The Jaxson

Jacksonville by Neighborhood => Downtown => Topic started by: Tacachale on November 25, 2019, 08:43:28 AM

Title: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Tacachale on November 25, 2019, 08:43:28 AM
(https://photos.moderncities.com/News/Nashville-NFL-Draft-Visit-Music-Center-FB/i-k8cgG6W/0/78699534/L/VisitMusicCity-FB-11-L.jpg)
Quote
Jacksonville isn't the only ville that has explored privatizing its parking. Nashville recently looked at a proposal that greatly exceeds Jacksonville's in terms of money generated for the taxpayers, $325 million over 30 years compared to Jacksonville’s $197 million.

Read more: https://www.thejaxsonmag.com/article/parking-privatization-jacksonville-vs-nashville/
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Charles Hunter on November 25, 2019, 09:32:02 AM
Good article.  If we go down this path, I would hope the City of Jacksonville retains control of parking policy and rates, instead of turning it over to the contractor.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 25, 2019, 10:04:37 AM
So if I'm reading this right...

This is the basic requirement:

Quote
Initial payout: $6,000,000
Annual minimum contribution to DIA: $1,092,277.49
30 year estimate (minimum contribution): $32,768324.70

And this is the estimated 'perfect-world scenario' based on arbitrary number-soup formulation (possibly the same one that Curry used on the Pension plan) contribution:

Quote
Estimated total contribution to city over 30 years: $196,609,948.20 (if the “combined profitability to city” is annual).

Or in layman terms - we expect 600% growth in 30 years....

Give me a fucking break. 
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Tacachale on November 25, 2019, 10:09:34 AM
So if I'm reading this right...

This is the basic requirement:

Quote
Initial payout: $6,000,000
Annual minimum contribution to DIA: $1,092,277.49
30 year estimate (minimum contribution): $32,768324.70

And this is the estimated 'perfect-world scenario' based on arbitrary number-soup formulation (possibly the same one that Curry used on the Pension plan) contribution:

Quote
Estimated total contribution to city over 30 years: $196,609,948.20 (if the “combined profitability to city” is annual).

Or in layman terms - we expect 600% growth in 30 years....

Give me a fucking break.

And even then, the numbers are more than $100 million lower than a deal that Nashville ultimately rejected.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: bl8jaxnative on November 25, 2019, 11:15:51 AM

This sort of scheme has been around for a long time.  I don't know if I've ever seen any of the parking deals turn out well for a city.


https://chicago.suntimes.com/2018/5/14/18348206/parking-meter-deal-keeps-getting-worse-for-city-as-meter-revenues-rise
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on November 26, 2019, 10:02:41 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on November 26, 2019, 10:22:36 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 26, 2019, 11:24:13 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

Are you intentionally being dense?

Because the devil's always in the details (contract) and I promise that whatever contract is written will have clauses that guarantee a certain amount of 'profit' for the private company.  (I'd present our current parking garage contracts as exhibit A thru infinity)

If those thresholds aren't met, I can promise you that there's no contribution to the city and will likely (again) include payments from the city to said company to meet financial expectation.

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on November 26, 2019, 02:28:08 PM
Punt!

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/11/26/dia-tables-vote-on-former-board-members-plan-as.html?iana=hpmvp_jac_news_headline
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on November 26, 2019, 02:33:40 PM
Highlights (since, paywall):
Quote
At the same time, it decided to not vote on a plan former board member Dane Grey had proposed at the committee’s last meeting. That plan would give Grey’s company, Elite Parking Services of America, a 30-year lease on seven city-owned parking garages, as well as control of on-street downtown parking and any future city-owned parking garages.

Umm...ok. Not sure if I like this or not. We study a lot.

Quote
Grey’s plan hasn’t been outright rejected, however: Tabling a vote on it — instead of outright rejecting it — has the benefit of giving the staff “breathing room” to develop its strategy, Boyer said, since it puts a “cone of silence” in place around the entire issue.

Anyone involved in city government should use the phrase "cone of silence" about as often as Watergate. Sorry, Curry and his boys tainted that one for the future.

Quote
The biggest question might be a philosophical one: Is the DIA’s goal for parking to raise revenue, attract more businesses, make downtown easier to visit or some mixture of motivations?

Bingo. I don't see how privatizing parking will, overall, be better for business.

Bottom Line: We do a lot of individual studies. I'm not sure we do a great job with overall strategic planning and implementation. As written this was a bad proposal so I guess I'm glad they didn't vote on it. But, I'm not convince the end result will be better.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on November 26, 2019, 10:05:52 PM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.

Under-charging for parking is part of the mismanagement.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on November 27, 2019, 08:33:13 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.

Under-charging for parking is part of the mismanagement.

When they stop under-charging for parking and transit at St. John's Town Center, then we can take a look at it. Right now i would say that DT is being over-charged considering the inconvenience of the outdated current system.   
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on November 27, 2019, 09:08:15 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.

Under-charging for parking is part of the mismanagement.

Not necessarily. It depends what the goal is of the city running parking. For example, if the city’s goal is to break evenin order to help cultivate a more friendly environment, they they will certainly charge below market rate.

This is where I agree with Boyer, but am concerned about the process. Public Parking does need to have a stated mission and vision as it relates to Downtown.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on November 27, 2019, 09:54:43 AM
All this sounds backwards. What is the vision for DT and specific city owned parcels first? When that's fully known and understood, then we should talk how things like incentives, mass transit (sorry U2C) and parking management, etc. best play a role in incrementally implementing that vision.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on November 27, 2019, 12:37:18 PM
All this sounds backwards. What is the vision for DT and specific city owned parcels first? When that's fully known and understood, then we should talk how things like incentives, mass transit (sorry U2C) and parking management, etc. best play a role in incrementally implementing that vision.

No dispute there. Setting parking rights is like chapter 10 of a book. Boyer wants to go back and see what the vision is for parking. That’s like going from chapter 10 to chapter 8. We still haven’t read and digested the first few chapters though.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: jaxlongtimer on November 28, 2019, 10:00:33 PM
Based on prior City projects, whether its parking, pension plans, the courthouse, dealing with the Jags and the stadium, the convention center, offering incentives to "big" projects that don't pan out, the LaVilla or Heckshcer Drive restaurant fiascos, the Shipyards or any other "business-like" deal, the City is almost always in over its head as terrible negotiators/deal makers and, generally, guaranteed to lose the taxpayers' money every time.

I just read an article that the JEA employees charged with negotiating its sale are being replaced by City employees appointed by the mayor.  While they may have "good intentions" to do their best (that's a big benefit of the doubt given they report to the mayor), none appear qualified to negotiate terms of a multi billion dollar utility sale.  I expect any proposal, should one make it through (a questionable outcome at this time), to surely screw the City's interests.

