urbanMSP

I looked closely at the signs. I always park in either the mall or on the southern part of Hennepin

I did too, I just figured I could get away with parking there for 15 minutes...guess not!

why shouldn't residents be able to park on their own block, when there is plenty of district parking? Is that so unreasonable? It's one of the densest areas in the city to begin with, and residents pay annually for permits and guest permits. Why should outsiders get free parking there at the expense of locals? Why shouldn't residents be allowed to manage their limited parking availability?

Residents pay $25/year for parking permits, and then a massive $10/year for visitor permits. That's not covering the costs, and it's clearly in many areas not enough to make residents consider whether they should seek out better options. Those options would include going carless, or sharing off-street space better.

When I lived in a foreign city with similar densities to Uptown permits cost $500/year (actually $250/6 mo). That was the tipping point into going carless and renting when we needed one.

why shouldn't residents be able to park on their own block, when there is plenty of district parking? Is that so unreasonable? It's one of the densest areas in the city to begin with, and residents pay annually for permits and guest permits. Why should outsiders get free parking there at the expense of locals? Why shouldn't residents be allowed to manage their limited parking availability?

Residents pay $25/year for parking permits, and then a massive $10/year for visitor permits. That's not covering the costs, and it's clearly in many areas not enough to make residents consider whether they should seek out better options. Those options would include going carless, or sharing off-street space better.

When I lived in a foreign city with similar densities to Uptown permits cost $500/year (actually $250/6 mo). That was the tipping point into going carless and renting when we needed one.

So the point of parking permits should be to make the residents consider going carless. Cool. Got it.

The point of parking fees should be to ensure last-space availability. Obviously. http://www.amazon.com/The-High-Cost-Fre ... 1884829988

So the point of parking permits should be to make the residents consider going carless. Cool. Got it.

I don't think that's the purpose (clearly it isn't at the moment).

The fee is awfully low. I don't see why it couldn't be closer to $20-25/month (or approximately $250 for the year). People frequently pay $50+ to park off the street in a lot. Surely having a spot more or less guaranteed on your block is worth more than the $2.08/month it currently works out to be.

Yes, in an area of limited parking, decent transit connections, and now with good car sharing services available, it's certainly appropriate for the city to price on-street parking in such a way that residents should consider whether they need their car.

$25/year and a "limit" of 2 permits per licensed driver does not enourage people to consider the opportunity costs of their car storage. I looked at the regulations in similar cities abroad, and they almost all limited the number of permits per household. Again, if parking is that constrained that the residents "need" permit parking then it would be even better for the residents if they and their neighbors had fewer cars.

Why should the city's policy be passive accommodation of residents' demands to store private property on the public right of way?

Are there any examples of parking meters and parking permits on the same block? Either overlapping (permitted cars park free at meters) or like a half & half situation? What if the north half of the block was meters

I think spdcheetah is creating a false equivalency in saying "Why should outsiders get free parking there at the expense of locals?" I don't think anyone is suggesting that outsiders (shoppers/drinkers, non-residents) should be able to park on this block for free.

I also think residential permits should cost more, to better reflect the value of that public infrastructure.

Something that's always missing from discussions about residential parking is the fact that no one is being forced to rent an apartment that doesn't provide off-street parking. I own a car because I drive to work. I would never choose to rent an apartment that didn't have parking. Uptown/The Wedge/Whittier are filled with 1960s/70s 2.5 story apartment buildings that have sufficient parking. No one is being forced to rent that old brownstone that only has 4 parking spots for 12 units. Especially in a more expensive neighborhood, people simply have to make better choices (I'm getting into a broader policy discussion here, forgive me). I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that people consider their parking needs before choosing a place to live. There are places that are better for car-free/car-light folks, and there are places that are better for folks that drive their car every day. Trade-offs have to be made. I choose to live a few blocks east of LynLake in Whittier because I know my apartment building will always have a parking space for me, my girlfriend will always find a space nearby on the street, and I can afford it. I wouldn't have those same expectations living in The Wedge, and I certainly wouldn't have those same expectations at 31st & Girard.

