[Vision2020] Where's the parking

Nils Peterson nils_peterson at wsu.edu
Wed Jun 28 00:57:15 PDT 2006


On 6/27/06 11:33 PM, "Bruce and Jean Livingston"
<jeanlivingston at turbonet.com> wrote:

> To cross reference this to our earlier discussion, many, probably most,
> myself included, would support the redevelopment of the grain elevators on
> the edge of downtown.  Simply asking questions about "where's the parking"
> is wise planning, rather than blindly re-zoning the property and eliminating
> parking requirements, only to discover parking problems later.  Asking these
> questions need not be divisive, and the questions ought not be thought to be
> out-of-place or irrelevant.  Other experiences have demonstrated that
> parking is an issue downtown, and it is an issue from there to the
> University.  Ignoring real parking concerns so that we can be "pro growth no
> matter the costs" by giving the developer everything he or she requests is
> unwise and foolish.


Thanks Bruce for this thoughtful reply.

I agree asking about the parking is wise planning. P&Z was moving to propose
Beebe develop a 'parking mitigation' plan. That seemed like a plausible path
to me, a way to raise the question of parking at the rezone stage, but since
the rezone did not discuss uses, allow the solution to be brought forward at
the building permit stage. It looked like a way to finesse the separation we
now enjoy of zoning from other hearings, eg CUP/PUD.

But without agreement on the nature of the parking problem(s) it may be
difficult to agree on the nature of an acceptable mitigation, so I was
attempting to start these threads on parking to get an analysis of what the
parking problem is, such that its solution could be better designed.

We got distracted by developer bashing and then bashing one another. Sorry.

Bill Parks thinks there are 3 parking problems, "impulse" parking (to shop);
employee parking, and downtown resident parking. If so, three solutions
might be needed. And they might not involve on-site parking. It may also be
that downtown parking is used by students unwilling to pay for UI parking --
I don't know Bill's thought on that -- but that could be a fourth problem.

Philip Cook added an interesting item to the conversation with his pointer
to the High Cost of Free Parking (At first I thought this might be a spoof
on a similarly titled video about an infamous retailer, but its at the
American Planning Association website and the first chapter is an
interesting read -- if not the common wisdom.)

The Idaho Smart Growth scorecard (
http://www.idahosmartgrowth.org/projects/scorecards/SmartGrowthScorecard-Com
mercialDevelopment.pdf) provides some help, suggesting on-street parking is
important, and that off street parking be behind or screened from the
street. From that one might conclude that employee/resident parking is one
kind of problem, to be addressed onsite, and visitor/shopper (impulse)
parking is to be addressed on the street.

That leads me to the thought that 3-hour parking downtown might be part of
our problem. Perhaps CBD street parking should be one hour, and some other
lots handle longer-term parking.

I understand we'll have a chance to continue this discussion in July when
Gritman brings forward a rezone for land it owns south of Jackson. I don't
know what they will seek, General Business or CBD.






More information about the Vision2020 mailing list