I knew the City of Idaho Falls was considering a few new concepts regarding downtown’s Memorial Drive. I had gathered the info for a future post, yet felt it might be too early to start the conversation until things solidified. Now that the Post Register has the story on their front page, I guess now the topic is current news and game for discussion.
For years now, city planners have toyed around with the idea of giving the riverfront and greenbelt a much-needed face-lift. The desire is to unite the east and west sides of town, and have the river corridor serve as a gathering place.
Proponents of the project envision a small water park, a pedestrian bridge joining the two greenbelts over the falls, an amphitheater, and even a civic plaza that would serve as a gathering point and perhaps it could possibly serve as a new home for the Farmers’ Market. However, that would mean closing down and/or limiting traffic on Memorial Drive. This also means a reduction in parking along Memorial Drive for downtown.
The Riverside Project is the name city planners have dubbed this proposal. Keep in mind though that this proposal is just getting started and is still in its infancy. Currently, five sketches are under review for suggested changes to Memorial Drive. The primary focus of these sketches is how to address the issues of parking and traffic.
Downtown sample plan
Option 1: 52% reduction in parking along Memorial Drive (101 parking spaces); two 20’ travel lanes allowing two-way traffic; 35’ landscaped parkway between travel lanes (an alternative is to hard surface medians and create plaza space for use during special events); reduces pedestrian crossing to two 20’ travel lanes; parkway provides pedestrian refuge areas with clear views to oncoming traffic; retains existing curbs on the east and west edges of paving.
Option 2: 57% reduction in parking along Memorial Drive (91 parking spaces); two 12’ travel lanes allowing two-way traffic; reduces pedestrian crossing to two 24’; increases open space added to the greenbelt.
Option 3A: 78% reduction in parking along Memorial Drive (46 parking spaces); partially closed to traffic; extends greenbelt to the Bonneville County Courthouse and the city’s Parks and Recreation building; extension may be developed as green space or hard-surfaced plaza or portions of both plaza and green; fire issues – a 20’ promenade is recommended to replace the existing sidewalk to connect the north and south sections of Memorial Drive to meet fire access requirements; Legion Drive becomes a two-way street.
Option 3B: 79% reduction in parking along Memorial Drive (45 parking spaces); partially closed to traffic; extends greenbelt to the Bonneville County Courthouse and the city’s Parks and Recreation building; extension may be developed as green space or hard-surfaced plaza or portions of both plaza and green; fire issues – a 20’ promenade is recommended to replace the existing sidewalk to connect the north and south sections of Memorial Drive to meet fire access requirements; Legion Drive becomes a two-way street. (Different design concept from option 3A.)
Option 4: 75% reduction in parking along Memorial Drive (53 parking spaces); two 20’ travel lanes transitioning to two 12” travel lanes allowing two-way traffic; pedestrian crossings are reduced to 24’ or two 20’ crossings with a pedestrian refuge area; increases open space added to the greenbelt; Legion Drive becomes a two-way street.
Once city planners have formally reviewed all sketches and addressed planning concerns, the city will hold a public forum for citizen input and suggestions.
At the moment, it is unclear when the Riverside Project will take flight due to the current economic situation. However, two funding requests have been submitted to Congressman Mike Simpson’s office.
What do you think the city should do?
A. Close down Memorial Drive and redirect traffic, expanding the greenbelt and providing a civic plaza.
B. Reduce traffic flow, still increasing green space and allowing for plaza development.
C. Move the idea for a plaza elsewhere and keep Memorial Drive open as it is currently.
D. Other – please explain your alternative.
*don’t forget to particpate in the poll to your right.
Popularity: 11%
Related posts:
Gato got runned over by Marcus many moons ago. Be ye daft, 2486? 
Let's have a new poll, alright, Joe?
Loading ...
{ 50 comments… read them below or add one }
As for myself, and since I have seen copies of the actual design sketches, I am partial to design option 3B and would select answer A.
