Portlanders for Parking Reform

Better Parking Policy For The City of Roses

Uncategorized

Why Would You Vote To Raise Meter Rates?

By 5 Comments

At the end of January 2016, downtown meter rates in Portland will go up $0.40 an hour.  This increase was suggested by a citizen Parking Metercommittee and was not initiated by city council or PBOT staff.  When council voted on this increase, there was much misinformation about the motivation for this adjustment.  When the rate actually goes up, there will likely be another round of stories.  As a member of the subcommittee that made the recommendation, I want to give a bit of perspective and background on the reasoning behind the increase.

The Reasoning

The City of Portland’s binding Parking Meter District Policy reads:

 “the on-street parking system in commercial districts is managed to support the economic vitality of the district by encouraging parking turnover, improving circulation, encouraging use of off-street parking, maintaining air quality, and promoting the use of alternative modes by managing the supply and price of on-street commuter parking. In managing the on-street parking system priority is given to short-term parking, followed by carpools and the remaining supply is managed for long-term use. Minimizing impacts on surrounding neighborhoods to protect neighborhood livability is a key objective of the City’s on-street parking management policies.”

The committee was reminded of this purpose statement and then provided with occupancy data and background information.

Basically, in many areas of downtown, particularly between 11am-1pm and from 6pm-9pm there is little to no on-street parking available. Some areas were at 95% occupancy. This is not good for business (which also means it isn’t good for employees of businesses). It’s not good for the environment, probably about 30% of the downtown traffic at those peak times is cruising for parking. All that extra traffic, and every turn a car makes, makes the downtown less safe for vulnerable road users.

Furthermore, pricing for off street parking in SmartParks is currently more expensive (for 3 hours) than on-street metered parking. That doesn’t make sense. When the on-street goes to $2, the SmartPark will stay as it is, making it a more attractive choice which should cut down on cruising and make more spaces available.

Another consideration is the cost of transit compared to parking. If the cost of parking is cheaper than transit, or even comparable, then there is an incentive to drive rather than ride transit. Trimet fares have gone up significantly since the last meter increase.

Those considerations align closely with the city policy I quoted above.

Will It Really Work?

The only tool we have right now is a blunt district-wide price increase. This isn’t great. In some areas of the city this will be too much because they already have a good occupancy rate. In other areas the increase will not be enough to free up spaces. The price balance with the SmartParks is important, and that might be the most effective part of this increase.

What’s Next?

Looking forward, the city is developing policy to allow for a more performance based pricing solution. There is a school of thought that if you have 85% occupancy you will have a space on every block face open. This means that someone who needs a space near a location because they are mobility challenged or have a load to carry will find one quickly. The city will lower rates in areas a little further away to encourage people who are able and have the time to park and walk a few blocks.

What About Low Income Workers?

It’s also critical to keep in mind that there are several city owned parking garages that are nearly empty after 7pm and overnight parking is only 5 dollars. One likely outcome with this increase is that the city will offer discounted monthly evening passes for low income workers. On-street metered parking is not supposed to be the place where downtown workers park, for retail in particular, it’s short sited to have your employees parking where your customers should be.

If we are really concerned for the well-being of low wage workers in Downtown, which we should be, then we should demand the additional money be put to work helping them.  I haven’t run the numbers, but I wonder if two million dollars is enough money to extend Blue Line MAX service to 24 hours a day?  Another effective program could be discounts for transit passes and/or cab vouchers for low wage workers. [Read more…] about Why Would You Vote To Raise Meter Rates?

Are Portlanders Environmentalists?

By 3 Comments

Drowning EarthPortland is one of the most liberal cities in the country, on paper.  Our neighbors are Democrats, Greens, Working Families Party members, anarchists, socialists, and the like.  We garden, subscribe to CSAs, ride bikes, and talk plenty of talk.

But what happens when you suggest that we’ve got to increase the number of car-free households in the city (and the country) if we want to slow the rate of CO2 emissions?

“Not everyone can ride a bike.”

“Cars aren’t going away any time soon.”

“I need to get my kids to 3 after school activities in 3 quadrants 3 times a week.”

