Gateway Center
This is a separate post regarding the Gateway Project. It's probably a done deal, but it's generated a lot of anger and frustration (which has never been heard or cared about by the Powers That Be).
So, are you for it or against it? How will it affect Downtown Port Angeles and the surrounding neighborhoods? How about traffic and parking? Who benefits from the Gateway Project, and who gets screwed?
So, are you for it or against it? How will it affect Downtown Port Angeles and the surrounding neighborhoods? How about traffic and parking? Who benefits from the Gateway Project, and who gets screwed?
Labels: Gateway Center, Port Angeles, Port Angeles Downtown Association
posted by Tom Harper at 12:53 PM
12 Comments:
Gateway is gonna wreck things, and not just downtown. When shoppers can't park downtown, they're gonna park in the nearby neighborhoods. They'll park on 2nd, 3rd and 4th Streets and then just walk down the Laurel Street stairway or the Oak Street Zigzag. And then where are the people who live in that neighborhood gonna park??
Same with Valley Street and Marine Drive. Not good.
neighbor, as I understand things, many shop owners in downtown feel there is not enough parking in downtown. My experience is that there is plenty of parking. I have always found a spot. Sometimes I have to walk as much as a whole block. When I have discussions regarding parking, those that feel there is not enough parking are mostly not willing to walk. I seriously doubt that very many people are going to park at the top of the bluff and walk to downtown when the lot on Lincoln between First and Second has space available, or the lot on Front between Zaks and the record store has spaces available, or the street spaces on Front south of the Red Lion are usually empty.
Unfortunately, even now without the Gateway being built, most shoppers choose to shop outside of downtown. I bet your neighborhood is safe from the potential of downtown parkers.
...WELLLL - GOL-LY...It suprises & disappoints me that more folks have no comments about the DOWNTOWN "GATEWAY" PROJECT. Maybe it's OK that 125(+/-) parking spaces will be lost at (THAT) location...???
...If there's no central parking - is there then left a "BUSINESS-DOWNTOWN" ???
...Just curious..."MJ"...
In response to MJ and to WC. Let me start with the fact that I have never supported or been in favor of the Gateway project, especially in its current design configuration. I do not believe that if put to a vote the Gateway would survive any better than the aquatic center did. However, once complete the Gateway is designed to be parking neutral. No loss (or maybe a total of 5 spaces lost at most) of parking in that location is expected. During construction parking will be displaced to other areas (probably less convenient) around the downtown area.
My experience is that if you are willing to walk (say the distance across the WalMart paring lot) there is not a parking problem downtown. If you must see your destination from your parking space for it to be a reasonable distance to walk, you probably will never think there is enough parking downtown and continue to walk across the WalMart parking lot because, after all, you can see your destination.
....You are absolutely/ probably correct, Seymour - and thanx for the 'positive info' on the "Project".
You appear to be up on the "Plan". "Where" are the proposed parking areas scheduled for the construction period, and where are the (non lost /(-5 spaces) spaces going to be relocated after (IF/WHEN)the "Transportation /Pavillion Centre" is built?
The "bid" due date has been "rescheduled" again with updated PLAN changes, AGAIN, at last week's Transit meeting.
GEEEEEWZ, LOUISE - IT'S GOING INTO ITS (14TH?) YEAR NOW FOR A "SIMPLE RELOCATED DOWNTOWN BUS STOP"???... ;-( "MJ"...
MJ, I have learned to ask the right questions of the right people. That results in gaining information. I don't have a lot of details. I know a plan is being developed, but the details are not available.
When I go downtown and put on my "magic see a solution goggles" I see some areas where temporary parking might take place. Since Clallam transit will be the only beneficiary of the Gateway, I would urge them to step up and provide a shuttle to parking outside of the downtown. Under utilized lots exist at Safeway, Goodwill/Riteaide, and even at Riteaide east. A continuous shuttle to any of those lots makes sense to me. The area that used to be parking at the Oak Street property seems like a possible candidate for expanded (temporary) parking. The north side of Front Street between Peabody and Lincoln is marked with red curb. Why not park there? There may be other solutions for the disruption expected during construction.
The Gateway is supposed to be parking neutral. No net loss. I say maybe 5 spaces because I don't know exactly how many might be lost. It really depends on how you count and what you count. The 'official' line is zero.
I guess I'll add my two cents here.
I hear and see comments regarding the loss of parking spaces, which appears to actually be minor. Why quibble over five spaces? I've never had any trouble finding a place to park downtown. I listen to people gripe about having to park a block or two from their destination downtown, yet these same people will park a block or two away at WalMart, and then walk the equivalent of four blocks throughout large super stores.
What I am concerned about is the rumored lack of revenue from the parking lot which was acquired by the city. Maybe I have misunderstood. Could somebody set me straight on this? I'd appreciate it very much.
Thanks,
Taylor
...Hi,Taylor...I'll skip the discussion on the "how far(from)a parking spot vs (in)a parking lot"- & get right to the "revenue loss" question.
The City sold some parking property (spaces)to "C/C Transit" that was a revenue generater for the P.A.D.A.- which in turn reduces not only "central" parking spaces, but also revenue that (was) being directed to the Association from those spaces. (Kevin T. can confirm it best).
That is my understanding of "parking spaces & revenue". Paul L.
Hi, Paul. Thanks for the reply. I would still like to know how many spaces and what the projected lost revenue from these spaces will be. I understood that these spaces were generally free to the public, and the only revenue would have been from the $15 per month parking passes. Perhaps you would be able to ask Kevin for a dollar amount of the projected loss?
In addition, as to parking distance: Our society has become one where cars and parking reign supreme. If some people have special needs that require closer parking, then we really should be talking about allocating more parking spaces for "handicapped" parking. We have become a fat, unhealthy society, as evidenced by national and international reports on obesity and longevity rates.
We go to Seattle frequently. Finding a parking space definitely is a challenge there. But, you know what? People actually walk! Wow! What a concept! You know what else? Having to walk from a parking spot to a store location does not deter people from shopping, either.
Let us know what you find out about the estimated dollar amount of lost revenue to the PADA from parking.
Thanks much,
Taylor
...Back to ya', Taylor... ("TJ") -I haven't talked with "KT" yet - but I'll put it this way. (we'll skip - "about the spaces" for this discussion). OK?
...If the City GAVE some property to "C/C Transit" for say $2.2M - and the property was "Co-Shared - for Parking" between the PADA & the City - has there been a loss of some "revenue" for the PADA?
...Since I flunked algebra in Hi School,I'm not sure. What say you? Loss -or- No Loss??? (I will still try to get Kevin's take on it, tho'). Paul L. ("PL")...
...RESPONSE TO "TJ" (12-02)...Kevin T. is meeting with "THE CITY" next Monday on the "PARKING ISSUE" next Monday (prior to the PADA BOARD MTG.) at 6:15PM @ "The OFFICE".......(CLUE HERE)!!! (FOR "EVERYONE"). Paul L. ... ;-) ......>>>>
Hmmmmmmm, Anyone out there that really wants to stop the Gateway Project? What can we do as citizens of Port Angeles? It's quite apparent that the City could care less about the wishes of the voters.
Post a Comment
<< Home