Commenters overwhelmingly pan proposed Ann Arbor parking rate hike
Comments on our story about the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority's proposal to raise parking meter rates and extend hours came in swiftly all day Thursday.
The conversation has provided insight from a variety of interested parties: business owners, downtown employees, downtown patrons, longtime residents, University of Michigan employees and others.
Considering the importance of the issue and the value of this discussion, we thought it was worth pulling out and highlighting some of the common threads. The following excerpts, edited for spelling, give a good representation of reader sentiment on this issue.
Many readers said increasing parking meter rates will cause them to go downtown less often:
greenstriper: The mess caused by the Library Lot parking crypt project has caused me to find alternatives to the places I used to go downtown. In the past two years, I've cut my visits downtown by about 80%. If I didn't have a post office box at Liberty Station, I probably wouldn't go downtown at all any more.
kms: I, too, have greatly reduced my trips downtown since that (Library) lot mess. That used to be my favorite parking place... I no longer go to the downtown library and post office and have found other places to shop and dine as well. I've been going to the Northside Grill for breakfast and Casey's for dinner, two great places that have their own free parking lots.
JHW426: I don't think this rate increase will not stop people who are going downtown to eat at a specific restaurant, however, I know it will stop me from going downtown on those evenings when I just want to go down to walk around and go into a few shops.
Lindsay W.: If they're going to hike up the prices of the parking downtown, the least they could do is use some of the money to install lights in the residential neighborhoods that have free parking so I don't feel so terrified walking back to my car at night with a serial rapist on the loose.
A downtown employee explained why she parks at meters:
Amanda: I work downtown, and it's already infuriating to know that unless I find a free spot (which is rare) I'm going to be losing $1.20/hour from what I make. I often work at night and don't get out of work until after midnight, so the last thing I want to do is walk several blocks down a dark street, or into a poorly lit parking structure alone, especially with the sexual assaults that happened early last month.
… They need a solution that will help downtown workers 1)find parking, even if it is in a structure and 2) have affordable options. I wouldn't mind walking an extra block or two to work if my colleague and I are parked in the same area and only pay 50 cents or a dollar an hour, or $3 flat rate.
Several business owners weighed in with their experiences:
simply amazed: After this "elevated rate, multi-tiered, DDA taking over the parking" proposal came out in AA.com a couple months ago, DDA gave us a financial reason to move. Cost of doing business just surpassed "we have to live with it" and has reached "are you nuts." After 40 years of working and supporting downtown, with a sad heart we say, "ooooooo, cya."
bunnyabbot: This week I had people come to a2 from Detroit, Saginaw, Chicago, Toledo, NY, Boston etc etc, many here b/c of move in week for their kids going to Michigan, parking downtown was a concern for many, the popular questions are "how well is parking enforced around here?" "can you make change for the meter?" "parking is really high here!" That doesn't even count the numerous people who visit A2 from around the state who aren't here for a particular reason other than to check out A2.
HENDRIX242: I am a downtown business owner who refuses to pay to park. I work to earn money, not spend it. I park over a mile away to avoid paying over $1 an hour to park. I can use the exercise as well. But I find the DDA, Pollay & Newcombe especially, disconnected from the day to day economic reality of most people. Most people don't want to park in a structure for a 20 minute errand. Most people don't come downtown to dine at $45 a plate dinner. Most of my customers come down to buy from a local business, not some chain or faceless Internet black hole…
The last midtown surface lot, where one could park & hop out to take care of business; immediately & without burden. Take that away & you ruin the business of the quick buy: a pair of shorts at Sam's, picking up repaired jewelry at Abracadabra or a single book on hold at the Dawn Treader. Meter spots will ALWAYS be too far, too few for this purpose. Heaven forbid if you actually have to carry anything of weight somewhere.
