[TGE-mail] Parking lots on Grand

Fri Mar 9 15:49:52 CST 2007

Mr. Vogt,
I think you're right: we (the residents) don't have the financing to back our
wants, but we live here.  Does this lack of money invalidate our opinions?
Sincerely, 
Amy S. McPherson

These views are my own and not those of my employer.

-----Original Message-----
From: tgena-bounces at lists.more.net [mailto:tgena-bounces at lists.more.net] On
Behalf Of Tim Vogt
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:42 PM
To: 'Bruce Ponman'; tgena at lists.more.net
Subject: Re: [TGE-mail] Parking lots on Grand

This is amazing to me.  I am wondering if anyone is actually reading my
emails.  Bruce if you and the others, that are so opposed to the additional
parking, which will be good for business on South Grand, want to approach
Commerce with a plan and financing to build retail and parking now I am sure
they would listen.  Everyone wants and wants and wants, but I don't see
anyone willing to have the personal financial risk attached to your wants.
Residential density as well as a dense commercial district are vital, I agree
completely.  But until there is a sufficient demand additional parking is
needed.  Many of you I am sure opposed the removal of the homes behind the
Bread Company a few years ago.  And there still is not enough parking.  And
in regards to Absolutely Goosed and the other retail venues around that
business this additional parking will only help their businesses and increase
pedestrian activity on the east side of Grand. Won't more consumers help with
that problem?  Of course it will.  It is virtually imposible to find a park
by Absolutely Goosed now.  I am sure if you were to talk with South City
Diner, they would tell you that the small lot to the south off Grand is good
for their business.  And finally the area behind Commerce will be developed
as Condos, and as I have stated over and over again this lot per Commerce
will be temporary until the demand justifies the enormous amount of capital
needed to build the planned retail and parking garage.sspp

Timothy Vogt

Vice President 

Millennium Restoration & Development Corp.

P: 314.772.9200

F: 314.772.9201

-----Original Message-----
From: tgena-bounces at lists.more.net [mailto:tgena-bounces at lists.more.net] On
Behalf Of Bruce Ponman
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 1:38 PM
To: tgena at lists.more.net
Subject: Re: [TGE-mail] Parking lots on Grand

Tim,

I'm affraid you've got things turned around. Bottom line: if there aren't
more businesses on South Grand, fewer people will make the trip and
additional parking spaces will go unused. People do not go to the CWE (or the
East Village, for that matter) because there's excellent parking, they go
because there are interesting businesses there. And restaurants in particular
benefit from proximity to other restaurants; density is good far all. Right
now the east side of Grand between Hartford and Absolutly Goosed is a dead
zone after dark, unless you want to buy gas. This area, with little light and
activity is a drag on existing businesses. A surface parking lot does nothing
to address that problem. There is no reason why a row of retail space can't
be built along Grand with parking directly behind, as was successfully done
one block to the north behind the bread company. Why does the parking lot
have to go to the street?

Bruce Ponman

TGE resident

PS. It's not at all clear that the studies you site have got it right. The
following is taken from a review of Donald Shoup's book, The High Cost of
Free Parking, that appeared in the Spring 2006 issue of the Next American
City.

America's love affair with the automobile, and the toll it has taken on both
the built and natural environments, has been well documented. Surprisingly,
then, UCLA planning professor Donald Shoup's meticulously researched book,
The High Cost of Free Parking, is the first to treat in depth the subject of
automobile parking, the state in which the "average car spends about 95
percent of its life." It is a subject of great financial consequence:
according to figures developed by University of California at Davis professor
Mark Delucchi and updated by Shoup to account for inflation and the number of
motor vehicles owned in the United States, in 2002 the subsidy for off-street
parking alone was between $127 billion and $374 billion. This figure is
roughly the same amount as our nation's Medicare or national defense
budgets-without including subsidies for the free on-street parking that
exists on most urban streets. 

While many American cities believe they suffer from a parking shortage, the
real problem is that they have too much free parking. Over the last
sixty-plus years, planning for parking has meant planning to provide parking
without cost, and America has provided enough to satisfy 99 percent of all
automobile trips to the home, office, or shopping. This superabundance has
had costs well beyond municipal subsidies: parking lots mar the urban
landscape, the high cost of providing parking makes developing affordable
housing more difficult, and free parking skews transportation choices toward
driving, thereby increasing congestion and pollution and encouraging sprawl.
And because the cost of providing parking spaces is bundled into the cost of
development, Shoup explains, this so-called "free" parking is actually paid
for by everyone. Off-street parking, required by municipalities for nearly
every land use, is expensive to provide. But rather than directly charge
drivers who use the parking, developers absorb the costs of providing
parking. The higher cost of development translates into higher rents in
residential and office buildings and into higher retail costs in commercial
buildings. Not everyone chooses to drive; yet we all subsidize drivers
indirectly by paying higher costs passed on to us.

________________________________

From: tgena-bounces at lists.more.net [mailto:tgena-bounces at lists.more.net] On
Behalf Of Tim Vogt
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 11:36 AM
To: MFord816 at cs.com; tgena at lists.more.net
Subject: Re: [TGE-mail] Parking lots on Grand

I have stated numerous times the result of those studies.  This is a lot not
a vast ocean of parking.  Bottom line is that if there is not parking there
will be no customers.  Everything happens in good time, and I am sure if a
group of you wanted to approach Commerce to buy the building at the corner of
Juniata and Grand and invest millions of your own dollars to build the retail
and parking, they would probably be very receptive.

Timothy Vogt

Vice President 

Millennium Restoration & Development Corp.

P: 314.772.9200

F: 314.772.9201

-----Original Message-----
From: tgena-bounces at lists.more.net [mailto:tgena-bounces at lists.more.net] On
Behalf Of MFord816 at cs.com
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 6:44 AM
To: tgena at lists.more.net
Subject: [TGE-mail] Parking lots on Grand

I have to weigh in on the side of the residents who are concerned about
parking lots fronting on Grand. The city is not suburbia - people live here
because we don't want to see vast oceans of parking everywhere. And yes,
it does affect the walkability. There was a parking study done years ago
for the South Grand business district. Does anybody have the results of that?
At what point did this street-fronting parking lot idea come into play?  

Mary
26xx Louisiana