This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 12, 2009 12:58 PM. The previous post in this blog was It's the water. The next post in this blog is Have a great weekend. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Friday, June 12, 2009

Not up to code

A reader writes:

Believe it or not, the Lents stadium would not be required by the zoning code to have any parking at all. Because it is on a site "well served by transit" there is no minimum parking requirement. See city code 33.266.110(B)(3).

But for the sake of argument, if it were not exempt, how many spaces would be required for the use? The minimum parking standard for a "major event entertainment" use is one space for every eight seats. (City code 33.266, Table 266-2) All the spaces would need to be provided on-site; they can't count street spaces.

6500 seat stadium = 812 parking spaces
9000 seat stadium = 1125 parking spaces

Somehow, I don't think 360 spaces is going to cut it.

As we noted months ago, it's the parking, stupid.

Comments (27)

What is the definition of "well served by transit"?

Maybe this is all a diversion to draw attention away from the spiraling cost of the "SAP" system the city is installing.
WWeek says is 20mil over budget. I wonder what the total is? It may make the TRAM and Water Bureau billing look very small before it is done.

But you have omitted any consideration of bicycle parking, which can be substituted for motor vehicle parking according to an equation employed by PDOT. In lieu of hundreds of motor vehicle parking spaces, thousands of bicycle spaces could be demarcated.

PDOT has not infrequently made such substitutions, resulting in bicycle parking that is not functional except to satisfy parking requirements.

How many spaces does PGE Park have for parking again? So much for that argument.


PGE Park under so many of its prior labels long predates the current zoning code and is "grandfathered", so the parking non conformance is not an issue.

And both MAX and busses do run along the adjacent street on the esat side of PGE.

It's not a legal issue at Lents Park either, according to the reader Bog cites. What's being discussed is whether there would functionally be enough parking. PGE has no parking, and things work out pretty well. Lents also has MAX and bus availability--not to mention much more street parking than PGE. So it's hard to see why parking would be a bar to building at Lents.

This is why the new condos and Leed luxury apartments don't need to provide adequate parking for their tenants. They are adjacent to a bus line or MAX and "well served by transit."

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink; you can lead citizens to the MAX but you can't make them ride it.

A majority of these tenants (and baseball fans) are not going to use mass transit for most (or indeed any) of their trips. And even if they do, they mostly likely own cars and need somewhere to park them while they are riding the bus or MAX or tootling around on the streetcar.

This is pure gravy to the owners of condos and luxury apartments with inadequate parking (they can charge tenants for the privilege of having one of the parking spots as well as levy condo fees), and hell for the neighbors who see their curbside parking disappear under the onslaught of tenants/sports fans who drive and take all curbside parking.

I'm opposed to the whole Lents idea, but I'm not sure I agree with the no-one-rides-mass-transit-to- spectator-sports argument. MAX in the Rose Quarter is very busy for Blazer games. Some one ought to have numbers on the car/transit mix and numbers for Blazer games. Who knows about Beavers games.... hardly anyone goes to them...

The figure cited for mass transit use at PGE Park was a whopping 89%.

But but but..... One will be able to get all you can eat food with a 27 buck ticket for Timbers and Beavers games... This has a certain former sports columnist giddy.....

How many spaces does PGE Park have for parking again? So much for that argument.

PGE park is in an established, central city, commercial zoned area of the city. Lents is in an established, single family residential area on the edge of the city. So much for that argument.

"The figure cited for mass transit use at PGE Park was a whopping 89%."

How in the world did anyone come up with this figure? How would they begin to get an accurate percentage count?

PGE has no parking, and things work out pretty well.

Yeah, three hundred people who think it's worth the hassle show up.

I live on the east side, about a mile from a Max stop - I drive there, and go to Winterhawks games and the occasional game at PGE park. It's quick, efficient, and I don't have to change trains. I also get off the Max within a block of either venue.

Going eastbound (from NE 60th) I would have a one-in-three chance of catching the new green line - otherwise would have to change trains to get to Lents. I also think the stop is several blocks from Lents Park, and that's not exactly a fun neighborhood to walk through. And, with Tri-met cutting Max service, I look forward to waiting 45 minutes for a train. Never mind, I'll just listen to a Mariners game on the radio.

Lentsok, I'd like to read where you got the 89% mass transit usage for PGE Park. I've never have seen that number, please cite.

Also, many property owners have tried to provide off-street parking for their developments. But if located on or somewhat close to mass transit, PDOT and Office of Sustainable Development have not allowed parking. The City should make the same requirement for the Lents AAA BallPark Plans-no parking is allowed, period. Apply the same requirements for all. Let's be fair and equitable, Then watch Paulson leave town with his club.

If you can't leave or catch a bus, you'll be happy to stay and stimulate the Lent's economy. The horn honking is progress people! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RoJALo3rPU

Look, you can't compare transit usage at a stadium in the urban core to a stadium in relatively far-flung outer SE. Completely a case of apples and oranges. For one thing, you can take the Max to PGE Park, and then take the max or the bus/streetcar (not to mention walking) to any number of OTHER locales within 5 minutes. Malls, shops, NW 23rd, the Pearl, downtown itself, Washington Park, the Zoo, etc. etc. etc. Tell me what else is 5 minutes away from Lents by bus or Max? Nada, my friend, nada.

To answer Dave J:

The internationally famous McDonald's Museum on Powell

Is there a blog or a forum or open space or whatever where exactly the opposite views (ie pro "the idea") are being aired ?

Seems to me like LLP, Creepy, Randy and a few lurkers are lone voices in this project for whatever reason, but I can't believe the intelligentsia in the city are all so wholly against the idea ?

89% of PGE Park baseball attendance is practically a whole busload.

"I can't believe the intelligentsia in the city are all so wholly against the idea?"

nobody i talked to tonight liked the idea, not that we're intelligentsia or whatever

i voted for sam and randy, too, but i think they've lost their marbles

it would be great if they came around

i might forgive them if they stop this madness

"i might forgive them if they stop this madness"

They always do, for a brief period, right before they get re-elected.

Then the madness returns.

The figure cited for mass transit use at PGE Park was a whopping 89%.

Right. They ride it from the Galleria parking garage.

Tell me what else is 5 minutes away from Lents by bus or Max?

A mugging?

Regarding the confusion over how such a number could be pulled, there are surveys done at PGE sporting events from time to time.

The PGE Park website notes there is limited parking and encourages Beavers fans to take trimet.

I'm not saying the 89% number is accurate, just saying it may not be the huge whopper some make it out to be.

And it's a bit confusing that this blog spent so much time and effort documenting the poor attendance (mostly in the 100s it seemed) of the Beavers, and now is claiming that the small parking lot will be the project's doom.

Peak attendance and average attendance are two different things, Gene. They need to have enough parking for peak nights to avoid trashing the neighborhood, and enough average attendance to pay off the bonds. There is no chance they will have either.

Also, Gene, the point is that we have every reason to suspect that the lowball figures for parking are nothing but the camel's nose under the tent, and that once the city is irrevocably committed (trees cut, ...) then the Barefoot Lord will suddenly pull another study out of his ear that shows that he's got to have the full 1500 spaces or else he won't be able to make it work. Having already invested many millions polishing his Nibs' knob, the CoP losers will then announce the new "mixed use" five-level parking ramp with some money-losing retain and a "green roof" or some such nonsense, to be built by their hand-picked buddies.

We're at the flim-flam stage where the boosters will say absolutely anything to get the rube on the hook. The only hope for sanity is to force them to use the same numbers in every forum, rather than their preferred tactic of telling each audience what it wants to hear.

Clicky Web Analytics