Recent Changes for "Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure" - Davis Wiki

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

AlexMandel — 2012-03-25 11:15:28

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 160:	Line 160:
- ''2012-03-25 11:14:04'' [[nbsp]] I'd be in favor of this, if it means they eliminate most on street parking downtown - which is majorly hazardous to cyclists and causes a lot of traffic. Kudos to whoever got the city to start putting in bike parking instead of car spaces on the street over in front of ["Orange Hut"] and a block over near ["E St. Plaza"] --["Users/AlexMandel"]	+ ''2012-03-25 11:14:04'' [[nbsp]] I'd be in favor of this, if it means they eliminate most on street parking downtown - which is majorly hazardous to cyclists and causes a lot of traffic. Kudos to whoever got the city to start putting in bike parking instead of car spaces on the street over in front of ["Orange Court"] and a block over near ["E Street Plaza"] --["Users/AlexMandel"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

AlexMandel — 2012-03-25 11:14:04

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 159:	Line 159:
	+ ------ + ''2012-03-25 11:14:04'' [[nbsp]] I'd be in favor of this, if it means they eliminate most on street parking downtown - which is majorly hazardous to cyclists and causes a lot of traffic. Kudos to whoever got the city to start putting in bike parking instead of car spaces on the street over in front of ["Orange Hut"] and a block over near ["E St. Plaza"] --["Users/AlexMandel"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2012-02-17 18:56:20

clarification

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 155:	Line 155:
	+ *What I meant was the carrying charge to the city is $92,000 each month.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DonShor — 2011-11-30 20:07:33

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 156:	Line 156:
- ''2011-11-30 19:06:45'' [[nbsp]] The bonds are costing the city money. From the Sac Bee: "Davis, with two separate bond issues totaling $18 million, garnered a solid A+ rating from Standard & Poor's, as the city is deemed to have a strong capacity to repay. Even so, the city will pay effective rates of 7.1 percent on one $13.3 million issue and 8.4 percent on $4.7 million on another."	+ ''2011-11-30 19:06:45'' [[nbsp]] The bonds are costing the city money. From the Sac Bee: "... the city will pay effective rates of 7.1 percent on one $13.3 million issue and 8.4 percent on $4.7 million on another."

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DonShor — 2011-11-30 20:06:45

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 155:	Line 155:
	+ ------ + ''2011-11-30 19:06:45'' [[nbsp]] The bonds are costing the city money. From the Sac Bee: "Davis, with two separate bond issues totaling $18 million, garnered a solid A+ rating from Standard & Poor's, as the city is deemed to have a strong capacity to repay. Even so, the city will pay effective rates of 7.1 percent on one $13.3 million issue and 8.4 percent on $4.7 million on another." + Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/13/4050654/agenciesbond-blitz-carries-a-big.html#ixzz1fFTVdSsr --["Users/DonShor"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-11-30 18:41:57

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 153:	Line 153:
	+ ------ + ''2011-11-30 17:41:57'' [[nbsp]] Good news the Council put this on hold on October 4, 2011. But, keep an eye on what transpires both with the lot and with the bond money that's sitting accruing interest at $92K/month. --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

ScottMeehleib — 2011-11-11 17:19:15

reply to Tom

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 152:	Line 152:
	+ *Do you ever have problems finding parking in the metered parking lot downtown? I never have, but then again, like most people, I hate paying for parking in Davis. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but my assumption is that the parking garage would also not be free. If it is actually going to be free, it may sway my opinion. -SM

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

TomGarberson — 2011-11-11 17:04:10

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 150:	Line 150:
	+ ------ + ''2011-11-11 16:04:10'' [[nbsp]] Both last night (Thursday at 6:30pm) and this afternoon (12:30pm) I had a hell of a time finding a parking place. Both times it was 10+ minutes, and last night I wound up in the F Street theater structure, more than 3 blocks from my destination. So I'll say it again: downtown needs a parking solution. I don't know whether this structure is the right solution, but I'm guessing it'd be better than nothing. --["Users/TomGarberson"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

resincakes — 2011-11-11 16:45:52

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 148:	Line 148:
	+ ------ + ''2011-11-11 15:45:52'' [[nbsp]] Don't do it Davis. --["Users/resincakes"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

BarbaraZ — 2011-10-18 12:51:59

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 147:	Line 147:
- ''2011-10-18 12:51:02'' [[nbsp]] I have ALWAYS found parking, day and night, summer or winter, within a block (often closer) of where I want to go downtown. I appreciate all the trees in the present parking lot, especially at night when the lights are turned on. I feel safe at night parking there right next to Kinkos/FedEx. I would NOT use a parking garage. Why go for this outdated model of car centric development, especially when there are empty commercial properties downtown? Please, City of Davis, reconsider this! --["Users/BarbaraZ"]	+ ''2011-10-18 12:51:02'' [[nbsp]] I have ALWAYS found parking, day and night, summer or winter, within a block (often closer) of where I want to go downtown. I appreciate all the trees in the present parking lot, especially at night when the lights are turned on. I feel safe at night parking there right next to Kinkos/FedEx. I would NOT use a parking garage. Why go for this outdated model of car-centric development, especially when there are empty commercial properties downtown? Please, City of Davis, reconsider this! --["Users/BarbaraZ"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

BarbaraZ — 2011-10-18 12:51:02

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 146:	Line 146:
	+ ------ + ''2011-10-18 12:51:02'' [[nbsp]] I have ALWAYS found parking, day and night, summer or winter, within a block (often closer) of where I want to go downtown. I appreciate all the trees in the present parking lot, especially at night when the lights are turned on. I feel safe at night parking there right next to Kinkos/FedEx. I would NOT use a parking garage. Why go for this outdated model of car centric development, especially when there are empty commercial properties downtown? Please, City of Davis, reconsider this! --["Users/BarbaraZ"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Flynn — 2011-10-18 02:00:16

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 141:	Line 141:
	+ ------ + ''2011-10-18 02:00:16'' [[nbsp]] I've personally always thought that they should convert the empty lot on G and Sweet Briar into a parking structure, possibly with some small shops on the bottom. + Another idea: add some solar panels to the tops of some of the parking structures we have, use them to power an electric shuttle trolley that runs from the parking structures to downtown. Net benefit of getting people to park outside the core area while still providing convenience. + Alternately, what about that empty lot on Olive Drive across from Redrum? Right next to Downtown, but it's an area where a parking building would not be an eyesore + Finally, we've seen that parking meters CAN work in Davis. I say we put meters in the lots, but NOT the parking structures. This will encourage folks (especially Downtown employees - you know who you are) to actually use the parking we have, rather than running out every two hours to move their cars. --["Users/Flynn"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-10-15 21:11:40

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 10:	Line 10:
- On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. Other sites on the periphery of the downtown core would be considered also. (see [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Council Will Study Parking, Tackle Low-Hanging Fruit, Before Proceeding with Huge Parking Project]). Some believe that this City Council action represents the death of the proposal.	+ On Oct. 4, 2011, the ["City Council"] voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. Other sites on the periphery of the downtown core would be considered also. (see [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Council Will Study Parking, Tackle Low-Hanging Fruit, Before Proceeding with Huge Parking Project]). Some believe that this City Council action represents the death of the proposal.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-10-15 21:10:57

moving link to where it makes more sense

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- - [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Council Will Study Parking, Tackle Low-Hanging Fruit, Before Proceeding with Huge Parking Project] -- Some believe that this City Council action, taken on Oct 4 2011, represents the death of the proposal.
Line 12:	Line 10:
- On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. Other sites on the periphery of the downtown core would be considered also.	+ On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. Other sites on the periphery of the downtown core would be considered also. (see [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Council Will Study Parking, Tackle Low-Hanging Fruit, Before Proceeding with Huge Parking Project]). Some believe that this City Council action represents the death of the proposal.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-10-15 20:56:37

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 12:	Line 12:
- On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots.	+ On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. Other sites on the periphery of the downtown core would be considered also.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-10-15 20:55:15

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 12:	Line 12:
- On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project for one year, in the event that studies identified a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots.	+ On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project. It may be considered again after one year, in the event that studies identify a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-10-15 20:51:31

