Comments on: DDA Mulls Role: Events, Marketing?

By: Jeff Hayner

Jeff Hayner — Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:45:23 +0000

Mr. Hathaway, thanks for your concern about the removal of the surface parking. It seems strange to suggest that the DDA can force a developer to act. Of course, at this point, the DDA is working so far beyond reason it is anybody’s guess why they would would remove that parking prematurely. Look at the Bizzarro world the DDA lives in. Ms. Lowenstein responds to your question not with an answer, but with a Republican-style talking-point. “Parking as a tool” is a DDA talking point, which we have heard from Ms. Pollay on many occasions. Ms. Smith says a five year plan is “always in draft form” – so basically, they reserve the right to do whatever they want with our money, without having to seek approval or even commit to any project. Is that half-million dollars still in there to re-do two alleys, including Mr. Dahlmann’s Bell Tower alley? Just curious. Thanks to Mr. Powers for suggesting that the plan should become more concrete, so as to be useful to the rest of us. Hire a marketing staff member to promote the downtown? More unnecessary spending. Mr. Detter speaks as chair of an advisory committee that is supposed to have 12 members, but recent reports say as few as three people are present at their meetings, and his comments are accepted by the DDA as representative of all downtown citizens. The DDA goals, funded by our money, are out line with most people’s vision of Ann Arbor. Zero cars downtown? Less on-street parking? I never hear anyone ask for that when I ask people what they want from their city. And I spoke to over 2000 people last fall. Transit in the form of Light Rail/Connector – paid for no doubt by the upcoming AAATA millage – which was recommended by Mr. Guenzel, in his dual role as DDA Board member and AAATA advisor. Are these the values of the majority of Ann Arbor citizens, or the wishes of the well-connected few?

By: Will Hathaway

Will Hathaway — Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:48:52 +0000

Tom, Since you ask, I do frequent the downtown. As a life-long Ann Arborite, I can usually find a space without too much trouble. I don’t mind walking a few blocks so that makes it easier.

However, I am not thinking about this from a selfish perspective. I am empathizing with visitors to Ann Arbor who may be less knowledgeable, or perhaps less able to walk from a distant parking space. We also know that there are many people who are fearful about parking in a structure – whether above or below ground. The 141 surface spaces on the Y Lot would be ideal for those people. They might find them as they circle the block after giving up on the lines waiting to enter either of the surface lots on Ashley Street (where there is often a “full” sign on weekend nights).

I am honestly surprised that the DDA has apparently taken a position that it would rather not be bothered to run a 141 space surface parking lot as long as it can. I used to work for the Chamber of Commerce years ago and there was a saying that it was the sign of a healthy downtown to have a parking shortage. I think that Ann Arbor is thriving in many ways. I credit the DDA in part for this success. While I can see the good things the DDA has done, it isn’t immune from error. I think that this decision by the DDA is a mistake.

By: Jim Rees

Jim Rees — Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:38:32 +0000

Ann Arbor needs less surface parking, not more. Michigan is littered with cities that have plenty of parking, places like Detroit, Flint, Warren, Benton Harbor, and Battle Creek. I don’t want Ann Arbor to be like those places.

By: Tom Hollyer

Tom Hollyer — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:55:12 +0000

Will, do you park downtown very often? I do at all times of day and evening, weekday and weekend, and while my experience is admittedly a sample of one, I have never had a problem finding a space. I am sensing that you have had trouble. If so, when?

By: Will Hathaway

Will Hathaway — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:08:51 +0000

I guess it is good to know that the DDA has so much surplus parking capacity in that area that they can easily spare 141 spaces to make a point.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:13:13 +0000

Will, the balance board weighed at the committee meeting was the fact that on either side of the block where the 141 spaces are offered, there are two facilities with 994 (Fourth & William) and 738 (Library Lane) spaces, respectively. So the board’s conclusion was that people who needed parking spaces in that area would not be “penalized” but rather would still have their needs served. But to test how crucial that 141-space lot is to the system, I think it would be useful to look at the peak periods for those three facilities and check what the total availability of spaces is during peak. [Otherwise put, if you track the sum of available spaces in those three facilities, does that sum typically dip below 141 spaces and if so for how long and how frequently?] If that number were more than 141 spaces, I’d say the board would have some data to support that aspect of its rationale. I didn’t hear a data request like that made at the committee meeting.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:56:55 +0000

Re: [5] variance in the number of spaces

54 of the total spaces are being used right now by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority as construction staging for the Blake Transit Center.

By: Will Hathaway

Will Hathaway — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 20:46:02 +0000

Thanks Dave.

I am still puzzled by some of the numbers. For example, the variance in the number of parking spaces, but I can see that the net revenue is lower once operating costs are factored in. Even so, my understanding is that the DDA doesn’t look at the finances of its parking structures/lots in isolation. The DDA plans on a system-wide basis. So the logic for unnecessarily removing these 88 or 144 (or however many) spaces from circulation is still not apparent to me.

If the DDA feels the need to push a particular developer to move forward, there must be other means besides penalizing the people the DDA was created to help.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:46:31 +0000

Will, the botched link was my fault. Here's the correct link: [link] I've also fixed it in the article.

By: Will Hathaway

Will Hathaway — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:12:15 +0000

Joan, Thanks for your response. Your comment sent me to the DDA website where I found this statement:

“The mission of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA) is to undertake public improvements that have the greatest impact in strengthening the downtown area and attracting new private investments.”

That mission is a little bit more than promoting private development downtown. The implication is that the DDA feels the best way to strengthen the downtown area is to preemptively remove surface parking spaces a block from Main Street? This seems counter-intuitive.

Perhaps the DDA staff analysis of the Dahlmann proposal would help clarify the reasoning. Unfortunately the link in the article took me to a memo about taxi stands.

When I look at figures in a DDA parking fund inventory from a few years ago, the projected revenue for the Fifth and William lot in FY 2011/12 was over $270,000 for 88 parking spaces. Unless the annual revenue has dropped by over $100,000 since then, the net should be much higher than $12,000. It should be more like ten times that amount.

Regardless, I don’t think the decision should be based on how much revenue above expense the lot would return. That is not the only financial consideration with regard to those parking spaces because they represent ease of access for visitors to the downtown, the customers for downtown merchants.

If you asked a business owner on Main Street or anyone trying to park their car downtown, I bet they would say that the DDA would serve the needs of the public and accomplish its own mission by helping to keep those parking spaces available during the period prior to construction.

Maybe you can help me understand how this furthers the DDA’s mission.