| Message: |
Good luck with that conversation. Seems dead set on not opening it back up.
On 8/17/2024 4:08 AM, Ken McGurn wrote:
I am meeting with the mayor late next week to get to the bottom of why they r not open to parking.
1st Ave sits empty most of the week, folks. Has for years…… Even the Downtown Advisory Board made a motion to open it. Harvey publicly stated in a recent article that he would vote against the board’s motion. Look no further for the reason why practicality is losing the fight.
Best, Andrew Hear Again Records 201 SE 2nd Ave. Suite 105 Gainesville, FL 32601 352-373-1800
Valuable spaces for folk to park and spend going to waste (maybe spaces in garage but folk do NOT like parking in garages…) And I’ve never found it a good idea to discourage or make it harder for my Customers to come to me… From: Adam Bass <adam@bassmanagementco.com>
Date: Friday, August 16, 2024 at 8:36?PM
To: Kenneth McGurn <ken@mcgurn.com>, Andrew Schaer <hearagain32601@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike <mpalmer22@gmail.com>, scott shillington <topchat@cox.net>, "gabby@thehipp.org" <gabby@thehipp.org>, Anthony Lyons <ALyons@amjinc.com>, David Villmow <david.villmow@vpizza.com>, "Mann, Philip R" <mannpr@cityofgainesville.org>, Chipper Flaniken <chipper@citychurchgnv.com>, Anthony Rue <true@voltacoffee.com>, "Singleton, Brian M" <SingletonBM@cityofgainesville.org>, Anthony Rue <anthony.rue@gmail.com>, Ben <gainesville@marksprimesteakhouse.com>, Danny Hughes <drhughes3@gmail.com>, Erik Zika <erik@threepointshospitality.com>, Gabriel Chavez <gabe@wyattscoffee.com>, Hirofumi Leung <hiro@dragonflyrestaurants.com>, Justin Griffin <justingriffin@hookedonharrys.com>, Linda McGurn <linda@mcgurn.com>, Michael Reeves <reevesm@circuit8.org>, Quang Tran <quang@collectiveand.co>, Ryan Murphy <ryan@rmurphyllc.com>, The How Bazar <thehowbazar@gmail.com>, Tony Thomas <tony@threepointshospitality.com>, "naileshpatel@bellsouth.net" <naileshpatel@bellsouth.net>, "paramountgrill@gmail.com" <paramountgrill@gmail.com>, "robert@robertarushpa.com" <robert@robertarushpa.com>, "shawncliche@gmail.com" <shawncliche@gmail.com>, City Commission Gainesville <CityComm@cityofgainesville.org>, Nathan Collier <nathan.collier@colliercompanies.com>, Michael Warren <mewarren@amjinc.com>, "Moti (Mordechai) Boaziz" <boazizmoti@maverickfl.com>
Subject: Re: Downtown Gainesville Parking - West 1st Avenue A busy afternoon Friday night but SW 1st Ave sits empty. Why can’t this be opened back up? On Aug 1, 2024 at 9:41?PM -0400, Andrew Schaer <hearagain32601@gmail.com>, wrote:
Just saw on Gainesville Word of Mouth that someone started another petition against paid parking. Link below. I met with City staff on SW 1st Avenue. The street can be opened ‘relatively’ easily because staff used removable bollards. The street is currently being redesigned as a pedestrian mall and so that it can continue to be parking when not used as a mall. NOTE: When that work begins they are “required” to rip out ALL the existing brick because ADA only allows a 2% slope ‘building to street.’ It is currently 5.5%. If they work on the street they must change the slope. Such a waste. However, nothing can be done. ADA is ADA and controlled at the state level. The street is in very poor shape and absolutely must be redone. In my opinion whomever is organizing the dancing in the street should move to the plaza because of the trip hazard liability. The street should be opened immediately to cars to move pedestrian back to the sidewalks and out of the street. PS Originally they used the wrong trees. Those tree roots spread far and wide uplifting the sidewalk and street. The city wants to change the type tree to reduce this issue in the future. I'll reach out to city leadership about potentially getting a response to the surveys. Even if there's disagreement, it would be very helpful to hear the nature of their disagreement. Silence won't get us very far. We'll need to speak honestly with each other and potentially discuss compromises, etc.