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 6:	Line 6:
- The ["City of Davis"] is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of ["3rd Street" 3rd], ["4th Street" 4th], ["E Street" E] and ["F Street" F] Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level.	+ In 2011, the ["City of Davis"] considered a plan to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of ["3rd Street" 3rd], ["4th Street" 4th], ["E Street" E] and ["F Street" F] Streets (see photo at right). The proposal included about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, which would replace all 113 existing spaces at ground level. It also included retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level. The plan appears unlikely to move forward, although it has not been eliminated as a future option.
Line 8:	Line 8:
- The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space. $15 million is more than half of the available funds for the city's list of redevelopment projects.	+ The facility would cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space. $15 million is more than half of the available funds for the city's list of redevelopment projects.
Line 10:	Line 10:
- It would be funded by redevelopment bonds. The project had been planned for many years until this Summer (2011) when it was fast tracked to move forward because the state threatened to abolish redevelopment agencies and rescind funding that the city had been counting on for this and many other redevelopment projects.	+ It would be funded by redevelopment bonds. The project had been planned for many years until the Spring of 2011 when it was fast tracked to move forward after the state threatened to abolish redevelopment agencies and rescind funding that the city had been counting on for this and many other redevelopment projects. + + On Oct. 4, 2011, The City Council voted to take steps to more effectively manage downtown parking and utilization of existing off-street parking lots and structures. They voted to postpone consideration of the 3/4/E/F project for one year, in the event that studies identified a true need for a large new parking facility even with effective utilization of existing parking lots. +
Line 14:	Line 17:
	+
Line 33:	Line 37:
- A public workshop was held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 6:30PM-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall.	+ On Tuesday, August 23, 2011, the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for the Transportation Implementation Plan (a temporary committee of stakeholders and experts on city transportation issues), meeting in the ["City Council Chambers"], considered the Downtown Parking and Access Plan. The latter plan was initiated by ["Joe Krovoza" Mayor Krovoza] at the July 19 City Council meeting. The TAG voted to put forward to the City Council a recommendation that further consideration of the parking structure project be postponed until downtown parking needs were studied to determine whether such a facility was necessary at all, or whether a more effective parking management scheme could better address issues of parking scarcity.
Line 35:	Line 39:
- The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] held a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 12PM-1PM at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street).	+ The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] also held a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 2011.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-10-11 16:39:21

more accurately

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 4:	Line 4:
- [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Project killed by city council Oct 4 2011]	+ [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Council Will Study Parking, Tackle Low-Hanging Fruit, Before Proceeding with Huge Parking Project] -- Some believe that this City Council action, taken on Oct 4 2011, represents the death of the proposal.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DonShor — 2011-10-10 22:37:39

update

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 4:	Line 4:
	+ [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4742:council-will-study-parking-tackle-low-hanging-fruit-before-proceeding-with-huge-parking-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Project killed by city council Oct 4 2011]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

shraken — 2011-10-10 22:31:39

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 136:	Line 136:
	+ ------ + ''2011-10-10 22:31:39'' [[nbsp]] I can't wait for them to build this. I'm throwing my (in future tense) xb0x360 off the top. With any luck it will roll over to the computer repair place. --["Users/shraken"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DanielAmoni — 2011-10-02 21:36:25

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 134:	Line 134:
	+ ------ + ''2011-10-02 21:36:25'' [[nbsp]] My family recently moved to Davis because of it being a very bike friendly town. I find the fact there is even a debate about this very depressing. On the one hand, Davis is considering spending money to fix the mistake of making 5th St. too car-centric, and on the other hand is thinking about building a big parking garage? --["Users/DanielAmoni"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-10-02 20:45:45

factual clarification

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 110:	Line 110:
	+ + * I wrote above: "The first thing to be fixed should be Fifth Street, so that pedestrians from the Old Davis neighborhood can safely cross this busy, fast-moving speedway. It's estimated that only $50,000 is needed to make Fifth Street "pedestrian-friendly." This means people with kids, strollers, grandparents and city visitors will be able to safely cross at "C," "D," and "E" streets without risking their lives." fknochenhauer [see below] + + * This exact figure is from a City of Davis Public Works staff estimate of making 5th St. "pedestrian-friendly" with additional paint, cross-walks, signage and traffic-calming measures from the train tracks to "B" St. It has nothing to do with the proposed "5th St. Road Diet / Re-design" which Michael Bisch is suggesting. I would think that the co-president of the Downtown Davis Business Association would want more and safer access to the downtown area from the Old North Davis Neighborhood. But, perhaps, I'm wrong. Let's stay factual and not include irrelevant arguments into why the parking structure will inhibit rather than promote non-motorized access to our thriving downtown businesses. We want to visit downtown more often, by foot, on bike and by other means whenever possible. However, 5th St. is a dangerous expressway, presently designed to speed motorists past downtown, to and from other sectors of our city and outlying freeways. Crossing at an intersection lacking a light or crosswalk is a death-defying experience. I know this because I reluctantly do it every time I shop downtown -fknochenhauer

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

ndah100 — 2011-09-24 15:26:58

deleting my own comments

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 63:	Line 63:
- ''2011-08-09 12:05:48'' [[nbsp]] Personally I highly oppose this project, downtown Davis does not need a parking structure. Not all of the parking spaces are even used on the downtown streets. And if people need extra parking, they can easily find one by driving onto another block. If anything this would literally make the downtown view less appealing, because from a mile away you would see a tall concrete structure. And there are more bikes in Davis then there are cars I am pretty sure. - If anything City of Davis, invest in bike racks for downtown Davis. I usually have to lock my bike onto garbage cans.
Line 66:	Line 64:
- And the parking lots at the movie theaters are half full over 90 percent of the time. So adding another addition of a - movie theater parking lot is highly unnecessary. - - If you build a parking structure, might as well build another Thai restaurant to accompany it. - - A true waste of $15 million. --["Users/NikhilDahal"] - ------
Line 84:	Line 75:
- ------ - ''2011-08-09 13:09:36'' [[nbsp]] You can alwaaays find parking on parking on I street and J street, it's just I can find many other things thatthe City can do with $15 million, it'll be a month(?) before UCD starts , and Unitrans will be in full swing, bike theft will soar 300%, and half of Davis will walking/ biking. --["Users/NikhilDahal"]	+

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-23 10:46:09

linked Yackzan Group and Watry Design

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 36:	Line 36:
- On Tuesday, July 19, 2011, the Davis City Council voted 3-2 to move forward with preliminary design work on the project, by approving an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Yackzan Group, and a sole-source contract with Watry Design for Phase 1 concept/schematic scoping architecture for the project.	+ On Tuesday, July 19, 2011, the Davis City Council voted 3-2 to move forward with preliminary design work on the project, by approving an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with [http://www.yackzangroup.com/ Yackzan Group], and a sole-source contract with [http://www.watrydesign.com/ Watry Design] for Phase 1 concept/schematic scoping architecture for the project.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

KevinWan — 2011-09-21 19:47:44

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 139:	Line 139:
- * Employees account for much of the downtown parking scarcity. Anyone who's worked or has spent a regular amount of time in the downtown core can attest that "I gotta go move my car" is a statement you hear quite often. Having more long term parking (["Residential_Parking_Permits" X-Permit/D-Permit]) available to retailers and their employees would not only free up on-street spaces for customers and visitors, it would reduce the amount of cars circling around trying to find another space, bringing the traffic relief you seek. The circling phenomenon was especially bad during the block-face parking enforcement, where people could not repark their cars on the same block. As a Downtown Davis business owner, I would greatly welcome a parking structure with free 3 hr parking with a couple of floors dedicated to X/D permits and see on-street parking changed to 60-90 min limits (which is the direction The City is going anyway) to encourage use of parking structures for long term visitors. --["Users/KevinWan"]	+ * Employees account for much of the downtown parking scarcity. Anyone who's worked or has spent a regular amount of time in the downtown core can attest that "I gotta go move my car" is a statement you hear quite often. Having more long term parking (["Residential Parking Permits" X-Permit/D-Permit]) available to retailers and their employees would not only free up on-street spaces for customers and visitors, it would reduce the amount of cars circling around trying to find another space, bringing the traffic relief you seek. The circling phenomenon was especially bad during the era of block-face parking enforcement, when people could not repark their cars on the same block. As a Downtown Davis business owner, I would greatly welcome a parking structure with free 3 hr parking with a couple of floors dedicated to X/D permits and see on-street parking changed to 60-90 min limits (which is the direction The City is going anyway) to encourage use of parking structures for long term visitors. --["Users/KevinWan"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

KevinWan — 2011-09-21 19:45:27

response to mr. ogul

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

No differences found!

