Valet Parking; An Issue Addressed by Other Cities but Ignored by St. Louis

Valet parking continues to be a problem in the City of St. Louis. Along Washington Avenue, Locust, Lindell (near Compton), Mississippi and on Euclid valet companies are abusing permits issues by the street department. These firms, predominantly Midwest Valet, are pushing the envelop to the point where they are killing the street life in areas where they operate. For example, on Washington Avenue across from Lucas Park Grille they routinely take 4-6 parking spaces which are held until a nice car comes along. This happens despite the permit indicating they use of the spaces is strictly for bringing cars in and out — that cars must be moved to private parking spaces immediately.

The problem we have is the street department is really ill-equiped to address this issue. The city has no valet parking ordinance so streets director Jim Suelmann is basically winging it by issuing these permits. While I appreciate him trying to make due it is really no way to run a city and certainly not a way to deal with an issue that could potentially harm emerging districts. His response to me with respect to violations has been to call the police. I think the police have more important things to spend their time on than trying to keep valet companies from violating weak permits. The Board of Aldermen needs to pass a comprehensive ordinance regarding valet parking.

I did some quick research and found this issue front and center in many cities struggling with overly aggressive valet companies attempting to take over their streets and public parking spaces:

Miami:

From the City of Miami Parking Authority web page:

The City of Miami, in conjunction with the Miami Parking Authority, established a new Valet Ordinance in October, 2004. This ordinance covers the operation of all permanent valet stands within the City of Miami established for restaurants and shopping centers, as well as those created for special events and other one time uses. Operators are now required to submit a formal application that is reviewed by various City Departments, and is administered and reviewed by the Miami Parking Authority.

The actual ordinance (pdf) includes a number of things worthy of consideration for St. Louis. First, they must submit a site plan showing where they will have the drop-off area as well as their desk and key holder. In addition they must show proof of having sufficient off-street parking for all vehicles — on-street parking is prohibited.

They address the issue of “ramping” — the drop-off and pick-up of vehicles:

The public on-street/curbside parking spaces, metered or non-metered, shall only be used for ramping of vehicles. Ramping of vehicles shall consist of allowing the customer to enter or exit a vehicle and to turn it over to or retrieve it from a valet parking operator employee. Ramping shall only be permitted and operated in the public on-street/curbside spaces provided by the department for ramping. There shall be no storage of vehicles in the area used for ramping. A vehicle will be considered stored if it remains in the ramping area for more than ten (10) minutes. Ramping spaces shall not be blocked by any type of sign, structure or other type of object. These spaces shall not be cordoned off by any type of signage, rope or barrier of any kind;

The give the valet company the use of 60 feet (roughly 3 spaces) to perform this operation. This leaves the remaining spaces free for the general public.

Scottsdale, AZ:

The City of Scottsdale recently held an open house to train local valet companies on their new valet ordinance. Their website on valet parking includes a link to the actual ordinance (20 pages) and the application materials (10 pages). Here is how Scottsdale defines the valet parking zone:

The valet parking zone shall be no less than sixty (60) feet in length. The valet parking zone shall be no less than ten (10) feet and no more than twenty (20) feet in width. A valet parking
zone located on Scottsdale Road shall be no less than twelve (12) feet and no more than twenty (20) feet in width. The valet parking zone shall not be located:

(a) Closer than thirty (30) feet to the intersection of any two (2) or more streets;

(b) On any of the roads identified as unavailable on the map specified in section 16-573; or

(c) Within one hundred (100) feet of another valet parking zone which is on the same
side of the street.

Cambridge, MA:

The City of CAmbridge doesn’t waste a lot of words, their short and sweet valet parking page gives you the basics. Here is a bit of their provisions:

E. If there is a parking meter (s) at the valet space (s) the applicant will be responsible for covering the parking meter (s) during the hours of valet operation. The bag used to cover the meter (s) shall be approved by the Director.

F. The cost for valet space shall be $20.00 per year per foot of curb required to operate the service safely between 6 P.M. and midnight on the days required.

G. No charge shall be assessed for the use of this valet service on the public way.

So, a 60 foot space would cost $1,200 per year. Taking 10 spaces, as some of these companies in St. Louis are doing, would cost $4,000 per year. What is interesting is they specifically indicate no fee “shall be assessed” if the valet is operating in the public right of way. This makes sense if you are going to take away public parking spaces you should not be profiting but instead be providing a service.