I agree with Ken's thought about library parking, especially since the library system is primarily funded by our tax dollars. It makes sense that spaces funded in this way would be made publicly available as much as possible. Thanks Scott and Ken. I'm in support of both library parking and the reopening of SW 1st Ave. I would also like to see the Downtown Advisory Board vote reverse the city's decision to implement paid parking in August. I understand this will take more time. Many thanks to the board for getting involved. Hello Everyone - Scott from The Top here, We appreciate Ken’s comments on downtown access and the lack of patron parking for all downtown establishments. Downtown needs support from our City now more than ever. If there is anyone on this thread who feels the closing of SW 1st Ave has negatively affected the ability for people to visit and support downtown merchants and organizations, then please be vocal. Ken’s photo of an empty SW 1st Ave shows the lack of merchant support we are experiencing daily. This corridor once gave vital support to all tenants of downtown. It was the main east/west parking solution for patrons who live across and outside of town. In the morning this area was once parking for the coffee houses, the Church, and downtown breakfast joints and brunch cafes. At noon these spaces provided access for lunch spots like Harry’s, The Paper Bag Deli, Pop A Top, and many other daytime food options. After lunch, it provided access to visit Gator Spirit convenient store, Hear Again Records, tattoo shops, local Pool Halls, or a great show at The Hipp. At dinner time folks could access parking for Dragonfly, Paramount, Marks Steakhouse, Boca Fiesta, or one of the many other special dinner options that give downtown its flavor. The point is, this parking area supported all Mom and Pop style businesses that make our downtown special, and attract people from all over to visit. To take this parking away post Covid, was not supportive. Keeping downtown creative should always be encouraged, so implementing the ability to temporarily close this SW 1st ave for programmed special events should always remain a healthy option. Maybe first Fridays? Special events can and must continue, but we all need the street back for patron parking during the many hours and days this space currently lays inoperable. The downtown advisory board has got it right requesting to open this street to parking access, but they need all concerned merchants to contact the Mayor and City Commissioners to insure they are listening. Last October we collected 35 signatures of local downtown businesses that were in favor of returning this street to patron parking. There was no response from the City. So if you support this idea, it is time to be heard. Additionally, we agree the Library parking lot and the County District Attorney lot have great potential for weekend parking to expand. Better lighting downtown and more police presence on weekends is needed to insure a safe environment. We need to have a safe downtown with a supportive amount of patron parking, then we can have the good folks at "Go Downtown" promote and advertise this special area as the fantastic option it clearly is. This is how we all can grow the heart of Gainesville. Please contact Mayor Ward or any of the City Commissioners to hear your concerns. Two empty parking lots. Downtown parking is getting more and more expensive and harder to find. This causes marginal people to avoid the area when there is free parking at all non-downtown restaurants. However, we have almost 90 unused downtown spaces. They are SW 1st Avenue, which I understand the new advisory board voted to have reopened and the library. The library closed their lot years ago because of the cost to clean up the trash. Perhaps it could be opened on Friday and Saturday nights with the City agreeing to clean that lot on those two following mornings. A relatively small amount of money would be needed to do this especially if it was only used during normally high use weekends. It seems wasteful to have that many readily available spaces going unused. (See pictures). Thanks for the ongoing dialogue everyone. We'll fill out the survey and send it in soon. Andrew I'm guessing Passport experiences vary widely among those on this email chain based on whom we serve. Plenty of people who go to City Church have no problem with it, but anecdotally probably half of those who are 65+ have ongoing difficulties with it. We've also had a lot of problems with the validation system, but I recognize not everyone uses that function. We'll see what the surveys say, but given the email feedback I wonder if a hybrid/diplomatic approach as far as what we send to the city is something like: 1. We collectively advocate for 24/7 free parking with well-enforced time limits during peak hours (such as what Adam proposed in his letter). 2. If the city disagrees with our advocacy and moves forward with paid parking, we advocate for a system in which patrons only pay to park during peak hours (like Adam proposed in his letter) with well-enforced time limits. We also advocate for low parking rates and clearly marked means of payment that do not require use of the passport app (even if the app continues to be offered as one payment option). 3. We request additional dialogue with the city in the near future concerning some of the challenges with Passport and the difficulties some patrons face when it's the exclusive payment option. 4. We request dialogue with the city in the near future to share some of our ideas concerning the stewardship of the SW garage and hear about proposed plans for the garage. 5. We request dialogue with the city in the near future to give input concerning their plans for the streetery.
