Parking Meters are holding back Downtown Development

[simms3]

^^^yes, sparking day trips out of curiosity from everyday people who don't have the patience to be tried at the meter could actually do wonders for downtown.

[Debbie Thompson]

I don't think it's the parking meters.  I think it's the malls.  Before malls, people didn't mind paying a little for parking to shop downtown.  Or they parked at Sears, where it was free, and walked to the stores around Hemming.  Or rode the bus to Hemming, and all the stores were right there. Or someone dropped them off and picked them up when they were done.  It was no big deal, and since at that time, Jacksonville had sprawled out only to about University Blvd to the south, it wasn't too far for that.   The air conditioned malls, where one could go from store to store in comfort, did in the stores downtown, not the parking meters.  It was just too easy to go to the mall.

There used to be meter maids in scooters driving through downtown constantly, with a piece of yellow crayon on a wand.  They'd mark each tire with a yellow mark about once an hour.  If they came through and you had two marks, you would get a ticket.  Easy to control two hour parking, if Jacksonville wants to pay, I guess the current PC term would be, meter persons.

I keep a few dollars worth of quarters in my glove box so I have them handy for parking meters.  No big deal. When I go downtown, I'm going to the UPS store, the Library, or the Landing.  Something like that.  Nothing earth shaking.  If I can't find a parking spot, I go home rather than get annoyed, and come back later.  Or spring for hourly parking.  I can see if you had to make an appointment, and couldn't find a spot, that would be majorly annoying. But if it's that important, spring for hourly parking.

If you work downtown, it makes sense to have a monthly spot.  Four years ago before my job moved out of downtown, they ranged from a low of about $30 at the convention center (ride the Skyway, which was included before it was free) to a high about $90 if you park in a parking garage right where you work in attached parking.  Some businesses offset all of part of the cost for their employees.

[IrvAdams]

Replace meters with time limit signs. Make it easy to park; do something to encourage people to visit.

And while you're at it, remove all or most of those blasted one way streets. What in the world is the purpose? Anyone know? That would also create a more friendly reconnect with Springfield regarding walkability. The one-ways are a racetrack. Navigating across them feels like being the frog in a Frogger game.

[marksjax]

Debbie, good point about the malls and the decline with DT. No doubt that was the trigger.
I didn't realize there was parking enforcement that far back either. I do remember a lively Hemming Plaza and being dropped off there on the city bus from Arlington when I was a kid.
You don't see that anymore (kids going DT on the bus to wander around, it was an adventure, lol). Guess moving the main bus location north caused some of that also.

Irv, couldn't agree more on the one way street issue. Really intimidates those who are not familiar with DT.

[marksjax]

Actually, Downtown will 'magically' begin to improve if the meters are taken out.

You would know if anyone would.
I like that thought!

[ProjectMaximus]

simms3,
You make a compelling argument I must admit. And also that many big city downtowns are not the 'go to' spot for nightlife.
And with your background I respect your take on the cost's associated with travel and parking issues in big cities.
So, perhaps the removal of meters here in Jax would not make any difference, that is certainly possible.
But I just can't help but think that doing something/anything bold such as this might help nudge the needle a little bit to the positive side and might spark an interest in casual day trips to explore the downtown area if nothing else in the beginning.
But realistically I get your points and can't argue with the logic.

Which argument? I don't think Simms is arguing against the removal...he seems to be stating pros and cons and also cautioning that it wouldn't be a magic pill to solve downtown's problems.

That said, I don't understand your premise that because other successful big cities have implemented parking fees in their CBDs that that means parking fees do not have an adverse effect in Jacksonville. As you point out, those cities have far more to do and far more reason to be downtown than Jacksonville does. So how is it an appropriate comparison? Should we have the same rental rates as SF? Just cause they can doesn't mean we should.

It seems quite reasonable that parking meters could be a hindrance to the growth of retail businesses in a struggling downtown AND that a successful downtown can overcome this obstacle. So remove them for now, and when downtown Jacksonville resembles even a fraction of Midtown/Downtown Atlanta, Manhattan, or SF then we can put them back in.

[finehoe]

It seems quite reasonable that parking meters could be a hindrance to the growth of retail businesses in a struggling downtown AND that a successful downtown can overcome this obstacle. So remove them for now, and when downtown Jacksonville resembles even a fraction of Midtown/Downtown Atlanta, Manhattan, or SF then we can put them back in.

Bingo.

[marksjax]

PM, I guess I was arguing that the removal of the meters would be enough of a change to transform DT into a bustling district. I was looking at it from the perspective of citizens who occasionally go DT and have to hassle with the meters and parking tickets, and why they might not want to return.

simms3 was pointing out that there were more problems with our DT than the meters, essentially comparing vibrant cities and their success despite the meters.

Given that perspective I asked myself this question: "If our DT was a busy, lively and bustling DT (like it was pre 1970) would I even be concerned with the parking meters?" Probably not.

I certainly agree with you that their removal or reduction might be a good place to start turning the corner.

