5632 replies to this topic

[Bingo]

I suspect that was phase 1 in shifting parking usage from on street to parkades. My guess is phase 2 is removal of the "free" hour.

 

I have not heard of phase 1 and phase 2, where did you find the information on the removal of free parking for the first hour?

[jonny]

Council has bigger items to fund, such as a new pool. There's actually nothing wrong with leaving parking supply to the market. There is nothing stopping a private company from building a parkade and charging market rates for parking.

You really don't think Helps, Isitt & Co think this way, do you?

[VicHockeyFan]

It's 50k an underground spot? Maybe 30k. That's quite the price tag for 200 spots.

 

Yes, it would not be cheap.  But ongoing maintenance is minor.  So you ammortize that investment over a very long term.  You get $150/mo. or more for the spot.  Using real simple math you get that back in 20 years.

[nagel]

I have not heard of phase 1 and phase 2, where did you find the information on the removal of free parking for the first hour?

I haven't heard it.  That's just what I would do.  I believe parking in urban centres should generally be in parkades, not on-road, and should not be subsidized.

[nagel]

You really don't think Helps, Isitt & Co think this way, do you?

I wouldn't be surprised if their motivations were less palatable, especially Isitt, but it's a good way of reframing the issue regardless of their actual motivation.

[Bingo]

QUOTE

 

“I think building a new parkade would be the worst possible idea,” Helps said.

“Thirty years from now, there will be autonomous vehicles everywhere. They won’t need parking spots.”

http://www.cheknews....te-hike-241120/

 

 

Oh give me a break! 

But yeah I suppose "thirty years from now" is just around the corner, so I should start looking NOW for somewhere else to shop rather that in downtown Victoria.

[nagel]

Yes, it would not be cheap.  But ongoing maintenance is minor.  So you ammortize that investment over a very long term.  You get $150/mo. or more for the spot.  Using real simple math you get that back in 20 years.

Who does?  These are publicly financed?

 

I suspect given the time value of money, plus the cost of financing, the actual payback period would be much longer than 20 years.

[nagel]

Young's solution is not terrible.  You raise rates.

 

Another option is an app that provides real time information on parking supply.  In parkades initially (easy to do by in vs out totals) but could be expanded to on-road or private lots.  Then you remove the information gap.

[VicHockeyFan]

The City gets the money back, a continuing income stream.  

[jonny]

I wouldn't be surprised if their motivations were less palatable, especially Isitt, but it's a good way of reframing the issue regardless of their actual motivation.

Maybe I'm just bitter and jaded, but for some reason I have a hard time believing this council would approve a privately financed, hideous and extremely utilitarian parking structure like the View St Parkade, for instance.

[jonny]

Young's solution is not terrible. You raise rates.

Another option is an app that provides real time information on parking supply. In parkades initially (easy to do by in vs out totals) but could be expanded to on-road or private lots. Then you remove the information gap.

Have we demonstrated that there is a problem? I have personally never had a problem finding parking, aside from around the Christmas rush.

[VicHockeyFan]

Have we demonstrated that there is a problem? I have personally never had a problem finding parking, aside from around the Christmas rush.

 

I don't think we have.  Of course things get tight at Christmas, they do at malls too.

[rjag]

I haven't heard it.  That's just what I would do.  I believe parking in urban centres should generally be in parkades, not on-road, and should not be subsidized.

 

You have to consider what downtown is and its function, i.e. the role each player has in making it what it is. We have the provincial government with a massive presence and thousands of employees commuting in from 13 differing municipalities and further afield. We have an increasing resident presence that will only grow more that require food, goods entertainment etc. We have a huge tourism sector with hotels, attractions and restaurants. And we have the business sector which include tech, professional and retail. All of these contribute to the local economy which in turn generates a massive amount of property taxes as well as other sources of revenue for the City of Victoria. In exchange the City should be obligated to provide services to aid in the proper function of ALL of these sectors and encourage their success. If part of it is a demand for bike lanes and it will contribute to the economy or the health of the residents then sure lets work with that. If part of it includes providing a way for people to bring their business/money into the core to spend at any of the above or to simply enjoy what the core has to offer then they have an obligation to ensure that there is adequate facilities to accommodate how those folks get here. It may be bus, bike, walking or ....and I know this is hard to admit....a car.