I agree with Joe
I think the whole idea sounds terrific, but some kind of arrangement does need to be made for the parking. I haven’t read the article in the paper yet, so I’m not sure whether they are addressing that or not. But that part does have me concerned.
I need to study all the options more before I make a choice there.
Good article Joe. You seem to put a lot of thought, research, and effort into your articles. Thanks.
Idaho Native (comments #3) – Thank you for your compliment.
I agree that some consideration has to be given to address the parking needs of downtown. In fact, I believe the need for parking will increase if and when the project is completed. It is my hope that such improvements will revive and bring life back to the downtown core.
I wouldn’t mind a modest parking garage being placed somewhere downtown. But where and at whose expense?
I think shutting off the entire downtown area to car traffic is a GREAT idea. Downtown is a wonderful place, and could have some great potential to be a meeting place for families and community events.
The best way to do this? Nix the cars. There is plenty of parking in the free parking lot along the railroad tracks, but nobody uses it. Downtown is crammed with vehicles, which adds to noise and creates a nasty smell. So I say, LET THEM WALK!
The only issue I can imagine here is deliveries to bars and restaurants downtown. No distributor is going to walk 200 yards with a few kegs of beer. Any ideas on how to fix this problem?
One of the things I loved the most about living in France was exploring the pedestrian-only districts. They’re filled with residential areas, stores and parks and make for a wonderful place to explore without having to dodge traffic. These stores get their deliveries either late at night or early in the morning, using smaller delivery vehicles than the rigs we’re used to seeing here. Getting disributors here to shift to the smaller delivery vehicles would be an interesting problem, but as this example shows, it’s been done in other areas. I’d really enjoy strolling (and shopping) more in downtown IF if it were a pedestrian-only district.
That being said, I like the idea of closing Memorial Drive. Losing the parking would be a problem for some — but a relief for most. I hate driving on Memorial because of the parking, especially that in the middle of the street, because the parked cars make it dofficult to see oncoming traffic if you’re turning onto or off of Memorial between E St. and Broadway. Then there are the cars that back out into traffic. Closing Memorial and extending the greenbelt gets my vote.
It all depends on what Frank Vandersloot wants for downtown, he’s in the process of aquiring downtown property for his MelaleucaFalls project, the Money Wise Mayor has the details.
And from what I understand, Vandersloot has plans to construct an enormous shade over Idaho Falls, blotting out the sun and making citizens have to use more electricity from his . . oh yeah. That’s Monty Burns. Nevermind . . .
No one uses the parking at the railroad tracks? Really? I park there every single day of the week, Jeremy…and there are many days when I return from lunch and there isn’t a single parking spot to spare. It’s packed!
When I first heard of this proposed project (years ago) I had several concerns about parking…primarily because I work downtown and parking is already scarce.
But I also could never understand the city’s claim that reducing parking and/or closing off Memorial Drive to traffic would “allow for greater access to the greenbelt.”
It’s as if they don’t realize that they would be eliminating over half the available parking space adjacent to the greenbelt—and with no explanation as to how they intend to make up for the lost parking.
I would love to see the Farmer’s Market relocated, mostly because the Public Library parking lot gets abused by market-goers. I would love to see a beautiful plaza along the greenbelt…water park…skatepark…landscaping…sculpture…walkways…the whole bit. But there is a critical parking issue that must be resolved before rolling out such a project.
My multiple-part question for those who support a vehicle ban in the downtown area:
1) What is your parking solution for the hundreds of people who work downtown?
2) As Jeremy alluded to, how do you satisfy the dozens of businesses that rely on delivery trucks for office supplies, food shipments, daily UPS and FedEx deliveries, etc.? (Keep in mind that the handful of banks downtown rely on armored car service.)