Some questioned whether the DDA consulted with downtown businesses before announcing the proposal:
jcj: [quoting the story] "Several downtown businesses owners and managers reacted with concern on Wednesday after DDA Executive Director Susan Pollay laid out a plan calling for a three-tiered pricing structure for parking meters in the area bound by State, Huron, First and William streets."
Does the DDA ever discus their bright ideas with business BEFORE going public?
HENDRIX242: I was not contacted. I've been here for 10 years. No mail, no email, no survey, no personal visit, no consultation or advisement what so ever. The city can easily find me when it's time to pay my Personal Property Tax, but has no interest in hearing my opinion or informing me of ANYTHING that occurs downtown.
More than a few readers took issue with DDA board member Newcombe Clark's suggestion that meters should be expensive in order to encourage people to walk. Among them, this mother:
AANEMom: He obviously hasn't had to tote young kids several blocks to a destination in the biting cold.
Readers who have lived in other cities or frequently travel offered perspectives on how other municipalities handle downtown parking:
Tom Joad: Palo Alto, CA has FREE 2 hour parking on its downtown streets, YES, FREE. The 2 hour limit is rigorously enforced by meter readers who carry a hand-held device that clocks every car's time via license plate reader.
DonBee: I eat in downtown Palo Alto regularly when I am working in California, it is the most friendly place for someone from out of the area to find food and peace and quiet. In two hours, done right, you can do a lot.
jrigglem: Wow, wow, wow. … Wake up DDA! You are not a big city, you're not even close to being as nice as Ferndale or Royal Oak, you really need to realize who your demographic audience is. I think in the long run, the DDA will lose more money because parking is too high.
One downtown resident had an enterprising idea:
Mr Blue: I'm going to start parking my (one) car in front of my home with a sign on it reading, "Will move car for your parking pleasure. $10".
Very few readers supported the DDA's actions. Of those, this was perhaps the most thoughtful comment:
johnnya2: 1. One of the reasons parking fees are popular is BECAUSE it is a fee given to those who use it AND some of those will likely be employees of the UM (who pays no property tax) and many out of towners 2. The alternative would be higher taxes to pay for the surface lots and garages OR the businesses in the area would have to have their own lots. Imagine that cost. How many spaces does the Ark need and they will need to upkeep it themselves.
Some offered suggestions on what else the DDA should be doing:
Lou Perry: DDA spends no effort to increase town human traffic to enhance business success. … Where are the mini-training sessions for new individual businesses so they have a better chance of survival? How are they promoting the downtown beyond Washtenaw County?
Have your say. Vote in the poll or continue the conversation below. Jen Eyer is director of audience engagement for AnnArbor.com. Reach her at jeneyer@annarbor.com.
Comments
John Hritz
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 6:57 p.m.
If the goal is to cause turn over at the meters and encouraging structure use, having the first 30 minutes of parking free (or very cheap) on the street and up to two hours free in the structures seems like a reasonable start. The existing practice of restricting parking on the first few levels of the structure before 10am seems to work well and should be kept. Together it provides some opportunity to get downtown, buy something or have a quick bite, and head out unscathed. This would duplicate most of the customer benefits of the remarkably under-subscribed parking validation program.
seldon
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 6:36 p.m.
I don't understand Newcombe's position in the least. Or rather, I understand it, but I don't see how his view makes sense as a member of the DDA. Unless Amazon and the management of Briarwood and Arborland get a seat on the DDA these days.
Roaring_Chicken
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 5:15 p.m.
Are we not aware of the number of businesses LEAVING Ann Arbor? I take note of: There have been many studies of parking rate policy in the transportation and economics fields ... working paper at the National Bureau of Economic Research, Arnott, Richard & Inci, Eren, 2006. "An integrated model of downtown parking and traffic congestion," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 418-442, November." 2006. How many businesses have folded since 2006? Where's Borders these days? If you "encourage" people to walk, or "encourage" parking turnover, by punishing would-be shoppers via rates/fees/taxes, people will walk indeed -- to their computers and simply buy ONLINE. You want to bring downtown A2 back? Consider FREE PARKING.
johnnya2
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 6:03 p.m.
