I have been wondering/ thinking recently about parking standards in downtown. A quick search of the land use/ zoning ordinace for downtown brings up that the CBD zone has no parking requirment.



I was wondering if others with more information could shed a little light on the parking standards/ practices in the downtown and downtown west neighborhoods. IE: What are these areas zoned? What parking standards apply for these zones? Does or has the city considered a Payment in lieu for parking standards?

have other cities done this successfully?

I don't think its completely analagous to what you're suggetsing but I know Clayton requires every development to produce X number of parkign spaces - which leads to garages over surface lots

I agree it can be a very bad idea - but if handled well it might work. It seems to work in clayton because the area is at such a premium that it forces developers to build spaces in their buildings or develope garages on surface lots.



I imagien it could work in DT if we demanded garages with street level retail and forbade surface lots ... of course that might drive a lot fo development away by making it too costly. ... How about a tax credit for in buildign parking or garages with retail?

A requirement for ground-level retail for all new parking within a defined Downtown district would prohibit any new surface parking lot, where the primary use of a property is parking (accessory lots adjacent to buildings, if on the same property would still be permitted). Otherwise, all new parking within the district could be required to be less gross square footage than other uses on the property, permitting in-structure parking (within an office or lofts, for example) or even accessory lots adjacent to a large enough building, but no more free-standing garages (not even ones with ground-floor retail) or independently owned parking lots (on their own parcel or exceeding the square footage of other uses).



But in addition to discouraging new parking lots, free-standing garages (like Kiener and 9th Street), or garages lacking ground-floor retail (like Stadium), I think it's equally, if not more important to encourage the redevelopment of existing surface lots. To achieve this, a new Downtown district could have higher land assessments, land value becoming a larger share of the total property assessment, which combines land and improvements. As such, the land owner would be encouraged to have greater density or Floor Area Ratio in development on his or her property. Surface parking or a one-story building, like free-standing drive-thrus, would then see the greatest relative increase in taxes.



As an initial experiment, I think the tools of higher land assessment and/or restricting any new parking as primary use would be appropriate from the River to 14th, Cole to Poplar.

^Interesting. I like.

agreed. I'm certainly not cliaming to have any well informed ideas on this subject (I clearly know less about the ins and outs of development than many on this forum). I just have a layman's belief that it would be possibel to create a system of incentives/penalties that would aid both parkign and density (thus reducing our DT's sea of surface lot parking) .. many of the ideas floated here would seem to have some promise

This was touched on on another thread: What's up with the restaurants that take over several metered spaces every evening for their valet parking? I assume they pay the city for this, but it still really irks me. Lucas Park is one of the worst at this.



Any thoughts?

Framer wrote:This was touched on on another thread: What's up with the restaurants that take over several metered spaces every evening for their valet parking? I assume they pay the city for this, but it still really irks me. Lucas Park is one of the worst at this.



Any thoughts?

They do the same thing in Clayton... they need access to the street and an area for people to pull over for the valet...It doesn't bother me

I don't have a problem with valet parking, it's when the valets take up an entire block of meters to do so. There are a few establishments downtown that abuse this and it needs to stop. They need to park the cars in garages then take them out when people are ready. We're talking about public streets here.

The Valet outside of LPG services more than just LPG. The sign shows complimentary valet, and they've got Wasabi and another place on the sign as restaurants being serviced. Talking to the head chef at Wasabi, they paid (w/ LPG) for the Valet. I think LPG pays more since its' a larger space though.

^Copia is also another establishment that blocks off meters for the entire street block for valet parking and it's not complimentary ($3). It's pure speculation, but I imagine the city has granted allowances because a valet service is aiding in revenue production. These resturants see increases in patrons by providing valet parking and the more people they serve, the more money the city makes off the taxes. Perhaps there is a kick back to the city or as part of the agreement on a per meter basis? I haven't a clue, just throwing out thoughts.



Regarding requirements to provide parking with the construction of new developments/rehabs...I know that Chicago has inacted such codes. All condos must provide at least one parking spot for each unit. I realize that the parking difficulties in STL vs. Chicago do not compare, but yet again downtown doesn't lack parking, it's the number of surface lots that are prohibiting the development of land that is being discussed. I think this idea does have merit.

Copia STILL blocks off the ENTIRE block for their vallet parking!!!!! This is just ridiculous!!!!!:evil:

Framer wrote:Copia STILL blocks off the ENTIRE block for their vallet parking!!!!! This is just ridiculous!!!!!:evil:

Not the whole block, but close to 2/3 of the length.



Plus not just on the weekends. I've seen the valet out there and Mondays and Tuesdays.

dweebe wrote:

Framer wrote:Copia STILL blocks off the ENTIRE block for their vallet parking!!!!! This is just ridiculous!!!!!:evil:

Not the whole block, but close to 2/3 of the length.



Plus not just on the weekends. I've seen the valet out there and Mondays and Tuesdays.

I don't think I have a problem with a Valet parking Copia customers cars in public places. I do have an issue if they "block" off the area, regardless of no cars being there.



I have seen the cones on the sidewalk (I do not remember the day), but have definitely seen them on the road over the weekend(s).



As downown grows and an educated populace comes in, this issue will resolve itself. Any establishment can shrug off 2-3 complaints, but not 20 - 30.