In a city with so little parking...

[Roy Pitchford]

...what would possess the people in power to remove parking in the relatively high-traffic area of Madison Park??

The angled parking on Madison Ave outside the pool is currently being ripped up in preparation for the resurfacing project. It is to be replaced with curb-side parking (possibly with meters, no one I've spoken with really knows) which, by my estimates, will cut the number of parking spots in this area by 50%, when it is all completed.

Now, you may say that I'm only issuing my complaint because I work at the library next to the park...that I'm losing my own access to parking...and you'd be right. Why shouldn't I? But this will impact pool visitors, library patrons, music connoisseurs going to Mahalls, TASO, etc. We've already had comments from library patrons.

If you'd like my opinion, at best, the city was coerced. The decision was driven by a financial ultimatum from some larger seat of power, similar to the decision to remove certain traffic lights from Detroit.
At worst, well, I can save that for later.

P.S. Destruction of the parking spots started on Thursday, yet, no one has felt it important to bring up here? Wonder why...

[Valerie Molinski]

I think the 'city with so little parking' is a total fallacy. Lakewood has a ton of parking. I guess it is all perspective though.

And the head in parking spaces will not work with the bike lane. There is a bike lane planned. You knew that, right? I think it is as simple as that, and not some grand conspiracy as alluded to.

[Paul Schrimpf]

Conspiracy aside, it's a shame to lose that parking. Going by Mahalls on busy concert nights those spots are/were always well used. Ah well ... progress, I guess.

[john crino]

I found the news of the parking spaces removal on Facebook this past weekend posted by the city. There is a small concentration of traffic between the Coachhouse and Barrocco and the idea of the city removing 14 of 28 spaces in that confined area needs to be addressed. Is the city going to replace them somewhere? Provide a muni lot? Allow people to park at the library after hours? Maybe I missed the meeting but any input from anyone would help? Kelly Flamos? Colin? City ?

[todd vainisi]

It will also directly impact the residents who live near the park because that will be 14 more cars that need to park on their streets. Oh wait, I forgot there is parking all over and never any shortage of spots at all! Ha.

[Valerie Molinski]

It will also directly impact the residents who live near the park because that will be 14 more cars that need to park on their streets. Oh wait, I forgot there is parking all over and never any shortage of spots at all! Ha.

I live near the park. I fully accept that parking is at a premium, on Clarence for example, when there is a show at Mahalls, or on holidays when people are visiting their relatives at the nursing home at the other end of the street. Much of the time, when I drive by the park and these spots, both the lot at the park AND these head in spots, are not full. It's very rare that all spaces are taken at both those locations AND the spaces along the street as well. I just don't get planning and providing large lots and ton of overflow parking for instances that are not every day life. Of course, there will be times more parking is needed, but not all of the time.

More cities are moving towards limiting MAXIMUM parking (instead of only spelling out a minimum) so that we don't have dead spaces that are under-utilized. I love the convenience of a close by spot as much as the next guy, but I'd rather live in a place where we are not awash in car parking and perhaps lose some to provide for other modes of transport or to provide more opportunities for pedestrians and pedestrian activity. I realize we all have to live and work in Lakewood and would like it to be as convenient as possible. But car is not king and by chosing to live in Lakewood, we make choices. I have a shared driveway and no room to park an RV, while a relative in Westlake does not have these problems.

And here is a relevant article:

The Complete Business Case for Converting Street Parking Into Bike Lanes
http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/0 ... es/387595/

[Jim O'Bryan]

I don't have related articles...

I have the fiasco called Detroit Avenue. Which has been completely screwed up since our
"planners" a peraphor for the last room in the basement laid hands on it.

The same "consultants" probably from the same group that found Subsidium, is putting
togather another plan to completely screw up Madison and make it as screwed up.

I think it is time that residents need to think about stepping in and stopping these thugs
from ruining our city anymore.

Planning, building, services, just getting worse and worse, as those with ties get told to
shut down conversation with BS. This administration is out of control.