Dont let facts get in the way of your story. If somehow your belief is Borders closed due to parking you are a fool. In fact, the downtown Borders was one of the more profitable ones in the chain. It had higher rent, higher labor, parking fees, and STILL made money. Then we take a look at Arborland. Free parking, lower rent, lower labor, yet it was losing money. If every Borders in the country did what the Liberty Street location did, we would not have any conversation about the demise of Borders. I can name other businesses that have opened over the last several years that have been a rousing success. Bar Louie, Mani Osteria, 5 Guys, Sava, CVS, 7/11, Google, (they could have looked for space in the burbs you know) and The Cupcake Station There is a higher demand for parking spots than there is supply. it is basic and simple. If you don't believe that, you haven't been paying attention. I also cant wait to see you order a nice dinner and bottle of wine from the Chop House or Real Seafood online.
shepard145
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 4:30 p.m.
Leftsists are famously cheap when it comes to charity but they LOVE TAXES AND FEES. Always want to GIVE MORE to their beloved government!! Lets use the Dearborn model - plant parking meters on every square foot of paving so we can further feed ever spending government. ......except that, like Dearborn, we get burned ONCE then quickly shop/park/spend SOMEWHERE ELSE. I expect Briarwood Management and every business with their own parking lot to fully support this plan!
Tom Wieder
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 3:42 p.m.
Many of the comments remind me of the old Yogi Berra quote: "Nobody goes there anymore . It's too crowded." If the city made street parking free, do you think you'd be likely to get a space, when it's hard to find one now? Street parking is free every day after 6 pm, and there are few spaces available. The idea that street parking rates keep people out of downtown doesn't make any sense. True, some people only like to go places where they can park easily and cheaply - that's called a suburb, not a downtown. Those people really don't like downtowns. The only way to have that kind of parking near each place you want to go is to level most of the buildings and put parking lots next to the few remaining ones. Cheap parking in a vibrant downtown is an oxymoron. A successful downtown makes the land there expensive. Parking requires land, or structures built on it. Those things have to be paid for - by the government (taxes), business owners (who pass along the costs to their customers) or individual users (people who bring their cars). Take your pick. One choice not available - free or cheap, easy parking in a successful downtown.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 10:12 p.m.
Gotta love the ignorant posts that claim this is a tax. It's not a tax. It's a way to give a big pot of money ($9 million surplus this year on parking operations) to the businessmen who run the DDA. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 10:06 p.m.
How does someone "defiantly" work for the government? Just wonderin' Good Night and Good Luck
shepard145
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 7:14 p.m.
You DEFIANTLY work for the GOVERNMENT with that attitude. Are you here to help us? LOL We all know the dictionary distinction between your beloved fees and beloved tax increases but at some point the distinction is irrelevant when OUT OF CONTROL GOVERNMENT SPENDING is involved. How about this for a parking collection pan: Reduce parking fees and spend less!? ...oh how you democrats must cringe, like empty shirt unqualified community organizer obama, at the thought of disciplined government spending!! Note, as the worst president in the last hundred years, his name shall no longer be capitalized. ...neither shall the office until a qualified president replaces him in 2012 and he returns to Chicago where he can do far less damage working for Acorn again.
johnnya2
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 5:54 p.m.
Shephard, Is your belief that working hours are M-F 8am to 5 pm or some 1950's ideal of the world? I bet there as many employees during a dinner hour at the restaurants on Main Street as there are all the other people through the course of the 8-5pm time frame. It is NOT a tax. It is a FEE. If you do not understand the difference you really should get an education. Most people who try to park downtown say there is not enough supply close to where they want to go. That would make one think that the DEMAND is higher than the supply, which should justify a price increase. It is econ 101. If the demand falls as the doomsdayers seem to think, than there will be empty parking spaces all over downtown. Talk to me when that happens. Otherwise there is an intellectual void in your argument.