Only way to find out is to try it but I seriously doubt our city leaders are likely to take that gamble.

[ssky]

Wow...deja vu! Don't look now, but some of you have just agreed with Jerry's sage recommendation of nearly four years ago! 

93
Downtown / Re: Can Downtown Survive?
« on: July 06, 2010, 02:41:39 AM »
I’ve changed my mind about the need for parking meters downtown.  They’re not needed, and should be replaced with a blanket 2 hour free parking limit throughout downtown.  The city has the technology to enforce that limit already in place.  The few remaining downtown merchants will also help by reporting overtime vehicles. Have a “three strikes rule” that entails issuing 3 warning per year for overtime offenses, followed by $25 citations.  Spell the rules out on the warnings. This will discourage downtowners and office workers from parking long term on the street, and relieve the occasional visitor from fear of fines.

The two top concerns my customers have when visiting downtown is getting mugged, and having their car ticketed or towed.  The parking meters, though not enforced after 5 PM (officially 6 PM) only contribute to visitors’ angst.  My business operates after 5 PM, and all the meters do is act as spooky tombstones in a creepy cemetery.  Visitors are already nervous about visiting downtown, and the meters reinforce that apprehension.   Removing the meters would be akin to planting neat rows of flowers across the lawn.  A little less stressful, Huh?  Isn’t that what Downtown needs: a little less stress?

San Marco has the right idea.  Last week I had to visit my broker, Scottrade, that just moved to San Marco from Downtown.  Scottrade was formerly located at street level on Laura between Bay and Forsyth.  It was a pleasure to do business in San Marco.  I found a parking space right away, and there were no parking meters to pay.  I crossed the street, did my business at Scottrade, and left  in less than 10 minutes.  There are a lot of little 10 minute transactions that do not happen downtown because of the parking meters, and because the parking meters are being fed all day by office workers.

I asked the manager of Scottrade why they had moved to San Marco, after 7 or so years downtown.  I remember when they opened downtown and how excited I was about having them nearby.  The manager told me that doing business was difficult in downtown, and that his customers complained about how inconvenient it was to visit the downtown office.  Parking was a major concern, followed by the preponderance of vagrants and general seediness of the area.  He stated that parking in San Marco has not been an issue for his customers.

I also asked the manager if, when downtown, Scottrade had any contact with the downtown community, specifically DVI.  He said no, nothing, never met DVI.  On the other hand, San Marco rolled out the red carpet, and Scottrade was showered with attention by the various community organizations that operate there (I can’t remember which ones).

So, let’s get rid of the downtown meters and start enforced 2 hour free parking.  I guess DVI will have to find something else to adhere their stickers to.

[AuditoreEnterprise]

PM, I guess I was arguing that the removal of the meters would be enough of a change to transform DT into a bustling district. I was looking at it from the perspective of citizens who occasionally go DT and have to hassle with the meters and parking tickets, and why they might not want to return.

simms3 was pointing out that there were more problems with our DT than the meters, essentially comparing vibrant cities and their success despite the meters.

Given that perspective I asked myself this question: "If our DT was a busy, lively and bustling DT (like it was pre 1970) would I even be concerned with the parking meters?" Probably not.

I certainly agree with you that their removal or reduction might be a good place to start turning the corner.

Only way to find out is to try it but I seriously doubt our city leaders are likely to take that gamble.

or possibly at least up the time limit a bit so people weren't running back and forth to cars. I mean it's not like the police are out chalking tires to see if the car is passing the limit anyway

[simms3]

Like the meters, I don't see how eliminating one-ways will magically solve downtown.  Certainly removing meters and creating more "small town" two ways can help make it easier for people  to park for free and maybe to get around, but the fact that people are "so confused" by one-ways is odd to me.  I don't think I can recall any downtown I've been to that doesn't have a ton of one-ways.

Usually when people advocate getting rid of one-ways, it's more "pro-pedestrian" and "anti-car", not to make it easier for cars to get around.  Usually the purpose of one-ways *is* to make it easier for drivers, but it usually increases the speed of traffic, and that can be a hazard if there are a lot of pedestrians.

I contend that there are just a ton of people in Jax who sadly don't get around or out of Jax much.  It's going to sound elitist, but Jax is easily one of those cities where despite all the transplants, there are somehow a ton of people who really haven't left and Jax is their only/main experience.

Here on MetroJax we are often advocating for things that have been implemented in Greenville, SC.  Greenville is a great *little* town, and I would in fact place it in the small town category.  I think there are practices there Jax can implement, but despite how small Jax is, it's actually a much larger and unwieldy town than Greenville.  I don't think downtown should necessarily be viewed as a small town downtown.  Downtown Jax should be the economic engine of the region, and it will suffer until it is restored to that position.  Jobs jobs and jobs are the best and brightest hope for downtown. Eliminating meters and creating one-ways will not create jobs.  In fact, if downtown sees a lot more employment at some point, narrow one-ways will not be a good thing as traffic won't be able to squeeze in.