Bloop also suggested an alternative delivery schedule. I’m certain it’s the delivery service that dictates the schedule to the business owners—not the other way around. And smaller vehicles would be less obtrusive to sightseers, but it’s just not possible to deliver 6 pallets of paper to a print shop or 30 scooters to a scooter shop in a Prius.
3) What is your parking solution (for example) for the regularly-busy Colonial Theater (not to mention the incoming and outgoing stage sets)? Especially for those who might be wheelchair-bound and might need to park close by? And what to do about accessible parking in general?
Don’t get me wrong—I’m not against the idea wholesale, but I couldn’t support this ad hoc notion of a pedestrian-only downtown as it’s being presented here without thoughtful consideration of the impact on day-to-day goings on.
Jeremy (#5) – All five designs provide for drop-off and delivery options. The most restrictive options for traffic would be 3A and 3B. However, the exact wording from the concept summary for these options are as follows: “Provides drop-off area for vendors, special events, and visitors to Greenbelt. Drop-off area near recreation center; however, may create access problem for recreation center and visitors may have to park approximately one-half block or more from the entrance to center.”
Personally, I am fine with that. I figure if you are going to the rec center for exercise, then what’s the problem with adding “one-half block” to your routine?
Bloop (#6) – I agree with your comments concerning parking and traffic on Memorial Drive. Every time I need to turn onto Memorial from one of the side streets, I can’t seem to see the oncoming traffic very easily – specially when driving a car. If you’re lucky, you might be able to catch a glimpse of an opening by looking through the windows of the parked cars on the street. Then, if you’re crossing onto the other side of Memorial, you play the game all over with the opposite flow.
I would be glad to see some type of change to Memorial Drive. Most any plan is better than what they have now. Don’t forget though, this plan does not not call for a ban on parking or vehicles downtown. This plan only reduces the number of available spots for parking downtown. And yes, all five plans are more sensitive to pedestrians and would make downtown a little more pedestrian friendly.
Nonetheless, my vote is still design option 3B and poll answer A.
While I agree with getting rid of the parking in the MIDDLE of memorial (who thought of that anyways? It just seams like a traffic hazard to me). I don’t agree with getting rid of all traffic in downtown. Maybe a portion of downtown, or even the majority.
I think if we left a few streets downtown distributors would be less inconvienenced and less likely to cause a problem for businesses down there. I think if they made room for a single large parking garage that would help with people who are opposed to getting of of parking, while lessening the footprint of said parking. Just a thought.
Well, the entire downtown pedestrian district is pie in the sky. The issue here is whether closing a portion of Memorial Drive is a good idea or not — which I think it is. It’s always confused me why the park along the river downtown is so narrow, and why the buildings on Memorial Drive (the courthouse in particular) face away from the river. I know the courthouse faces “C” Street — but why? “C” Street isn’t particularly attractive a block from the courthouse.
Memorial used to have a grassy boulevard down the middle of the street, with a World War I memorial foundain in it. Then the powers that be decided downtown needed more parking, so the boulevard — and the monument — went away.
I used to work downtown and had to deal with parking. It’s the pits to get to work too late to find an all-day parking place and have to go out and move your car every 2 hours to avoid a ticket.
I knew people at the time who just considered parking tickets to be the cost of parking, but that seems extravagant.
I’d like to see what would come of a poll of people who work downtown regarding the parking situation. I worked downtown from ‘83 to 2001, and it was a constant issue with my co-workers and others that I frequently talked to that worked at other businesses downtown.
I’d love to see more nice areas around the river, I truly enjoy spending time there, but I think the parking issue needs to be addressed first, especially if we are contemplating things that are meant to bring more people to the area. The visitors will need to be able to park as well as the employees.
I wouldn’t mind walking a bit if there was a multi-level parking garage somewhere in the downtown area.
We’re in a recession. Worry about things that matter, like your jobs. Leave my main thoroughfare alone.
I agree, the jobs are definitely more important, but you know that if they decide they want to do something, they’ll do it, and if people want to have any input, they’d better speak up.
