Parking Meters in Brady Arts District

[rebound]

This is mostly just for discussion purposes, but why should the city have to provide any free parking downtown?  As more people utilize downtown, both living there and for entertainment/work,  parking will be a more sought-after resource.  It seems only reasonable that the users are charged for the service.

[Red Arrow]

This is mostly just for discussion purposes, but why should the city have to provide any free parking downtown?  As more people utilize downtown, both living there and for entertainment/work,  parking will be a more sought-after resource.  It seems only reasonable that the users are charged for the service.

Automobiles are the only reliable method for most of us to go downtown since Tulsa's public transit system is what it is.  Most public transit systems are subsidized, so the users are not paying their way.  Consider free parking the subsidy for the public transit system we don't have.

[TheArtist]

In my area of downtown there are getting to be fewer and fewer parking spots in the evening and weekends as there are more residents, events, etc. They just park there and the cars sit all evening or day on the weekend. So pretty soon there will essentially be no street parking nearby and your best option will be the $5 parking garage. So then the question becomes do you want to have no street parking and pay $5 for the garage a block or two away? Or $2 parking closer to my store? Plus if they do that what I will do is say... "spend $30 or more in my store, show me the app on your phone that shows you paid to park and I will pay for your parking (deduct $2 from your purchase total). Or if you spend $50 or more in my store, show me your garage parking ticket and I will pay for your parking. Other businesses can do something similar.

Pretty soon with the growth in the area and the residents and their guests, etc. taking up the street parking more and more to the point that soon there will be no street parking, if they leave things the same, your choice will then be to pay $5 for the garage, and not the $2 street parking nearby.

For my business its good to have spots constantly opening up nearby, and if you want to stay more than 2 hours, the parking garages will be an option.

[Red Arrow]

In my area of downtown there are getting to be fewer and fewer parking spots in the evening and weekends as there are more residents, events, etc. They just park there and the cars sit all evening or day on the weekend. So pretty soon there will essentially be no street parking nearby and your best option will be the $5 parking garage. So then the question becomes do you want to have no street parking and pay $5 for the garage a block or two away? Or $2 parking closer to my store? Plus if they do that what I will do is say... "spend $30 or more in my store, show me the app on your phone that shows you paid to park and I will pay for your parking (deduct $2 from your purchase total). Or if you spend $50 or more in my store, show me your garage parking ticket and I will pay for your parking. Other businesses can do something similar.

Pretty soon with the growth in the area and the residents and their guests, etc. taking up the street parking more and more to the point that soon there will be no street parking, if they leave things the same, your choice will then be to pay $5 for the garage, and not the $2 street parking nearby.

For my business its good to have spots constantly opening up nearby, and if you want to stay more than 2 hours, the parking garages will be an option.

I certainly understand the need for parking spot turnover.  Free parking doesn't need to be unregulated parking but it would bring up how to pay for enforcement.  Newark Delaware had (late 60s, early 70s) limited street parking near the University.  Someone chalked tire treads and if you were there too long, you got a ticket.  I don't know if the city or the University paid for enforcement.

Offering to pay for a customer's parking is not new but it is a good idea.  It tells me you want my business.  Well, it's a good idea except that your pedestrian customers will want a discount too.  Shopping mall merchants pay for their customer's parking in the rent they pay to the mall owners.  It's a lot more convenient for the customers.  Ultimately the customer pays for parking in marginally higher prices at the stores.  Since pretty much every one at the mall arrived by auto, there are probably not too many complaints from pedestrian customers.

The merchants and city need to decide if parking meters are for parking turnover or revenue.  If the parking rates are low enough, the business that would typically do a (pick a number) $10 sale could participate in parking reimbursement.  The price of a ticket could help make up the difference to pay for enforcement.

[TheArtist]

I certainly understand the need for parking spot turnover.  Free parking doesn't need to be unregulated parking but it would bring up how to pay for enforcement.  Newark Delaware had (late 60s, early 70s) limited street parking near the University.  Someone chalked tire treads and if you were there too long, you got a ticket.  I don't know if the city or the University paid for enforcement.

