Please note: This was originally posted on this website
on March 28, 2007. That was before many details, including
the MOUs, were released.
Some of the ideas in this perspective are wrong, but remember,
this was before the public had much of the information now
available. I had the opportunity to speak with Deputy Mayor Mark
Becker about many of my concerns and questions on April 25, 2007,
the day after the City Council vote on the finance resolutions.
Read the interview here.
Councilman
Tom Smith at the March 27, 2007 City Council’s first public
discussion of the proposal, advocated leaving the hotel and
parking garage development at the corner of Jefferson and
Harrison, but moving the rest of Harrison Square north to the
Omni
Source property. Councilman Smith feels that riverfront
development is necessary to downtown revitalization efforts and
that the majority of young people today want riverfront options.
A riverfront ballpark would certainly offer a more aesthetically
pleasing view of downtown compared to the current proposal.
However, it is a considerable distance from the downtown core.
Lawton Park and
Science Central to the east and
Headwaters Park to
the south border most of the area. To the west a solid
residential area that is similar to the one on Ewing Street,
although better kept.
The Omni Source property lies far to the north of the downtown
core, which would stretch the core out, rather than concentrate
it. Perhaps the distance is minimal, but Headwaters Park
makes it seem farther.
As I consider Smith's proposal, it would be too much
like the current Memorial Stadium in that one would feel removed
from the excitement of the downtown core. In the past
when the issue of riverfront development was raised, numerous
concerns about building along a river whose levels can fluctuate
wildly over the course of a year surfaced. The public was very
much against this
idea when Tom Smith revealed artist’s conceptual drawings of
possibilities for development.
One questioner at the library mentioned traffic and parking concerns.
If you’ve spent any time downtown at all, you know that traffic is
not currently a concern in the evening or weekend hours. If there were to
be a baseball game, convention/event at the Grand Wayne Center and
event at the Embassy in the same time period, things could get a
little exciting. But there are solutions to that problem. Trying
to navigate Jefferson between Webster and Clinton when the Embassy
lets out is a problem and always has been. But it would seem that
better coordination between police and event planners could
alleviate this. A possible solution would include an AM
transmitter and electronic message board signs broadcasting
traffic updates and information similar to those
used along interstates.
Harrison Square would only be blocks from the North-South corridor of
Clinton/Lafayette Streets and even closer to the East-West
Jefferson/Washington Boulevard corridor. However, the only
logical entrances/exits from the parking garage location in the
concept drawing are onto Harrison or Douglas Street which would
curve into Webster on its’ Western end. The choice to exit onto
Harrison Street could mean a left turn out of the garage and against traffic.
The
Douglas option going west would have problems of it’s own. In
either case a direct unimpeded route would be difficult at best.
This can be overcome with planning and foresight.
This leaves the parking concern. In the new rendering, Webster Street is now
closed between Jefferson and Douglas as well as Lewis Street
between Harrison and Webster which eliminates possible on-street
parking near the ballpark. There is some on-street parking
indicated on some of the streets surrounding the ballpark. The proposed parking garage would
contain 900 spaces (although I’ve heard some officials state it
will be 1,000 spaces) with these slots to be divided between the
proposed hotel, Grand Wayne Center and other venues downtown, not
to mention the ballpark. It’s already been stated that a certain
amount of the spaces, still being negotiated, would be reserved
for the hotel.
If the future development of the aforementioned properties along Baker Street
were to occur, where would parking take place? A weekday game
would be even worse with Lincoln Financial Group employees filling
its’ parking lots. I’m not sure if public parking in the evenings
and weekends on these lots has been considered. That would be a
temporary solution, as those properties could possibly be
developed in future phases eliminating this option.
I tried to get parking figures for a Wizard’s game from the
Coliseum, but was unsuccessful. Is a 900/1,000-space parking
garage large enough? Or is it too large? How quickly
would a garage of that size empty? If it’s a hassle to use,
people won’t attend games and or other events downtown defeating
the whole purpose and setting back revitalization even further.
Would the entire project be better served by splitting the parking garage
into 2 separate buildings? Perhaps one in the indicated position,
the other somewhere on the southern edge of the project? Either
way, some drivers will probably chose to park in the surrounding
residential areas between Ewing and Fulton Streets,
inconveniencing residents in an area already clogged with
resident’s cars. Where would buses park? Existing
retail/restaurants in the area might be forced to hire security to
ensure parking for their patrons although I’m sure this added expense
would be offset by increased revenue resulting from more activity
in the area. Adding a second parking garage to the project would
add to initial construction costs, but be cheaper in the long run
than adding another at a later date.
People should be encouraged to park and walk, but then again, let’s face it,
drivers downtown are not
pedestrian-friendly. What
about the possibility of utilizing other parking
garages downtown via shuttle trolleys? Citilink already provides
this service during weekdays in the summer, what about extending
it to include nights/weekends during games? The parking concern
needs to be addressed in a thoughtful manner and not easily
dismissed as pure laziness or matter of convenience on the part of
those complaining. Planning needs to insure easy access into
and out of the
area. If there is one thing that is evident from the complaints
about parking and traffic, convenience is an absolute. You can
build it, but give them traffic snarls and unsafe conditions and
they won’t come back.