Just had a sample of one of the designs added to the post. Sorry if the details come out small. That was the best downloadable picture I could find online.
That’s why I’m speaking up! Sounds like a great idea to those of you that don’t live in the area I’m sure…but it’s a horrible plan.
I think our tax dollars could be better spent on making our city more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. That’s been a concern on this site for sometime. Why not take the money that would be spent on this project and put it towards something more feasible like bike lanes, pedestrian crosswalk lights, etc.
I thought our city just had a reduction in parks and recreation dept with numerous employees being laid off. Who’s going to handle the upkeep of such a large project once it’s done if we hardly have enough city workers to take care of the parks we already have.
While I like the project overall. I don’t think this is the right time to implement such a project with the current state of our economy.
I do think a nice ampitheatre on the water would be nice eventually.
I think it’s a great idea — once the parking issue is resolved. I too hate all of the parking along Memorial Drive, but those people have to have somewhere to park. Sometimes I feel like I am living “dangerously” when I try to cross Memorial — one of the reasons why I like those little orange flags the pedestrians use. All of the people who would use the area might not be able to walk very far. If the Farmer’s Market is moved over there, people going to it would need a car close by. When I go, I buy lots of goodies from there. How about where the Savings Center and it’s parking lot and where Melaluccea used to be; could that whole area be made into a parking lot?
And, let’s face it. If it’s difficult to get to (like quite a hike to get to), most people will not utilize it.
Marcus, Memorial Drive is also my main corridor to get to 17th or downtown; but I am sure I can find another way.
Has anyone heard any more about what’s going on with the vast dirt fields on the other side of the river? I realize that construction slows in the winter, but I’ve been watching that road from Pancheri to Sunnyside in hopes of seeing something coming along there, or even just a sign.
Whatever is going on there would be new, and not disrupting anything existing.
Any new news?
This seems to me to be a bunch of feel good hippie crap.
Hey whatever happened to the talk about building a bicycle hiway around town?
I was going to suggest the Saving Center area as a possible Parking Garage as I was reading and then read Idaho Native’s comment. I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought of it. These things don’t have to cost a lot of money. We don’t need a 1,000 space parking garage. They could even make it a three story one with office space on the top floor. That way everyone has the benefit of it. I was just downtown this past Tuesday, and it took me 10 mintues to find a spot. I then had to cut through an alley to get to where I was going. I think that the Riverside Project is a great idea. When you go to park on Memorial you can hardly ever find a spot unless it is after business hours, as most of the people that park there work downtown. Which is great. But if you do find a spot there, you take your life and whoever is with you, into the hands of those that are driving there. I’m surprised that nobody has lost their lives trying to cross that.
I’ve been to a lot of places that have these downtown pedestrian friendly areas. I love them. One of my favorites is in Winchester, VA. It’s gorgeous. It’s mainly this one long road that was turned into walking only area. All delieveries are made to the backs of these buildings, where most of them are made normally.
This doesn’t have to be totally drastic, but I think that if they do this it will bring our community together and revive downtown IF.
You know, I’ve been thinking about the possibility of having a civic plaza along Memorial Drive and the greenbelt, and the possibilities are really interesting. If we were to shut off the area around the city buildings all the way to the greenbelt and redo the streets into pedestrian-friendly walkways, it could really improve the local culture. They could move the farmer’s market to that location. They could have outdoor concerts and street performers, street vendors and family activities.
Perhaps they could install a fountain outside the city buidling and flower gardens. This would certainly brighten up the downtown area, which needs it badly. The are could be quite wonderful, but right now it looks like just another old, rundown small town urban cesspool.
Imagine the rise in property costs for apartments in the area, though! In a very short time, you would change the downtown culture to drugs and prostitution (yes these prolems still exist downtown) to wealthy, affluent urbanites and artists.
And Marcus, sometimes something feels good because it IS good.