The City should bring in savvy, disinterested, civic-minded and experienced business community negotiators to work on its behalf when deal making.  At a minimum, I would think some of our recently "retired" CEO's or other highly experienced deal makers would be happy to work on behalf of the City they call home.  City employees and elected officials just don't have the chops for it, living in an alternate and/or conflicted world.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on November 29, 2019, 05:19:08 PM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.

Under-charging for parking is part of the mismanagement.

Not necessarily. It depends what the goal is of the city running parking. For example, if the city’s goal is to break evenin order to help cultivate a more friendly environment, they they will certainly charge below market rate.

This is where I agree with Boyer, but am concerned about the process. Public Parking does need to have a stated mission and vision as it relates to Downtown.

The goal should be to keep 15% of parking available at all times through demand pricing.  The Town Center has so much parking it is only 85% full 1 day a year.  However, the Town Center has started charging for the prime spots.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 02, 2019, 09:33:46 AM
The fact that any company could come in and propose a parking agreement that updates the technology, increases the number of parking spaces, keeps revenue to the City the same (or even increases it), AND generates huge profits just shows how mismanged parking currently is.

OR ....... how much they intend to raise the cost of parking, and the areas that are being charged for it.

With #LyingLenny involved, get ready to drop trou and bend over JAX.

Under-charging for parking is part of the mismanagement.

Not necessarily. It depends what the goal is of the city running parking. For example, if the city’s goal is to break evenin order to help cultivate a more friendly environment, they they will certainly charge below market rate.

This is where I agree with Boyer, but am concerned about the process. Public Parking does need to have a stated mission and vision as it relates to Downtown.

The goal should be to keep 15% of parking available at all times through demand pricing.  The Town Center has so much parking it is only 85% full 1 day a year.  However, the Town Center has started charging for the prime spots.

But this 85% number....what's the goal here? Throwing out an arbitrary number (even if it does make some sense in concept) doesn't take away from the need to understand the goal here. Is the goal to make parking a profit center? A loss leader? A break-even?

To an earlier point made, we need to really have an action plan on what our vision is and what we want this property to be. Parking and city-owned property can be a tool if you use it right.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 02, 2019, 09:43:58 AM
The objective of 85/15 is to maximize revenue while ensuring that parking is always available.  If maximum revenue is a loss leader, break-even, or a profit center is irrelevant since revenue is maximized.  Once revenue is maximized it can't get more maxed.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: lowlyplanner on December 02, 2019, 04:14:56 PM
The goal of the 85% occupancy rate is to ensure that there is always a spot available on the street for someone willing to pay.  If the pricing is set up correctly, then people will automatically sort themselves into short term, long term, and economy spaces, and you don't need to do a ton of enforcement or other categorizing.

As Donald Shoup, the economic of parking, said, "The ideal parking spot is the one that balances your sloth and your greed."  i.e. your willingness to walk vs. your not wanting to pay.

In my opinion, it would not take a huge rate increase to have it so there was always a spot available near where you wanted to go.  Right now, it's roughly comparable to feed the meter all day vs. park in a garage.  If the rate went up to $1 per hour, it wouldn't even be close.

How would that change people's behavior?  Is it worth an extra buck to park right in front of bellweather and have lunch?  Or to run into Chamblin's?  I suspect it would be to a lot of people.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: itsfantastic1 on December 02, 2019, 04:31:11 PM
To an earlier point made, we need to really have an action plan on what our vision is and what we want this property to be. Parking and city-owned property can be a tool if you use it right.

It appears the DIA is going to try and answer that exact question since they've tabled the motion of the unsolicited RFP.

Quote
Grey’s plan hasn’t been outright rejected, however: Tabling a vote on it — instead of outright rejecting it — has the benefit of giving the staff “breathing room” to develop its strategy, Boyer said, since it puts a “cone of silence” in place around the entire issue...

Much of that time will be spent figuring out the answers to the questions that were raised in DIA’s own study, known as the Haahs study. Among them: The biggest question might be a philosophical one: Is the DIA’s goal for parking to raise revenue, attract more businesses, make downtown easier to visit or some mixture of motivations?

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/11/26/dia-tables-vote-on-former-board-members-plan-as.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/11/26/dia-tables-vote-on-former-board-members-plan-as.html)

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 02, 2019, 06:19:40 PM
The goal of the 85% occupancy rate is to ensure that there is always a spot available on the street for someone willing to pay.  If the pricing is set up correctly, then people will automatically sort themselves into short term, long term, and economy spaces, and you don't need to do a ton of enforcement or other categorizing.

As Donald Shoup, the economic of parking, said, "The ideal parking spot is the one that balances your sloth and your greed."  i.e. your willingness to walk vs. your not wanting to pay.

In my opinion, it would not take a huge rate increase to have it so there was always a spot available near where you wanted to go.  Right now, it's roughly comparable to feed the meter all day vs. park in a garage.  If the rate went up to $1 per hour, it wouldn't even be close.

How would that change people's behavior?  Is it worth an extra buck to park right in front of bellweather and have lunch?  Or to run into Chamblin's?  I suspect it would be to a lot of people.

Careful.  I referred people to Shoup earlier and you would have thought I was throwing puppies into a wood chipper.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on December 03, 2019, 07:50:08 AM
Considering no one wants to go DT in the first place, and you have to pay for parking, including a significant inconvenience cost, that no place else in the city is being charged, the rate that achieves 85% occupancy is probably pretty damn close to zero.

M-F 9-5, why does anyone need to even go DT that doesn't work there?  Chamblins and Sweet Pete's are about the only reason I can come up with. Has anybody noticed more spaces available now that the Landing is closed?   
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 08:28:34 AM
During the day parking downtown is a challenge.  On street parking is in high demand and I personally have driven around several blocks looking for an open space.  I go downtown to see my attorney, the courthouse, property appraisers office, the main library, events at Times Union/Florida Theater, and occasionally to make deliveries.

I've also been known to park for free at King St station and take the skyway just to avoid the hassel and save $2 in the process since I actually enjoy walking.  My wife is the opposite.  She would pay almost any price not to walk more than a block.

During events at the Times Union and Florida Theater demand pricing could charge for on-street parking near those venues with decreasing rates the further away you park.  However, there will certainly be times when parking is free throughout downtown.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 03, 2019, 09:01:44 AM
I agree with vic in that DT Jax isn't vibrant enough to significantly raise parking rates.....if the true goal is vibrancy. Personally, I've never had a problem parking in a garage or on-street in DT Jax but I'm also one that is totally fine parking a block or two away and walking, which is what happens when people park at the average Walmart or shopping mall. What I have a problem with is being able to find enough choices open to pass choices in surrounding neighborhoods on a consistent basis outside of work or research related trips. Livability seems to be a larger dilemma than parking, IMO. So to me, the parking management topic should revolve more around how it can best assist in the economic enhancement of the area.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 09:49:25 AM
Is your opposition limited to this specific plan, or 85/15 demand pricing in general?
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 03, 2019, 10:09:34 AM
So to me, the parking management topic should revolve more around how it can best assist in the economic enhancement of the area.

