Or the Interurban Transit Partnership look at acquiring land? 

If you charged $100 month, had 1000 people participate, that's $100,000/month, $1.2 Million a year. You'd have to carry financing on the land or lease spots from Meijer, plus the overhead of the buses, drivers, insurance, stations, etc... I don't know if there's enough meat there for a viable business plan, but maybe a public-private partnership? 

 

[Quercus]

12 hours ago, temporary.name said:

I oppose tax funded bike systems that interfere with existing infrastructure that was designed for other uses besides biking. 

We may be '30%' there but is it worth it to invest in the remaining 70%?  I don't think so.

Are you implying roads were never designed for anything besides cars? Roads existed long before cars. One of the reasons cities put in bicycle infrastructure is because the general population forgot that bicycles are allowed on roads. That can result in aggressive behavior and fatalities.

You say you support streetcars. Would you support the installation of 30% of a streetcar system?

Bikes aren't a silver bullet for parking problems. Neither are buses, cars, or Harleys. But they all deserve a spot on the road.

[joeDowntown]

My perspective: I work downtown and live in the burbs. I would never drastically increase my commute time for public transportation.

But I also seek job opportunities that are in the city. And we eat, drink and socialize downtown. 

There are a lot of people like me. Buses won't help. Bike lanes won't help. So the city better figure out something quick. The lot I park in (not owned by the city or Ellis) has 3 monthly parking spots left. 3.  

Smart development would be taking a multi-faceted approach to address transportation downtown. Right now, it seems like we're planning for something we're not, and not addressing what we are. 

@x99, are you in theatre? I actually agree with a lot of what you say, but then you throw in such dramatic statements. To say downtown is an office park with a few scattered restaurants is a bit absurd. 

Joe 

[amylynne]

I rode my bike to and from a meeting downtown last night and took the bus home from an event this evening, so clearly I am a total weirdo and you can all judge me now.

Saying that bike lanes are preventing traffic from being efficient isn't very true. As far as I can tell from biking and driving a car through downtown we don't actually have many traffic problems. We have rush hour for 20-30 minutes twice a day when traffic backs up in certain areas. The rest of the day traffic moves fine.

 

[GRDadof3]

9 hours ago, amylynne said:

I rode my bike to and from a meeting downtown last night and took the bus home from an event this evening, so clearly I am a total weirdo and you can all judge me now.

Saying that bike lanes are preventing traffic from being efficient isn't very true. As far as I can tell from biking and driving a car through downtown we don't actually have many traffic problems. We have rush hour for 20-30 minutes twice a day when traffic backs up in certain areas. The rest of the day traffic moves fine.

 

I don't think anyone here is passing judgment on the "actual people" who choose to ride the bus or the "actual people" who choose to bike to their destinations. Just like people who choose those modes shouldn't pass judgment on those who can really only practically drive, because it's really the only viable option they're being presented. We're talking about systems. 

 

[organsnyder]

No one is saying that everyone needs to stop driving and only get around on a bamboo-frame fixie. However, we also need to recognize that part of developing a comprehensive network that encourages all modes of transportation. Some modes of transportation are going to always be more expensive—both to the user, and for society—and they should be priced accordingly. For those of us that are willing and able to change our habits in ways that lower costs (I can't even really call it a sacrifice that I have to sit and read a book or listen to a podcast for an extra 25 minutes a day), the system should encourage it.

As it is now, the system is incredibly inflexible: either you have a monthly parking pass, or you roll the dice in finding a spot. I contend that that is leading to increased usage of monthly passes by people that would be willing to use other modes, but that need the assurance of dedicated parking. If the system were more flexible (hell, even the ability to have multiple physical passes for a single spot to allow for easier sharing among colleagues), we could use our existing resources more efficiently.

We may need more capacity, but that's not the main problem right now. We need to focus on how we can use our existing facilities to better serve the needs of the community. If we do that, than we'd also multiply the effectiveness of any added capacity we build in the future.

A side note: I'd be happy if the city would just re-activate credit card processing. The whole system has been "out of order" for months, now.

Edited February 8, 2017 by organsnyder

[GRDadof3]

I think we all pretty much agree that solutions need to be found, both short term and long term. Who wants to sign up for Parking Commission?!

My issue is that recently, in the last few years, 99% of the effort has been trying to mode shift everyone, by the city and the "Mobility Department" using the stick instead of the carrot. And big money paid to consultants who really don't seem to understand mid-sized city dynamics, only Tier 1 cities.

You guys will all be happy to hear that it SOUNDS like the city commission and at least one downtown stakeholder is actively working on a commuter option. 

I've also heard that Colliers (who leases a lot of office space downtown) is working on a comprehensive parking study and "communique" for downtown and prospective downtown business owners. Good for Colliers, but what a cluster. 

 

[arcturus]

On 4/10/2014 at 7:21 AM, arcturus said:

It's a good time to be a parking lot owner in downtown Grand Rapids.

Quoting myself from nearly 3 years ago.  Of course we all knew this.

[organsnyder]

1 hour ago, GRDadof3 said:

Who wants to sign up for Parking Commission?!

Funny you say that—I just started looking into it yesterday due to the discussion here. From my (mostly outsider) perspective, I don't think that we're doing enough to focus on how improved customer service and flexibility could better leverage our existing assets.