Offering to pay for a customer's parking is not new but it is a good idea.  It tells me you want my business.  Well, it's a good idea except that your pedestrian customers will want a discount too.  Shopping mall merchants pay for their customer's parking in the rent they pay to the mall owners.  It's a lot more convenient for the customers.  Ultimately the customer pays for parking in marginally higher prices at the stores.  Since pretty much every one at the mall arrived by auto, there are probably not too many complaints from pedestrian customers.

The merchants and city need to decide if parking meters are for parking turnover or revenue.  If the parking rates are low enough, the business that would typically do a (pick a number) $10 sale could participate in parking reimbursement.  The price of a ticket could help make up the difference to pay for enforcement.

As far as I can tell the parking system is "self contained" the proceeds go to pay for the employees and maintenance, replacement, upgrades, signage, etc. Its not a source of revenue and I wonder where people get that idea? They don't even make enough to do what they want to do with what they make which is why so many are broken down and we have multiple systems (haven't been able to afford a downtown wide change all at once) etc.

I need turnover, and if not then we need to go back to the zoning issue and transit.  We fought for the zoning thing and got no where (which could help with where to place public garages and transit so they worked well with retail areas etc. but that was a no go) we had very little support from the people.  Now we are trying this solution and everyone is up in arms.  WTH!

[rebound]

Automobiles are the only reliable method for most of us to go downtown since Tulsa's public transit system is what it is.  Most public transit systems are subsidized, so the users are not paying their way.  Consider free parking the subsidy for the public transit system we don't have.

I get your position, and maybe could see a compromise solution.  First, I think most of us would agree that we aren't getting a robust transit system anytime soon, so that's not even on the table.  Also, per Artist's posts below, the issue is with parking turnover and availability, rather than "parking" in general. 

I could see this working in a similar vein to turnpikes.  I.E., there are plenty of free roads to get me between TUL/OKC/Lawton, but they are a little slower and take a little more time than the turnpikes.   I am more than happy to pay for the direct premium route, but others may choose to take the back roads.   For downtown parking, the street parking is the premium and should be charged for.  If the city subsidises free parking, it would be best done in large parking garages.  These might be a bit further away from the door of the establishment, but it would be free.  That general scenario might satisfy both sides.  Free parking, but a little less convenient, for those that want it, and premium street parking for those willing to pay for it.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I could see this working in a similar vein to turnpikes.  I.E., there are plenty of free roads to get me between TUL/OKC/Lawton, but they are a little slower and take a little more time than the turnpikes.   I am more than happy to pay for the direct premium route, but others may choose to take the back roads.  

I use the turnpike to OKC a lot...for many years.  Occasionally we take route 66 for the "road trip" feeling of it.   Did that again over Christmas and it is always a refreshing change.  Got some good pics of several sections of old road.  Found a 1961 Cadillac for sale that looked interesting.  Ate at Ken's Pizza in Chandler - very disappointing this time...they have changed.  And it took about 4 hours from Edmond to Sapulpa, not counting lunch.  We spent probably 30 minutes doing touristy stuff (pics, etc) so the 1 hr 40 min trip took almost double by not using turnpike.  

Noticed that Richardson (candidate for governor) has bill board saying he will "make turnpikes free again..."   Geez...just shows how stupid he is right out the gate...turnpikes in this state have never been free, even thought that WAS the promise to fool people into voting for them - that they would be free when "paid for".

Could go south to I-40, then west to OKC for free!  Have done that a few times and it only takes about extra 20 - 30 min overall for where I go in that area.  Very viable when there is heavy construction on the Turner.  But notice how Tulsa is 'boxed in' with pay roads - it's the only way OKC can keep their "edge" - let everyone in and out of that area for free while overcharging everyone to get into and out of Tulsa area.  That is a multi-million dollar benefit/subsidy to OKC over us.