This.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 03, 2019, 10:11:15 AM
During events at the Times Union and Florida Theater demand pricing could charge for on-street parking near those venues with decreasing rates the further away you park.  However, there will certainly be times when parking is free throughout downtown.

Thinking solely about economics, I agree. In practice, variable priced meters would be completely confusing for people who don't go downtown often, which is a significant percentage of the population. If you want to get more people downtown, a parking policy that would confuse the average person is not ideal.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Tacachale on December 03, 2019, 11:07:05 AM
So to me, the parking management topic should revolve more around how it can best assist in the economic enhancement of the area.

This.

(https://media0.giphy.com/media/J5jmQF8IwNS6Y/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 11:51:49 AM
During events at the Times Union and Florida Theater demand pricing could charge for on-street parking near those venues with decreasing rates the further away you park.  However, there will certainly be times when parking is free throughout downtown.

Thinking solely about economics, I agree. In practice, variable priced meters would be completely confusing for people who don't go downtown often, which is a significant percentage of the population. If you want to get more people downtown, a parking policy that would confuse the average person is not ideal.

Cities around the world manage to do it.  Download the parking app to your phone and it doesn't only tell you how much it costs, but also tells you were the available spaces are.  I think that would make it less confusing for the average person.  Check out the ParkChicago or ParkBoston apps.

Here is a map of all the open on-street parking spaces in Chicago and the current parking rate.
https://map.chicagometers.com/

Right now there are 11 on-street spaces available in front of the Adler Planetarium at $2/hr.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 03, 2019, 12:06:08 PM
Is your opposition limited to this specific plan, or 85/15 demand pricing in general?

I'm not sure if this reply was in response to my reply above but my opposition to any parking plan or the 85/15 demand pricing model ignoring local context would deal with the need to first address a vision of what DT Jax should be and how to get there. Parking is just one of many tools that can either assist or hurt the process of achieving that vision, depending on what the actual vision is. Depending on that vision, the 85/15 demand pricing model could make sense or completely ripping out all meters and making on-street parking free could.

No one in this town appears to know what the end game or goal is for downtown. For decades it's been a continuous line of half-baked ideas and expensive projects built on assumptions made by individuals who hold power but have no clue or experience on how to revitalize anything.

Unfortunately, at this time it seems like most public entities are working in silos and those silos aren't exceeding in equitable public participation, input and buy-in before running head first to implement solutions for problems that actually may not even exist.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 12:52:18 PM
Making downtown parking free during the day would be a total disaster and kill off any hopes of retail or restaurants.  There is a reason why you don't see large scale office space at the Town Center.  Office workers would take up all the free parking.  Downtown parking is already free after 6PM and on weekends and do you see any businesses open during those times?  Answer - very few.  Clearly free parking is not driving those types of businesses to downtown.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 03, 2019, 01:52:49 PM
During events at the Times Union and Florida Theater demand pricing could charge for on-street parking near those venues with decreasing rates the further away you park.  However, there will certainly be times when parking is free throughout downtown.

Thinking solely about economics, I agree. In practice, variable priced meters would be completely confusing for people who don't go downtown often, which is a significant percentage of the population. If you want to get more people downtown, a parking policy that would confuse the average person is not ideal.

Cities around the world manage to do it.  Download the parking app to your phone and it doesn't only tell you how much it costs, but also tells you were the available spaces are.  I think that would make it less confusing for the average person.  Check out the ParkChicago or ParkBoston apps.

Here is a map of all the open on-street parking spaces in Chicago and the current parking rate.
https://map.chicagometers.com/

Right now there are 11 on-street spaces available in front of the Adler Planetarium at $2/hr.

Correct - in cities with vibrant urban areas where the population is used to paid parking I agree. Chicago can likely charge whatever it wants for parking. That isn't the case here.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 03, 2019, 02:20:16 PM
Making downtown parking free during the day would be a total disaster and kill off any hopes of retail or restaurants.  There is a reason why you don't see large scale office space at the Town Center.  Office workers would take up all the free parking.  Downtown parking is already free after 6PM and on weekends and do you see any businesses open during those times?  Answer - very few.  Clearly free parking is not driving those types of businesses to downtown.

Parking isn't a primary driver but it can be a detriment if not coordinated properly with the overall goals of creating a vibrant environment.

Is there an example of where free time enforced on-street parking was a disaster or are you making an assumption based off a book by someone else you read somewhere? There are quite a few places that have vibrant dining and retail districts that offer free time limited on-street parking. Cleveland is an example of where free one hour parking is allowed and enforced on its main retail corridor (Euclid) in the heart of the CBD. Smaller examples include Greenville and Lakeland. The devil is always in the details and the details can differ depending on context, culture and economics.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/593548913_YhmaJ-M.jpg)
Free on-street parking in downtown Cleveland.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/593548662_j9Qby-M.jpg)
Right across the street from this

Btw, Town Center is poor comparable.  That's a shopping mall developed by a single entity in a suburban area, which is full of suburban large scale office developments. It's a different contextual animal altogether.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Captain Zissou on December 03, 2019, 02:32:51 PM
I didn't watch a youtube video by some guy, but i did just go to Europe for 2 weeks where I used a parking disc almost every day.  It's a really easy way to do free hourly parking that everyone followed.  This could be implemented in Jax extremely easy and could probably pay for itself.  You want unlimited free parking in designated areas? Pay $5 for a parking disc.  Revenue goes to infrastructure improvements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_parking
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on December 03, 2019, 03:21:47 PM
Downtown parking is already free after 6PM and on weekends and do you see any businesses open during those times?  Answer - very few.  Clearly free parking is not driving those types of businesses to downtown.

There is Free parking on weekends and nights in DT JAX, but it is free everywhere else too. 

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 03:34:14 PM
You guys are funny.  When someone isn't educated on a subject you say go read a book, and then when some actually does read a book and becomes educated on a subject you denigrate that too.  Make up your mind.

Now back to the subject.  I don't know what the magic price per hour is for Jax that produces the 85/15 breakdown and that number is certainly different for each part of downtown.

I do know this though - downtown Jax meters are currently more than 85% full now which means 2 things.  1) We aren't charging enough and 2) People are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking.

