CURB FUTURE PARKING DEMAND
HB has 2 parking issues in the downtown!
We have the current parking shortage spilling into the neighborhoods and we have the future impact that greater occupancy and new development will have on the existing problem. The current parking shortfall needs to be dealt with and it will be difficult to solve. The future problem is preventable by actions we take now. We have the chance to prevent the city from allowing parking to worsen downtown.
HB Neighbors CEQA lawsuit is addressing the future impacts to prevent the parking problem from degrading.
Parking demand is generated by increased development and higher densities. When more buildings are built, higher building densities allowed, and higher levels of uses are created within the buildings, we referred to these as “Parking Demand Generators”. If a new development is built with adequate parking on site there will still be more increased demand for street parking but, its impact will be minimal. When new parking generators are created a parking shortage occurs.
The “tool box” or techniques that the city of HB uses to allow developers to build less parking are:
TOOL 1: PARKING IN LIEU PROGRAM
The parking in lieu program allows a developer to purchase up to 50% of the required parking from the city with the city supposedly creating this parking at another location. As of Sept 2009 the city has collected fees for more than 263 parking spaces at an average of $4.5k per space. The average cost to build a new parking space in our downtown is several times more (some say more than 10 times more) than the fees collected.
TOOL 2: MIXED-USE REDUCED PARKING
Mixed-use reduced parking allows lower required parking under the theory that complimentary uses create parking demands at different times (eg. daytime office use above a nighttime restaurant use) The city of HB misuses this theory by purposing residential over restaurants. Both of these uses crate parking demand at the same time of the day.
TOOL 3: VALET PARKING
Valet parking is purposed to add as much as 40% more parking spaces. In fact valet parking actually adds much lower additional parking and is not often available when actually needed.
TOOL 4: THE OUTSIDE DINING LOOPHOLE
The outside dining loophole allows any restaurant to provide no parking for their outside dining areas provided they don’t exceed 20% of the restaurant area. Downtown HB has more outdoor dining area than any other commercial center in Southern California. Outdoor dining is a wonderful experience, but it needs to have corresponding parking.
TOOL 5: TANDEM PARKING
Tandem parking is allowing one car to block in another car in certain situations. This reduces the allotted square footage for isle ways and increases the amount of parking spaces on a given square footage of garage. The problem with tandem parking is that it is only fully utilized in a small number of cases. Even in households with 2 bedrooms the tandem system quickly degrades if the residents have different working hours or other reasons why they are unable to be present for the twice daily car shuffle. This results in one of the two cars frequently being parked on the street.
I’m happy to hear that you are still focused on defeating the Downtown Specific Plan. It must happen! I’m happy to know that my contribution is still making a difference. When will we hear more about the progress in the litigation?
I had an endless stream past my house on Wednesday night singing various drunk versions of “Danny Boy”. I couldn’t sleep. My dog couldn’t sleep.
Now tonight the police helicopters have been circling before 8 pm. What are the crime stats like for this year so far. My gut is telling me we are seeing a change for the worse. It’s not even summer yet.
Frank
Hi Frank – we are working diligently on our challenge of the Downtown Plan’s EIR. We are in the process of creating the administrative record which will sit between 5000 and 10,000 pages large. In addition, we are transcribing all of the associated hearings and city council meetings (also a large job). We expect a court ordered settlement meeting to occur soon, but are not optimistic about coming to a resolution. Next we will navigate through the rest of the CEQA legal process. We will issue a more formal statement in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.
So how do we take these “tools” away from the city so that they can no longer allow the developers and business owners to profit from additional business at the expense of the community? Face it that is what we are talking about here. If there are ways to increase business without having to pay for the associated parking then the businesses and developers will exploit these options first.
$4.5k is way too low to build a parking spot in HB. $40 to $80k is more like it depending upon how deep you build the parking structure. It becomes more expensive the deeper you dig. To fix this parking problem they will have to dig deep.
Now that the Main Street Library will be closing, due to budget cuts, I’m sure the city will find a way to utilize that site for the parking needs. Remember the “administrator” a city employee can charge the allowable uses of the library site WITHOUT so much as a city council vote. Today we have a library tomorrow we have a parking structure.
The city would rather have a ridiculously expensive police helicopter program, and the bragging rights to go with it, than have literate children. The city would rather fund expensive redevelopment studies out of the tax payers’ pocket, than have literate children. The city would rather have 9 active lawsuits and an army of attorneys on staff, than have literate children.
The budget cuts that need to come are:
Sell the helicopters.
Fire ½ of the legal department.
Seattle all of the law suits.
Make the developers pay for their parking needs.
Norm Newland
How many planning staff does it take to come up with a comprehensive parking plan?
Why are several residents groups trying to solve the parking problem when our tax payers money is funding highly educated planning staff to solve the problem for us?
Wake up city staff. This is your job. The people have spoken. Now use your tools and education and solve the problem.
Did you all know that your city council will soon file an application to annex Sunset Beach? Here are some particulars–The HB plan states no utility taxes will be imposed on Sunset Beach residents (because new utility taxes can be contested by Sunset residents and may even nix the annexation. Also, no new police or fire services are planned to take care of increased needs in those area. Those facts, in additional to additional HB downtown defelopment is going to create a nightmare for both Sunset Beach residents and for Huntington Beach residents.
Also, I’ve recently learned from this website that HB needs Sunset Beach park acreage to be able to build the planned cultural center in the Main Street Park.
How convenient for them!
Hunting Beach Neighbors and the Citizen’s Association of Sunset Beach certainly have the same issues and reasons to oppose annexation!
Gretchen Hoad
If the Sunset Beach folks do not want the annexation, why would our city council force them to accept it. Why is the city council even interested in Sunset Beach. I suspect it is to resolve a land use issues that are preventing the development of some land in the city. Does anyone know why the city council has any interest in Sunset Beach? Is it the percentage of required park land?