Palm Desert, CA:

All of these provisions, including the City of Palm Desert, talk about violations and consequences:

Routine inspections and field observations will be conducted by Public Works and/or Code enforcement staff to insure compliance with the regulations set forth to apply to valet parking
permit tees. Violations found will be recorded for reevaluation and possible revocation of the permit.

Others mentioned above go into detail about fines for non-compliance. I like the idea of checking to ensure that permits are being followed. Imagine the building department issuing a building permit but then not performing inspections to ensure it was followed. If the street department is going to issue valet permits they need to be able to inspect for compliance.

Austin, TX:

The City of Austin has a pretty detailed ordinance covering most of the basics, it can be read on pages 123-133 of this PDF document.

Other Cities:

From an article on valet parking from White Plains NY:

In Boston, time limits on how long a vehicle can be parked waiting to be parked are set. Beantown requires records to be maintained for each car parked; permits are issued for one year, and renewable. As of November, 2003, Boston charged $40 per linear foot of curb space used for the permit, and $150 per sign for a five year period.

For example if one parking space was 20 feet long and “Cheers” used 10 spaces for their “holding queue” the fee would be $8,000 a year. Plus the restaurant and business would have to pay the establishment where they were parking the cars if they did not have their own lot or were using a city lot.

Reading Boston’s valet parking permit regulations indicates White Plains has to look at creating valet parking areas where the cars are eventually parked; perhaps consider shared valet parking zones, and insurance issues. Boston does not allow parking at street meters.

When Palo Alto enacted a Valet Parking ordinance in 1999, the fees were similar to Boston’s: $450 permit application, $74 annual permit renewal; $220 short-term permit; $35 per space per week for on-street parking spaces (for the valet parking zone); $150 per valet parking sign fee and a $30 penalty for unauthorized parking in on-street valet parking spaces.

When Santa Monica was drawing up their ordinance in 2001, they recommended $1,750 per valet location, and a space use fee of .50 per hour of valet operation annualized upfront. Santa Monica projected a $50,000 revenue from the 17 operations expected, and that was 5 years ago. They also opted for a uniform rate, so motorists could not congest traffic by “shopping” for the least expensive valet rate.

In Houston, valet parking regs were enacted in 2003. Businesses there must apply for a valet zone permit for $100 a year. Valet companies in that city which operate the valet parking for businesses that offer it must pay $1,000 the first year and $750 each additional year. Houston also requires the valet companies operating the nightly drop-offs and returns to maintain liability coverage of a minimum of $300,000, and perform a criminal background check on their “Kookies.” (Remember Edd Byrnes as the Parkboy on 77 Sunset Strip?)

In the mile-high city of Denver, they have a most specific ordinance which can be read at www.denvergov.org/parking_Management/template311681.asp. The ordinance allows the valet offering establishment two meter spaces (40 feet) for their valet zone included in the excise and license application fees. And Additional meter spaces for more than a 40 foot zone are purchasable for the annual meter time request for one year upfront about $2,500 back in 2001 when the ordinance was enacted. This is in addition to the fees the establishment will have to pay for the private parking area where the cars will eventually be parked.

The issues are many: hours of operation; method of operation; how much of the street is given over; insurance; who parks the cars; where they are parked; the routes the cars take to and from the valet zone; signage; licensing fees; and potential revenue and enforcement penalties for violations.

The City of Denver has a very nice 2-page summary of their ordinance. This helps the public and the operators know what to do and expect without having to read through a lengthy ordinance written in legalese.

Clearly this is an issue that cities all over the country have faced and addressed. I’ve been writing about valet parking abuses in St. Louis since February yet I’ve not seen any new or proposed ordinance coming out of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen. I volunteered my time to assist the city streets department in drafting some guidelines for valet parking but I was given the brush off.

