Downtown Parking

[GoGators]

I am not minimizing or discounting your statistic, but what is your solution? My honest question is what is economically viable today, and does not sell out the future, as a replacement for those spaces?

First, I would eliminate on street parking and make way for protected bike lanes, pedestrians, and parklets. Getting rid of the parallel spots along the street car line eliminates the possibility of it being blocked by cars anyway. This would be a small step the city could do tomorrow. Not much the city could do with private lots that are already there. I wouldn’t allow any further demo permits for surface lot construction within the core. Plus if possible, The city should put pressure on these private property parking owners to keep up with current landscaping requirements that go along with new construction. Finally, I would actually enforce the city ordinance of allowing people to park only on specific hard surfaces. Any lot that includes gravel, grass, etc. would be fined until shut down. That’s where I would start.

[Ross MacLochness]

No one goes to a city because of its lack of parking either. No one goes to cities because of their mass transit. .

I go to cities specifically for those reasons.

[HangryHippo]

I go to cities specifically for those reasons.

As do I.

[Plutonic Panda]

Lol I’m not buying it. Maybe that is one of the reasons but it isn’t the main reason. You go to cities because of the city. That would be like saying “oh I went to NYC specifically to ride the subways and everything else like the historic landmarks were second.” Perhaps you two are missing my point or I’m not explaining it.

But saying “no one visits a city because of its parking” is a false equivalency.

[Dob Hooligan]

First, I would eliminate on street parking and make way for protected bike lanes, pedestrians, and parklets. Getting rid of the parallel spots along the street car line eliminates the possibility of it being blocked by cars anyway. This would be a small step the city could do tomorrow. Not much the city could do with private lots that are already there. I wouldn’t allow any further demo permits for surface lot construction within the core. Plus if possible, The city should put pressure on these private property parking owners to keep up with current landscaping requirements that go along with new construction. Finally, I would actually enforce the city ordinance of allowing people to park only on specific hard surfaces. Any lot that includes gravel, grass, etc. would be fined until shut down. That’s where I would start.

I agree with your overall concept. I might quibble with some details, but this is a good start. Especially no parking on the street car line.

[dankrutka]

IF YOUR LACK OF PARKING ISN'T THE ONLY REASON FOR VISITING A CITY THEN YOUR OPINION IS INVALID! ha ha. Giving you a hard time, but I think you're dismissing people's opinions because you're missing our larger point.

I think the point is that many of us travel to dense, urban cities not just because of their public transportation and lack of parking but because these things are what make these cities vibrant and walkable. They're interconnected. You can't separate them.

In general (because it depends how they're spread around), every parking spot OKC has in it's core makes OKC less dense and walkable because cars are taking up spaces that could be filled with residents, visitors, businesses, and more broadly, street life. And, the more dense/walkable and less cars the more the benefits accrue. Unfortunately, OKC keeps building parking garages every block and wonders why the streets are dead and no one is riding the streetcar. Again, I don't care what OKC does outside the core that much, but urban areas that don't abide by urban principles are not as good as those that do.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^ Oh I agree with you about OKC’s parking. Plus the parking garages they are building are horribly designed and should be hidden or underground like most cities. We tore down a beautiful bus depot and building recently for some. I can go on all day bashing these parking garages.

My response about the whole visiting cities for transit thing was in regards to Gators comments about people not visiting a city because of its parking lots. Of course no one does and no one here claimed they do.

But I was not too impressed with the streetcar when I rode it and for the money we could have got more with an enhanced articulated bus system and dedicated bus lanes. This would have prevented virtually every problem the streetcar current has.

Given OKCs car culture, I’m not so convinced parking garages are affecting ridership that much but I could be wrong. We need a multi billion dollar investment in OKCs mass transit network alone AND getting serious about interstate rail travel as well as connecting OKC to Tulsa with 110 MPH rail to their DOWNTOWNs and increasing speeds on heartland flyer. Extend heartland flyer to newton. Do that and I bet ridership increases. Since the street is already in place it should be expanded and the new expansion double tracked instead of a circulator.

[HOT ROD]

The flaw in your argument is a majority of MAPS taxes comes from outside downtown. All citizens have input not just downtowners. Your argument is no one else matters except downtowners.

I think we have a thriving city with a great downtown. Parking spots allow non downtowners to come and enjoy all the MAPS projects.

Like another poster said there is not an overabundance of building demand to shut down parking spots. And small businesses rely on parking spots to generate extra revenue which can make just enough difference.

Outside of downtown the biggest complaint I hear is not enough parking. Regardless if its true or not its their perception. And a lot of people outside of downtown have made cars their #2 expense and want to park close to their cars. Some have fears of walking far downtown. I think its unfounded but people think this.

There is no reason to eliminate spots and lets see how it does once all 3 new venues are open year.

And a majority of MAPS goes outside of downtown too

Im getting sick and tired of people making this argument with the idea that MAPS only benefits downtown. While it is true that in downtown you can have the flashy and best building uses MAPS has always been a city wide effort not just in collections. Having downtown amenities just illustrates the beauty of having a core, it's economically advantageous to build big venues given the urban design constraints that dont exist in the rest of the city, Venues feed off each other in a dense area - so it makes sense to build a arena, baseball stadum, and canal to co-exist and create the destination that downtown is.

but lets not forget the fairgrounds is ALWSAYS at MAps and isnt downtown, there are no senior cititizen centers downtown, very few trails and new sidewalks are downtown, ect. Maps has always been city wide, its just easier to build the big attractions downtown for a variety of reasons. ...

[Jeepnokc]

And a majority of MAPS goes outside of downtown too

Im getting sick and tired of people making this argument with the idea that MAPS only benefits downtown. While it is true that in downtown you can have the flashy and best building uses MAPS has always been a city wide effort not just in collections. Having downtown amenities just illustrates the beauty of having a core, it's economically advantageous to build big venues given the urban design constraints that dont exist in the rest of the city, Venues feed off each other in a dense area - so it makes sense to build a arena, baseball stadum, and canal to co-exist and create the destination that downtown is.

but lets not forget the fairgrounds is ALWSAYS at MAps and isnt downtown, there are no senior cititizen centers downtown, very few trails and new sidewalks are downtown, ect. Maps has always been city wide, its just easier to build the big attractions downtown for a variety of reasons. ...

Has anyone done the numbers percentage wise to see how much money goes to each part of the city? Would be interesting.