[thelakelander]

People aren't confused by one-ways in general. It's Jax's ruins of the loop one-way system that has screwed things up for many. For example, if you were on Duval, wanted to head south and missed Laura Street, you're forced to drive six blocks to Jefferson before the next opportunity to turn south.  That's insane and extremely confusing for anyone not familiar with the quirkiness of DT Jax. So I'd argue that removal of meters (I assume free two-hour time limits.....Cleveland is a big city experimenting with this) and two-waying a few streets to create a more context sensitive atmosphere on some blocks (I believe San Diego has done with some streets in the Gaslamp District), would be good if your goal is to make DT Jax a more end user friendly downtown environment. With that said, these things alone will not change DT by themselves.  But doing a lot of small common sense moves and policy changes can do a lot to facilitate positive market rate growth in DT Jax and the surrounding neighborhoods.


DT Cleveland - The Health Line BRT corridor (Euclid Avenue) offers free one hour parking in the heart of DT Cleveland. While the metro overall may be in decline, it's downtown is healthier and more lively than DT Jax.

Below, the two-way section of 5th Avenue in San Diego's Gaslamp Quarter.









All of the east/west streets in the Gaslamp, south of Market Street, are two-way. They've even gone as far as putting four way stop signs up at many intersections instead of full blown traffic signals.  It successfully slows down auto traffic, making it a more pedestrian friendly environment.



Two way streets aren't a revitalization savior but if the goal is to slow traffic down and make a few streets more pedestrian friendly corridors, they do work for that.  In the end, a mix makes the most sense depending on traffic count and livability goals. For example, two-waying Bay, Forsyth, State/Union, Main/Ocean, etc. makes less sense than doing the same with Hogan, Julia, Monroe, Duval, etc.

[IrvAdams]

People aren't confused by one-ways in general. It's Jax's ruins of the loop one-way system that has screwed things up for many. For example, if you were on Duval, wanted to head south and missed Laura Street, you're forced to drive six blocks to Jefferson before the next opportunity to turn south.  That's insane and extremely confusing for anyone not familiar with the quirkiness of DT Jax. So I'd argue that removal of meters (I assume free two-hour time limits.....Cleveland is a big city experimenting with this) and two-waying a few streets to create a more context sensitive atmosphere on some blocks (I believe San Diego has done with some streets in the Gaslamp District), would be good if your goal is to make DT Jax a more end user friendly downtown environment. With that said, these things alone will not change DT by themselves.  But doing a lot of small common sense moves and policy changes can do a lot to facilitate positive market rate growth in DT Jax and the surrounding neighborhoods.

+100%
The street direction grid has always perplexed myself and others I am with, plus added a complexity whose purpose is lost on any rational individual. And then you have to pay for the privilege of arriving? Simplify.

[simms3]

The Gaslamp doesn't stand between office workers and the 5 and is basically a residential/tourist neighborhood with lots of pedestrians.  I think that's the only difference between that area and "downtown", of which DT SD does have one ways leading to the highway to effectively funnel traffic in/out during rush hours.

I'm not opposed to either, just trying to point out that neither 2-waying streets or removing meters will all of a sudden bring the people and make downtown successful.  1-ways and meters are basically a fact of almost every downtown in America.  Some are more successful than Jax, and some are like Jax and not successful.

Sounds like Jax should simply have a more effective 1-way system that's easier to understand for drivers going in/out (a la East/West from 95) and 2-way all of the N-S streets such as Laura.

[thelakelander]

The Gaslamp doesn't stand between office workers and the 5 and is basically a residential/tourist neighborhood with lots of pedestrians.  I think that's the only difference between that area and "downtown", of which DT SD does have one ways leading to the highway to effectively funnel traffic in/out during rush hours.

Jax is similar, except a lot more empty. The majority of office space in DT Jax is south of Adams Street. Nothing stands in the way of it and I-95 via the Main Street, Acosta and Hart Bridges. For the majority of downtown's side streets, one can pitch a tent in the middle and not worry about getting hit by cars. For most, traffic would move just as efficient if their signals were replaced with four-way stop signs.

I'm not opposed to either, just trying to point out that neither 2-waying streets or removing meters will all of a sudden bring the people and make downtown successful.  1-ways and meters are basically a fact of almost every downtown in America.  Some are more successful than Jax, and some are like Jax and not successful.

I agree they aren't the end all but I don't see a strong argument in keeping them either. Turnover was an issue in 1950 when there were three times as many people and not many parking decks.  Now it's a ghost town.

Comparing the situation to the NBA, in 1990, you needed an entire team to guard a prime Michael Jordan. In 2014, you would not need to dedicate five guys to slowing down the 51 year old version. In short, how we addressed a problem 60 years ago may not be the right way to address today's environment.

Sounds like Jax should simply have a more effective 1-way system that's easier to understand for drivers going in/out (a la East/West from 95) and 2-way all of the N-S streets such as Laura.

Jax really needs to decide what it wants to be.  When that's determined, everything else, from transit vs roadway investment to 1-way vs 2-way streets, etc. should fall in place.