As for free parking, I guess you could do that if you limited the amount of time someone could park but that is problematic thanks to the Supreme Court ruling that wffectively makes enforcement unconstitutional.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 03, 2019, 04:05:37 PM
You guys are funny.  When someone isn't educated on a subject you say go read a book, and then when some actually does read a book and becomes educated on a subject you denigrate that too.  Make up your mind.

I can't speak for others but I don't recall telling anyone to go read a book. But when I do see comments mentioned as facts that I know aren't totally accurate, I do try to challenge and point them out where they can then be validated or turned back.

Quote
Now back to the subject.  I don't know what the magic price per hour is for Jax that produces the 85/15 breakdown and that number is certainly different for each part of downtown.

I do know this though - downtown Jax meters are currently more than 85% full now which means 2 things.  1) We aren't charging enough and 2) People are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking.

My recommendation is to take a step back and first begin to look at things holistically. For all we know, one or two could be right or both could be wrong.

Quote
As for free parking, I guess you could do that if you limited the amount of time someone could park but that is problematic thanks to the Supreme Court ruling that wffectively makes enforcement unconstitutional.

The cities that offer it pull it off some sort of way. So it can be done if that is the desired outcome.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 03, 2019, 04:30:11 PM
I do know this though - downtown Jax meters are currently more than 85% full now which means 2 things.  1) We aren't charging enough and 2) People are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking.

This argument doesn't really hold water. For example, if you wanted 15% of the meters free in Lower Manhattan, you'd likely need to charge about $150 for 30 minutes - probably more. Most of the people that suffer through driving their own car (or have a dedicated driver) are either obscenely wealthy, or have very important business matters that can not be done anywhere else in the world other than lower Manhattan and they have to be there.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: J Random Sucker on December 03, 2019, 05:19:04 PM
Clearly free parking is not driving those types of businesses to downtown.

ISWYDT
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 05:27:03 PM
Lower Manhattan tops out at $7.50/hr and Chicago tops out at $6.50/hr inside the Loop.  As for Greenville, as mentioned earlier that is a political decision and not a financial decision.  They are leaving a lot of money on the table which could be used for any number of pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit initiatives.  I know Greenville is looking at implementing some sort of rail system so we'll see how they fund it.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 03, 2019, 05:36:13 PM
As for Greenville, as mentioned earlier that is a political decision and not a financial decision.  They are leaving a lot of money on the table which could be used for any number of pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit initiatives.

They very well could be leaving money on the table. However, it's difficult to say that what they've done so far has not been a part of creating a very vibrant community. Sometimes higher quality of life and the end user experience are determined to be more important priorities for a community than milking people for additional revenue. That's why I say it's better to first determine what your community's ultimate goals are, then tailoring tools like parking management to best assist in delivering that outcome.....which doesn't have to be about how much money you can make off the end user.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 03, 2019, 10:42:25 PM
I just added this to my reading list.

https://www.amazon.com/Parking-Management-Best-Practices-Litman/dp/1932364056/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_20?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1932364056&pd_rd_r=ce19333f-ee16-4bbc-9e8e-1e091bb3a933&pd_rd_w=5bdAs&pd_rd_wg=eKJgO&pf_rd_p=a966b482-aeee-4b16-9ffe-9a1cb857c30c&pf_rd_r=2YSJ7BFH8QTA8RGEQTQ1&psc=1&refRID=7VCKXACBZ9FSJCBYJFDR
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Lostwave on December 04, 2019, 09:15:34 AM
I don't understand why Jax feels the need to privatize everything.  All that means is someone else makes money instead of it going back into the city coffers.  The streets (and parking) are a public service and the city should own and profit from those, not some random CEO. 

The city govnt should just hire a smart, well paid manager to run the parking better and everyone wins.  Parking could be a profit center for the city, or at least break even... as opposed to letting some private company make money on public investment.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 04, 2019, 10:30:14 AM
I don't understand why Jax feels the need to privatize everything.  All that means is someone else makes money instead of it going back into the city coffers.  The streets (and parking) are a public service and the city should own and profit from those, not some random CEO. 

The city govnt should just hire a smart, well paid manager to run the parking better and everyone wins.  Parking could be a profit center for the city, or at least break even... as opposed to letting some private company make money on public investment.

I agree 100%.  From parking to selling JEA to cutting Khan in on profits from Daily's Place - it is little wonder this city is strapped for cash which will only get worse.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Peter Griffin on December 04, 2019, 10:38:14 AM
The city received an unsolicited proposal to privatize parking, they didn't start this ball rolling, a private company did.

This latest proposal was not the city's idea.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on December 04, 2019, 01:37:39 PM
Yes, but that just illustrates how inactive the City is.  City Hall needs to be more proactive in areas such as this and not just waiting around for the private sector to come up with things.  Also, it might have been an unsolicited proposal but the immediate response should have been "great idea but we will do it ourselves", and not even entertained the idea at this point.  If the City does their due diligence and determines that they couldn't effectively do it themselves, then put out a competitive RFP.  However, my experience has been that by the time an unsolicited proposal is made public the decision has already been made.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 04, 2019, 01:49:42 PM
City Hall needs to be more proactive in areas such as this and not just waiting around for the private sector to come up with things.  Also, it might have been an unsolicited proposal but the immediate response should have been "great idea but we will do it ourselves", and not even entertained the idea at this point.  If the City does their due diligence and determines that they couldn't effectively do it themselves, then put out a competitive RFP. 

I agree with this!
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on December 04, 2019, 02:40:39 PM
Yes, but that just illustrates how inactive the City is.  City Hall needs to be more proactive in areas such as this and not just waiting around for the private sector to come up with things.  Also, it might have been an unsolicited proposal but the immediate response should have been "great idea but we will do it ourselves", and not even entertained the idea at this point.  If the City does their due diligence and determines that they couldn't effectively do it themselves, then put out a competitive RFP.  However, my experience has been that by the time an unsolicited proposal is made public the decision has already been made.

This. I Completely Agree.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: fieldafm on December 05, 2019, 11:49:21 AM

I do know this though - downtown Jax meters are currently more than 85% full now which means 2 things.  1) We aren't charging enough and 2) People are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking.


Sorry. Those 'facts' are opinions, and not correct.

Downtown Jax meters are not more than 85% full across the board. In certain parts of Downtown, meter utilization is high. In other parts of Downtown, meter utilization is low. In some parts of Downtown, meter enforcement is essentially non-existent. On any given day, about 80 metered spots are occupied by non-paying City employees and elected officials. Quite a few metered spaces along Independent Drive, Hogan St, Laura St, Bay St and Adams St have been taken out of the inventory due to various demolition and construction projects. I can name north of half a dozen business owners who park in metered spaces outside their front door from 8-5pm Monday through Friday, and then complain that their 'customers can't find parking'. Several times a month, metered spaces along Hogan St are taken out of the parking inventory due to school busses and tour busses from performances at TUPAC. Some publicly-owned surface parking lots are well-used. Others are not well-used (and instead said users park illegally across the street for free, with no enforcement for those illegally parked). Others are not open to daily (or even off-peak) parking. Others are currently closed to any monthly or daily parking (cough: the Landing East Lot).