Are our neighbors who say these things environmentalists or not?

Is their identity as nature lovers, liberals, as “Portlanders” enough to convince them that they need to change, or at least stop opposing environmentally focused reforms (like upzoning, no minimum parking, parking permits)?

Should we push people to either accept and support the post-Paris agreement reality, which was the reality all along, or to stop identifying as an environmentalist?

Should we worry about alienating supposed allies if, when push comes to shove, they won’t actually stand up for what they say?

What do you think?

One Proposed Solution for the Inner City Parking Dilemma

By 1 Comment

The Southeast Examiner recently published an op-ed by PDX Shoupista Steve Gutmann on the topic of neighborhood parking reform.  Steve paints a great picture of how a comprehensive solution would look and work in our close-in neighborhoods. (Note: printed as is from the SE Examiner site with permission from Steve) 

What is your solution for the inner city parking dilemma?

1. First, the residents shall immediately legalize peer to peer driveway rentals through several readily available online marketplaces such as www.parkeasier.com and www.justpark.com. This would allow my neighbor across the street and others to rent out their driveway and earn money. This can happen without construction, loss of green space or expense. Give those nearly car-free millennials living in zero parking apartments an off-street place to park their cars.

2. Second, any interested neighborhood shall have a clear, simple and legal pathway to managing parking demand by voting to establish a Parking Benefit District. This would give any neighborhood that’s tired of listening to itself complain about the lack of local on street parking (like Richmond, Goose Hollow and Nob Hill) a simple and democratic way forward.

Steps would look something like this: any contiguous area containing a certain number of (e.g. fifty or more) on street parking spaces could hold a vote to decide whether the local parking situation is annoying enough to justify the creation of a Parking Benefit District to manage the problem; if the ayes win, they could set up the PBD, count how many on street spaces are available in the district, and rent out 85% of them; the first spot per household would cost something significant (like $50/month). Once every household that wants a spot has one, households could rent a second on street space for $75/month. After that, if there were any remaining unclaimed spots, they’d be made available to residents of Commercial Use Zones (e.g. zero parking apartment dwellers), for $100 per month.

Since the overall demand for parking under these conditions is impossible to foresee, there would need to be a mechanism to adjust these prices up or down, to ensure that every available spot is used; and  the PBD isn’t underpricing street parking, and leaving money on the street.

Why would the Parking Benefit District want to maximize revenue? Simple. Because all of the money would be put into a “Local Right of Way Enhancement Fund,” that would fund improvements to the public right of way in the Benefit District. Improvements like pothole filling, sidewalk ramps, crosswalk re-striping, regular street sweeping, installation of dynamic crosswalk signals… maybe even burying utility cables.

If the streets are fine as they are, then give the money back to every resident of the PBD. The public right of way belongs to the public, and if it generates revenue and the public can’t agree on how to spend it, it should simply go back to the people as an annual dividend. Note that everyone in the district would get a dividend including those who don’t park on the street.

3. Public streets shouldn’t be managed in a way that gives only certain privileged people (i.e. car owners) a free place to park. Especially if there’s more parking demand than available supply, street parking should be managed to maximize the public benefit. In other words, it should be managed to maximize value to ALL local taxpayers (renters and owners alike).

I understand that my proposed policy will raise hackles but remember, impacted neighborhoods would have to choose to adopt this policy, and, people won’t tax themselves unless they see on obvious problem. If adopted, the new fee would surely upset some people. However, it’s important to realize that parking has never been “free.” It has always cost money, and we have all been paying it.

Portland Parking Symposium Video

By 1 Comment

On June 29th, 2015 the city of Portland held a Parking Symposium featuring several excellent talks and panels by parking policy experts, real estate developers, and community activists.

A youtube video of the event has been posted by Portland Shoupista Alan Kessler.  It’s 4+ hours long, so you might want to break it up a little bit.

Highlights:

Jeffrey Tumlin’s Keynote

City of Seattle Department of Transportation’s Mary Catherine Snyder and Paulo Nunes-Ueno

My question about Portland parking meters

Portland’s Rick Williams on the Lloyd District

Closing Remarks by Jeffry Tumlin