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

KevinWan — 2011-09-21 19:45:14

response to mr. ogul

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 139:	Line 139:
	+ * Employees account for much of the downtown parking scarcity. Anyone who's worked or has spent a regular amount of time in the downtown core can attest that "I gotta go move my car" is a statement you hear quite often. Having more long term parking (["Residential_Parking_Permits" X-Permit/D-Permit]) available to retailers and their employees would not only free up on-street spaces for customers and visitors, it would reduce the amount of cars circling around trying to find another space, bringing the traffic relief you seek. The circling phenomenon was especially bad during the block-face parking enforcement, where people could not repark their cars on the same block. As a Downtown Davis business owner, I would greatly welcome a parking structure with free 3 hr parking with a couple of floors dedicated to X/D permits and see on-street parking changed to 60-90 min limits (which is the direction The City is going anyway) to encourage use of parking structures for long term visitors. --["Users/KevinWan"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

MeggoWaffle — 2011-09-21 10:33:11

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 128:	Line 128:
	+ * I'll chime in here and say I am one of those women who hates parking garages. I thought it would be different in Davis, but I have been leered at and even followed, and this is during the day, not even at night. Additionally, parking structures ARE a crime magnet where I went to undergrad so I would not be so quick to dismiss that possibility. --["Users/MeggoWaffle"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

jsogul — 2011-09-20 23:04:22

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 136:	Line 136:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-20 23:04:22'' [[nbsp]] I don't see how adding more parking downtown is going to help the traffic situation, which to me is downtown's real problem. --["Users/jsogul"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-09-20 23:00:30

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 127:	Line 127:
	+ * Bars are more easily avoided than parking lots. But back to the point -- the fact remains that it would be easier to get away with mugging someone in a closed parking structure than in an open parking lot. The fear is not irrational. --["Users/CovertProfessor"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

jsogul — 2011-09-20 22:57:32

commenting

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 126:	Line 126:
	+ * I think we can agree that a lack of crime does not necessarily inspire feelings of comfort or safety. But if you are seriously worried about crime magnets, like fknochenhauer seems to be, you should probably be protesting bars and other establishments that sell alcohol, not parking structures.--["Users/jsogul"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 21:52:46

bullet point and quote from Sue Greenwald

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 129:	Line 129:
	+ * Personally and, especially, professionally, I would think that someone (meaning Michael) who might be viewed as an ambassador for the Downtown Davis Business Association as its co-president and is a Davis REALTOR interested in building alliances with locals, would endeavor to couch his comments so that they are factual and not totally sarcastic as we see above. It's demeaning to the individual (meaning, you, Michael) and the DDBA when you ignore the obvious facts that are part of the public record (well documented at http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4568:vote-on-parking-lot-illustrates-fundamental-lack-of-transparency-in-city-of-davis&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79) plus council member Greenwald commented the following: ..."is why I said at the meeting that I thought it fairer to everyone to pull the plug now. I said that I didn't think the project has sufficient public support, and that I thought a '''5 story parking garage smack in the middle of town would be ugly'''..." Now, where is a four-story garage discussed? Let's talk facts, not fiction mixed with tired sarcasm. - fknochenhauer (I love bold in the right place, don't you?) +

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 21:29:12

added existinglot3 pic - notice the blue sky

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 10:	Line 10:
- [[Image(Existinglot2.JPG, thumbnail, 300, "Existing City-owned Lot")]] - [[Image(Existinglot1.JPG, thumbnail, 300, "Another View of the Existing City-owned Lot")]] -	+ [[Image(Existinglot2.JPG, thumbnail, 250, "Existing City-owned Lot")]] + [[Image(Existinglot1.JPG, thumbnail, 250, "Another View of the Existing City-owned Lot")]] + [[Image(Existinglot3.JPG, thumbnail, 250, "Existing lot and Blue Sky viewed from FedEx Kinko's")]]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 21:26:14

Upload of image Existinglot3.JPG.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-09-20 19:44:55

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 125:	Line 125:
	+ * Ask some women how they feel about parking structures at night when they are alone, as compared to surface lots, and report back. I think you'll find that they are not too enthused about parking structures, whether their feeling of unsafety is a false perception or not. I don't think anyone is saying that this structure would be worse than the others, but rather that we don't need another parking structure in town. --["Users/CovertProfessor"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

jsogul — 2011-09-20 19:27:22

not a crime magnet

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 124:	Line 124:
	+ * I haven't researched this thoroughly, but I don't believe there is any evidence suggesting that the existing parking structures in Downtown Davis are crime magnets. I used to read the police reports every day for a year and I rarely saw any incidents at the addresses for the parking structures downtown. I don't see any reason to believe this parking structure would somehow be more crime-prone than our existing structures. --["Users/jsogul"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-09-20 16:27:38

added second pic.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- [[Image(Existinglot2.JPG, thumbnail, 300, right, "Existing City-owned Lot")]]	+ +
Line 9:	Line 10:
	+ [[Image(Existinglot2.JPG, thumbnail, 300, "Existing City-owned Lot")]] + [[Image(Existinglot1.JPG, thumbnail, 300, "Another View of the Existing City-owned Lot")]]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 15:27:03

added picture of Existing Lot - Chase Bank Photo

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
	+ [[Image(Existinglot2.JPG, thumbnail, 300, right, "Existing City-owned Lot")]]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 15:22:47

Upload of image Existinglot2.JPG.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-20 15:19:16

Upload of image Existinglot1.JPG.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-09-18 17:58:21

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 125:	Line 125:
	+ * Well said. --["Users/CovertProfessor"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

JabberWokky — 2011-09-18 17:03:02

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 122:	Line 122:
- * All information on the wiki is provided by people like you. If you have information and you're not sharing, there's little anybody can do. Please hit "Edit" and correct anything you notice wrong, here or elsewhere on the wiki. Otherwise, you're contributing to the very problem you are complaining about. This is not a blog, so do not feel your only right is to make commentary. The content on this wiki is quite literally and legally yours, Michael. Of course, it also belongs to other people as well, so please be respectful of others; but you are empowered here to make changes. It is up to you if you do so. --["Users/JabberWokky" Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards], jw.dw@timewarp.org	+ * All information on the wiki is provided by people like you. If you have information and you're not sharing, there's little anybody can do. Please hit "Edit" and correct anything you notice wrong, here or elsewhere on the wiki. Otherwise, you're contributing to the very problem you are complaining about. This is not a blog, so do not feel your only right is to make commentary. The content on this wiki is quite literally and legally yours, Michael. Of course, it also belongs to other people as well, so please be respectful of others and work out disputes between individuals, but you are empowered here (and encouraged!) to make changes. It is up to you if you do so. --["Users/JabberWokky" Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards], jw.dw@timewarp.org

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

JabberWokky — 2011-09-18 17:02:05

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 116:	Line 116:
- * All information on the wiki is provided by people like you. If you have information and you're not sharing, there's little anybody can do. Please hit "Edit" and correct anything you notice wrong, here or elsewhere on the wiki. Otherwise, you're contributing to the very problem you are complaining about. This is not a blog, so do not feel your only right is to make commentary. The content on this wiki is quite literally and legally yours, Michael. --["Users/JabberWokky" Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards], jw.dw@timewarp.org
Line 123:	Line 122:
	+ * All information on the wiki is provided by people like you. If you have information and you're not sharing, there's little anybody can do. Please hit "Edit" and correct anything you notice wrong, here or elsewhere on the wiki. Otherwise, you're contributing to the very problem you are complaining about. This is not a blog, so do not feel your only right is to make commentary. The content on this wiki is quite literally and legally yours, Michael. Of course, it also belongs to other people as well, so please be respectful of others; but you are empowered here to make changes. It is up to you if you do so. --["Users/JabberWokky" Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards], jw.dw@timewarp.org