As a downtown resident and business owner who has fully studied local utilization rates, revenues (which have gone down in recent years since a competent administrator left the Office of Public Parking), demand/supply and who talks to monthly and daily parkers on an almost day-to-day basis... my conclusion isn't that 'people are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking'.

Instead they 1) don't have enough good reasons to choose to pay to park downtown instead of simply going elsewhere (that's a demand issue), and that 2) it is unreasonably hard to be a true consumer because they are confused as to the various parking options (that's a management issue). You'd be surprised at how much revenue is collected at metered parking after 6pm on weeknights and during weekends, even though metered parking is free during these periods. There is also zero uniformity on pricing among both public and private options.  Some public and private facilities aren't even consistent as to when they are open to accepting off-peak customers. 

Neither of these conclusions point to a supply issue.

I'm saying this also, as someone who does believe that there are some easy fixes that can be accomplished without relinquishing these duties to a private operator, who believes that there is an unmet need for some strategically-located public facilities to offer free parking during certain periods to help economic development efforts, and that strategic price increases at both public on-street facilities and within public structured parking facilities are warranted (but that doesn't mean that prices should go up across the board among all available public parking spots).  That is to say that I fully agree that there are specific pricing strategies and supply management strategies needed... but those aren't blanket statements based on a paragraph read in a book. Instead that's based on regression analysis of localized variables. The application of theories based on an understanding of what is actually happening around you is more important than the book itself.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: fieldafm on December 05, 2019, 11:55:19 AM
The city received an unsolicited proposal to privatize parking, they didn't start this ball rolling, a private company did.

This latest proposal was not the city's idea.

That 'unsolicited' proposal has the implicit backing of several powerful people in City Hall. So, let's not pretend like there isn't a preferred outcome among some (though not all) of the button pushers.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Captain Zissou on December 05, 2019, 12:42:56 PM
Recently I've been spending a bit of time in Bradenton, FL where I stay at a 1941 hotel downtown that has since been converted to a Hampton. A new large garage opened up right across the street and it's right next to their main restaurant/entertainment areas.  When I was there for thanksgiving, they shut down the main drag to cars and set up a stage and vendors.  Open containers were permitted and people came out in droves.  Most of these people parked in the garage for free and walked over.  The next day I went for a run on the Riverwalk, which is far better than Jax's.  Below are some quotes from the city administrator about the garage that seem much more thoughtful than anything I've seen in Jax.  Parking is supposed to be helpful to the citizens and businesses of downtown.  It's not supposed to profit off of them.

Quote
The parking garage is already complete, but will not be open until construction on the sidewalk surrounding the garage is complete. Bradenton's City Administrator, Carl Callahan, said he doesn't want to open up the garage until it's safe for people to walk in and out of it.

Callahan said the sidewalk project should be complete by September 8th the latest, but most likely will be done by Labor Day Weekend.

This new parking garage will have 500 parking spaces, and will be free to park for the first few months.

"We've had a lot of construction in this general area. Between the garage, the museum, the new hotel across the street. We'll be parking it free at least through the holidays just to be fair and try to be helpful to the consumers and also to our businesses downtown," said Callahan.

Once the holidays are over, people will have to pay to park. The price of parking hasn’t been decided on yet, but Callahan said it most likely will be free the first two hours, just like most of Downtown Bradenton.

One more way to know this isn't in Jacksonville...

Quote
The garage is on budget for the project’s $13.8 million price tag
https://www.bradenton.com/news/local/article231761403.html
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: fieldafm on December 05, 2019, 02:35:32 PM
The temporary free parking sounds like a local strategy that works best for their particular situation.

Here in Jax, I believe there is room for free night/weekend parking at two specific public parking facilities, outside of a special event.

While certain parts of the DIA boundaries should likely be changed to free two hour parking, I don't believe that 24/7 free parking is the right thing to do throughout the entire DIA boundary.

Another thing to consider is that the tax base downtown is not what it once was. Public parking is the DIA's only dedicated funding source, as most of the Tax Increment Financing monies are already encumbered. Paying for infrastructure improvements like converting one-way streets to two-way streets (which would further enhance the Downtown experience for the end user and has proven to result in increased sales for business owners) could be bonded out and paid for with increased efficiencies in how the Public Parking Fund is managed.

Again, its all about what the end goal is.  If the end goal is to do the kinds of things that would make Downtown Jacksonville a true destination, then tailoring parking management to meet those goals is one of several critical tools needed in the tool belt.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on December 05, 2019, 02:49:50 PM
Another dedicated funding source could have been the Downtown Historic Preservation Trust Fund but they didn't want it.

Again, its all about what the end goal is.

This is the biggest elephant in the room. It's also one I don't think the city actually knows.

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on January 07, 2020, 12:45:55 PM
Mayors Office knew about this privatization attempt eight months earlier:

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2020/01/07/former-dia-board-members-bigmoney-parking-contract.html
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: acme54321 on January 07, 2020, 02:45:28 PM
And Curry just recently appointed this guy to the JEA board?  You can't make this stuff up :o
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: marcuscnelson on January 07, 2020, 06:20:58 PM
I hate to bring it in here, but given the national issues, I'm constantly finding myself unsurprised that the former chairman of FLGOP seemingly can't help but be blatantly corrupt and detrimental to this city in every possible way.

Like, it's one thing for it to be just JEA, or just Lot J, or just the convention center, or just the Landing, or just parking, or just any of the other things mentioned on this website every day. But this is laughable. Every single step this man has taken in office is somehow either beneficial only to his own interests or harmful to our community. Or both. What is it going to take to get the house in order? How many times are we going to find out about what Lenny Curry knew, and when he knew it?
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Papa33 on January 07, 2020, 06:51:52 PM
The fact that the Buisness Journal is reporting this  as an investigative piece tells me some of Curry’s reliable supporters are smelling the stink.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Kerry on January 07, 2020, 07:35:01 PM
Good thing consolidation got rid of all the corruption and shady deals.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on January 07, 2020, 08:11:30 PM
I hate to bring it in here, but given the national issues, I'm constantly finding myself unsurprised that the former chairman of FLGOP seemingly can't help but be blatantly corrupt and detrimental to this city in every possible way.

Like, it's one thing for it to be just JEA, or just Lot J, or just the convention center, or just the Landing, or just parking, or just any of the other things mentioned on this website every day. But this is laughable. Every single step this man has taken in office is somehow either beneficial only to his own interests or harmful to our community. Or both. What is it going to take to get the house in order? How many times are we going to find out about what Lenny Curry knew, and when he knew it?

