Double the number of corrals within how many years? This is like "Obvious Typo 101".

Unless you're buying a bed. Or anything bigger than your head.
And remind me again how the store merchandise is getting into the store?

Just wait till they start charging you to park your bike. After all, they will be losing money by taking out the car parking spaces, so someone will have to take up the slack.

Define "free." (See book by Donald Shoup)

Bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes bikes.

Bored reading all that? That's how I feel everyday hearing about f**king bikes in Portland.

You like your bike. Great. Now STFU about it. You supposed adults are more excited about bikes than me when I got my first Huffy. It's just a f**king bike. Ride it and shut up.

Well, here's one Portland native who won't be going anywhere *near* this area once this gets put in place. I know, I didn't spend "enough". Too bad.

It's bad enough finding a parking near the south blocks, now that the green line has consumed everything from 4th to 8th south of market.

Portland is getting less and less friendly for many of us every year.

Oh, and getting rid of fareless square, so I can't park where there *is* parking, then "commute" to where I want to go? Even smarter. Great.

Hope you enjoy your anti-business attitudes. It's working.

ujfoyt: they're not losing money on parking spaces when they replace free parking with bike corrals, like they have in all the places I can think of that bike corrals have been installed (admittedly, I don't often cross the bridge from the east side).

I own a business in south east portland, and have just requested a bike corral in front of my place because the two privately installed racks that are currently on my sidewalk can't accommodate everyone that rides to my area - which frequently results in bikes locked to trees, street signs, and chain link fence in the area.

A good number of my customers ride their bikes to my non-bike oriented business. I ride 7.2 miles round trip on my bike every day I work (with the exception of once or twice a month trips with too much inventory to carry reasonably in a trip or two on my bike). Portland likes to bike; bike corrals make good sense.

converting on street parking to bike parking is nice and high profile and all, but lets see portland start approving high density development and large grocery store development without any parking requirements. When they do that we will know they are serious. If the city really wants to increase density they should stop with trying to install single family homes on 25 foot wide lots and start allowing really innovative things like if a grocery store wants to convert their parking lot into an apartment complex.

Death to parking requirements that force sprawl!

"If the city really wants to increase density they should stop with trying to install single family homes on 25 foot wide lots and start allowing really innovative things like if a grocery store wants to convert their parking lot into an apartment complex."

Sounds like the East Coast...weird.

Econoline - sounds like San Francisco or NYC, which we're not.

Death to the Pearl!

How am I going to rent 18" subs at Showcase?

@D: How many times in your life have you bought a bed? I've bought 2 in my life. Once was in college and I convinced my friends to help me carry it 3 blocks for a 6 pack of beer, and once was after college and they delivered it for $20. And since the new one still has 14 years left on the 20 year warranty, I'm not intending on buying a new one any time soon anyways.

But tell you what. If they replace all the mattress delivery van spots with bicycle parking in this city, I'll be right there with you complaining, okay? In the mean time, you should take your straw man and go home.

@ econoline: "but lets see portland start approving high density development and large grocery store development without any parking requirements."

You realize the city began eliminating parking minimums throughout the central city in 1995, and as of 2001, there are no minimums at all, right? (This applies Downtown, Pearl District, South Waterfront, Lloyd District, Central Eastside, Goose Hollow)

The reason why the grocery stores that have opened recently have so much parking is because the lender requires it, not the city.

The City makes money off of the parking meters to help with the budget. If, and/or when, a lot of this revenue goes away, who is going to take up the slack? I can see a time when bike riders will have to have a county or city license to park downtown. I know, you might think I'm all wet, but just wait and see.

Or, this has just occured to me, they will raise the taxes on downtown businesses to help make up the difference.

A metered parking space generates between 3 and 5 thousand dollars per year.

@ujfoyt/GLV
How many times must it be repeated before you understand?
The parking spots converted to bike corrals were free parking spots. That means you did not have to pay money to park your car in them. That means there is no lost revenue. That means there is no tax needed to "make up the difference". That means $3,000 - $5,000 per year still rolling into city coffers from all the metered parking spots in the city that are not the ones being discussed in this post.

rico, are you kidding? All of the corrals downtown, I'm thinking Stumptown on 3rd, in front of South Park, in front of Powells, and quite a few others, all had meters. I said nothing about a tax, but that is real money the city is giving up, rightly or wrongly.

Rico: you are wrong. All of the corrals downtown (Stumptown on 3rd, in front of South Park, in front of Powell's, several others) were previously metered spots. That's real money the city is giving up, rightly or wrongly.