Church Office: 352-587-2144
Before getting into the replies, please try to remember how dead the downtown streets were for 3 weeks in 2022 when the City first implemented Passport Parking. The plan worked. There was parking galore because nobody was coming downtown. This chain started because the people here were opposed to replacing free time limit parking with Passport Parking. We're still very much opposed to that. The majority of emails in this thread show as much. A few weeks ago, Chipper sent in an email stating that he has had to sacrifice sermon time in order to help his congregation navigate the parking app. Customers tell me all the time that the app gives them issues. It's not just the app though, it's paid parking in general. Those of us who have competition in town with ample free parking know that paid parking will cripple us. It's not inviting, and it will not lead to more people coming downtown - only less. With regard to enforcement, it's specified in #1. "Preserve free street parking and encourage the removal of Passport Parking from City lots. We propose enforced time limits of 1-2 hours instead." While the garage is and will continue to be an issue, it is best to strike it from the agenda at this time. There have been many emails in this chain identifying issues with the SW 3rd St garage and many opportunities for AMJ to speak to those issues. Hopefully, we can brainstorm some cool ideas to help with that situation moving forward. The main concerns expressed in this chain have been paid street parking, the Passport Parking app, safety, the garage, and the reopening of SW 1st Ave. Correct me if I'm wrong, but our communications with the city have basically led to a proposal for Passport Parking (with two free hours), which relies on use of the app and only encourages people to stay longer...... and some valet spaces (thereby taking even more public parking). Scott and I will move forward with getting signatures from other businesses. We've already got a bunch of folks onboard and we'll get more. It's not a tough sell. Due to the complexity of ownership and or management of the SW parking garage, we feel it is best to exclude the garage as a topic for now. We have always heard of the City pushing Patron Parking in this direction, but it does seem clearer now that control/ownership and therefore future use as a City lot for patron parking - is indeterminable at this point. Better to concentrate our focus on the two main points. Here is an updated version of Andrew’s collective work. It’s time to really embrace the work that has been a joint success so far. I have already received myself, many verbal requests to sign up on this from Downtown concerned businesses outside this group. Are we good to hit the streets and emails? I agree with keeping it focused on the study and things that can be done now.
I think we need to offer specific items they will likely take action on.
Andrew, on your list, I'm indifferent to item number 1. It's not a difficult system to use and it's widely used in other cities comparable in size to ours.
I think enforcement should be mentioned. Consistent enforcement Tuesday- Saturday 11 am to 7pm.
I do agree that items 3 and 4 should be addressed, but at a later time. We will certainly review the questionnaire however our position at this point will be to only address the street parking concerns, and what the City requested, as part of the parking study. The Streetery, SW 1st Avenue, (which we own a property on) and the SW parking garage (which we now own essentially ½ of the rights to) are not items we are prepared to request any changes to, at this point. Both of those matters are quite important to us and need more time to consider the various issues, along with other surrounding business in the case of SW 1st Street and the users in the case of the garage. That said, the group can and should proceed however it wishes if consensus happens on some or all of the items listed below.
Adding Gabby at The Hippodrome to the email chain so she can catch up on all of this. Andrew This is terrible news. It just paves the way for them to establish Passport Parking all over the place and then eventually go back on the free two hours. I think we should take an immediate stance on the following: 1. Opposition to Passport Parking. 2. Time limit adjustments over paid parking. 3. Reopening parking on SW 1st Ave. 4. Ask for insight about management of the SW 3rd St. garage and offer our ideas as possible solutions. Scott and I will be circulating the attached questionnaire to businesses in the coming days. Please feel free to fill it out and send it back. Thanks Anthony. Very helpful. Sounds like we should send something soon then - and if time is of the essence then we should make sure we're not making perfect the enemy of good. If I can be of service in getting something out, I'm happy to help. Not quite sure what the rush is however from the city, and it would be charitable for them to check in with us given the challenges we face of communicating back and forth as a group and managing all of this in the margins of our vocational responsibilities.
Church Office: 352-587-2144
Recently I heard that the City is going to move forward with the latest version of their parking suggestions (two hours free and then paid, Adam sent to you all in the past). They made this decision, I am told, based upon our lack of follow-up as a group. If the group wishes to send a letter to them, it seems like it should be done soon, though Adam presented one previously that was not agreed to. I am sending this purely as an update.