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 5:07 p.m.
Your attempted connection between the DDA, parking and President Obama is silly.
shepard145
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 4:45 p.m.
You miss the point, sport. This is a tax increase, not some grand plan. As with your beloved obama and that city of fools, the problem is not that parking is too cheap, but government has the capacity for unlimited spending. Parking will NEVER be expensive enough. ..but you and others try the old "blame the victim" strategy, which is amusing. "…If you love the city enough, send government a check!!.." Parking fees during work hours are a planning strategy to keep spaces open for shoppers – not a cash grab like this. Your presumption that shoppers should be willing to waste their money on parking just because AA is a city is naïve and contrary to reality. My guess is that you work for the government. FYI, in the real business world, our beloved market economy severely punishes those who don't understand how it works and it sounds like the DDA and many AA businesses are lining up for a painful lesson.
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.
Tom, the point that I see is not so much the cost of parking but more so the in-efficacy of the DDA. They're clueless, listen only to themselves, formulate policy before finding out of there is a need or a desire from the broader public. They seem to favor unsustainable development, big developers and out of town high rollers instead of making it better for residents and the folks who foot the bill. They seem to have a skewed vision of what Ann arbor is and what it already offers, preferring to change it to Portland, Boulder, Austin or Madison. Their policy makers, primarily Susan Pollay and political appointees, have been in charge for a long time and the problems never seem to stop. Indeed they continue to make missteps, have yet to develop a coherent parking and development policy and consistently underestimate the will of local residents who are not part of the DDA. Instead of making what we have better they seem to want to change Ann Arbor into what suits their unsustainable, costly and elitist vision. One would think that after all the problems, we might look for a different direction and a new person to head the DDA. Either that or disband it entirely.
bunnyabbot
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 3:36 p.m.
I also believe as other commenters here do that whatever a poll says, whatever people that own business downtown say, whatever customers say about buying local from locally owned businesses downtown, the DDA will do whatever it is they plan on doing regardless.
SonnyDog09
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 2:58 p.m.
This is a pointless article. We all know that our public servants do not care what we the people think.
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:36 p.m.
The DDA seems intent on making downtown a playground for out of town elites who can afford to park. I've lived here for a very long time and walk S Main on the weekends in the evening when the weather is nice. I rarely see anyone I know or have seen before. There seem to be very few local residents. Most of the people who are in the fancy bars and restaurants do not appear to be from Ann Arbor. Much of what the DDA seems to do seems misdirected, confused, incoherent and out of touch with the real world in Ann Arbor. Their "vision" seems to be to want to change Ann Arbor into Portland, Boulder, Austin or some other place. Let Ann Arbor be Ann Arbor. It's a midwest college town. It's residents are plain spoken, no "fancy airs" kind of folks. Ann Arbor believes in sustainability, the DDA does not. Susan Pollay needs to go. The DDA needs to to restructured. If they can't do it themselves, it needs to disbanded. If Hieftje can't see this and refuses to lead, he needs to go as well. I know that this is anecdotal, but the DDA needs to seriously reassess their mission. If they can't and and willonly continue to repeat their ham handed efforts
johnnya2
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 5:49 p.m.
So instead of raising taxes on those that LIVE in Ann Arbor, they are forcing those that want to come here and "use it as their playground" to pay higher parking fees. I would put that as a major win for the community.
a2umichfan
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.
Beyond the hike in parking prices, the city is making it clear that they would prefer people not drive into the downtown area. The change in traffic lanes on Huron and in the East Ann/Catherine/Thayer/Ingalls neighborhood, and the addition of new bike lanes throughout town will make it increasingly difficult to drive into the area (especially during high volume times, not to mention move-in and football Saturdays).
The Picker
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.
Comments on comments! Do we really get anywhere on A2.com. This e-rag is not the watchdog of government, which was the traditional role of the media, but a cheering squad for the status quo. This type of legislation will continue as long as we have one party rule.