Along Washington Avenue the valet parking woes are spread across three wards in a three block area! The 1100 block of Washington where Copia takes nearly 300ft for car parking is located in the 7th Ward (Phyllis Young). The 1200 block where Lucas Park Grille and a club take up a considerable percentage of the block is located in the 5th Ward (April Ford-Griffin) and finally the 1300 block where Lucas Park Grille spills over as well as the bar/club in the 1400 block is located in the 6th Ward (Lewis Reed). Other abuses in the 6th Ward include valets at 1111 Mississippi. On Olive on either side of Compton you get valets doing things such as placing orange cones in the bike lanes. One side of Compton on the south side of Olive is Reed’s 6th Ward while the west side of Compton along Lindell is in the 19th Ward (Mike McMillan). Heading west to the West End things are more clear — Euclid and Maryland is squarely in the 28th Ward (Lyda Krewson).

Our aldermen, in my view, don’t think much beyond their ward boundaries so the idea of them working together on a city-wide solution just might be a bit too much to expect. Other cities, somehow, manage to get beyond ward boundaries and develop solutions for their entire city.

ACC; Reed May Challenge Shrewsbury for President’s Seat

The ACC is reporting Ald. Lewis Reed may run against Jim Shrewsbury for the President of the Board of Aldermen:

Lewis Reed, an alderman of Ward 6 which includes Lafayette Square and Tower Grove East among its neighborhoods, running for president has a number of significant implications for local African American politics. Currently, African Americans, despite comprising a majority of the city’s population, hold only twelve of the the twenty-eight seats on the Board of Alderman.

Neighborhood scuttlebutt has two possible replacements for Reed’s aldermanic seat: committeeman Patrick Cacchione and Christian Saller, an active resident with expertise in urban planning. Both are white. Assuming all other things remain as they are, the African American representation on the Board of Aldermen would drop to eleven seats. Before redistricting African Americans held thirteen seats on the Board of Aldermen.

I don’t know Patrick Cacchione but the fact he is the ward’s committeeman that makes me think he is too “establishment” for my taste. Christian Saller isn’t exactly a radical but I know him to be very level headed, experienced in development circles (he works for the St. Louis Development Corporation, SLDC) and fairly pro-urban. I would easily describe him as someone that “gets it.”

As I indicated yesterday, Lewis Reed has $385 in his campaign account and the campaign has $5K in debt. While seeking an aldermanic seat this is probably easily overcome but if he intends to run a city-wide campaign he will need to begin getting his message out to voters in areas other than the 6th ward where he is well-known. Shrewsbury’s last report indicated a tad over $177K in the treasury. Reed could still catch up and run an effective city-wide campaign but he is starting from behind the curve. It would have been interesting if Mike McMillan had run for President of the Board rather than License Collector.

Even if Reed does not run for the President’s seat I’d like to see Saller, or someone else, challenge him in the aldermanic race. Next year Reed will have served two full terms (8 years) as the 6th ward alderman.

Update 9/22/06 @ Noon: Jake Wagman of the Post-Dispatch confirms Reed is considering a challenge to Shrewsbury. I just happened to be sitting next to Wagman as Reed passed through the conference room adjacent to the board chambers. Wagman handed Reed his computer with the ACC post and asked for a comment. Antonio French of PubDef was also able to speak to Reed on the issue. As both are indicating and as I overheard, Reed has not declared his candidacy but is seriously considering making a run.

Get Involved in St. Louis — Run for Elective Office!

Now is the time to plan running for elective office in the City of St. Louis. Continuing with my series trying to drum up good candidates for the upcoming elections here is some additional information that you won’t easily find on any website be it the Board of Elections, politically inclined independent newspapers or a local political party. All these sources, no matter how progressive they may purport to be, favor the status quo of over the common person (that would be you and I) not knowing how to run for office.

I’ve had the benefit and pleasure of running for elective office after seeking the Democratic nomination in the March 2005 primary for Alderman in the 25th Ward. After just two short months from filing to election I didn’t do too bad, receiving 44.1% of the vote in a two-way race with an incumbent that outspent me roughly 5 to 1. More time and more money may have tipped the scale. What I didn’t have was the benefit of planning a good 5-6 months in advance, nor did I have this type of information at my fingertips when I started.

I believe our main elected body, the St. Louis Board of Aldermen, is stagnant. They have been in office many years and are not energized to seek new ideas. Challenging them in the political arena will accomplish a couple of things. First, if they are challenged it will make them work for the job. Second it will be an opportunity to bring up issues such as the need for new zoning codes that will promote good urban design and remove some of the politics out of the development process. And finally it is an opportunity to get someone new in office that will bring a fresh perspective and new energy to the position. Tried and true is not getting us where we need to be.