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

JabberWokky — 2011-09-18 16:59:41

Merflugle.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 116:	Line 116:
	+ * All information on the wiki is provided by people like you. If you have information and you're not sharing, there's little anybody can do. Please hit "Edit" and correct anything you notice wrong, here or elsewhere on the wiki. Otherwise, you're contributing to the very problem you are complaining about. This is not a blog, so do not feel your only right is to make commentary. The content on this wiki is quite literally and legally yours, Michael. --["Users/JabberWokky" Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards], jw.dw@timewarp.org

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-18 16:06:18

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 122:	Line 122:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-18 16:06:18'' [[nbsp]] If it's not 50' or five-stories, then, I must somehow be confused by the first line at the top of this topic page: "The City of Davis is proposing to build a five-story parking structure on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot..." I'll soon be posting some pictures of this pleasant, tree-shaded parking lot and the blue sky above it. What's not to like about it? It has easy access. You see friends across the lot. You easily go from businesses to your car, drop things off, and continue your shopping. You can easily find your car in the shade when you return and depart with ease. You can smell the trees and see the sky. You feel safe. A nice customer experience in downtown Davis. Why change it? --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-09-17 22:22:02

rm hr

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 121:	Line 121:
- ------

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Davidlm — 2011-09-17 21:45:27

Dup removal

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 123:	Line 123:
- ------ - ''2011-09-17 21:38:58'' [[nbsp]] The projected cost of this humongous monstrosity is $28,000,000, wait no, make that $56,000,000, let's call it an even $100,000,000. And it's a CRIME MAGNET!!! Don't you think your comments are a bit strident and over the top? You'd think the City Council was proposing to build a nuclear waste repository in the heart of Downtown. --["Users/MichaelBisch"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

MichaelBisch — 2011-09-17 21:38:58

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 123:	Line 123:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-17 21:38:58'' [[nbsp]] The projected cost of this humongous monstrosity is $28,000,000, wait no, make that $56,000,000, let's call it an even $100,000,000. And it's a CRIME MAGNET!!! Don't you think your comments are a bit strident and over the top? You'd think the City Council was proposing to build a nuclear waste repository in the heart of Downtown. --["Users/MichaelBisch"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

MichaelBisch — 2011-09-17 21:20:09

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 121:	Line 121:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-17 21:20:09'' [[nbsp]] The projected cost of this humongous monstrosity is $28,000,000, wait no, make that $56,000,000, let's call it an even $100,000,000. And it's a CRIME MAGNET!!! Don't you think your comments are a bit strident and over the top? You'd think the City Council was proposing to build a nuclear waste repository in the heart of Downtown. --["Users/MichaelBisch"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-17 19:16:50

double entry by fknochenhauer deleted

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

No differences found!

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-17 19:03:27

double entry by fknochenhauer deleted

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 121:	Line 121:
- ''2011-09-17 19:01:57'' [[nbsp]] The total cost of this ill-conceived and massive parking structure is now projected at over $28 million, including the interest associated with the city bond already floated earlier this year. The $13+ million bond is presently costing the City of Davis over $92,000 per MONTH (that's $92K/mo) in accrued interest! No typos there. Those are the FACTS. Since the city is accruing such fees, of course every stakeholder is in a hurry to create design specifications and a proposal on what associated impact the parking structure will have on this, otherwise, very nice parking lot. The "idea" of a parking structure is costing big money already. - - At present, there has been no inclusion of additional costs of automated SMART METER parking hardware employed as other cities use. These are the machines one uses to "buy" parking time per space on each level. The estimated cost is the CONSTRUCTION cost(s) and does not include additional personnel management, cleaning, annual maintenance, crime prevention and automation costs. Plus, having worked in a parking garage at San Jose State University, I know full-well how thrill-seekers, vandals, transients and do-nothings frequent a garage to victimize its patrons. Need I mention the suicides, too? A parking garage is a CRIME MAGNET in any city. Who wants this in Davis when we have better, low-cost, transit alternatives? --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-17 19:01:57

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 120:	Line 120:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-17 19:01:57'' [[nbsp]] The total cost of this ill-conceived and massive parking structure is now projected at over $28 million, including the interest associated with the city bond already floated earlier this year. The $13+ million bond is presently costing the City of Davis over $92,000 per MONTH (that's $92K/mo) in accrued interest! No typos there. Those are the FACTS. Since the city is accruing such fees, of course every stakeholder is in a hurry to create design specifications and a proposal on what associated impact the parking structure will have on this, otherwise, very nice parking lot. The "idea" of a parking structure is costing big money already. + + At present, there has been no inclusion of additional costs of automated SMART METER parking hardware employed as other cities use. These are the machines one uses to "buy" parking time per space on each level. The estimated cost is the CONSTRUCTION cost(s) and does not include additional personnel management, cleaning, annual maintenance, crime prevention and automation costs. Plus, having worked in a parking garage at San Jose State University, I know full-well how thrill-seekers, vandals, transients and do-nothings frequent a garage to victimize its patrons. Need I mention the suicides, too? A parking garage is a CRIME MAGNET in any city. Who wants this in Davis when we have better, low-cost, transit alternatives? --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-17 18:56:25

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 116:	Line 116:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-17 18:56:25'' [[nbsp]] The total cost of this ill-conceived and massive parking structure is now projected at over $28 million, including the interest associated with the city bond already floated earlier this year. The $13+ million bond is presently costing the City of Davis over $92,000 per MONTH (that's $92K/mo) in accrued interest! No typos there. Those are the FACTS. Since the city is accruing such fees, of course every stakeholder is in a hurry to create design specifications and a proposal on what associated impact the parking structure will have on this, otherwise, very nice parking lot. The "idea" of a parking structure is costing big money already. + + At present, there has been no inclusion of additional costs of automated SMART METER parking hardware employed as other cities use. These are the machines one uses to "buy" parking time per space on each level. The estimated cost is the CONSTRUCTION cost(s) and does not include additional personnel management, cleaning, annual maintenance, crime prevention and automation costs. Plus, having worked in a parking garage at San Jose State University, I know full-well how thrill-seekers, vandals, transients and do-nothings frequent a garage to victimize its patrons. Need I mention the suicides, too? A parking garage is a CRIME MAGNET in any city. Who wants this in Davis when we have better, low-cost, transit alternatives? --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

MichaelBisch — 2011-09-17 18:36:16

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 114:	Line 114:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-17 18:36:16'' [[nbsp]] Wow, there's a lot of misinformation here. It's a FOUR-STORY structure, not a FIVE-STORY structure. Maybe we should underline and capitalize to make it more dramatic. We already have Downtown structures of similar height. A UCD study completed last year found that only 14% of Davis residents arrive Downtown by bicycle. The Downtown bicycle racks are half empty 90% of the time. How do you know it'll be a monstrosity/eyesore unless you allow the preliminary design work to go forward? If the structure is reduced to 2 stories, you'd actually lose parking spaces because of the retail ground floor. This project is not the result of suddenly free money. It's been discussed for 15 or 20 years and has been a top City priority since 2004 at least. The Fifth Street Road Diet project is in excess of $850,000, not $50,000. Hooray, the Enterprise opposition piece "Parking Garage Doesn't Fit Davis" was co-authored by the adjacent property owner without proper attribution (fair and balanced ala Fox News). The excerpts provided further below have already been debunked by Rich Rifkin on the Vanguard. Is this what passes for an informative debate around here? --["Users/MichaelBisch"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-09-14 14:14:01