We don't even necessarily have to care about the cost of public vs. private space here -- going by the vacant lot at 3109 Girard, it looks like the land is valued at about $820,000 per acre in that area. A 200-square-foot slice of that would be a bit over $10/month to pay off in 30 years at 0% interest. Parking permits don't translate directly to something like rent since there can be turnover throughout the day, but it seems like anything in the range of $10 to $30 per month ($120 to $360 per year) could be an appropriate price to me.

I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that people consider their parking needs before choosing a place to live.

I have to imagine that most people renting today do just that. I don't know anyone who has signed a lease without checking out the parking situation. I've even driven around with friends who were looking into Uptown or Loring Park apartments to check out differences in the morning, midday, and evening parking situation.

This is probably more of an issue for long-time homeowners whose lot never came with a garage (or not enough garage space), but--up until fairly recently--had more than enough space to park when Uptown wasn't nearly as busy.

When I first moved into my apartment 11 years ago there always seemed to be street parking near by. I don't drive but would see open areas most of the time and my visitors never commented on any difficulties. Now that several restaurants have opened up with limited/valet/no parking lots it is next to impossible to find parking especially in the winter. I'm not sure permits are the answer but it would be nice if it was not such an issue but it is only getting worse. Perhaps its time to move to the burbs and get a car ; )

Exiled_antipodean and Twin Citizen, You're right about permit costs. I have come around on that. The city could and should charge a lot more for parking permits-- they could make additional revenue and plow that right back into street improvements, and maybe a few people will decide to go carless. I live in a critical parking area, and I know I would pay a lot lot more money for my permit if I had to.

But I stand by my response to ECTransplant's characterization of everyone as "entitled" for wanting parking in a very car-dependent metro area.

I don't disagree with the opinion that the permit fee should be more. I get the sense that the real cost, however, is really the hassle of having guests over - if there are more than a few people visiting at a time, they have to park somewhere else. Even if you're using your guest pass for them, there's the hassle of giving them the permit to put in their car, and collecting it again when they leave.

I lived for many years on James Ave near Lagoon where all the apartment buildings are built close together without parking whatsoever. Early 20th Century apartments built before the automobile on the streetcar line. I estimate that 30-40% of residents choose not to have a car in my former building. I got used to parking a block away at times.

Exiled_antipodean and Twin Citizen, You're right about permit costs. I have come around on that. The city could and should charge a lot more for parking permits-- they could make additional revenue and plow that right back into street improvements, and maybe a few people will decide to go carless. I live in a critical parking area, and I know I would pay a lot lot more money for my permit if I had to.

But I stand by my response to ECTransplant's characterization of everyone as "entitled" for wanting parking in a very car-dependent metro area.

Wanting parking doesn't make people entitled. Demanding free parking or so-far-below-market-value-it-might-as-well-be-free parking in one of the few places in the metro you can almost call urban with decent transit does.

Exiled_antipodean and Twin Citizen, You're right about permit costs. I have come around on that. The city could and should charge a lot more for parking permits-- they could make additional revenue and plow that right back into street improvements, and maybe a few people will decide to go carless. I live in a critical parking area, and I know I would pay a lot lot more money for my permit if I had to.

But I stand by my response to ECTransplant's characterization of everyone as "entitled" for wanting parking in a very car-dependent metro area.

Wanting parking doesn't make people entitled. Demanding free parking or so-far-below-market-value-it-might-as-well-be-free parking in one of the few places in the metro you can almost call urban with decent transit does.

I don't know. Most of these folks in these areas are renters. They move in. They pay the fee. They get the permit. That was my experience. I'm not sure who the straw man is doing all this demanding. It's on the city to charge more if they want to charge more, period.

The people who made a fuss to get the permit parking established in the first place

(At least 75% of the residents on the block)

The people who made a fuss to get the permit parking established in the first place

I mean, it's a pretty easy sell: Ensure you have parking in front of your building, or at least on the same block.

I know I'd take advantage of it if I was on such a block, even if I'd vote against the initial measure. There's very little incentive not to, especially when the price is so low.

The people who made a fuss to get the permit parking established in the first place

I mean, it's a pretty easy sell

Yeah. I think the only reason it hasn't taken over the Wedge yet is because renters rarely answer their door.

God bless renters!

And what happens when a street is dense enough that even with Critical Parking there's still far more residents with permits than there are spaces on the street?