Ok, enough lecturing —- you get the picture. The following is more information including dates to help plan your campaign.

Important Dates for upcoming elections — filing begins in November!

•Wednesday, October 11, 2006 — Deadline to register to vote in November election.
•Tuesday, November 7, 2006 —- Election Day (I will be in Chicago and must vote by absentee for the first time ever).
•Monday, November 27, 2006 — Filing opens at 8am for Spring 2007 elections (even numbered wards, some city-wide offices — I don’t have the full list at this time)
•Friday, January 5, 2007 — Last day to file for Spring 2007 Elections
• Thursday, January 25, 2007 — 40 Day Before Election Report due (for period through 1/20/07), except those running as an independent.
• Monday, February 16, 2007 — Last day to submit signatures to run as an independent candidate for April general election.
• Monday, February 26, 2007 — 8 Day Before Election Report due (for period from 1/21/07 – 2/22/07), except for those running as an independent.
•Tuesday, March 6, 2007 — Municipal Primary election
• Tuesday, April 3, 2007 — Municipal General election

Running as a party candidate (Republican, Green, Democrat…):

•Filing fee is 1% of the annual salary for the job. To run for the Board of Aldermen you’d pay roughly $327 (I think the total taxable income is $32,700/year). This can and should be paid from your campaign treasury.
• You do not need the approval of a party’s central committee to file and seek office.
• Filing starts at 8am on November 27th. Most likely candidates will have had someone waiting in line to hold their place before filing opens. This is so they can assure their name is on the top of the ballot, above any possible challengers.

Running as an independent candidate:

•You must collect signatures equal to 10% of the registered voters in your ward (or 10% of city if running for a city-wide partisan office). So, if your ward had 7,000 registered voters as of April 2005 (the last mayoral election) you’d need 700 valid signatures.
• These would need to be turned in by the 8th Monday prior to the April general election. I believe this would be February 16, 2007 if they counted the dates back the same way I did. Ideally these would be submitted earlier although you can run as an independent after filing has closed for those seeking a party nomination.
•Working the polls on November 7th would be an ideal way to collect the necessary signatures as well as starting to campaign. I will try to put together an editable PDF form that could be used for such purpose. Email me privately if you are interested in running as an independent.

• Independent candidates must file election reports as well, see the Missouri Ethics Commission calendar for dates related to the April 3, 2007 election date.

For the purposes of this post I’m not going to get into city-wide offices such as the President of the Board of Aldermen or the Circuit Clerk. Here are the fourteen seats on the St. Louis Board of Aldermen that are up for re-election (name/party/ward/years served as of election/# terms as of election/campaign fund):

• Fred Heitert; R-12th Ward: 28 years (7 terms); Campaign fund unknown, files “limited activity” reports
• Terry Kennedy, D-18th Ward: 18 years (4.5 terms); $385 as of last specific report (2003).
• Stephen Conway, D-8th Ward: 16+ years (4 terms); Less than $4K
• Stephen Gregali, D-14th Ward: 12 years (3 terms); $12,500 in 2003, limited activity since
• Craig Schmid; D-20th Ward: 12 years (3 terms); $4,7000 in 2003, limited activity since
• Lyda Krewson, D-28th Ward: 9 years (2+ terms); nearly $19K on hand
• Lewis E. Reed, D-6th Ward: 8 years (2 terms); $356 on hand, $5K in debt.
• Dionne Flowers, D-2nd Ward: 8 years (2 terms); Campaign reports due in April & July not yet filed!!!!
• Joseph Vollmer, D-10th Ward: 4 years (1 term); $13K on hand.
• Jeffrey Boyd, D-22nd Ward: 4 years (1 term); $28K on hand.
• Frank Williamson, D-26th Ward: 4 years (1 term); $13K on hand.
• Donna Baringer; D-16th Ward: 4 years (1 term); $14K on hand.
• O.L. Shelton, D-4th Ward; since June 10, 2005; No campaign committee as of July 06!
• William Waterhouse, D-24th Ward: since December 16, 2005; $2,500 on hand

A new round of quarterly reports will be due in the middle of next month so we will see who has kicked into campaign mode and who has not. Many of these have not really had to campaign in years, if at all. Some have a pretty substantial campaign treasury but that should not discourage anyone from running, it will simply make your campaign have to work harder and smarter.