Yes it is very helpful. Thank you Chipper! As a potential way to move forward, perhaps we can take the following steps to combine the good work that Adam, Scott, and others have done: 1. Conduct a survey along the lines of what Scott presented 2. Adam/Scott/et al. summarize the findings in a letter to the city along with proposed action steps 3. Downtown entities determine whether or not they want their name on the letter. Those who decline to put their name on it are of course welcome to send their own feedback to the city. - I think it would be a wise to pen a letter that contains some guidance as far as which items in the letter are the highest priority - I think it would be wise to pen a letter that pushes for free parking while also providing guidance concerning our views on how a payment structure should work if the city insists on moving forward with a pay-to-park plan. I would hate for our parking feedback to become moot if our free parking request doesn't land (which is probably more likely than not). - I confess that I'm not sure how to proceed with the SW 1st Street parking concerns. We (City Church) did benefit from that parking when it existed, and I also agree that the 1st Street corridor is now barren/low energy for most of the day. At the same time, I'm sensitive to the fact that a few businesses really do benefit from the present situation even as other businesses do not. I would love to find some kind of hybrid option or compromise that provides some parking options on 1st Street while providing some outdoor opportunities for the businesses that benefit. Perhaps people smarter than me can figure out what that might look like. - One "unknown" for me right now is the likely future purpose and function of the SW garage. I'm under the impression that AMJ owns a share of the spots in that garage and may use them for their building project on lot 10. If that's the case, that may introduce even more urgency as far as finding reliable and accessible parking options for downtown since that would significantly reduce parking availability in that garage in the long term. I'm guessing Anthony could shed some light on this. I think I've exhausted my feedback for now. I hope this is helpful, and at this point I'll happily fade into the background and listen to feedback/proposals from others.
Church Office: 352-587-2144
All of this seems to be driving to keeping parking open and free and a bit better managed. I fully support this and happy to put our name (V Pizza) on this.
Totally agree with Chipper on all things here. Should we push to have the app removed from city lots as well as fighting against it being used for street parking? I’d be willing to join Chipper on that motion and it’s communications to the city. Also, moving the overnight parkers in the SW 3rd garage to floors 3-5 is a great idea! Between that and painting over the unenforced jury parking signs, it would definitely help the situation. Responding to the last few emails: - I do think free parking is worth pushing for, along with retiring the app. If the city decides they do want to gather some revenue from downtown parking fees, then it is what it is. But I don't think it serves the interests of downtown businesses/organizations nor people coming downtown to use or benefit from their services. Again, I could be wrong, but my guess is that some combination of free parking plus strict time limit enforcement during peak hours plus no overnight parking (like 3am to 6am) is the way to go. To help with enforcement, parking attendant hours could be changed to double up the personnel resources available during peak hours while abandoning enforcement during non-peak hours. For example, I'd rather have two attendants working downtown during peak hours instead of one attendant working during peak hours and one attendant enforcing time limits when there's hardly anyone parking downtown. - I've been dialoguing back and forth with the city for 2 or 3 years about challenges with the app. I understand that it's convenient for some people (don't need quarters, etc.), but plenty of people (per the statements made in the document Scott sent) have a very difficult time using it and/or don't bother coming downtown because they feel as though they can't use it. That feedback was louder when the app first came out, but one of the main reasons it's dissipated is that some folks just avoid downtown now. Our church just hosted a meeting for many pastors in the downtown/east Gainesville area, and I ended up spending significant time in lot 13 helping several pastors navigate the app (which, on top of everything, wasn't functioning properly that morning - so we had to abandon it and use the browser option). - Adam - I certainly agree with you that we want the SW garage to be hospitable to students (and everyone else). The issue right now is that the garage has sold so many permits that it limits access to the garage on the most accessible floors for people coming downtown to eat, shop, etc. It also creates significant capacity problems when the city hosts big events (Art Festival, Fest, etc.). We're trying to find a way to make the first few floors more available for people (students, non-students, etc.) who want to spend a few hours downtown to eat, drink, shop, attend a concert, etc. This probably means selling less permits (I'd assume by capping the number sold and prioritizing people who live/work downtown) and banning overnight parking (say between the hours of 4am to 6am) on the bottom 2 floors. I think it makes sense for overnight parkers to take advantage of floors 3-5, and it prevents people with permits from storing their vehicles in prime parking spaces.