 

The old saying people vote with their money. If they have a perception that its awkward or barriers are being put up to inconvenience a select group then they simply, (like water flowing through a pipe) take their business elsewhere. Hence the massive success of Westshore and Uptown.

 

If parking is identified as a potential game changer then they cant simply stick their heads in the sand and be all progressive, they may have to acknowledge it.

 

I know for a fact 1 law firm is moving today out to Royal Oak and one of the main reasons is the trouble their clients have parking for 2-4 hour meetings when the parkades are in so much demand.

 

This is an unintended consequence of the successful parking program combined with loss of hundreds of surface parking spots. 

[DavidSchell]

is this issue a seasonal thing?

 

11 months out of the year, parking is fine, but 1 month of the year their is a problem ... does that mean we build more Parkades that will not be fully utilised 11 months out of a year or is their another solution to this issue.

 

Perhaps invest in a light rail system with starting points  next to multi-level Parkade, paying for parking also gets you on the train. Now we take care of parking issues and have a system that is utilised all year round.

 

Just food for thought   

[jonny]

Oh brother, now the CTV is saying we have “downtown parking woes”.

 

We just go from one crisis to the other. “Housing crisis.” ‘Fentanyl crisis.” “Parking crisis.”

 

Everything’s a bloody crisis or some sort of emergency.

 

Like I have said before, the City has an easy and free solution to any parking “woes”. Offer height, density and other zoning incentives to any developer who offers public parking as a part of their new building.

 

I.e. offer 50 public parking stalls, and boom, you can now build 5 stories taller. Zero risk to the taxpayer. No complicated analysis or studies required. Zero land acquisition or construction required. Easy freaking peasy, which means they’ll do something much more complicated and dumb. They’ll study the damn thing to death and then we’ll really be in a crisis when one of the moldy old CoV parkades is condemned.

[nagel]

Another thing lost in the discussion from the media is that yes we may be losing hundreds of spots, but we are also adding hundreds of residents. Many of those residents will also not have access to parking, and even if they do have parking, it's likely they will do most of their shopping downtown. So there is likely a net positive as far as economic impact on downtown retailers from the influx of new residents.

[aastra]

 

I suppose "thirty years from now" is just around the corner, so I should start looking NOW for somewhere else to shop rather that in downtown Victoria.

 

For sure, 30 years will go by in the blink of an eye. Even though we're still depending on the city parkades that were built in the 1960s and 1970s. Even though we're seriously considering refurbing the Crystal Pool.

[aastra]

 

...is this issue a seasonal thing?

 

The TC would run parking crisis stories semi-regularly back in the day. I'm talking in the 1980s and 1990s. You know, when downtown was absolutely flush with parkades and surface parking lots and the residential parking pressures were effectively nil.

[aastra]

What's the authoritative figure re: the increase/decrease in the total number of parking spots over the years and decades? The Waddington complex introduced way more parking spaces underground than were previously present on the surface of that same block. I suspect Harbour Square also increased rather than decreased the number of spaces on its block. There were no parking spots at Eaton's back in the day, which means parking was increased significantly on that block as well when the Eaton's Centre was built. The Yates Street parkade added levels back in the late 1980s or whenever that was. The conference centre surely introduced more parking than was already there on the Empress back lot. Underground parking has been added in dribs and drabs underneath office blocks and condo buildings all over downtown.

[Dr.Doinglittle]

The solution has been mentioned - simply raise rates to a point where there is less pressure on existing parking. Victoria is cheap to park compared to places like Vancouver. And get rid of the first free hour. Why they did that in the first place is beyond me.