My guess is that a lot more questionable activity will come out in the next few months. What has come out so far, makes Corrine Brown look like a Girl Scout in comparison. It will be interesting to see what the ending outcome will be and how this JEA fallout will impact the rest of his initiatives like Lot J.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 08, 2020, 10:01:11 AM
Good thing consolidation got rid of all the corruption and shady deals.

I promise you, there is not any form of government that cannot be corrupted if the wrong people are in control (elected or appointed) and the public is not diligent in their responsibilities.  The fact that incompetent and corrupt leadership is JAX's real problem is borne out all the more by these fiascoes. 

There does need to be more constraints put on the Mayor's role. For instance, JEA board USE to have appointed by the Governor and the Mayor, not just the Mayor. I don't know how or when it changed but that was a mistake.   

Moving to non-partisan elections would be a BIG help. JAX and FL are under one party control and absolute power has corrupted absolutely. 
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on January 08, 2020, 11:20:31 AM
Moving to non-partisan elections would be a BIG help. JAX and FL are under one party control and absolute power has corrupted absolutely. 

I’m not sure I agree with this. Yes, the elected republican mayor has made a mess. With that said, even if the (R) wasn’t after his name, you’d know what party he belongs to.

It also wouldn’t change the fact that the local Dems apparently forgot they were allowed to support a candidate in the race.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 08, 2020, 12:47:59 PM
It takes the US vs THEM out of it. Candidates run on their ideas and experience and the voters do the same, at least to a more significant degree. The party's also hold purse strings and information/assistance over the heads of their incumbents too.

There is literally no benefit that I see to partisan elections and no downside to nonpartisan ones that I see. That said, I do know and have lived in cities that have partisan elections, but that aspect is largely ignored. Jax is clearly not of that vein though. 
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Bativac on January 08, 2020, 03:09:14 PM
It takes the US vs THEM out of it. Candidates run on their ideas and experience and the voters do the same, at least to a more significant degree. The party's also hold purse strings and information/assistance over the heads of their incumbents too.

There is literally no benefit that I see to partisan elections and no downside to nonpartisan ones that I see. That said, I do know and have lived in cities that have partisan elections, but that aspect is largely ignored. Jax is clearly not of that vein though.

Have to agree with you there. Partisan elections only help the candidates get themselves elected. If all you're doing is campaigning as a representative of a party, then tribalism takes over and each tribe votes for their person. Nowadays people seem particularly attached to their party to the point where I'm not sure anything else the candidates say really matters, and it's a shame this is happening with local elections since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor. Especially in a place like Jacksonville.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: bl8jaxnative on January 08, 2020, 04:32:34 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 08, 2020, 04:37:47 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on January 08, 2020, 04:43:48 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

Ok. Not sure what the heck that means, but Ok.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on January 08, 2020, 04:51:46 PM
It takes the US vs THEM out of it. Candidates run on their ideas and experience and the voters do the same, at least to a more significant degree. The party's also hold purse strings and information/assistance over the heads of their incumbents too.

There is literally no benefit that I see to partisan elections and no downside to nonpartisan ones that I see. That said, I do know and have lived in cities that have partisan elections, but that aspect is largely ignored. Jax is clearly not of that vein though. 

Here's the thing: Lenny Curry is the first mayor I've seen that I truly thought was a party "hack". meaning someone who thinks, "to hell with the other side of the aisle".

 - Delaney was the exact opposite of a party "hack"
 - Peyton I thought did a poor job as mayor, but it wasn't because of partisan politics. He definitely wasn't a unanimous party choice or anything, though him and Hightower did box everyone (READ: Mike Weinstein) out in the 2007 re-election.
 - Alvin Brown is a Democrat but had some very conservative views and appointed numerous Republicans. His downfall mostly was due to his terrible financial stewardship, as well as issue embracing some social issues.

Jacksonville's elections aren't non-partisan but they're Unitary, so it's not like there's a Republican Primary and Democratic primary so each party's zealous can find the furthest right and furthest left person on earth and pit them against each other like in Tallahassee or Washington.

I guess my point is, Lenny Curry's is a clown and a Republican hack that likely should have kept his role behind the scenes versus being the actual candidate. But, I struggle to find that the system was truly the issue. Sometimes people just suck.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 08, 2020, 07:08:44 PM
I think Peyton started the trend toward making the city government more partisan and it has only gathered strength since, with Curry putting it into high gear. Brown took stands he shouldn't have and I think wouldn't have (or at least not as vocally) in an effort to appease the GOP elements in the city. That never works for a Dem and he would have been better served to avoid partisan stands as much as possible.

I also think the partisan aspect has been a factor in more than a few city council races over the years, again getting stronger over time.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: JerryHen on January 09, 2020, 06:45:33 AM
City politics only mirror what's going on nation-wide, no?
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: I-10east on January 09, 2020, 07:19:08 AM
Sorry for going offbase, but alot of Illinoisans are fleeing to Nashville. Of course Illinois has a 'preferable' political atmosphere, with 'reasonable' taxation and safety, with their 'fair' gun laws in Chitown...Nashville might have to change it's name to Nashicago.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Adam White on January 09, 2020, 07:58:22 AM
Sorry for going offbase, but alot of Illinoisans are fleeing to Nashville. Of course Illinois has a 'preferable' political atmosphere, with 'reasonable' taxation and safety, with their 'fair' gun laws in Chitown...Nashville might have to change it's name to Nashicago.

The population of Illinois is approximately 12.5 million people. The population of Chicago is roughly 2.5 million people. There's a lot more to Illinois than just Chicago. I'd not be surprised if some of the purported migration constitutes hicks from Southern Illinois. Nashville is a redneck mecca.

All joking aside, you've done a typical I-10: you took one statistic and then came up with a rationale for "why" which conveniently fits your political views. Doesn't matter if it's true or not - you KNOW it must be true.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: I-10east on January 09, 2020, 08:24:02 AM
^^^Why did you conveniently leave out the metropolitan area of Chicago? ChiTown metro is around 9.4 million. I never said that all of Illinois is Chicago, but don't kid yourself; Chicagoland is a HUMONGOUS part of Illinois's population. Like you said 12.5 minus 9.4 leaves only around 3.1 million not in Chicagoland.

I'm not even saying that people are fleeing to muh 'conservative cities' but just 'more sane' cities, just my opinion. Cali to Arizona, or Cali to Texas has similar migrations. Chicago local news and other news has spilled the beans, the secret has been out for a loong time... Don't shoot the messenger.

https://wgntv.com/2018/05/21/illinois-residents-fleeing-state-for-financial-reasons/

https://tennesseestar.com/2018/09/06/dear-tennessee-get-ready-for-historic-mass-migration-from-illinois/
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Adam White on January 09, 2020, 09:11:08 AM
^^^Why did you conveniently leave out the metropolitan area of Chicago? ChiTown metro is around 9.4 million. I never said that all of Illinois is Chicago, but don't kid yourself; Chicagoland is a HUMONGOUS part of Illinois's population. Like you said 12.5 minus 9.4 leaves only around 3.1 million not in Chicagoland.

