Parking on 14th Street Sidewalk Continues

The sidewalk along 14th Street, just north of Clark Ave, has pedestrians throughout the day & night because of the Civic Center MetroBus Transit Center, Civic Center MetroLink station, and the Gateway Transportation Center (Amtrak & Greyhound), so the south. The sidewalks aren’r packed, but the pedestrian traffic is steady. When events are held at the Scottrade Center or Peabody Opera House the pedestrian level increases dramatically as people make their way to these venues. Sidewalk space becomes scarce, especially if you’re going again the flow.

The other day, as I returned downtown on MetroLink, and I headed north on 14th to go home, people were headed into the Scottrade Center en mass. This isn’t the first time I’ve posted about these sidewalks being used for vehicles rather pedestrians:

• January 2007 Sidewalk Reserved for Circuit Attorney’s Office
• December 2011 Parking on 14th Street Sidewalk…Again.
• April 2012 Peabody Opera House Valets Caught Driving On 14th Street Sidewalk

The examples above were on the east side of 14th, the other day it was the west side of 14th getting squeezed:

The remaining sidewalk was tight as I met people heading to the event at the Scottrade. I find this unacceptable, I’m just not sure how to get it to stop.

— Steve Patterson

Readers Prefer Individual Parking Meters

It’s been a very long time since a poll got as few votes as last week’s, which makes it hard to draw any conclusions. Anyway, here’s the data:

Q: Please pick the answer that represents your preferred order for on-street paid parking:

1. 1) Individual meters 2) Pay-per-space stations 3) Pay-and-display stations 17 [33.33%]
2. 1) Pay-and-display stations 2) Pay-per-space stations 3) Individual meters 10 [19.61%]
3. 1) Pay-and-display stations 2) Individual meters 3) Pay-per-space stations 6 [11.76%]
4. 1) Pay-per-space stations 2) Pay-and-display stations 3) Individual meters 6 [11.76%]
5. 1) Pay-per-space stations 2) Individual meters 3) Pay-and-display stations 6 [11.76%]
6. 1) Individual meters 2) Pay-and-display stations 3) Pay-per-space stations 5 [9.8%]
7. Unsure/no answer 1 [1.96%]

In terns of first choice answers the numbers look like:

1. Individual meters: 22
2. Pay-and-display: 16
3. Pay-per-space: 12

All very close, but again the numbers are low.

I’ve long been a fan of pay-and-display because they eliminate the need to pre-define each space, potentially getting another car to fit on the block, but walking back to the car is more challenging for me now. Remembering a 5-digit space number to use a pay-per-space station is also difficult for me now, I’d need to save the number on my phone, or take a photo of the space number.

Currently the Treasurer’s Office isn’t testing a pay-and-display system because no companies with such systems responded the RFP last fall. The two types of individual meters are being tested in the CWE, two types of pay-per-space stations are being tested downtown.

— Steve Patterson

St. Louis Zoning Needs Maximum Parking Requirements Instead of Minimums

A few months ago a reader sent me an article about a trend toward new residential buildings constructed without parking:

A wave of new residential construction projects in places like Seattle, Boston, and Miami are showing that, yes, modern American cities can build housing without any car parking on site. (Real Estate Trend: Parking-Free Apartment Buildings)

It wasn’t surprising to me to see this in cities that value the pedestrian and support public transit by actually using it. Here only a few of us value pedestrians, use public transit. Bankers wanted condos/apartments to have more than one parking space per unit, requiring a minimum of a 1:1 ratio. For example, a 100-unit project couldn’t have 80-90 spaces, it needed at least 100 to get financing.

In Dcember Boston approved a new project with zero resident parking, raising eyebrows even there:

Recall that in September developer Related Beal asked for the BRA to approve a revised plan for the residential component of Lovejoy Wharf: 175 condos instead of a few hundred apartments; and, please, let us eliminate the 315-space garage. The developers’ logic? There’s so much public transit nearby and the project’s smackdab in one of the nation’s most walkable (and bikable) cities that it’s sheer cloud cuckoo land to follow the Boston regs of at least one parking spot for every two housing units. (No Parking: Boston Green-Lights Car-Less Condo)

One space for every two units? St. Louis doesn’t have any parking requirements downtown, but lenders mandate one space per unit. Outside of downtown at least one space per unit is required. What we need to do in places like downtown, around near light rail stations & bus transfer centers, is have maximum parking requirements, rather than minimums. I’d set the maximum pretty high initially, like 0.8/0.9 spaces per unit.  It could be set to automatically lower over the next 20-25 years, ending up at say one parking space for every two units.

Currently when most people rent an apartment, or buy a condo, they get a parking space included. Of course, parking isn’t free, but the cost isn’t clear to the consumer when it is bundled. Just the act of charging a separate fee will cause the end user to begin to evaluate/question car ownership. Instead of $800/month the apartment might be $750/mo with parking at $50/mo.

A few downtown buildings do this, one just reopened. CityParc is one of six 1950s buildings originally part of the urban renewal project called Plaza Square.

This is the only one of the six with garage parking, but even that isn’t enough for one space per unit. Public policy has an impact on outcomes, require minimum parking you’ll get more than necessary and fewer pedestrians.

— Steve Patterson

An Update on Lucas Park

The land that’s now Lucas Park was given to St. Louis by the Lucas family in the 1850s. Read about Lucas Place, now Locust, and Lucas Park here. In the last couple of decades the park became the gather place for the homeless downtown. For a couple of years the park has been closed as it undergoes a much-needed refresh. Slowly the park has been opening up again.

Old habits don’t die easily. 

— Steve Patterson

Poll: Metro’s 60ft articulated buses are completely rebuilt 2004 New Flyer models from Ottawa, costing $430k/ea vs $825k/ea new, reaction?

Friday Metro showed off the first of (15) 60-foot articulated buses that’ll be here by the end of summer, 5 will go into service on the busy #70 (Grand) MetroBus route on June 9th. St. Louis isn’t the only city that bought some of Ottawa’s 226 old articulated bus fleet. From March 2012:

Last week, Winnipeg Transit announced it wants to spend $1.1 million to purchase articulated buses at a discounted rate from New Flyer Industries, after Ottawa traded them in for new buses. The buses will cost $53,000 each, instead of the $625,000 they would cost brand-new.

In total, it will cost Winnipeg $2.2 million to buy and fix up the buses. (City committee in favour of buying articulated buses)

For years Metro has purchased new buses from Califiornia-based Gillig, but they still don’t offer an articulated bus. New Flyer, out of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, has been offering articulated buses for years.

For more information, see Metro’s articulated bus fact sheet (PDF). These new buses are the subject for the poll this week, I’d like to get your thoughts. I’ve provided a range of answers, plus I’ve also set the poll so you can enter your own if you don’t like the ones provided. The poll is in the right sidebar.  Results and my views will be posted on Wednesday April 2nd.

— Steve Patterson