Downtown Parking Facilities

[twincitizen]

This event Tuesday night ought to be of interest to many urbanMSP'ers:

https://www.thedatabank.com/dpg/132/per ... &c=8229266

On Tuesday, August 12, TLC welcomes you back to Republic for our third Transportation on Tap event of the year! Enjoy light appetizers on us and talk bike, walk, bus, and rail with other TLC members and friends. This month we'll dig into the topic of parking in the Twin Cities.

How do parking policies influence how we get around and how our neighborhoods develop? Who pays for free parking? How do parking spaces and placemaking initiatives intersect? Who is embracing bike parking? And how does parking in Minneapolis and Saint Paul compare to other cities nationally and internationally?

When: Tuesday, August 12, 2014
5 PM - 7 PM

Where: Republic
221 Cedar Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55454

[mattaudio]

City parking ramp at Walker Art Gallery a loser for taxpayers
http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 30131.html

“We wish more people would park with us, but they don’t seem to do that,” said City traffic and parking services director Jon Wertjes.

[twincitizen]

From the StarTribune

City Hall has banned new surface parking lots downtown. Now it’s pushing to enforce existing requirements for landscaping.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/253670271.html


Sounds good to me. This will at least hide them a little behind fences and or trees/shrubs and make them a little less fugly. Hopefully long range they will all disappear all together though.

Strib has an update: http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 87961.html

[EOst]

Complete with a great Frey quote:

Frey said it sounds like Short is “asking for a date with a developer. And I hope someone asks him out.”

[lordmoke]

In case anyone wasn't aware, Short is the owner of that full-block-crater monstrosity on 2nd Ave & 9th St. He does not own either of the small buildings though.

[twincitizen]

From the StarTribune

City Hall has banned new surface parking lots downtown. Now it’s pushing to enforce existing requirements for landscaping.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/253670271.html


Sounds good to me. This will at least hide them a little behind fences and or trees/shrubs and make them a little less fugly. Hopefully long range they will all disappear all together though.

Strib has an update: http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 87961.html

And now a Strib editorial: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/edit ... 10971.html

[min-chi-cbus]

I can't believe ANYBODY has a problem with sprucing up crumbling parking lots! To me, that solution is so obvious it shouldn't even have to be enforced. Think of it from a business perspective: if a customer can choose where to pay for parking, is he going to chose your crumbling lot or the one that looks like it's cared for? And as far as how can the owners afford to make these changes: charge more for parking. That's how every other business in the history of business (well, successful businesses) recovers from rising costs -- they pass it down to the customer.

[Silophant]

But these changes would require a few parking spots to be removed, and removing even one surface spot downtown is tantamount to removing all parking downtown and declaring a HOLY WAR ON CARS!!!1

(Source: Two of my coworkers, upon learning of the impending redevelopment of the Nicollet Hotel block)

[xandrex]

I can't believe ANYBODY has a problem with sprucing up crumbling parking lots! To me, that solution is so obvious it shouldn't even have to be enforced. Think of it from a business perspective: if a customer can choose where to pay for parking, is he going to chose your crumbling lot or the one that looks like it's cared for? And as far as how can the owners afford to make these changes: charge more for parking. That's how every other business in the history of business (well, successful businesses) recovers from rising costs -- they pass it down to the customer.

If you're parking your car in a lot, do you actually care that much what it looks like? They're all really about the same - open tracts of asphalt with no visible security. A few trees might be nice, yeah, but nobody is going to circle around looking for the prettiest lot. They're looking for some place that is close and inexpensive.

[mullen]

i love that opinion piece and this highlights why it's been so hard for downtown to improve. it seems only increased demand for open parcels will get these surface lot owners to sell their cash cows. with developers competing and driving up prices.

my personal top of the list for worst is that lot across from the ameriprise building. but there are so many to choose from.

[FISHMANPET]

I'd say location is the biggest factor when choosing a lot to park in downtown, but if everything else was equal, I'd choose the nicer looking lot. If the owner cares enough to keep up the lot then maybe they care enough to keep their security cameras working or have someone patrol the lot and basically I'd have less of a chance of damage to property or self.

But location is 99.99% either way so the rest is scraps.