I'm not even saying that people are fleeing to muh 'conservative cities' but just 'more sane' cities, just my opinion. Cali to Arizona, or Cali to Texas has similar migrations. Chicago local news and other news has spilled the beans, the secret has been out for a loong time... Don't shoot the messenger.

https://wgntv.com/2018/05/21/illinois-residents-fleeing-state-for-financial-reasons/

https://tennesseestar.com/2018/09/06/dear-tennessee-get-ready-for-historic-mass-migration-from-illinois/

I can't access the first article in my region. The second one posits that it is tax rates that is driving migration. Kind of undercuts your, "muh political atmosphere, muh safety, muh gun laws" argument.

There's also the weather, but until you can find some way to blame that on the Libtards, you'll probably ignore it.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: I-10east on January 09, 2020, 09:18:35 AM
^^^I'm not gonna get political, because I probably will get censored. I think that I made my point pretty clear. 
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Adam White on January 09, 2020, 09:41:47 AM
Dude, you already got political. And you're just as bad as the people you criticize.

In any event, if you don't want to be "censored" for "getting political" you might want to a) not go off-topic and b) avoid trying to make political points (either overtly or by implication) when you respond. Everything doesn't have to have a QAnon angle. Some people just like pizza.

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: bl8jaxnative on January 09, 2020, 10:14:32 AM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.

Again, you're in the wrong country if you want this sort of thing.

There is every reason for it.  It's literally unconstitutional and anti American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: I-10east on January 09, 2020, 10:48:26 AM
Dude, you already got political. And you're just as bad as the people you criticize.

In any event, if you don't want to be "censored" for "getting political" you might want to a) not go off-topic and b) avoid trying to make political points (either overtly or by implication) when you respond. Everything doesn't have to have a QAnon angle. Some people just like pizza.

I'm not taking the bite, just so you and others can shout for censorship like always...
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Tacachale on January 09, 2020, 10:52:28 AM
Folks, please stay on topic and please don’t take swipes at each other. Thanks, the management.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 09, 2020, 12:56:24 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.

Again, you're in the wrong country if you want this sort of thing.

There is every reason for it.  It's literally unconstitutional and anti American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association

It's unconstitutional and anti-american, yet it is what many (most?) cities already do.  That being conducting non-partisan elections.

 
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Tacachale on January 09, 2020, 01:47:55 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.

Again, you're in the wrong country if you want this sort of thing.

There is every reason for it.  It's literally unconstitutional and anti American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association

It's unconstitutional and anti-american, yet it is what many (most?) cities already do.  That being conducting non-partisan elections.

Yes, plenty of cities have non-partisan elections.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: bl8jaxnative on January 16, 2020, 05:03:01 PM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

WHat they call non partisan means that the candidates are not listed on the ballot by party.     that is hugely different from banning actual part afiiliations.  Essentially it's an excercise that means F*** All.   

For example, everyone and their grandmother know's that LA's Garcetti [sic] is a democrat.  He was a chair for the Obama campaign in Cali.   And he had a spat with Hillary since she endorsed one of his opponents.

Chew on that, what they hell does it mean to not print a party affiliation on a ballot when Hillary Clinton and Obama are openly working in the picture.   

If you're not tlaking about banning the parties, your endorsing then an insignificant facade.   

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.

Again, you're in the wrong country if you want this sort of thing.

There is every reason for it.  It's literally unconstitutional and anti American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association

It's unconstitutional and anti-american, yet it is what many (most?) cities already do.  That being conducting non-partisan elections.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Adam White on January 17, 2020, 02:39:00 AM
"
 since political party affiliation shouldn't be a factor.
"

You're in the wrong country.

WHat they call non partisan means that the candidates are not listed on the ballot by party.     that is hugely different from banning actual part afiiliations.  Essentially it's an excercise that means F*** All.   

For example, everyone and their grandmother know's that LA's Garcetti [sic] is a democrat.  He was a chair for the Obama campaign in Cali.   And he had a spat with Hillary since she endorsed one of his opponents.

Chew on that, what they hell does it mean to not print a party affiliation on a ballot when Hillary Clinton and Obama are openly working in the picture.   

If you're not tlaking about banning the parties, your endorsing then an insignificant facade. 
 

It shouldn't and there is no reason for it to. There is no liberal or conservative way to pick up the garbage or do 90% of what local governments do.

Again, you're in the wrong country if you want this sort of thing.

There is every reason for it.  It's literally unconstitutional and anti American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association

It's unconstitutional and anti-american, yet it is what many (most?) cities already do.  That being conducting non-partisan elections.

Now's the time when you can take a moment and point to where the OP (or anyone else) advocated "banning actual part(y) affiliations".

The OP just said it was sad, as party affiliation shouldn't matter at local level. And he was reinforcing one of the points you made - that people know what party the candidate would represent if the elections weren't non-partisan (also reinforcing what Steve had posted earlier).

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 17, 2020, 08:26:51 AM
There are many non-partisan elected officials that do not overtly put their partisan leanings out to the public at large. There are others that will on occasion endorse a given candidate in a given race, but don't do so with any regularity. There are others that have endorsed candidates from both parties in different races. There are local officials that identify with one party or my even be elected under their party, but have on occasion crossed parties to endorse a candidate.   

Partisan politics as practiced at the state and national level is not relevant and is detrimental to local politics.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Steve on January 17, 2020, 01:36:07 PM
Back on topic: the DIA committee that studied this is recommending to the DIA board to reject the proposal from Elite in its entirety.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Peter Griffin on January 17, 2020, 01:44:26 PM
Back on topic: the DIA committee that studied this is recommending to the DIA board to reject the proposal from Elite in its entirety.

Good. It seemed for all the world like a cash grab from some private interest. The parking situations in our vibrant urban neighborhoods aren't very problematic to my eye.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: vicupstate on January 17, 2020, 02:22:06 PM
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20200116/city-loans-covered-parking-garage-owners-delinquent-tax-fees (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20200116/city-loans-covered-parking-garage-owners-delinquent-tax-fees)

Yeah, JAX has a great history with this kind of thing.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: thelakelander on January 17, 2020, 02:38:32 PM
^Imagine what downtown would look like by now if we spent $56 million on it, instead of to this group to manage parking garages since 2004.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Peter Griffin on January 17, 2020, 02:45:58 PM
The downtown parking situation is such a PITA. Monthly parking garages abound, and the hourly debit/credit garages oftentimes get taken over at nights by the "Special Event Parking" attendees who are cash only

No consistency, no predictable places to park and hit the Bay St/Laura St corridors, uncertainty about which method of payment to take with me for a night out, it's aggravating.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: fieldafm on January 17, 2020, 03:06:51 PM
Interesting comments today...