They freely LIE to residents. "Remember "I heard 100 beds" and "I heard rumors too." Said
the two architects of closing the hospital, months after they knew it was closing.

City Hall out of control, with absolutely ZERO SUCCESS.

Oh wait 5 Guys and Taco Bell, well Taco Bell.

FWIW

.

[Roy Pitchford]

I think the 'city with so little parking' is a total fallacy. Lakewood has a ton of parking. I guess it is all perspective though.

I agree with you with a proviso.
If a greater portion of the people of Lakewood utilized their garages for their cars, Lakewood would, indeed, have plenty of parking.

I love the convenience of a close by spot as much as the next guy, but I'd rather live in a place where we are not awash in car parking and perhaps lose some to provide for other modes of transport or to provide more opportunities for pedestrians and pedestrian activity.

Do those parking spaces prevent bicyclists from using the road? I will grant you, its more risky for bicyclists due to reduced visibility on the part of the driver, but that visibility issue is present with cars as well.
Are there no sidewalks in the area, forcing pedestrians to walk in the streets?

I'm sorry, but I don't see the bikes and pedestrians issue as being that much different from the situation now.

Now, if you want to put some puzzle pieces together:
Our Mayor Summers is on the board of directors of NOACA. NOACA is connected with the UN's Agenda 21 plan, an effort to build "sustainable development" which is their way of defining radical environmentalist and anti-democratic policies.
http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com

It wouldn't look very good if a member of your board of directors wasn't implementing your own policies.

[Paul Schrimpf]

I do feel bad both for Mahalls, which invested a boatload into that place and relies on traffic outside the city, and the Library, which is already woefully low on parking and the lot it does have is, at best, challenging.

It will be interesting, if not somewhat depressing, to see which Madison businesses will be able to survive this summer's onslaught. It needs to be done, but I can imagine a business owner having a lot of sleepless nights imagining the worst. Big Fun gave up.

[todd vainisi]

Much of the time, when I drive by the park and these spots, both the lot at the park AND these head in spots, are not full. It's very rare that all spaces are taken at both those locations AND the spaces along the street as well.

I guess if you live right there, you'd see it more than me. I often try to drop my kids off or pick them up from the pool or library and find no available spots. In the evening and at night I also often find they are all used. I feel "lucky" when I get a spot in that row.

As for the spots in the back/south side of the park... those don't really qualify as parking spots for the pool or library or madison bars to me. I get that they are only a 'walk through a big park' away, but it's just not the same, especially if you are talking about night time or in the winter (do they plow the path? i don't know).

I just really don't see a reason to eliminate any of the parking spots we have. I don't usually see that many people biking down madison - in fact, more often than not I don't see a biker or only see one during a short drive through Lakewood. If we apply the 'only-plan-for-minimum' philosophy to the bike lane, then there should be no bike lane either.

[Ben VanLear]

I just really don't see a reason to eliminate any of the parking spots we have. I don't usually see that many people biking down madison - in fact, more often than not I don't see a biker or only see one during a short drive through Lakewood. If we apply the 'only-plan-for-minimum' philosophy to the bike lane, then there should be no bike lane either.

This is all covered in the excellent article that Valerie posted. It seems counter intuitive, but decreasing on-street parking and adding bike lanes is a big benefit to local businesses. Obviously it is still a tough sell, which is why it has been studied, and studies again and studied some more - same result though, bike lanes good for business even at the cost of parking. That being said, I don't think adding bike lanes to Madison had anything to do with removing these parking spaces. It probably has more to do with being consistent with the rest of the street. I can't see there being any real problems with parking - there are two big lots at the park.

If nothing else I think it will make the street look better - less like a parking lot right in the street.

http://www.pps.org/blog/reimagining-our-streets-as-places-from-transit-routes-to-community-roots/

[todd vainisi]

This is all covered in the excellent article that Valerie posted. It seems counter intuitive, but decreasing on-street parking and adding bike lanes is a big benefit to local businesses. Obviously it is still a tough sell, which is why it has been studied, and studies again and studied some more - same result though, bike lanes good for business even at the cost of parking.