My favorite pedestrian areas is Boston. Pretty much the whole city. Boston is incredible easy and safe to walk, as it is designed for people, not cars. The whole area around Fueneal Plaza is wonderful.
But then again, Boston is the greatest city in the world.
Those problems with always exist downtown because downtown is populated. Further populating the downtown area isn’t going to remove drug culture and questionable people, it’s going to increase it. Really, I don’t care much about it, because for the most part these people leave me and my family alone.
Closing off a highly trafficked artery in favor of recreation is stupid.
Downtown is populated by low-income individuals, which attracts the drug problem. I hate to sound cliche, but that’s the way it is.
Marcus, it’s not as if you’d be shutting off broadway or removing the local businesses downtown. You’d simply be shifting away from cars to feet. It’s good for people, it’s good for the air, and in the end, i think you’ll find it’s good for business. I recall a story about a town in the Midwest that had a bike-only downtown, and it was a huge hit. When business started booming, they started allowing cars, and it crashed.
If you build it, they will come. And they will walk there.
ps Isn’t the “artery” downtown Broadway? Nobody is talking about shutting that down.
I, for one, would love excuses to walk. I love to walk, but hate to exercise, so if I’m forced to walk, I’m ok with that.
May not make sense, but that’s just me
Memorial, sir, sees constant traffic. Closing it off would be a mistake.
We are not talking about closing off the entirety of downtown, but a street that was designed to effectively funnel traffic around the downtown area and to the residential areas beyond.
A parking garage would be neat-o, but even before concrete prices shot sky high, the estimate for a structure like that was around $1,000 per square foot, after you factor in design and labor costs. Yipes!
Yes, the initial cost can be high, but to pay to park will bring in revenue, plus, if you have leased office space, that will bring in even more money. And you don’t have to have an ugly parking garage. There are plenty of designs out there that actually improve the look of downtown areas.
I have an idea, let’s just mow down the whole downtown area and turn it into a park! We can have green garbage cans, and green trees with cute little green plaques where people can donate thousands of dollars to sponsor “nature.” We won’t need a parking garage because there won’t be anymore business and everyone can just walk or ride their bikes from their homes on the wonderful bicycle highway (remember, speed limit 10) of Green Idaho Falls. And in the 8 months of Idaho winter, when it’s 10 below for 4 months and 32 degrees the other 4 months, everyone can hook on their dogsleds and drag their toboggans to the wonderful cute little hill right in the center and then we can all just have a gay ol’ time. Honestly…this hole conversation is ridiculous. Make the road safer, rearrange parking, and add a couple crosswalks. But seriously, get rid of the parking altogether? Some people have to work for a living, and their jobs are in that area. A parking garage that improves the look of downtown? It’s a city! It’s supposed to have concrete and alleys, and garbage, and trucks, and smells. Have you ever been to New York? And don’t tell me Boston doesn’t have concrete parking garages. You idealist feel-good wackos worry me. I’m with Marcus on this one.
Thanks for the constructive response. You’ve totally won me over. Pave it all! Let’s build some more coal power plants! We can burn these tree-hugging hippies for warmth! We are so awesome!
Please don’t burn the hippies…that’s about the worst smell that I can imagine.
It all comes down to parking and so far I haven’t seen anyone give any kind of realistic solution to this issue. A parking garage is not realistic due to the expense and I don’t see any vacant area large enough in the downtown area to make more.
Keep in mind that only two of the five options redirect traffic on Memorial Drive, which (for arguments sake) closes Memorial off as a thoroughfare. Those two options instead redirect traffic to Legion Drive and B Street using a short section of N. Capital Avenue as the connection between. The remaining three options continue to use Memorial Drive as a primary artery for downtown traffic flow.