The downtown parking situation is such a PITA. Monthly parking garages abound, and the hourly debit/credit garages oftentimes get taken over at nights by the "Special Event Parking" attendees who are cash only

No consistency, no predictable places to park and hit the Bay St/Laura St corridors, uncertainty about which method of payment to take with me for a night out, it's aggravating.


Quote
In a two-hour meeting Friday, Boyer walked through the majority of the recommendations from a parking study that DIA received last year. She outlined strategies – introducing variable pricing, installing kiosks for mobile payments, ticketing JEA employees that park at meters without paying and more – that would increase revenue while keeping parking within DIA authority.

"Probably 50 percent of our meters on a daily basis are not generating revenue," said Boyer, blaming that stat on government vehicles not getting ticketed and on allocations of parking for school buses and other short-term uses. "It's a really substantial number, and I think it's out of control."

She recommended against privatizing on-street parking, an element of Grey's proposal, because rate structures could be used to incentivize certain behaviors, like charging higher rates during the work day to encourage high turnover and lower rates or free parking at night to encourage workers to dine out before leaving the area. That power should not be handed over to a private company, which would make purely profit-based rate decisions, Boyer argued.

Boyer told the Business Journal after the meeting that the same logic does not necessarily apply to the city-owned parking garages downtown or the envisioned shuttle system.

"They don't have the same issues," said Boyer.

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2020/01/17/downtown-agency-votes-to-reject-contentious-bid-to.html?iana=hpmvp_jac_news_headline (https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2020/01/17/downtown-agency-votes-to-reject-contentious-bid-to.html?iana=hpmvp_jac_news_headline)



Almost as if these very same issues were discussed somewhere on this forum....




I do know this though - downtown Jax meters are currently more than 85% full now which means 2 things.  1) We aren't charging enough and 2) People are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking.


Sorry. Those 'facts' are opinions, and not correct.

Downtown Jax meters are not more than 85% full across the board. In certain parts of Downtown, meter utilization is high. In other parts of Downtown, meter utilization is low. In some parts of Downtown, meter enforcement is essentially non-existent. On any given day, about 80 metered spots are occupied by non-paying City employees and elected officials. Quite a few metered spaces along Independent Drive, Hogan St, Laura St, Bay St and Adams St have been taken out of the inventory due to various demolition and construction projects. I can name north of half a dozen business owners who park in metered spaces outside their front door from 8-5pm Monday through Friday, and then complain that their 'customers can't find parking'. Several times a month, metered spaces along Hogan St are taken out of the parking inventory due to school busses and tour busses from performances at TUPAC. Some publicly-owned surface parking lots are well-used. Others are not well-used (and instead said users park illegally across the street for free, with no enforcement for those illegally parked). Others are not open to daily (or even off-peak) parking. Others are currently closed to any monthly or daily parking (cough: the Landing East Lot).

As a downtown resident and business owner who has fully studied local utilization rates, revenues (which have gone down in recent years since a competent administrator left the Office of Public Parking), demand/supply and who talks to monthly and daily parkers on an almost day-to-day basis... my conclusion isn't that 'people are discouraged from going downtown because there isn't any parking'.

Instead they 1) don't have enough good reasons to choose to pay to park downtown instead of simply going elsewhere (that's a demand issue), and that 2) it is unreasonably hard to be a true consumer because they are confused as to the various parking options (that's a management issue). You'd be surprised at how much revenue is collected at metered parking after 6pm on weeknights and during weekends, even though metered parking is free during these periods. There is also zero uniformity on pricing among both public and private options.  Some public and private facilities aren't even consistent as to when they are open to accepting off-peak customers. 

Neither of these conclusions point to a supply issue.

I'm saying this also, as someone who does believe that there are some easy fixes that can be accomplished without relinquishing these duties to a private operator, who believes that there is an unmet need for some strategically-located public facilities to offer free parking during certain periods to help economic development efforts, and that strategic price increases at both public on-street facilities and within public structured parking facilities are warranted (but that doesn't mean that prices should go up across the board among all available public parking spots).  That is to say that I fully agree that there are specific pricing strategies and supply management strategies needed... but those aren't blanket statements based on a paragraph read in a book. Instead that's based on regression analysis of localized variables. The application of theories based on an understanding of what is actually happening around you is more important than the book itself.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Peter Griffin on January 17, 2020, 03:22:13 PM
I'm aware the points I made above were discussed elsewhere, I was just voicing my opinions about downtown parking. I didn't realize how many spaces were taken up by non-paying city employees who aren't ticketed for their illegal parking. I only know my experience is one of frustration.

It's easier for me to bike around Riverside or even make the long trek Downtown on my bicycle than it is to drive downtown, which keeps me from visiting it as often. Even before I lived in Riverside I at least knew I'd be hunting for street parking until I found it, so I'd go there since it was predictable. Downtown, which garage? $5 cash only lot, $10 cash only lot, free meter, which garage? Who's to say this fellow in a yellow vest isn't just some guy collecting cash and letting people park in a lot where I'll be towed? I don't trust it. Let me swipe my card and park in a garage, please!

Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: fieldafm on January 17, 2020, 03:43:42 PM
^^totally appreciate the perspective. It is one that is shared almost universally, among those I talk with (IE people that park downtown during the day and on nights/weekends). 

The admittedly childish told-you-so was directed at the few know-it-all contrarians that unfortunately infiltrate this forum.
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Peter Griffin on January 17, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
The admittedly childish told-you-so was directed at the few know-it-all contrarians that unfortunately infiltrate this forum.

I gotcha  ;)
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: Florida Power And Light on January 21, 2020, 09:46:05 PM
Two guys wearing “ Nashville “ caps, posing as Jacksonville Rail Yard Investors,one the buyer, closed on Storage unit, the other the Architect, ready to roll from antiquated rail yard storage and transport to .......
Title: Re: Parking Privatization: Jacksonville vs. Nashville
Post by: bl8jaxnative on January 26, 2020, 01:03:37 PM
The stuff on downtown parking reminded me of a few weeks ago.  I flew back early afternoon.   With some time on my hands, I parked downtown to do some shopping at the Cub & Wolf and Chamblins.   Being an airhead, I didn't even think of paying my meter.  How the hell do you park downtown mid afternoon in the middle fo the week not pay a meter for 90 minutes and not get a ticket?  FIIK, but I didn't get one.