I believe 8 of the 14 have been in office long enough, with at least two terms (8 years). There are people born since Heitert was first elected that are now old enough to run for the office themselves!!! But, as others will certainly indicate, if the voters think they are doing a good job they have the right to re-elect them. My feeling is we as engaged citizens need to step up and run for office and actually give voters a choice. It would be wonderful to see a couple of Democrats, a couple of Republicans, a couple Greens and an independent or so in each of the 14 wards. Of course, that ain’t gonna happen but one can dream.

For additional resources see my post titled How to Run for Local Office.

Why Type of Mayor Do We Have in St. Louis

Civic Stretegies, the consulting group that indicated the Post-Dispatch was one of the worst urban newspapers, has an interesting section on their web page titled, Five Types of Mayors:

We think there are five broad “mayor types” today. None is the right way to be a mayor; mayors can be successful in any of these types. But we do believe that two types tend to wear better over a couple of terms in office, the managerial mayor and the urbanist/neighborhood mayor. And if you want to be mayor more than eight years, probably the urbanist/neighborhood mayor is the right type to be. Some of the longest-serving mayors today, Richard Daley of Chicago, Thomas Menino of Boston and Joseph Riley of Charleston, are urbanist/neighborhood mayors.

Their five types are Deal-maker, Ethnic-Champion, Managerial, Reform/Protest, and Urbanist/neighborhood. Their site lists descriptions for each type.

Clearly Mayor Slay is a deal-maker type mayor. I’d be an Urbanist/neighborhood type mayor — here is the description they give:

These are mayors who are focused on making downtowns and neighborhoods healthy. They delight in the details and can talk endlessly about neighborhood groceries and tree plantings. Result: Some think of them as small-thinking fussbudgets. Perhaps some are, but there’s a reason these mayors last so long in office.

I think they’ve hit the nail on the head with these types. What do you think?

Enjoy “Grovefest” in Forest Park Southeast on Saturday

This coming Saturday, the 23rd of September 2006, is a chance to party in the emerging area increasingly known as The Grove. From the Grovefest press release:

Forest Park Southeast is one of the most exciting areas of rejuvenation in St. Louis. The neighborhood enjoys many of the best proximities in the metropolitan area. Conveniently located between both major highways, 40 and 44, Forest Park Southeast is also adjacent to the finest cultural institutions the city offers; the Saint Louis Science Center, The Missouri Botanical Gardens, Forest Park, and all of the Grand Center attractions. The Washington University Medical complex is within walking distance and the Saint Louis University is just around the corner. An envisioned bio-tech corridor is progressing just across highway 40 under the Cortex initiative. And established neighborhoods nearby such as the Central West End, Tower Grove, and Lafayette Square serve as excellent role models for this neighborhoods revitalization.

Manchester Avenue as the central corridor to Forest Park Southeast offers similar building character and streetscape potential to another popular local urban and culturally diverse destination “The Loop”. A retail, dining, and entertainment district is indeed emerging along Manchester in Forest Park Southeast and is on track to become an important asset for St. Louis in much the same way The Loop has. The Forest Park Southeast Business Association has begun the grassroots work of positioning this stretch of Manchester Avenue as “The Grove” derived from adjacent Adams Grove and Tower Grove.

With this progression in mind it seemed an opportune time to hold an annual festival that celebrates the city and the uniqueness of “The Grove”. Known as the Grove Fest, the annual neighborhood showcase invites the St. Louis metropolitan area to enjoy a day of food, music, art and activities with a spot light on what’s new and what’s coming to Forest Park Southeast.

Proceeds will support the effort to continue the revitalization of Manchester Avenue by funding sidewalk and curb repair/replacement, sidewalk enlargement for outdoor seating, improved signage, streetscape trees and lighting, street furniture, parking lot improvements, and traffic light enhancements.
On behalf of the Grove Fest Committee (dedicated business owners and stakeholders in Forest Park Southeast) we whole heartedly invite you to explore this exciting neighborhoods possibility and support the 1st annual Grove Fest. This year’s event takes place on Saturday, September 23rd on Manchester between Sarah and Boyle noon to midnight.

www.grovefest.org

Manchester Road. Noon to midnight. Have fun!