That being the case, the primary question should be parking. Again, keep in mind that none of the five proposals ban parking all together along Memorial Drive. However, they all propose a significant reduction in the number of parking spaces available. Roughly, there are about 200 or so parking spaces along Memorial. The greatest reduction any of the proposals call for is Option 3B, which plans for a 79% reduction (down to 45 parking spaces) in parking spaces along Memorial Drive only. The lowest reduction would be Option 1, which calls for a 52% reduction (down to 101 parking spaces).
I like my4sons proposal of having a parking garage built. Regardless of happens with the Riverside Project, downtown needs parking that is more adequate. Customers, residents, businesses, and the government can all agree to this.
However, the questions of where and at whose expense still remain. I have seen and heard this agreement elsewhere and many times over.
In my experience, the solution that has worked best is a joint private-public partnership (city, county, and business). The city takes the lead to set a bond in motion to pay for the cost of construction. Then the city recruits local business to pay for a portion of the costs (bond) through leasing a certain number of spaces within the garage for a certain amount of time. Next, plans for the garage would include a certain amount of commercial space on the ground and second floors for lease, an example of such stores could be small deli’s, coffee shops, office space, etc. Naming rights for the facility could be sold off and leased for a certain amount of time. The city or the local economic development board could solicit monetary gifts from wealthy area residents wishing to invest in downtown in hopes of reviving the area. Capital investment grants can be sought from the state and federal government (yes, even though we are in a downturn, there is still money out there for these types of projects – regardless if it is right or wrong in your book). Increased parking fines could be applied towards the construction costs. The bulk of the remaining debt would be paid through the various parking fees imposed.
The remaining question is where. If the price is right and the property is up for sale, the area at the corner of Memorial and Broadway would be perfect. If not, what about the parking areas between Yellowstone and the railroad tracks – is that not already owned by the city?
Parking fees when parking is now free? I doubt if that is going to go over well with anyone. I don’t really see that businesses whether new or old would work above the parking garage. The existing shops are struggling now to stay open. It seems everywhere I go I see empty buildings. Are we sure we wouldn’t just be creating more?
I see a lot of empty building space at Taylor’s Crossing and a new office building built out on the new Pancheri(?) (think that is the name) Road that was built a couple of years ago and no one has moved into it yet. There are empty buildings downtown. I don’t think we need another building.
I don’t think this “face lift proposal” or even a parking garage would be feasible in our current economy. However, once the economy picks up and it will, we will need a better parking solution downtown. Especially if one of the above plans to beautify the riverfront is eventually put into action. Once that happens, I see more cafe’s and speciality stores opening up downtown and a parking garage would be a good solution. I’m still amazed that we don’t have parking meters downtown. There aren’t too many cities left in this country that don’t require you to pay for parking in their downtown areas. People may not like the idea because they’ve gone so long without paying for parking, but I think it’s necessary and would bring in much needed revenue to our city.
I would hate to see parking meters put in the downtown area. I think it would drive more people away when they can go to the many malls that we have and park for free. We need to come up with innovative ideas as to why people should support the downtown area and IMO, charging them to park would just drive them away.
Didn’t we used to have parking meters? Maybe I remember them from a movie when I was a kid or something, but I could have sworn that I remember us having them years ago.
How about charging for parking in lots, even if they are temporary lots, to raise money for a garage, and not charging for parking on the street. People who get sick of fighting for parking spaces will pay a small fee to park in the lots and people who choose to can still fight for the on-street parking. Isn’t that the way they do it in big cities?
Personally, I’d like to see the multi-level parking garage, even if I have to pay to use it. Businesses would probably validate parking. I do see where that might not be financially feasible right now tho.
Here’s a quote from Mayor Jared Fuhriman in yesterday’s paper – “There’s starting to be a lot of energy focused in downtown, We’re planning now, so when we’re back on our feet we’ll be ready to go.”
It is important to keep in mind that this project is not going to be completed tomorrow or even this year. As I said before, the project is just in the initial stages, its infancy. There is still a lot of planning to do, and that is why it is quite healthy to have the discussion now as to what our concerns are.
