The Parking Situation

Taking Parking Lots Seriously as Public Spaces - New York Times, January 6, 212

I know I've blogged about how parking lot layout is ridiculous. Given the fact current development puts so much importance to the parking (by providing an abundance); yet design is always the least of the concern. Retailers are focusing more and more attention on the "user experience". Well, user experience inside the store. Other than some minor tweaks to their outside appearance, the development community is not focused on street side appearance. At least in suburban Louisiana (development nation wide is trending away from this mindset).

In our auto-oriented state, everyone will be using a car. This means everyone will be parking in the parking lot and walking to the "front door". The parking lot itself is the first impression of a business. The car approaches the site, maneuvers the parking lot, then leaves the car to walk to the front door. This entire experience is usually horrific (to say the least). The bulky store, ugly sign, and poorly signed parking lot makes the experience unsafe to say the least. Then the motorist exits the car and transports themselves through the exact climate they drove through. Usually confusing, unsafe, and overall boring. Why do retailers make this a practice? I mean, once in the store huge amounts of details are incorporated into the design. From product placement, to advertising, to store layout, to design. There is more research done on your shopping experience then you will ever know. Yet, they don't really care about you until you enter the actual store. (Even though your experience is halfway over at that point.

That brings me to Towne Center in Baton Rouge. The shopping center was built in the middle of the older city, with a very strong client base. Mostly upscale stores, with lots of attention paid to attractiveness. Yet the parking lot is beyond ridiculous. Given the shopping center is set up to appear pedestrian friendly (i.e. lifestyle center), the pedestrian is give the last thought in all aspects. As a first time visitor I assumed it was pedestrian oriented. Yet it is impossible to store hope without crossing the parking lot. A parking lot that has few pedestrian paths (and absolutely no painted crosswalks). In fact, normal traffic flow is encouraged along the storefronts. By normal traffic flow, I mean the clueless driver trying to find a parking spot in a sea of a confusing layouts. The massive amount of parking makes it that much more confusing for the car - and encourages people to store hop with their car. All of this just makes me wonder why? A massive shopping center located in urban Baton Rouge should be extremely pedestrian oriented. Instead, all visitors are drivers who store hop in their car. It makes me extremely sad that a huge opportunity was wasted.

And yet, this mind set trickles down into the mindset of the older businesses in Mid City. Government Street, of course, is the prime example. Every single city in the United States have created amazing urban centers in their older neighborhoods. They are pedestrian oriented, while still allowing the car. This creates an amazing street life, and does nothing but escalates the sense of place. Yet Government Street businesses seem more concerned with parking then their actual business plan. Why do businesses sacrifice their appearance for the suburban parking influences? Gaining two or three parking spots in front of their store, while completely ruining the appearance of the area.

All of this is drenched in the suburban ideals (well, the twentieth century ideal). Mid-City drivers expect a parking spot in front of the store, even if it's easier to park on the street or adjacent to the store. In fact, it's more difficult to park in front of businesses along Government Street because of the foreseen "convenience"; which isn't anymore "convenient".

Because of this, Government Street still holds to the ideal of suburban parking lot standards, as stated in the article. Even though the density is well beyond an urban place.

By comparing the urban and suburban parking situation in Baton Rouge, two things need to be done. Mid City (and even downtown) need to move beyond the perception of parking convenience. It may seem like a petty issue, but the parking lot (as the article states) has become a huge public space in the last five years. While yes we do need to pay a lot more detail to the design because of the importance, we also need to evaluate how the need for each and every space that is provided. Government Street is extremely unattractive; and only because of the parking situation. By eliminating some of those space, redesigning the storefronts, and putting more thought in circulation; the street can put more focus on street life. Which would create a more desirable space that could be utilize day and night. Increasing the viability of the district.

And the suburbs will have their business from the car, the parking lot is crucial to their survival. If a stores parking lot is empty, it give a perceived appearance that no one is there. Creating a better designed parking lot will achieve a greater dynamic to the business climate. It just makes sense in today's market place.

Midwest Rail Lives! Work Underway in Four States
http://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/01/05/midwest-rail-lives-work-underway-in-four-states/

I've fallen off the blog since the holidays. Then this article forced me back because it coincided with my trip back home. I mean, a Chicago transit hub is growing fast. Which is - by the way - awesome.

When I go home, I like to fly into Chicago; especially right before Christmas. The one thing I hate living in the south is car dependency. Don't get me wrong, other than a semester in London, I've never been completely car-less. But at least in the Chicago area (and Great Lakes in general) there are options. I had a daily Amtrak train to Chicago that, be-it, never ran on time, and took forever; but for $20 I was downtown.

Thus my flight into Chicago commenced an entire week of car-free-ness. Ironically, I read an article on the plan announcing funds for the Detroit-Chicago and Davenport-Chicago rail line. Adding to the all-ready-under-construction, St. Louis line. Thus creating a pretty substantial hub in the midwest, especially with the combination of existing low-speed lines.

Yet... they aren't high speed. Maximum speeds at 110mph are no where near fast. It's literally 20th century 'stuff'. It's not horrible. When I was on the train from Milwaukee to Chicago, I clocked our pace at a steady  80mph. Which its still faster and more convenient than a plane of car.

What's even more awesome is that a Chicago hub will actually work. Florida gave up their funding; California is struggling with their funding; and the South received no funding... but I can't say I'm sad. Other than the east coast, Chicago is the only major cities where a good portion of the population doesn't have a car. Thus people need an option to leave the city... not just getting around the city.

Heck this already shows. Megabus entered the market (and was heavily used on my trip from Chicago to Indianapolis). Greyhound Express has also taken on an extensive hub in Chicago. The amount and frequency of these services identifies the need. A train line that would travel twice as fast would create even better access.

It makes me excited. Especially since the ease of access will trickle down into smaller markets (ah-hmm) Indianapolis, which grows better and better each time I visit. But I'll blog about that later.