Church Office: 352-587-2144
- Which question/questions seem too broad? We can totally rephrase them if needed. - Zero paid street parking, for sure. Preserving free street parking was and still is a primary objective - it's literally what started all of this. The app is already used in the garage and various parking lots - not much we can do there. - Wait, juror parking is no longer enforced in the SW garage?? Does everyone know this? Then why not paint the walls to read otherwise so people feel free to park there? I've been driving right past it like a sucker. Also, how much of the garage is owned by the city at this point? Public parking is offered by municipalities, yet much of the garage is privately owned, is it not? Public parking also generally involves a time limit less than days/weeks/months on end, doesn't it? It appears we could definitely use some more info on garage operations before tackling that issue. - With regard to the parking study . . . . the data doesn't support the conclusion, which benefits our cause. Personally, I think that should be our stance. - I think FREE street parking with 1-2 hour limits AND reopening SW 1st Ave should definitely make the final cut of what we communicate to the city. - Also, it would be really great if some other people chimed in. This is supposed to be a group effort to preserve free street parking, right? That’s a good idea to circulate a questionnaire. I think some of the questions are too broad, because I was reading the questions and thinking well yes, that makes sense and no that shouldn’t be changed. All of this within the same question.
Regarding enforcement- are you proposing zero paid parking anywhere in Gainesville and eliminate the Passport Parking app?
Again, completely agree on opening up SW 1st AVE. It worked during all the COVID restrictions, but things have changed.
Juror parking is no longer enforced and what you are suggesting is equivalent to putting no student parking signs around the garage. It’s public parking, available to the general public. You can’t exclude students, because it could potentially cause an inconvenience when trying to locate parking.
So what is the general consensus on this parking study and what to propose to the City? I can help shed some light here. I'll go in the order of Adam's reply. And yes, Ben, the garage referenced is the SW 3rd St garage. - We do think that circulating a mission statement and questionnaire among downtown businesses North and South of University is a good idea since we're ALL sharing the same free street parking. Also, we can submit a similar draft without the questionnaire to the city. - We are pro-enforcement, but anti-payment of any kind with the exception of violations. The concerns expressed by Adam assume that the city will follow through with Passport Parking - something we are all OPPOSED to. We do not want paid parking of any kind. A FREE tiered time limit approach will alleviate congestion in needed areas. Nobody will be staying longer because we assume the City's parking ambassadors will enforce the time limits. - Yes, we must utilize all available parking including COVID-based street closures (SW 1st Ave), which are under utilized throughout the week. We must also have a voice in the future plans for the SW 1st Ave parking on the other side of Main near Harry's as the city is looking to make some major changes there. - The SW 3rd Garage: Parking ambassadors have confirmed that the recent heavier occupancy of the garage stems from students avoiding higher parking fees where they live and purchasing passes to the garage. I also park in the garage daily and lately, I'll often end up on the roof due to lack of available spaces. Honestly, I don't mind, but if I were a customer, I would find it inconvenient (especially upon entering that disgusting elevator). The garage already has so many spaces devoted to juror and apartment parking that the added sale of spaces to students who don't live downtown really does have an impact. Anyway, if the student factor were removed, the garage would be less inconvenient to downtown guests. Adam- Item #3- Does the garage get full? I park over there daily and never have issues finding parking. Opening the state attorney parking lot and library I fully support. Am I correct in thinking Scott is referring to the parking garage over by Looseys? On 9/28/2023 9:42 AM, Adam Bass wrote: Just to clarify, is what you proposing something you want to circulate among the businesses and then submit to the City or are you using this as a gauge to determine the best way to approach the City?
In regard to item #1, if there is no enforcement any proposal free or paid becomes a moot point. My concern with tiered is if you get the first our free and you can buy additional time now I am buying time in the most convenient parking for very little money. This could lead to people staying long past the current 2 hour limit.
Item #2- Fully Support open SW 1st Ave up.
Item #3- Does the garage get full? I park over there daily and never have issues finding parking. Opening the state attorney parking lot and library I fully support. Thank you, Scott! I strongly endorse this approach to Protecting Patron Parking and the points listed as they more fully encompass the needs expressed by independent business owners at the SP+ forum at Bo Diddley Plaza months back and here in our email chain. Hello All - Here is another focused draft to be considered. This approach is direct with a clear mission. This hopefully embodies the many communications from members of this group as well as a few businesses outside this forum. The concept here has been explained to businesses nearby and support has been voiced. This is for the benefit of the group and can be edited to tailor ideas. We can mix in Adam’s response or other’s concerns as well. Please return comments, and again - appreciate everyones work here.
|