The Picker
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 6:45 p.m.
Who mentioned party? This is what all politicians do when unchallenged! We need more balance.
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:24 p.m.
Party affiliation has nothing to do with it. It's the appointed elites of the DDA and their political masters who believe in unsustainability. The mantra is we need 10,000 more people downtown in the next decade and we need more bedrooms for their cars so we can make more money to spend on "art" bike racks, "way finding" billboards that block sidewalks and taxpayer subsidized parking for DDA members businesses.
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:28 p.m.
The DDA also seem to be incredibly tone deaf and their little group also seem quite insular and in their bunker. The two hours free and lower rates and ruthlessly ticket violations is a great suggestion. What no one likes is getting taken for a ride by the DDA. Like I wrote before, the DDA, in many respects, seems confused and contradictory. The do not know how to craft a coherent policy and seem to lack basic skills in communicating their message. Frankly, the problem seems to be Susan Pollay who at times seems severely disconnected from the public and seems to be eternally blinded by her rose colored cheerleader glasses. It's time for a serious change to the DDA. It's been around too long in its current form, the mayoral appointed members seem cozy and out of touch, The staff is far too committed to unsustainable development and serving a very small portion of the local business community. They are unelected political appointees, yet act otherwise. Council is lax in their duties of oversight and most on council seem to be part of he same status quo bunch. There might have been some good reasons why the DDA was formed but it's existence today seem lost in the face of reality, like suggesting that people pay more for less. This decision to raise rates smacks of elitism that places well heeled downtown visitors able to pay increased parking rates over local residents who count their nickels and dimes
Twanders
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:24 p.m.
I propose a name change from DDA TO DDD, people who are actually impacted by the DDA can fill in the D....
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:27 p.m.
I know my comments will fall on deaf ears, but that's exactly my point.
Goober
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:14 p.m.
Jen: Contrary to the first comment posted, I compliment you on your article. What we need to remember from the summary of comments yesterday is that our city leaders have a tendency to do what they want to do and not include pulbic comments and feedback. Second, high parking fees might encourage turnover, but it will also encourage no service or patrons, which was loud and clear in many of the posted comments. It applies to myself, as well as many I know. This is not rocket science. The public must be brought in to many of these decisions instead of relying on our city leaders who have a strong track record of taxes, spending and waste to make the right decisions. We have far too many examples of poor decisions. I can hardly wait until November where I can vote against any encumbant.
KJMClark
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 2:22 p.m.
"This is not rocket science." - Yes, clearly it's not science at all.
Mr. Me
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:03 p.m.
I never drive downtown for short trips because the only parking spaces are on the top levels of the garages. I don't remember the last time I saw a metered space available that wasn't handicap. If raising prices means I can actually park on the street and run quick errands, I'd be more likely to patronize downtown stores, not less.
KJMClark
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 2:40 p.m.
Let's see. Errands I run downtown on a regular basis (pretty much every Saturday) are the downtown post office, Downtown Home and Garden, The People's Food Co-op and Farmer's Market, various book stores, the library, Bivouac, Kiwanis, Dascola Barbers, Sam's, Park Shoe Repair, Fingerle Lumber - geez, the longer I think about it, the more I come up with. I've shopped at everyone of these in the past six months, half of them in the past month. Sure look like "errand" type places to me.
Twanders
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:21 p.m.
Really you are MORE likely to run your errands DOWNTOWN? And pay $2/hour to park at a meter, instead of, say parking for free at most places you would run errands anyway? I would like to know what these said errands are? What kind of errands does one run in downtown A2? By errand do you mean eating bc last time I checked not a whole lot of errands to be run in downtown A2? Shopping at little gift/boutique stores and dining out does not constitute errand running... Sorry but I just don't see this being a reality. I live less than a mile from downtown, I coukd bike to run said errands if errand type places existed in downtown, they do not. Any places that are errand type places like the post office and dry cleaners offer free parking anyway!
