[MissoulaGov] Parking Kiosks

Wed Dec 16 01:56:33 MST 2009

Hi, everyone,

Parking Downtown is a very complex issue for many reasons, not the least of
which is the cost.  $50,000 per space may be a little high for the cost
estimate, even if one includes the cost of the land.  I managed the design
and construction of both the Central Park parking structure on Main Street
and the Superneau Parking Structure at the Millennium Building, and I can
tell you, I would have loved to have a budget of $50K/ space to work with on
those, but it was less than half that.

Other considerations including devoting precious space (in three dimensions)
to warehousing cars rarely get due consideration as the race to a solution
of a perceived need or problem drives the process.  Because it's "just cars"
architectural design usually doesn't get due consideration either, and the
design tends to focus on making the facility NOT look too much like a
parking facility.  Personally, I think the structures Missoula built
Downtown fit the context of their location.  I would have liked to have
included retail space in the structure on Main Street, but it was not
something we could include in our budget at the time. (We also looked at
including Mountain Line's transit facility there, too, but that had
insurmountable problems.). There has been some talk about retrofitting it to
make that happen but I remain skeptical due to the problem of cost and loss
of parking.  The Central Park structure was designed to accommodate one more
level (at the time of construction the cost was estimated to be a bit over a
million dollars for 100 more spaces. I am pretty sure it would be more now.)
but I don't think the case has been made to do that.  One key consideration
in siting any structured parking is whether it is at a place that is
appropriate-that is, is it where it will most likely used to near capacity
most days? Can existing on-street circulation handle the coming and going of
vehicles without unduly disrupting traffic patterns?  It is a matter of not
only building it where it CAN be built, but where it SHOULD be built.  That
has a lot of tricky value judgments that deserve thoughtful consideration.

The two structures I was associated with were built on existing surface lots
(and the dilapidated substation building that had the "Hellgate Kites" mural
on it).  Building sites that large that work for structured parking are in
short supply Downtown.  That means future structured parking will likely be
taller than existing structured parking-five, maybe six stories high--to be
worth building, which will create unique design and operational challenges.
One solution I hope our community will consider is mechanized parking.  It
is used in Europe very successfully where space limitations and historic
architecture demand smaller footprints for parking.  Mechanized parking is
efficient (five layers of mechanized parking in the same space as three
layers of conventional parking while four to five cars parked side by side
take up less than three spaces in a conventional garage.). Safety of users
is also increased while damage to cars and theft from vehicles is virtually
eliminated.  It is a strategy I would like to see Missoula, UM and St.
Patrick Hospital give serious consideration to before any additional parking
garages are committed to.  From a design standpoint, it is a lot easier in
most respects to include one or two floors of retail or office space since
there is no circulation of automobile drivers to deal with. Architecturally
there is a lot more flexibility because there are no ventilation issues to
deal with and the maintenance of the system is more straight forward.  There
are several other positive factors that deserve consideration-many more than
I can list here.  As for initial cost, it is comparable on a purely per
space basis-maybe a little more.  Once other considerations are factored in,
I believe it actually ends up being a better deal than conventional concrete
structures.

For myself, I am with Jordan.  I am going to be riding my bike and Mountain
Line to get around as much as I can. I understand that solution does not
work for everyone and so long as personal vehicles remain the preferred and
affordable means for people to go to and from Downtown, it is necessary to
accommodate vehicles.  That doesn't mean we have to use a value system that
demands warehousing of vehicles become the defining and dominating feature
of Downtown.  The Missoula Parking Commission is smarter than that and will
not be rushed into building anything without mindfully investigating its
options and considering views offered by citizens.

Geoff Badenoch 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Hess [mailto:wjordanhess at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 12:44 AM
To: pnooney at earthlink.net
Cc: Geoff Badenoch; Sally Brown; Brent Campbell; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Parking Kiosks

Patrick,

I meant to send this last week, but it is still pertinent:

Building new parking structures is far more expensive than providing premier
transit. At $50,000+ per space, parking structures are an extremely
expensive way to get people downtown. It is absurd to imply that Missoula
can't have a good transit system because we are not a large city full of
wealthy people. There are solutions for our size of community.

I'm going to use the University as an example, because I am more familiar
with it than with downtown in terms of parking and transportation, but the
two function similarly in these regards. On campus, ASUM spends about $0.65
per ride provided on the Park and Ride. While this may seem like a lot, in
order to provide parking for the same amount of money, a parking space would
have to turn over more than 5 times a day, 365 days a year for 40 years (a
rather generous lifespan for a parking garage). This doesn't take into
account the cost of maintaining the garage (about $1,000 per space per
year).

Consider this: paying for one person to NOT use a parking space is the exact
same thing as building one new parking space. If by providing better bus
service, I opt not to use an on-campus parking space, it is functionally
identical to the university building one additional parking space, but the
difference is that it cost the university a fraction of the cost.

We need to use this model downtown. Do not build any additional parking.
Instead, spend this money on increasing transit into downtown. This WILL
free up parking used by people who find the current level of transit service
to be inconvenient. This newly available parking can be used by folks who
cannot or simply choose not to ride transit.

Best regards,
Jordan Hess

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Patrick Nooney <pnooney at earthlink.net>
wrote:

The reality is that, as long as there have been "vehicles", there has never
been enough parking downtown, for residents, employees, business owners and
customers.  The University has the same problem.  And the two share the same
fantasies, that we don't need parking structures (that force people to,
horror of horrors, walk) or we don't need cars.

We have folks who believe, sincerely, that Portland is nirvana with its
transportation system and "bicycle-friendly" atmosphere.  A number of folks
think that Seattle has a great system.  And many will salivate over the
Metro system of Washington DC.  Guess what folks?  You need a couple or
three million folks (most of them wealthy) to pay for the darn thing.  We
don't.

Yes. It costs a bunch of bucks to build structures.  And, whoops, you need
to charge for the privilege.  That is the price of population growth that so
many of us seem to desperately need.

_______________________________________________
-----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------

Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But
posts to this list may be entered into the public record.
Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org
List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20091216/ee09d893/attachment.htm>