[Red Arrow]

For downtown parking, the street parking is the premium and should be charged for.  If the city subsidises free parking, it would be best done in large parking garages.  These might be a bit further away from the door of the establishment, but it would be free.  That general scenario might satisfy both sides.  Free parking, but a little less convenient, for those that want it, and premium street parking for those willing to pay for it.

Interesting.  I don't mind walking a few blocks.  The last time I was downtown, I parked near the County Court House (mom's estate stuff) near 7th and Denver.  I got done with the Probate folks and still had time on my parking meter so I walked to Decopolis and bought a couple of Christmas gifts. Then I stopped by Lassalle's and got a Quarter Muffulette to go before returning to my car.  0.8 mile 'round trip per Google Maps.  No biggie though.  My usual lunch break walk is 2.4 miles.

[Red Arrow]

I am more than happy to pay for the direct premium route, but others may choose to take the back roads.

...and Pike Pass makes that so easy.

[heironymouspasparagus]

...and Pike Pass makes that so easy.

Plus ya save a 'nickel' using the pass...

[cannon_fodder]

Didn't we reach a conclusion on parking meters in the Arts District some time ago, then implementation hit a snag (or failed for whatever reason).  To this day I don't think there are working meters at anytime in the Arts District.  People from the towers take up spots all day to avoid paying $25-50  a month to park, much to the annoyance of merchants.

People wouldn't expect the mall to provide free parking for them to get to their office.  These spaces are the parking for the restaurants and shops downtown.  The discussion on how much and when is important, but if we can't implement the 8-5pm baseline version of parking meters... I have trouble paying too much attention to the more rigorous details.

Basically, it's all academic until we can show that we can actually implement some plan.

[patric]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/news/city-matters-the-solution-to-tulsa-s-parking-system-no/article_823f985f-fa63-5556-a50f-5bf2f5393a5f.html

[heironymouspasparagus]

Automobiles are the only reliable method for most of us to go downtown since Tulsa's public transit system is what it is.  Most public transit systems are subsidized, so the users are not paying their way.  Consider free parking the subsidy for the public transit system we don't have.

Would the subsidies going to Jones Airport be considered to public transit or private...??  Subsidy from those of us who don't have private planes for those that do, not paying their (whole) way.


http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/aerospace/jones-riverside-airport-cleared-for-million-in-improvements/article_cb56a0b8-1a84-5e92-9c41-08ed2cc61db6.html

[TeeDub]

Thanks 2014. 

It would be public.   Much like our taxes going to bus and rail systems that you don't use.

[TheArtist]

Again, people are complaining that the city will be taking away their free parking.


First off the changes in pricing and hours would not apply all over downtown, they can be selectively applied to those areas that want and need it due to "locked in parking" by residents and workers in the area.

There already is no free parking during the days, so no change there.  

Evenings and on Saturdays, more and more there is no free parking in my area for the residents and workers take up the spots... and then you park several blocks away in spots that even with this plan could still be free parking.   (Residents may already have parking in a parking garage, but if they see a spot right nearby where they live... why not take it if its free? Then where is the free parking for you and my customers?) (Restaurant and store workers may be told "Do not park in front of the business that makes you money!" but that doesn't stop them from parking in front of another restaurant or business.) I have several new restaurants coming to my area along with several new hotels (even if they have valet or garage parking, if I was going to a city, or an event at a hotel, and saw a free street spot nearby on the way there I would snag it lol)

We just did a study that addressed this issue in the Downtown Walkability Study that cost us $75,000 and everyone loved it and said we needed to implement all of it.  This parking meter issue was just part of an "holistic" approach in which all the parts work together.  And it was even noted in the study that changing the parking from "free" can seem counterintuitive, and that often some merchants complain.  But that they have found that after its implemented, its usually those that complained the loudest, who then most loudly hail it as a success!  Studies show that when its applied SALES GO UP! Doesn't "seem" like they would, but the facts show that they do.  

And again, there would still be free parking nearby in those spots and areas where people do not park as much (where you sometimes end up parking now anyway).  But in those areas where the parking is locked in and full, there would now be a paid option if you so wish.