KJMClark
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 11:12 a.m.
I liked Tom Joad's idea - two hours for free then immediately and ruthlessly write tickets - after all, no one ever complains about tickets, right? Seriously Jen, those are what you call thoughtful comments? There have been many studies of parking rate policy in the transportation and economics fields, and what they usually find is that differential rates, just like what the DDA is proposing, are what best encourages turnover in on-street parking. You raise on-street parking fees enough to encourage turnover. Here's your thoughtful comment: <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w11118" rel='nofollow'>http://www.nber.org/papers/w11118</a> - working paper at the National Bureau of Economic Research, Arnott, Richard & Inci, Eren, 2006. "An integrated model of downtown parking and traffic congestion," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 418-442, November. "This paper presents a downtown parking model that integrates traffic congestion and saturated on-street parking. We assume that the stock of cars cruising for parking adds to traffic congestion. Two major results come out from the model, one of which is robust. The robust one is that, whether or not the amount of on-street parking is optimal, it is efficient to raise the on-street parking fee to the point where cruising for parking is eliminated without parking becoming unsaturated. The other is that, if the parking fee is fixed at a sub-optimal level, it is second-best optimal to increase the amount of curbside allocated to parking until cruising for parking is eliminated without parking becoming unsaturated." What's the point of making really thoughtful comments when AA.com is just encouraging the usual anti-Ann Arbor/anti-thinking rabble?
Carole
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 2:38 p.m.
Very much agree with Mr. Blue. Some comments re: just not going downtown because of high cost of parking. Thought just came to mind, a shuttle business-- drive folks down, pick up at specific time -- no parking, no fess, and no funds for the city. Pick up deliver and return.
Peregrine
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:43 p.m.
@talia: You didn't read very carefully. This quote is key: "The robust [result] is that, whether or not the amount of on-street parking is optimal, it is efficient to raise the on-street parking fee to the point where cruising for parking is eliminated without parking becoming unsaturated." If the on-street parking is empty, or even "unsaturated", that indicates that the price is too high. The goal is to have most but not all on-street parking spots used, that way people who want to run a quick errand, or will be carrying lots of stuff, or will have kids in tow, can almost always find a convenient spot without cruising. Remember cruising has lots of negative impacts. 1) Wastes time of driver and passengers, 2) wastes gas, 3) creates pollution, 4) contributes to congestion.
Twanders
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 1:13 p.m.
What's going to happen is the streets will be empty bc no one is going to pay $2 an hour to park in downtown A2. That's a fantastic solution!
Mr Blue
Fri, Sep 2, 2011 : 12:25 p.m.
Don't blame annarbordotcom. Yes, the "regulars" whine a lot, (including me) but the number of comments from non regulars and the breadth of their observations is not surprising considering the issue and the way the DDA seems to handle their business and our tax dollars. The DDA also seem to be incredibly tone deaf and their little group also seem quite insular and in their bunker. The two hours free and lower rates and ruthlessly ticket violations is a great suggestion. What no one likes is getting taken for a ride by the DDA. Like I wrote before, the DDA, in many respects, seems confused and contradictory. The do not know how to craft a coherent policy and seem to lack basic skills in communicating their message. Frankly, the problem seems to be Susan Pollay who at times seems severely disconnected from the public and seems to be eternally blinded by her rose colored cheerleader glasses. It's time for a serious change to the DDA. It's been around too long in its current form, the mayoral appointed members seem cozy and out of touch, The staff is far too committed to unsustainable development and serving a very small portion of the local business community. They are unelected political appointees, yet act otherwise. Council is lax in their duties of oversight and most on council seem to be part of he same status quo bunch. There might have been some good reasons why the DDA was formed but it's existence today seem lost in the face of reality, like suggesting that people pay more for less. This decision to raise rates smacks of elitism that places well heeled downtown visitors able to pay increased parking rates over local residents who count their nickels and dimes