Okay, I went and read that article. But, I'll tell ya what... comparing Lakewood to places in California or other places that have good weather year round just doesn't do it for me. I see that they also have some studies from Canada. Look, it's a nice article and all, and I don't mean to sound like I've got my head in the sand and refuse to open my eyes to the truth, but I find that a bunch of garbage BS. I find problems with their methodologies in almost each study. One of them suggests that bikers make more trips to Target so they actually spend more. But guess what? When I go to Target, there is a rack for like a small handful of bikes (which is usually empty) and a huge parking lot full of cars. So the 5 bikers bought made 3 trips each and bought $150 of stuff which is more than these 5 customers that came in cars. Guess what? They had 1,000 customers arrive in cars that day and 20 came on bikes.

The notion that a business will make more by catering to bikers than people arriving by automobile is an absurd notion. Count how many bikes you see on the street and then count how many cars go by. I would guess that more than half the adults I know don't even have a bike. And, from personal experience, I hate biking to go shopping. And we ride bikes a lot in my family.

How about instead of catering to bikers in our 6 months of winter, we concentrate on shoveling the snow on our sidewalks so people can at least walk? The last 6 weeks or so, I prayed every day that I didn't break my arm while walking my dog due to peoples solid-ice sidewalks.

But whatever, sounds like the decision has been made.

[Jim O'Bryan]

The notion that a business will make more by catering to bikers than people arriving by automobile is an absurd notion. Count how many bikes you see on the street and then count how many cars go by. I would guess that more than half the adults I know don't even have a bike. And, from personal experience, I hate biking to go shopping. And we ride bikes a lot in my family.

How about instead of catering to bikers in our 6 months of winter, we concentrate on shoveling the snow on our sidewalks so people can at least walk? The last 6 weeks or so, I prayed every day that I didn't break my arm while walking my dog due to peoples solid-ice sidewalks.

But whatever, sounds like the decision has been made.

Ben

I have to agree with Todd's comments above.

I have found the "Bike Cult" to be as over the top as any other. I have had many friends
that gave up cars for bikes, then they got cars again.

A bunch of well meaning people, with good thoughts, trying to social engineering
something they really do not understand.

There is a ton of great thoughts and good meaning that gets lost, but people giving it
nearly religious overtones, and making everyone a convert. If bike traffic equaled 1/10th
of street traffic, I could see looking at space for riders. But it is closer to 1 in 30 in the
summer, and 1 in 1,000 in winter. (made up numbers)

But what do I know?

It will be rammed down our throats by those that slaughter our city.

.

[Ben VanLear]

Re Weather: Has anyone here been to Minneapolis, Chicago, Madison, Montreal? It is possible to have a lot of people that use bikes for transportation and have a serious winter. That isn't ground breaking stuff looking at what has been done elsewhere.

Calling riding a bike to get around a cult with kind-of religious overtones or everyone giving up on cars (I use mine all the time) sounds like a little much to me, it just seems like a transportation choice that would fit a city of our size pretty well - not for everyone, but, you know, to have the option. Saying "I don't see people biking everywhere so we don't need bike lanes" seems kind of like saying "I don't see people walking everywhere so we don't need sidewalks" in the far-flung exurbs. Here are a few more good ones from just the past couple weeks:

Most important, safety. Vision Zero:
http://magazine.good.is/articles/vision-zero-street-design

Family biking:
http://bikeleague.org/content/family-biking-we-are-80

Interested but concerned:
http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/here-are-the-first-ever-national-findings-about-interested-but-concerned-bi

[Ben VanLear]

But to re-state from earlier, here is what is more relevant for this thread.

I don't think adding bike lanes to Madison had anything to do with removing these parking spaces. It probably has more to do with being consistent with the rest of the street. I can't see there being any real problems with parking - there are two big lots at the park. Remember when the discount drug mart plaza had pull-in parking? Looks much better now.

If nothing else I think it will make the street look better - less like a parking lot right in the street.

http://www.pps.org/blog/reimagining-our-streets-as-places-from-transit-routes-to-community-roots/