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 38:	Line 38:
	+ * [http://www.davisenterprise.com/opinion/opinion-columns/parking-garage-doesnt-fit-davis/ Parking garage doesn’t fit Davis] (Davis Enterprise, 2011-09-12) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4668:correcting-the-record-on-the-parking-garage&catid=53:land-useopen-space&Itemid=86 Davis Bicycles! Corrects the Record on the Parking Garage] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-09-06) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4643:should-city-study-parking-in-downtown-prior-to-constructing-14-million-dollar-project&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Should City Study Parking in Downtown Prior to Constructing 14 Million Dollar Project?] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-08-26) + * [http://theaggie.org/article/2011/08/01/davis-looks-into-expanding-downtown-parking Davis looks into expanding downtown parking] (California Aggie, 2011-08-01) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4568:vote-on-parking-lot-illustrates-fundamental-lack-of-transparency-in-city-of-davis&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Vote on Parking Lot Illustrates Fundamental Lack of Transparency in City of Davis] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-28) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4550:did-council-panic-and-force-through-poorly-thought-out-redevelopment-projects&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Did Council Panic and Force Through Poorly Thought-Out Redevelopment Projects?] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-21) + * Video: [http://davis.patch.com/articles/video-cycling-community-speaks-against-downtown-parking-structure#video-7083656 Cycling Community Speaks Against Downtown Parking Structure] (Davis Patch, 2011-07-20)
Line 39:	Line 46:
- * Video: [http://davis.patch.com/articles/video-cycling-community-speaks-against-downtown-parking-structure#video-7083656 Cycling Community Speaks Against Downtown Parking Structure] (Davis Patch, 2011-07-20) - * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4550:did-council-panic-and-force-through-poorly-thought-out-redevelopment-projects&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Did Council Panic and Force Through Poorly Thought-Out Redevelopment Projects?] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-21) - * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4568:vote-on-parking-lot-illustrates-fundamental-lack-of-transparency-in-city-of-davis&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Vote on Parking Lot Illustrates Fundamental Lack of Transparency in City of Davis] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-28) - * [http://theaggie.org/article/2011/08/01/davis-looks-into-expanding-downtown-parking Davis looks into expanding downtown parking] (California Aggie, 2011-08-01)

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

TomGarberson — 2011-09-13 08:03:53

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 107:	Line 107:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-13 08:03:53'' [[nbsp]] With the students arriving back, parking has gotten really bad again. A typical evening visit downtown involves circling half a dozen blocks looking for a parking space. It's at best a 50-50 proposition whether you'll be successful, or whether you'll have to give up and head to the amtrak lot or one of the two theater structures. Of course, in the F Street one, you stand a very good chance of seeing every other spot taken by larger vehicles that don't leave room for anything but a motorcycle or a Smart car between them. The G Street one is a bit better, but it's also much farther out of the way. + + The parking situation downtown sucks. It needs to be addressed. I'm not sure this structure is the right solution to the problem, but ''some'' kind of solution is needed. --["Users/TomGarberson"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

heyitsdimo — 2011-09-13 07:24:41

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 105:	Line 105:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-13 07:24:41'' [[nbsp]] There are other ways to spend $15million. Spend a little more time and be a little more creative people. --["Users/heyitsdimo"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

SteveDavison — 2011-09-12 11:11:06

Fixed typos, ammended dates

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 28:	Line 28:
- A public workshop was held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 6:30-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall.	+ A public workshop was held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 6:30PM-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall.
Line 30:	Line 30:
- The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] held a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 12-1pm at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street).	+ The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] held a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 12PM-1PM at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street).
Line 32:	Line 32:
- On Tuesday, July 19, the Davis City Council voted 3-2 to move forward with preliminary design work on the project, by approving an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Yackzan Group, and a sole-source contract with Watry Design for Phase 1 concept/schematic scoping architecture for the project.	+ On Tuesday, July 19, 2011, the Davis City Council voted 3-2 to move forward with preliminary design work on the project, by approving an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Yackzan Group, and a sole-source contract with Watry Design for Phase 1 concept/schematic scoping architecture for the project.
Line 99:	Line 99:
- Here's some germain excerpts: "...There isn’t anything aesthetically pleasing about slabs of concrete filled with parked cars and piled on top of each other. Take a piece of paper and list the top five aesthetically pleasing parking garages that you remember. How about the top three? Have you ever seen an aesthetically pleasing five-story parking garage? Our city has an identity and character that distinguishes it from other communities. We believe in open space, lines of sight, bicycles and low carbon footprints. It would be hard to think of a project more incompatible with our community’s ideals than a parking garage as tall as King Kong in the center of our downtown.	+ Here's some germane excerpts: "...There isn’t anything aesthetically pleasing about slabs of concrete filled with parked cars and piled on top of each other. Take a piece of paper and list the top five aesthetically pleasing parking garages that you remember. How about the top three? Have you ever seen an aesthetically pleasing five-story parking garage? Our city has an identity and character that distinguishes it from other communities. We believe in open space, lines of sight, bicycles and low carbon footprints. It would be hard to think of a project more incompatible with our community’s ideals than a parking garage as tall as King Kong in the center of our downtown.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-12 10:57:18

changed headling from "lot" to "garage"

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 97:	Line 97:
- ''2011-09-12 10:56:21'' [[nbsp]] Hooray, the Enterprise just published an opposition Editorial piece "Parking Lot Doesn't Fit Davis" (9/12/2011) to the proposed FIVE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE: http://www.davisenterprise.com/opinion/opinion-columns/parking-garage-doesnt-fit-davis/	+ ''2011-09-12 10:56:21'' [[nbsp]] Hooray, the Enterprise just published an opposition Editorial piece "Parking Garage Doesn't Fit Davis" (9/12/2011) to the proposed FIVE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE: http://www.davisenterprise.com/opinion/opinion-columns/parking-garage-doesnt-fit-davis/

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-09-12 10:56:21

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 96:	Line 96:
	+ ------ + ''2011-09-12 10:56:21'' [[nbsp]] Hooray, the Enterprise just published an opposition Editorial piece "Parking Lot Doesn't Fit Davis" (9/12/2011) to the proposed FIVE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE: http://www.davisenterprise.com/opinion/opinion-columns/parking-garage-doesnt-fit-davis/ + + Here's some germain excerpts: "...There isn’t anything aesthetically pleasing about slabs of concrete filled with parked cars and piled on top of each other. Take a piece of paper and list the top five aesthetically pleasing parking garages that you remember. How about the top three? Have you ever seen an aesthetically pleasing five-story parking garage? Our city has an identity and character that distinguishes it from other communities. We believe in open space, lines of sight, bicycles and low carbon footprints. It would be hard to think of a project more incompatible with our community’s ideals than a parking garage as tall as King Kong in the center of our downtown. + + Why would anyone believe that the signature structure of our community should be a giant car magnet? + The proponents of this proposal talk about creating thousands of square feet of new retail space in Davis. What they don’t talk about is the unfilled retail space in Davis now (the empty Borders and Blockbuster stores, for example). Nor do they mention the damage that will be done to existing businesses immediately adjacent to the towering walls of this project. Let’s face it. If there is a parking problem in Davis, this is the wrong way to fix it. This garage will displace street-level parking places, which most people prefer, with parking garage spaces that most people use as a last resort...." + + Keep commenting, writing to the Enterprise, the City Council, SPAC, Davis Downtown Business Association and all others to REJECT this concept. --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

AndrewWalker — 2011-08-29 12:35:24

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 94:	Line 94:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-29 12:35:24'' [[nbsp]] The area that this parking structure would take up is a parking lot that I park in frequently. It's my go-to spot for downtown parking, and it's a reasonable walk to anywhere downtown. I have no problem finding a spot there 95% of the time as it is, so I don't really see a need for a FIVE story structure. And I can't imagine that the kinkos-fedex would be thrilled to be essentially cut off from all sunlight if this thing goes up. I agree with most other people in saying that the money could definitely go elsewhere. --["Users/AndrewWalker"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

HenryStanley — 2011-08-25 23:46:46

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 23:	Line 23:
- * What's really needed is effective parking management to get downtown employees to use the existing empty spaces in the two structures, and thus free up on-street parking spaces for shoppers and visitors.	+ * Effective parking management would encourage downtown employees to use the existing empty spaces in the two structures, thus freeing on-street parking spaces for shoppers and visitors; a new structure may be unnecessary.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

HenryStanley — 2011-08-25 23:44:23

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
- * Five months of surveys by ["Davis Bicycles!"] have determined that there are about as many empty parking spaces in the two existing multistory lots as would be added by new project. Surveys included the busiest times of the day and evening.	+ * Five months of surveys by ["Davis Bicycles!"] have determined that there are about as many empty parking spaces in the two existing multistory lots as would be added by the new project. Surveys included the busiest times of the day and evening.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

HenryStanley — 2011-08-25 23:44:09

(quick edit)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
- * Five months of surveys by ["Davis Bicycles!"] have determined that approximately the same number of empty parking spaces currently exist in the two existing multistory lots, as the new project proposes to add. Surveys included the busiest times of the day and evening.	+ * Five months of surveys by ["Davis Bicycles!"] have determined that there are about as many empty parking spaces in the two existing multistory lots as would be added by new project. Surveys included the busiest times of the day and evening.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DougWalter — 2011-08-24 13:30:59

updated tenses

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 28:	Line 28:
- A public workshop will be held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 6:30-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall.	+ A public workshop was held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 6:30-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall.
Line 30:	Line 30:
- The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] will hold a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 12-1pm at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street).	+ The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] held a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 12-1pm at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street).