[GRLaker]

21 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

I think I've mentioned this before too, the former head of the Greater GR Bicycling Coalition said that the BEST cities in the country for bicycle commuting are getting about 5% of the population bicycle commuting. The BEST ONES, like Portland and Minneapolis.  GR is like around 1.5 - 2.0%.

I'm not saying bicycle infrastructure is a bad idea per se'.

80% of Ann Arbor downtown workers take transit into work, and AA hasn't built a ramp in 10 or 15 years? Why? Because they basically pay people to ride the bus. Same with Grand Valley students on the #50. 

If I could ride the bus for free to downtown I might do it. Actually scratch that, only if it was a straight shot to downtown and not 29 aggravating stops along the way.

A Silver Line for southwest, southeast, and north of GR could go a long way to create this non-car utopia downtown that people want to create. 

[organsnyder]

12 minutes ago, GRLaker said:

A Silver Line for southwest, southeast, and north of GR could go a long way to create this non-car utopia downtown that people want to create. 

The Silver Line would meet that criteria, except that the routing once it gets downtown really screwed up the "rapid transit" part of BRT. It's extremely fast (on par with driving) all the way up to Wealthy. However, it often encounters traffic snags when it meanders by GRCC, Butterworth, etc. The stretch of Wealthy from Jefferson to Division is especially bad during the afternoon rush. I understand the rationale for this routing, but it really can slow things down. I usually prefer taking the #1 in the afternoons for this reason.

Editing to add: I do agree that adding express BRT routes would greatly enhance commuting options for downtown.

Edited February 8, 2017 by organsnyder

[wingbert]

Welp, the tipping point for the suburban exodus appears to be closer than ever and the city wants to pretend everything is going to be okey dokey.

http://woodtv.com/2017/02/08/no-silver-bullets-to-solve-downtown-gr-parking-dilemma/

 

[GRDadof3]

26 minutes ago, wingbert said:

Welp, the tipping point for the suburban exodus appears to be closer than ever and the city wants to pretend everything is going to be okey dokey.

http://woodtv.com/2017/02/08/no-silver-bullets-to-solve-downtown-gr-parking-dilemma/

 

We are on the cutting edge here at UPGR. 

[Quercus]

I would love to see Wood TV dig a little deeper. It's interesting to hear that "about 95% of downtown parking is at capacity during the workday." Is that public parking? Private? Are the spaces actually filled, or is that the number of passes that have been sold? How many tenants have actually stated they are leaving because of a shortage of parking? How many have moved in because the location gives their employees more transit options? How is "downtown" being defined? Everyone seems to have a different definition on that front. When it comes to new construction, how often are parking-related variances being granted? If there is a problem, why aren't free market principles solving it? Weren't people complaining about parking around the arena back in 2000?

If there are any transportation planning students on here looking for a thesis...you may have hit the jackpot!

Although we may disagree on the existence or extent of the problem here, hopefully we can all agree that it is a much better issue to be facing than the alternative.
 

12 hours ago, temporary.name said:

30% of a streetcar is 100% of a streetcar system. It is like digging half a hole. A hole is a hole. A streetcar system is a streetcar system. 

This is one of my all-time favorite Urban Planet comments. I bruised me face and my palm after reading that one.

[GRDadof3]

18 minutes ago, temporary.name said:

Your original comment was not clear at all about what you think constitutes a 'system.' I, using the correct definition, assumed you meant a complete, operational, functioning, taking passengers and making money 'streetcar system.'  If you're counting, for example, a streetcar system that goes around a block (fully operational, mind you) as 30% of some future / planned / dreamed for end goal, than it is STILL a streetcar system.

I apologize that your inability to cognitively grasp my point caused you to hurt yourself. 

I agree, what constitutes a complete transportation system? Does one even exist? Anywhere in the world? So if there's no such thing as a complete transportation system, then there can't be an incomplete one. What does a 100% streetcar system look like? Serves every, man, woman and child right at their doorsteps?

The current bicycle infrastructure might not be to what the city would "like" to do, but that doesn't make it an incomplete system, especially since bikes can legally use the streets without infrastructure. 

This discussion might be a hot one but it's necessary. 

[GRDadof3]

31 minutes ago, Quercus said:

I would love to see Wood TV dig a little deeper. It's interesting to hear that "about 95% of downtown parking is at capacity during the workday." Is that public parking? Private? Are the spaces actually filled, or is that the number of passes that have been sold? How many tenants have actually stated they are leaving because of a shortage of parking? How many have moved in because the location gives their employees more transit options? How is "downtown" being defined? Everyone seems to have a different definition on that front. When it comes to new construction, how often are parking-related variances being granted? If there is a problem, why aren't free market principles solving it? Weren't people complaining about parking around the arena back in 2000?

If there are any transportation planning students on here looking for a thesis...you may have hit the jackpot!

Although we may disagree on the existence or extent of the problem here, hopefully we can all agree that it is a much better issue to be facing than the alternative.
 

This is one of my all-time favorite Urban Planet comments. I bruised me face and my palm after reading that one.

What do YOU suggest the solution is, Quercus? Or are you of the belief that no problem exists?