Park Plaza South Changes - Time For Real Change? ( 3. September 2006, 17:16 by Derek Young) ~ We Need To Act Now
Parking is one of those issues that’s less than sexy, but I get more requests to write about it than any other… expect to see a few more posts about it. The future of Park Plaza South and Park Plaza North, on the other hand, is very sexy as it has the potential to truly change the character of downtown – a character that many of us agree needs a bit of changing. From the News Tribune:
The team, Pacific Plaza LLC, plans to add one floor of parking to the garage, top it with two floors of office space, bring the Pacific Avenue retail space flush with the parking overhang and remove the on-street parking to extend the sidewalk.
Then, rec’d via email:
The group needs to have a substantive discussion about the proposed renovation of Park Plaza South. Dan Veolpel’s article on it discusses the history of the garages and the new proposal.
I contend that new office space in that part of town is not going to change the time of day people are out in that area – ultimately reducing the chances of revival in that area. The last time any real decision was made in regards to these garages was back in 1969 – so we really only get one chance with this.
Opinions? What are our next steps?
Link to The News Tribune
Previously on Exit133
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
I am a bit embarrased to say that I actually went down to city hall and looked at the drawings for the proposed renovations to the south parking garage.
bring the Pacific Avenue retail space flush with the parking overhang
That will help. Alot. Right now the commerce under the garage is pretty sparse and in a dark cave.
and remove the on-street parking to extend the sidewalk.
Hmmm. Undecided as to this effect. Some people like to park on the street. I guess the theory is that they will park in the garage. Will time strapped shoppers do this? Perhaps it is required if the retail spaces are pushed out.
I contend that new office space in that part of town is not going to change the time of day people are out in that area
The new office space will help the area. However, they will leave after work. At least it will be a positive improvement during the day.
On another thread, someone suggested having a high tower of condos on the parking garage. I agree but wonder if an investor is willing to pay for this.
”...and remove the on-street parking to extend the sidewalk.”
Pacific Ave could actually stand to more than double it’s on-street parking capacity. There is no need for Pacific to be five lanes wide- reduce it down to two and add angled parking. This would even allow room to expand the sidewalk…
2 | Posted by morgan | Sep 3, 08:23 PM
I’ve never been a big fan of the angled parking. Compared to other parking forms, it actually accommodates fewer cars and creates more congestion than necessary, in my opinion. Also, it reminds me of parking solutions in small towns in Iowa—maybe that’s an idea Eric Anderson brought with him that we can emulate.
Street parking is essential, however, because it acts as a buffer between fast moving traffic and pedestrian areas. This is why you rarely see pedestrians walking along busy streets: it’s a very hostile environment if you’re not driving a car. Therefore, the City should make every effort to retain the onstreet parking in some form.
Finally, the only good I can think of for keeping the existing structure is that you stay dry when it rains. Having a parking garage located next to one of the most prominent transit corridors in the Northwest makes no sense at all. It completely contradicts the Destination Downtown plan, which tries to make the CBD more transit dependent. Tacoma should take advantage of this unique opportunity and rid itself of the Park Plaza, replacing them with, of course, much higher density and uses more appropriate for prime downtown real estate than empty parking garages.
I wonder if Dan Voelpel reads Exit 133. He sounds a little too enthusiastic about too many of these mediocre, poorly-thought-out developments.
3 | Posted by drizell | Sep 3, 10:58 PM
Street parking is essential, however, because it acts as a buffer between fast moving traffic and pedestrian areas.
You have convinced me.
Street level commerce may struggle without some parking in front of the retail on the first level of the South Garage.
Yet, I hate to speculate about the distances involved.
Is there enough room to have a nice sidewalk and parallel parking?
Perhaps the garage sticks out so much toward the street (as will the new retail space) that this is not dimensionally possible.
Pathetic, Embarrassing, Sad
This project just shows that our city hasn’t made it and is not even close to making it. The take what you can get attitude is sad. The use of prime real estate in this way is embarrassing. The fact that not many people care or the thinking that the rehab is good for our city is pathetic.
Just my opinion. Have a great Labor Day!
5 | Posted by Jake | Sep 4, 11:17 AM
off-topic continued:
“I’ve never been a big fan of the angled parking. Compared to other parking forms, it actually accommodates fewer cars …”
This argument is unfounded. How does fitting two cars into the space previously occupied by one result in a net loss of parking?
”...and creates more congestion than necessary…
Downtown is congested? Maybe for a couple blocks over by UWT. During rush hour.
The rest of the day, I would say Pacific Ave is decidedly quite as far as major arterials go. The City’s traffic counts confirm this: a count from 2005, between 9th & 11th Street, for example, shows under 10,000 cars per day. Now, compare this with a count just taken at 6th and Alder which had over 17,000 cars.
Personally, I have never had a problem finding parking downtown. Then again, unlike most people, I actually like to walk and don’t mind parking a block or three from where I need to be.
My preference to see angled parking on Pacific has more to do with decreasing the size of the street. This would increase pedestrian safety by reducing exposure to traffic and by slowing traffic down.
We are trying to make Tacoma more pedestrian friendly, right?
6 | Posted by morgan | Sep 4, 01:38 PM
I don’t think that the parking in front of the retail is critical to survival at all. From my desk I am looking straight across the street at this space and I rarely if ever see someone park in front of the existing retail businesses and walk in. I think what kills the space is that it looks terrible. It is dark, it is dingy and it feels like you are going into a basement. Plus the structure above it is ugly even for a parking garage. BUT if you had to have parking in front of the retail after pushing it out you could drop the parallel parking on the Wells Fargo side of the street and shift the traffic lanes gradually before and after this block, that way you can push the retail out, push the sidewalk out, keep the parallel parking and only lose parallel parking on the Wells Fargo side, where there is already a visitor parking garage.
7 | Posted by Steve | Sep 4, 02:48 PM
This is from an email I sent to the city council:
On to Park Plaza North and South. I believe the city’s idea to re-hab these garages will be a large mistake. I don’t know about you but I think of Pacific Ave. as the center of Downtown, Prime of the Prime Real Estate. The Downtown Commercial Core area/zoning is not large but is the only area that will allow tall buildings (400 ft height limit). The large pieces of land under the parking garages are some of the last parcels with large scale redevelopment potential on Pacific Ave. I feel that the city is looking for a quick fix and taking what ever it can get. If you allow the garages to just be re-habbed and only adding a few stories of offices you are greatly under utilizing that Prime Real Estate. Investing here in this way just precludes us from adding to our tax base for the long term by not attracting mixed use downtown which is much more appropriate. The City needs to be leaders to the area of attracting what kind of development we want and to set the tone. The City must set high expectations and then follow their own vision of revitalization of the heart of our city. Think to the future not just about right now. Mixed use is what needs to go in there, tall buildings with commercial, residential, and parking underground! Lets not be a take what we can get city. The article in the TNT about United Way open to development of their parking lot was great. They know what is good for that site and the city. They are not going to take what ever they can get. They let it be known what they want and they will wait until they get it.
Announce to the World what we want. Wait till the time is right. Make the right decisions now for a brighter future downtown.
8 | Posted by Jake | Sep 11, 05:51 PM
Commenting is closed for this article.