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DarinWick — 2011-08-23 12:59:03

Updated recent developments to include public workshops.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 28:	Line 28:
	+ A public workshop will be held to discuss the proposal Tuesday, August 23, 6:30-8:30pm in the ["City Council Chambers"] at City Hall. + + The ["Davis Downtown Business Association"] will hold a brown-bag lunch workshop on Wednesday, August 24, 12-1pm at the Oddfellows Hall (415 2nd Street). +

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

DougWalter — 2011-08-12 22:49:00

Served on RDA panel, and received this testimony (and from other panelists)

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 13:	Line 13:
- * This is a well developed plan that the city has been pursuing for years. It is ready to go, with funding in place.	+ * This is a well-developed plan that the city has been pursuing for years. It is ready to go, with funding in place. + * The plan was developed in response to repeated requests from businesses inside the redevelopment area, who report that their customers consistently tell them that insufficient "convenient" parking limits their patronage of said businesses.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

fknochenhauer — 2011-08-12 17:30:51

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 84:	Line 84:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-12 17:30:51'' [[nbsp]] I can't believe that a FIVE-STORY structure and $15,000,000.00 is a logical "fit" for downtown Davis. The first thing to be fixed should be Fifth Street, so that pedestrians from the Old Davis neighborhood can safely cross this busy, fast-moving speedway. It's estimated that only $50,000 is needed to make Fifth Street "pedestrian-friendly." This means people with kids, strollers, grandparents and city visitors will be able to safely cross at "C," + "D," and "E" streets without risking their lives. PLEASE consider how much money the proposed parking garage/eyesore will cost. That money could be so useful in other ways. Plus, who really feels safe in parking garages? I don't and I'm a well-built, 50 year-old male who knows the street. Parking garages are a hassle to get in, park in narrow slots, walk out to errands,then find your car again and exit without hitting a post, car or getting honked at by other users. They smell, they attract unsavory types and are a haven for recreational thrill-seekers on many types of wheels. Visit YouTube to see garage thrill-seekers in action. + + The additional thing is the sheer size of this structure. It's unreal to consider spending $50,000/per space no matter what that does to alleviate parking or promote business. Put in a nice bike rental kiosk and let people rent bikes which can be reduced for by retailers validating their tickets when purchases are made resulting in a zero expenditure. It's not rocket science people. They do this in Amsterdam after which Davis proudly says its transportation concept is based. PLEASE SPEAK UP AGAINST THIS COSTLY AND NEEDLESS PROJECT. REJECT IT PERMANENTLY. --["Users/fknochenhauer"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-11 12:21:13

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 38:	Line 38:
	+ + Related article about redevelopment agencies and the insatiable desire for more car parking in California cities: + + * [http://systemicfailure.wordpress.com/2011/01/24/can-governor-brown-slay-the-redevelopment-beast/ Can Governor Brown Slay the Redevelopment Beast?]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-11 12:12:51

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 5:	Line 5:
- The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space.	+ The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space. $15 million is more than half of the available funds for the city's list of redevelopment projects.
Line 14:	Line 14:
	+ * The city intends to design a facility that is much more attractive with more light inside, compared to the other two multilevel parking structures nearby. Likely amenities will include large amounts of bike parking. A new, more spacious location for ["Bike Forth"] has been mentioned as a possibility.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-11 12:06:47

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- The ["City of Davis"] is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of 3rd, 4th, E and F Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level.	+ The ["City of Davis"] is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of ["3rd Street" 3rd], ["4th Street" 4th], ["E Street" E] and ["F Street" F] Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level.
Line 5:	Line 5:
- The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space	+ The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space. + + It would be funded by redevelopment bonds. The project had been planned for many years until this Summer (2011) when it was fast tracked to move forward because the state threatened to abolish redevelopment agencies and rescind funding that the city had been counting on for this and many other redevelopment projects.
Line 8:	Line 10:
- * Location is key to provide parking where it's most convenient: close to ["Downtown" downtown] businesses to attact more customers.	+ * Location is key to provide parking where it's most convenient: close to ["Downtown" downtown] businesses to attract more customers.
Line 11:	Line 13:
	+ * This is a well developed plan that the city has been pursuing for years. It is ready to go, with funding in place.
Line 14:	Line 17:
- * This expenditure to provide for the automobile is contrary to goals of the city to increase bicycle mode share, and the ["Cool Davis Initiative" Climate Action Plan].	+ * This expenditure to provide for the automobile is contrary to goals of the city to increase bicycle mode share, and the city's own [http://cityofdavis.org/cdd/sustainability/DCAAP/ClimateActionPlan.cfm Climate Action Plan].
Line 20:	Line 23:
	+ * Other worthy projects on the city’s long term redevelopment list have not received the same consideration as this project. The whole community needs to be more engaged in setting priorities for spending the city's redevelopment funds.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

calzephyr — 2011-08-10 15:46:41

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 73:	Line 73:
	+ ------ + "201108-10 It seems that lately the City of Davis is making long term development plans (this parking lot and the purchase of Chiles Road Restaurant site) based on the fact that the State/Federal funds are available if we use them now and may not be available next year. This is no way to run a City. Make your long term plans based on what is best for your citizens, not because someone is holding out a handful of "redevelopment money", but only if you fast-track the projects and use it today. This parking structure looks like a solution in search of a problem. It shouldn't suddenly be a better idea because there is free money involved. Take your time and do a good job, it's going to be sitting in the center of downtown for a long, long time. - -["Users/Calzephyr"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-10 11:44:11

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 14:	Line 14:
	+ * This expenditure to provide for the automobile is contrary to goals of the city to increase bicycle mode share, and the ["Cool Davis Initiative" Climate Action Plan].
Line 33:	Line 34:
- = Petition Drive = - Critics of this project have started an [http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fixdavisparking/ online petition] that instead calls on the city to "Fix downtown Davis parking."	+ = Petition Drive, Facebook = + + * [http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fixdavisparking/ online petition] calls on the city to "Fix downtown Davis parking" instead of building more parking + * [http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fix-Downtown-Davis-Parking-Why-Build-a-New-Highrise-Garage/240805422620035 on Facebook]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

hankim — 2011-08-09 16:37:16

Revert to version 20.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 49:	Line 49:
- ''2011-08-09 12:47:58'' [[nbsp]] Even on busy nights I can still find parking downtown. Sure, I might waste a few ounces of gasoline driving around looking for one or going into the Amtrak station, but it's not that huge of a deal. Seriously, if I can find parking spots at the park during the Farmer's Market, I think we're good. --["Users/hankim"]	+ ''2011-08-09 12:47:58'' [[nbsp]] Even on busy nights I can still find parking downtown. Sure, I might waste a few ounces of gasoline driving around looking for one or going into the Amtrak station, but it's not that huge of a deal. Seriously, if I can find parking spots at the park during the Farmer's Market, I think we're good. --["Users/hankim"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