[nordeast homer]

I can't believe ANYBODY has a problem with sprucing up crumbling parking lots! To me, that solution is so obvious it shouldn't even have to be enforced. Think of it from a business perspective: if a customer can choose where to pay for parking, is he going to chose your crumbling lot or the one that looks like it's cared for? And as far as how can the owners afford to make these changes: charge more for parking. That's how every other business in the history of business (well, successful businesses) recovers from rising costs -- they pass it down to the customer.

If you're parking your car in a lot, do you actually care that much what it looks like? They're all really about the same - open tracts of asphalt with no visible security. A few trees might be nice, yeah, but nobody is going to circle around looking for the prettiest lot. They're looking for some place that is close and inexpensive.

Actually, I typically look for a place that has an attendant and looks maintained.
1. I feel like my car is less likely to get broken into.
2. I don't want to give my money to someone who has no interest in keeping up their property.

[mattaudio]

So. If we truly want to see the highest and best use for land in our city, including downtown blocks that are currently surface parking...

Why isn't it on the city's legislative agenda to support the legislature changing the property tax to a land value tax?

[xandrex]

Actually, I typically look for a place that has an attendant and looks maintained.
1. I feel like my car is less likely to get broken into.
2. I don't want to give my money to someone who has no interest in keeping up their property.

^Clearly that's not the norm for thinking, though (otherwise, someone in the market would actually be doing it in a meaningful way). And I assume people who are most concerned about security choose parking ramps (regardless of if those are actually any safer). I can't speak for parking preferences in my area of downtown. When I do drive, I always park in Ramp C to take advantage of early bird specials ($6.25 for the day) rather than the $9-10 they seem to charge over where I am. Plus, being so far away is an incentive for me to continue taking the bus (since driving ends up being not any quicker and actually further away).

Frankly, most of the lots around town I see are pushing capacity during the weekday, so these owners probably see improvements as loss of cash flow.

[twincitizen]

The article we've been waiting for is on the cover of the MSP Business Journal today, courtesy of Sam Black:
https://twitter.com/MSPBJnews/status/586538002790412288

It looks like someone has been tracking how many parking spaces have been eliminated at the various surface lots (and one ramp) that have been lost to development.

[acs]

Reading the whole article, which mainly consisted of downtown employees complaining about parking costs and Realtors threatening to move companies to suburbs, I thought of this article and was reminded just how far behind we really are in our flyover state.

http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/0 ... es/389658/

[Wedgeguy]

The article we've been waiting for is on the cover of the MSP Business Journal today, courtesy of Sam Black:
https://twitter.com/MSPBJnews/status/586538002790412288

It looks like someone has been tracking how many parking spaces have been eliminated at the various surface lots (and one ramp) that have been lost to development.

Can someone clarify if the number under the red list are the actual number of spaces/stalls that will be in the parking structures, or is this the difference above what was the number stalls on the asphalt lots before they were taken over.

Ok These are the number that will go away, but some blocks or projects will have parking built back into them eventually. Nic Hotel Block, and Ritz block come to mind. While most of these new structure will be private parking, they do still hold car in them.

[PhilmerPhil]

So with an 8% reduction in space to store cars, can we expect to see an 8% reduction in space to move them?

[grant1simons2]

http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/300806751.html

Senate bill would allow added fee for downtown parking to go towards pedestrian improvements, informational kiosks, transit and bus lines, bike facilities, etc. In both downtown Minneapolis and downtown St Paul

[twincitizen]

Sounds like a great idea and hope it can stay in the transportation bill.

One big question I have is why they didn't get this done in 2013-14 with total DFL control...like did Minneapolis just suddenly realize this was a good idea? Supposedly this item comes from Mpls' legislative agenda this year.

More importantly, why do the cities need legislative approve to charge a fee? Cities currently charge a myriad of fees and surcharges on everything under the sun. Why would they specifically need legislative approval to add a fee to privately-held parking garages? Surely not every fee the city charges is ensconced in state law, right?

Even if this doesn't pass, they could always just increase prices at the several dozen publicly-held parking garages. It's not like the prices are capped by state law or anything. Obviously it would be better if the privately held ramps (and those owned by other government entities like the ABC ramps) were included too.