(sorry if this gets double-posted)

@rico: I think some of the downtown ones were actually pay spots. That said, the money collected from a pay spot doesn't actually pay for the rent on the land that it occupies*, so it is kind of irrelevant. But even if it did, what is better for the city: one car, with 1.5 people in it on average paying for a parking space, or 18 bikes with 1 person on them parking for free? Keep in mind that most of the businesses downtown with serious bike parking nearby sell food or coffee or something like that, not mattresses, (no matter how much D wants you to believe otherwise.) And if you look at the lost revenue from the parking money and the increase from more revenue, (and thus more taxes,) from more successful businesses, it is still a no brainer for the city...

*Take the assessed value of the land a building downtown occupies, divide by square footage, and then multiply by the square footage of a parking spot. Then assume a 6% interest rate, and even the bad parking spots are worth more than $10k/year: Which is why the garages are almost always more expensive than the one street spaces, they have to make a profit.

We're talking about on-street spaces here, matthew. No rent or taxes apply, as they are located in the public right of way. The only money foregone is from (not) plugging the meters.

GLV: Uhmm, what exactly do you consider meter revenue? Land has value, and just because it is owned by the government and called something special doesn't change that. Since the land being used to park cars can't be used by other people, (it is an exclusive use,) then those people can easily be charged rent for it, be it by the year (lease) or by the hour, (a parking meter,) or whatever. But meter fees = rent, there is no getting around that. Add up the rent charged over the course of a year, and you should be able to pay the interest on the value of the land. And since the value of one square foot of land is very similar to the value of the one next to it, while we don't know the exact appraised value of the land that the asphalt occupies, we can certainly guess based on the surrounding land...

As for taxes, businesses pay them based off of revenue or profit or size or whatever, all of which tend to relate to number of customers. More customers = more tax revenue for the government. Since those customers have to get to the businesses somehow, then it stands to reason that if more of them can get there, (because more of them fit into a parking area,) that those taxes will go up. Those taxes more than make up for the revenue lost from the parking meters.

"what exactly do you consider meter revenue? "

I consider it meter revenue, because it IS a unique category of revenue. You can call it a use tax, or short term rent, but I think that's a case of 6 of one, half dozen of another.

"Add up the rent charged over the course of a year, and you should be able to pay the interest on the value of the land. And since the value of one square foot of land is very similar to the value of the one next to it,"

Not always true. Comparing the value of land devoted to streets/parking with the value of adjacent, buildable land is meaningless, because you can't use the street for anything other than transportation. This restriction has a dramatic impact on the value of the land. It's just like zoning: why do you think industrial zoning in the central eastside is so coveted? Because if it went away, the businesses there would quickly be priced out for more lucrative development opportunities.

The same argument applies to parks: I could make a ton of money building condos in the middle of Laurelhurst Park, a lot more than the city makes off of that land now, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

Re: taxes, maybe the increase in business receipts taxes will make up for the loss of parking meter revenue, but if anyone has done that analysis, I haven't seen it. If there was a sales tax, you'd really be onto something.

For the record, I support the bike corrals, and I would like to see more of them. But in a meter district there's a cost beyond their installation. That was my original point.

"Comparing the value of land devoted to streets/parking with the value of adjacent, buildable land is meaningless, because you can't use the street for anything other than transportation."

It isn't being used for transportation now. It is used for storing people's personal property. Yes, it may be called "public right of way" but the 6-7 feet closest to the curb in most places in the city is actually "short term storage." Be it bikes or cars, it isn't for moving them, but for storing them. In any case, people currently take buildable land, (i.e. land not zoned "right of way") and put short term storage on it, and then charge rent to the people that want to leave their personal property on it, and they do it for a profit. In fact, downtown, it happens every other block, be it underground or above ground or on the surface. Therefor that short term storage can and should be compared to the value of the short term storage near the curb that the city owns, since they are the same thing, just one of them happens on land owned by the government, and the other happens on private land.

As for making money by building condos in the middle of Laurelhurst Park, you are assuming that the value of people's homes near the park wouldn't fall as a result, and that the tax revenue wouldn't fall either. It would be an interesting economic analysis, but it is an entirely different topic, because, with a few exceptions, (Disneyland,) people don't build parks on otherwise buildable land, where as people do build parking spaces all the time.

"In any case, people currently take buildable land, (i.e. land not zoned "right of way") and put short term storage on it, and then charge rent to the people that want to leave their personal property on it, and they do it for a profit."

Ok, so the city probably subsidizes on street parking, insofar as they don't have a profit margin and can charge less than what a nearby, market based garage would charge. But the same goes for city-owned Smart Park garages, which, ironically, are subsidized with meter revenues.

I'm not even sure what we are debating anymore.

SPK:

Showcase has its own off street parking.
For a nominal fee, Showcase will even rent you two reasonably well-trained chimps to help wheel your 18"s across the street.