WilliamLewis — 2011-08-09 16:25:19

Revert to version 19.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 49:	Line 49:
- ''2011-08-09 12:47:58'' [[nbsp]] Even on busy nights I can still find parking downtown. Sure, I might waste a few ounces of gasoline driving around looking for one or going into the Amtrak station, but it's not that huge of a deal. Seriously, if I can find parking spots at the park during the Farmer's Market, I think we're good. --["Users/hankim"]	+ ''2011-08-09 12:47:58'' [[nbsp]] Even on busy nights I can still find parking downtown. Sure, I might waste a few ounces of gasoline driving around looking for one or going into the Amtrak station, but it's not that huge of a deal. Seriously, if I can find parking spots at the park during the Farmer's Market, I think we're good. --["Users/hankim"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

hankim — 2011-08-09 16:04:02

Deleting people's comments.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 70:	Line 70:
- ------ - ''2011-08-09 16:03:04'' [[nbsp]] I could be wrong, but isn't 5 stories overkill? Perhaps a 2 story structure that would (roughly) double the amount of available spaces, and yet note obscure or detract from the surrounding areas. Just a thought. --["Users/OldDavis73"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

OldDavis73 — 2011-08-09 16:03:04

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 70:	Line 70:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 16:03:04'' [[nbsp]] I could be wrong, but isn't 5 stories overkill? Perhaps a 2 story structure that would (roughly) double the amount of available spaces, and yet note obscure or detract from the surrounding areas. Just a thought. --["Users/OldDavis73"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Wes-P — 2011-08-09 15:12:12

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 69:	Line 69:
- ''2011-08-09 15:08:19'' [[nbsp]] Does this mean they will (or already have) eliminate the height restrictions on new buildings? Or will one or more stories be underground if it is a five story structure? Seems it only matters during the daytime and, as has been proven with the pay lot, will remain primarily empty... --["Users/Wes-P"]	+ ''2011-08-09 15:08:19'' [[nbsp]] Does this mean they will (or already have) eliminate the height restrictions on new buildings? Or will one or more stories be underground if it is a five story structure? Seems it only matters during the daytime and, as has been proven with the pay lot, will remain primarily empty... If it is a free lot, the prior statements made by myself will most likely be proven false but will also be a marked waste of funds which will never be recovered by the city, but if it is a pay lot, it will still be a waste of money as the majority of spaces will remain empty and it will take decades to attempt to recover the funds. --["Users/Wes-P"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Wes-P — 2011-08-09 15:08:19

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 68:	Line 68:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 15:08:19'' [[nbsp]] Does this mean they will (or already have) eliminate the height restrictions on new buildings? Or will one or more stories be underground if it is a five story structure? Seems it only matters during the daytime and, as has been proven with the pay lot, will remain primarily empty... --["Users/Wes-P"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

OldDavis73 — 2011-08-09 14:20:00

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 66:	Line 66:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 14:20:00'' [[nbsp]] I could be wrong, but isn't 5 stories overkill? Perhaps a 2 story structure that would (roughly) double the amount of available spaces, and yet note obscure or detract from the surrounding areas. Just a thought. --["Users/OldDavis73"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

OliviaY — 2011-08-09 13:49:27

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 62:	Line 62:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 13:49:27'' [[nbsp]] I agree that even though it may take a while, I've never found parking to be a problem. 'Course that could be because I don't own a car and use my bike >_<. Okay Okay but when I'm downtown with friends and family, even on busy nights, we find a spot. Seems like a waste of tax dollars during an economic freefall to me and that's what concerns me far more than aesthetics. Why spend the money if we don't have to? Let's focus more on the slow but steady departure of businesses downtown leaving locations empty. + + Please for the love of god, someone tell me what is going to replace Borders?! A lot that large and empty would be depressing to see. --["Users/OliviaY"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

NikhilDahal — 2011-08-09 13:09:36

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 60:	Line 60:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 13:09:36'' [[nbsp]] You can alwaaays find parking on parking on I street and J street, it's just I can find many other things thatthe City can do with $15 million, it'll be a month(?) before UCD starts , and Unitrans will be in full swing, bike theft will soar 300%, and half of Davis will walking/ biking. --["Users/NikhilDahal"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

TomGarberson — 2011-08-09 13:07:13

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 55:	Line 55:
	+ It's also worth noting that parking spaces in the movie theater parking lots are so narrow that they're very frequently impossible to park in. I've had any number of times when I've gone looking for a space only to find a few cars parked at a little bit of an angle and blocking off an additional 5-6 spaces. Not "that's a little cozy, I'll look for something more convenient" blocked; more like "my car, which is fairly narrow, might not physically fit in that space, much less let doors open on either side for anyone to get out" blocked. +
Line 57:	Line 59:
- It's also worth noting that parking spaces in the movie theater parking lots are so narrow that they're very frequently impossible to park in. I've had any number of times when I've gone looking for a space only to find a few cars parked at a little bit of an angle and blocking off an additional 5-6 spaces. Not "that's a little cozy, I'll look for something more convenient" blocked; more like "my car, which is fairly narrow, might not physically fit in that space, much less let doors open on either side for anyone to get out" blocked. --["Users/TomGarberson"]	+ I would also ''love'' to see more downtown businesses get space for sidewalk seating. Sadly, a lot of areas are too narrow to be all that great (e.g. Thai Canteen, Beach Hut), but something is better than nothing. --["Users/TomGarberson"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

TomGarberson — 2011-08-09 12:57:14

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 52:	Line 52:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 12:57:14'' [[nbsp]] Parking downtown is a pain in the ass. During the summer it's manageable; if you go during lunch or dinner time while school's in, though, it's not uncommon to spend 5-10 minutes wandering through downtown waiting for someone to pull out. If your destination is out on F or G Streets, you've got some options; if you're farther west, though, absent a fair amount of luck with someone pulling out right in front of you, you're probably going to be parking four or five blocks from your destination. + + I'm definitely in favor of ''some sort'' of parking improvement. I don't know enough about this particular option yet to lean one way or the other on the high rise. + + It's also worth noting that parking spaces in the movie theater parking lots are so narrow that they're very frequently impossible to park in. I've had any number of times when I've gone looking for a space only to find a few cars parked at a little bit of an angle and blocking off an additional 5-6 spaces. Not "that's a little cozy, I'll look for something more convenient" blocked; more like "my car, which is fairly narrow, might not physically fit in that space, much less let doors open on either side for anyone to get out" blocked. --["Users/TomGarberson"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

CovertProfessor — 2011-08-09 12:53:42

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 50:	Line 50:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 12:53:42'' [[nbsp]] This thing sounds like it will be a major monstrosity/eyesore, and it's hard to see how that could be good for downtown. I too have always been able to find parking when I needed it. If there is anything that keeps me from driving downtown to shop, it's the traffic and all of the stop signs. A new parking structure won't improve that; in fact, it will make it worse if it encourages more people to drive downtown. But I doubt it will do that, since again, I don't really think that a new lot is needed. --["Users/CovertProfessor"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

hankim — 2011-08-09 12:47:58

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 48:	Line 48:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 12:47:58'' [[nbsp]] Even on busy nights I can still find parking downtown. Sure, I might waste a few ounces of gasoline driving around looking for one or going into the Amtrak station, but it's not that huge of a deal. Seriously, if I can find parking spots at the park during the Farmer's Market, I think we're good. --["Users/hankim"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:13:30

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 33:	Line 33:
	+ = Petition Drive = + Critics of this project have started an [http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fixdavisparking/ online petition] that instead calls on the city to "Fix downtown Davis parking." +

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:09:02

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 8:	Line 8:
- * Location is key to provide parking where it's most convenient: close to downtown businesses to attact more customers.	+ * Location is key to provide parking where it's most convenient: close to ["Downtown" downtown] businesses to attact more customers.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:07:45

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 16:	Line 16:
- *Closer to ["1st Street"] near the freeway may be a more desirable location for visitors to park. Other locations on the edge of downtown may be more suitable locations for more parking. How do we know? Studies have been inadequate to properly make this decision	+ *Closer to ["1st Street"] near the freeway may be a more desirable location for visitors to park. Other locations on the edge of downtown may be more suitable locations for more parking. How do we know? Studies have been inadequate to properly make this decision.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:06:46

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- The City of Davis is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of 3rd, 4th, E and F Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level.	+ The ["City of Davis"] is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of 3rd, 4th, E and F Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

NikhilDahal — 2011-08-09 12:05:48

Comment added.