The primary concern seems to be parking, then traffic. But all that is void if we can’t revive the downtown core, which is part of the hope behind the Riverside Project.
The parking fees that I propose are primarily for the “future parking garage.”
I know parking fees are not always popular, however the project would need to be funded and it would help address the issue of parking. Plus, this would be a use fee application and not a general tax/burden.
Perhaps the first 30 minutes to an hour could be free. A fee could then be applied on an hourly basis past the initial free period. Many cities do this across the nation.
I would suppose that some downtown merchants would even be willing to comp their customers’ parking stubs for the garage.
These examples would allow for individuals to still frequent downtown and also find a parking spot in a more timely and efficient manner.
Yes, those who work downtown or have business there would have to pay an hourly fee after passing the initial free period, assuming they or their company did not lease any spots in the garage.
My experience shows the working groups for the downtown business take up most of the parking spaces, leaving the customers or patrons looking for that precious spot that is so hard to find.
Yes, Idaho Falls did have parking meters at least until about the time the malls came to town. I have an idea. Let’s turn that new Marriott into a parking garage.
In a way, I agree with Realist. I’m not into bicycle highways, or a “green Idaho Falls” either. This is Eastern Idaho’s only full fledged city without a transient college base supporting it. We’ve traditionally been known as the hub for commerce in all directions, for literally hundreds of miles in some cases.
The cause of most of the stagnation in our downtown area is the city planning department’s continued promotion of growth toward the east, and now the south east edge of the city.
Memorial drive doesn’t need a reduction in parking. If you walkers have trouble crossing the street after you’ve found a parking space, by all means, walk to the traffic light at Broadway or take a stroll in the other direction to D Street and use the traffic controls there.
A pedestrian bridge over the falls would be awesome! A parking structure would be helpful. More city involvement in promoting the area for commercial and recreational use is what we need. Offer a reason for people to stop by downtown businesses on their way to shopping areas that can be developed on the west side of town. Wal Mart was a good start, but Taylor Crossing is nothing but a glorified office complex. We need the city to promote the West side as a viable location for commercial development.
You want to take away parking spaces? Pick two parallel streets ending on Memorial, make them pedestrian only. Run that function to Park St and make Parks St ped. only between them. The walkers can walk and shop till they drop because the shops on the pedestrian walkway will become hot properties in the district.
With a little thought our downtown area can become productive. Removing parking spaces from memorial isn’t going accomplish anything but make access to the area more difficult. It doesn’t take much thought to make something less productive, and we do a lot of that in this town.
I am surprised that no one has even mentioned that there is another option which will solve most of the problems. How about taking Memorial Drive under ground along with parking and place the park over the top. No problem with foot traffic, no problem with motor traffic, plenty of parking can be arranged along the sides of the traffic lanes. Minimal excavation could be used by elevating the area into a plateau. By doing this the area floor underground should be above sub level. I realize lava can be a problem in that area which will raise the cost of excavation but stabilize the foundation if it can be excavated. What are we talking about 2 to 3 blocks? Just a thought.
I read an article in the PR this morning regarding the Memorial Drive proposition. They said that there is concern over the parking spaces that would be lost because Memorial is where the city workers and people needing to use the courthouse, be in court, or have jury duty are parking.
Are they totally unaware of the amount of other workers, unrelated to the city buildings, that park in that area? This makes me believe that they are underestimating the parking problem overall.
Take away their personal parking space and make them look for one every day for a couple of weeks and maybe they will understand.
Agreed. I work downtown. Luckily I have a reserved parking spot…but it’s two blocks away from my office. If I do park in front of or along side my building, I have to go out and move my car every two hours. Frequently it is difficult to even find a spot at all. If the spaces along Memorial were to disappear, my clients and I would be fighting employees of Channel Blend, the courthouse, and the many offices for parking on Park Ave. and Capital. That’s saying nothing of the shoppers, green-belters and diners. Those Memorial spots need to stay.