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 35:	Line 35:
	+ ------ + ''2011-08-09 12:05:48'' [[nbsp]] Personally I highly oppose this project, downtown Davis does not need a parking structure. Not all of the parking spaces are even used on the downtown streets. And if people need extra parking, they can easily find one by driving onto another block. If anything this would literally make the downtown view less appealing, because from a mile away you would see a tall concrete structure. And there are more bikes in Davis then there are cars I am pretty sure. + If anything City of Davis, invest in bike racks for downtown Davis. I usually have to lock my bike onto garbage cans. + + And the parking lots at the movie theaters are half full over 90 percent of the time. So adding another addition of a + movie theater parking lot is highly unnecessary. + + If you build a parking structure, might as well build another Thai restaurant to accompany it. + + A true waste of $15 million. --["Users/NikhilDahal"]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:05:02

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 2:	Line 2:
	+ [[Image(3_4_E_F_aerial_view.jpg, thumbnail, 300, right, "Aerial view of the location of the proposed project")]]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:03:57

Upload of image 3_4_E_F_aerial_view.jpg.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 12:03:25

Image 3_4_E_F_aerial_vew.jpg deleted.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 11:58:41

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 12:	Line 12:
- * More parking spaces means more cars driving to downtown, which would discourage bicycling and walking rather than encourage these more healthy transportation modes.	+ * More parking spaces means more cars driving to downtown, which would discourage ["Bicycling" bicycling] and walking rather than encourage these more healthy transportation modes.
Line 14:	Line 14:
- * No proper parking needs assessment was conducted prior to moving the 3/4/E/F project forward for ["City Council"] approval in July 2011. The rush to approve the project was driven by fear of the loss of redevelopment funds. (For example, closer to ["1st Street"] near the freeway may be a more desirable location for visitors to park; whether the 3/4/E/F location will be as effective as it's claimed doesn't have any good study to back it up.)	+ * No proper parking needs assessment was conducted prior to moving the 3/4/E/F project forward for ["City Council"] approval in July 2011. The rush to approve the project was driven by fear of the loss of redevelopment funds. + *Closer to ["1st Street"] near the freeway may be a more desirable location for visitors to park. Other locations on the edge of downtown may be more suitable locations for more parking. How do we know? Studies have been inadequate to properly make this decision
Line 16:	Line 17:
- * A proper needs assessment and such a management strategy need time to work, and the community needs time to consider a capital project as big as this parking structure which would have big impacts on the look and feel of the downtown.	+ * A proper needs assessment and effective parking management need time to work, and the community needs time to consider a capital project as big as this parking structure which would have big impacts on the look and feel of the downtown.
Line 21:	Line 22:
- Voting Yes were ["Stephen Souza" Souza], ["Rochelle Swanson" Swanson] and ["Dan Wolk" Wolk]; Voting No were ["Sue Greenwald" Greenwald] and ["Joe Krovoza" Krovoza]. Only one person during public comment spoke in support of the project. Of particular concern (mentioned by Mayor Krovoza prior to the 3-2 vote) is that no effective parking management plan currently exists to ensure that existing or future multistory car lots are well utilized. Sue Greenwald was concerned that such a highrise structure would be out of place and could wreck the ambiance of the downtown core. Dan Wolk said that he was not necessarily in favor of building the facility, but he was did not feel that it was prudent to terminate the project at this juncture.	+ Voting Yes were ["Stephen Souza" Souza], ["Rochelle Swanson" Swanson] and ["Dan Wolk" Wolk]; Voting No were ["Sue Greenwald" Greenwald] and ["Joe Krovoza" Krovoza]. Only one person during public comment spoke in support of the project. Of particular concern (mentioned by Mayor Krovoza prior to the 3-2 vote) is that no effective parking management plan currently exists to ensure that existing or future multistory car lots are well utilized. Sue Greenwald was concerned that such a highrise structure would be out of place and could wreck the ambiance of the downtown core. Dan Wolk said that he was not necessarily in favor of building the facility, but he did not feel that it was prudent to terminate the project at this juncture.

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

NikhilDahal — 2011-08-09 11:54:15

Let the DavisWiki Debates begin!

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 30:	Line 30:
	+ + + [[comments]]

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 11:50:55

Differences for Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ = The Proposal = + The City of Davis is proposing to build a '''five-story parking structure''' on the footprint of the existing city-owned parking lot within the block of 3rd, 4th, E and F Streets (see photo at right). The current proposal would include about 350 ["Parking" parking] spaces, and replace the 113 existing spaces at ground level. It would include retail space fronting E and F Streets. Thus, the parking areas would not abut the street at ground level. + + The facility is expected to cost around $15 million, about 80% of this needed to build the parking garage. This works out to about $50,000 per new parking space + + == Proponents claim == + * Location is key to provide parking where it's most convenient: close to downtown businesses to attact more customers. + * Providing more off-street parking spaces right in the center of downtown will mean fewer cars on the streets, while making streets more people oriented with amenities like sidewalk seating and more bike parking in front of shops. + * Developers willing to build retail and other projects to keep downtown thriving will be unwilling to provide the necessary capital without well-located parking facilities. + + == Opponents claim == + * More parking spaces means more cars driving to downtown, which would discourage bicycling and walking rather than encourage these more healthy transportation modes. + * Five months of surveys by ["Davis Bicycles!"] have determined that approximately the same number of empty parking spaces currently exist in the two existing multistory lots, as the new project proposes to add. Surveys included the busiest times of the day and evening. + * No proper parking needs assessment was conducted prior to moving the 3/4/E/F project forward for ["City Council"] approval in July 2011. The rush to approve the project was driven by fear of the loss of redevelopment funds. (For example, closer to ["1st Street"] near the freeway may be a more desirable location for visitors to park; whether the 3/4/E/F location will be as effective as it's claimed doesn't have any good study to back it up.) + * What's really needed is effective parking management to get downtown employees to use the existing empty spaces in the two structures, and thus free up on-street parking spaces for shoppers and visitors. + * A proper needs assessment and such a management strategy need time to work, and the community needs time to consider a capital project as big as this parking structure which would have big impacts on the look and feel of the downtown. + + = Recent Developments = + On Tuesday, July 19, the Davis City Council voted 3-2 to move forward with preliminary design work on the project, by approving an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Yackzan Group, and a sole-source contract with Watry Design for Phase 1 concept/schematic scoping architecture for the project. + + Voting Yes were ["Stephen Souza" Souza], ["Rochelle Swanson" Swanson] and ["Dan Wolk" Wolk]; Voting No were ["Sue Greenwald" Greenwald] and ["Joe Krovoza" Krovoza]. Only one person during public comment spoke in support of the project. Of particular concern (mentioned by Mayor Krovoza prior to the 3-2 vote) is that no effective parking management plan currently exists to ensure that existing or future multistory car lots are well utilized. Sue Greenwald was concerned that such a highrise structure would be out of place and could wreck the ambiance of the downtown core. Dan Wolk said that he was not necessarily in favor of building the facility, but he was did not feel that it was prudent to terminate the project at this juncture. + + News articles about this issue: + + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4544:is-new-parking-structure-needed-at-e-and-f&catid=53:land-useopen-space&Itemid=86 Is New Parking Structure Needed At E and F?] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-19) + * Video: [http://davis.patch.com/articles/video-cycling-community-speaks-against-downtown-parking-structure#video-7083656 Cycling Community Speaks Against Downtown Parking Structure] (Davis Patch, 2011-07-20) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4550:did-council-panic-and-force-through-poorly-thought-out-redevelopment-projects&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Did Council Panic and Force Through Poorly Thought-Out Redevelopment Projects?] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-21) + * [http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4568:vote-on-parking-lot-illustrates-fundamental-lack-of-transparency-in-city-of-davis&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79 Vote on Parking Lot Illustrates Fundamental Lack of Transparency in City of Davis] (DavisVanguard.org, 2011-07-28) + * [http://theaggie.org/article/2011/08/01/davis-looks-into-expanding-downtown-parking Davis looks into expanding downtown parking] (California Aggie, 2011-08-01)

Proposed 3/4/E/F highrise parking structure

RussellReagan — 2011-08-09 11:38:18

Upload of image 3_4_E_F_aerial_vew.jpg.