University Ave. parking revisited with eye toward one-lane traffic

Traffic on University down 25-55% from what was expected post construction

By JANE MCCLURE

Returning a total of 451 on-street parking spaces to Univerity Ave. during evening hours could help businesses that lost parking during Green Line light rail construction. Or, would it simply create more free “park and ride” opportunities for those riding light rail to other destinations? As a “Parking Possibilities” study neared a Dec. 4 (after the Monitor deadline) St. Paul Planning Commission vote for its release and public comment period, the proposal, and the study, it’s based on, faces questions.

The St. Paul Planning Commission Transportation Committee voted Nov. 16 to release the study, which recommends bringing back on-street parking in four major commercial and mixed use areas between 6pm and 2am. Parking would be free and wouldn’t have time limits posted. Existing parking meters, which are already in several locations in St. Paul and Minneapolis, would remain in place.

The full Planning Commission will host a public hearing on the proposal Fri., Jan. 8, with a City Council public hearing on Wed., Feb. 17.

The Ramsey County Board will also weigh in as University Ave. is a county road. Minneapolis City Council and Hennepin County Board would also vote on the proposal as it impacts Minneapolis.

The cost of restoring on-street parking (to install signage) is estimated at $79,375. The proposal that would be implemented next year if it wins City Council and Ramsey County Board approvals, would restore on-street parking daily in four areas: Minneapolis’s Washington Ave. to St. Paul Hampden Ave., Prior Ave. to Aldine St., Syndicate St. to Grotto Ave., and Mackubin St. to Rice St. Those areas were chosen from a larger study from Park St. in St. Paul to 23rd Ave. in Minneapolis. Reinstating on-street parking would reduce those areas to one lane in each direction.

The Union Park District Council (UPDC) Land Use Committee also discussed the study Nov. 16. The committee will review the study before the Planning Commission public hearing and take a position then. Midway Chamber of Commerce and other district councils along the Green Line area are also reviewing the study but haven’t taken positions yet.

Nancy Homans, senior policy advisor to Mayor Chris Coleman, said that when the light rail was built, about 975 spaces or 85 percent of on-street parking along the route went away. That sparked outrage among business owners as well as nearby residents who feared to have commercial parking pushed into their neighborhoods.

The loss of parking was a flash point in the community before and during light rail construction. Business owners were infuriated that University Ave. only retained about 175 on-street parking spots. It didn’t help that when the light rail route was chosen, some elected officials promised that little or no parking would be lost.

Homans said the city responded by helping businesses fund off-street parking improvements. “But working with Metropolitan Council, we also agreed that once light rail was up and running and traffic patterns settled, we would look at returning parking to University Ave. if we could.” Light rail began operations in summer 2014.

In 2014 Metropolitan Council/Metro Transit, St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Hennepin and Ramsey County officials and staff formed technical and policy advisory committees to look at whether parking could be restored to parts of University Ave. The committees included public works, fire and police officials, as well as planning and economic development staff from both cities. The study was completed in May 2015 and includes surveys, traffic counts and scrutiny of University Ave. in its current configuration.

The study faced more questions at UPDC than at the Planning Commission committee, although both groups raised the issue of the planned soccer stadium at Snelling and St. Anthony avenues. UPDC Land Use Committee Chairperson Katie Jarvi questioned reducing University to one lane when people are coming for soccer games and other stadium events. “I really don’t want University down to one lane with those events going on,” she said.

Planning Commissioner Chris Ochs said the city should look at converting largely underutilized spaces for parking, until more redevelopment occurs. He said the stadium developers need to be counted on to provide their own parking.

Rob Vanasek, who lives in the Iris Park neighborhood by the Green Line, said his neighbors are more concerned about Green Line commuter park and ride and area employees parking in the neighborhood. Iris Park is discussing residential permit parking. “People would have less of a problem with allowing parking on University during the evening,” he said.

Another concern raised is whether restoring parking to University would force more traffic onto east-west neighborhood streets.

“Traffic has not returned to the University Ave. corridor in the volume it was pre-light rail construction,” said Chris Ferguson. He is a Stadium Village business owner, Midway Chamber Board member and engineer who has been involved in the parking studies.

When light rail came in, and parking was lost, some predicted many businesses would close. Others said many more businesses would flock in. Neither trend has borne out all along University, although Ferguson said he has seen more business closings in Stadium Village.

“It’s difficult to run a business without on-street parking,” he said. Ferguson has heard from businesses that want on-street parking back. Evening parking would help, especially for restaurants.

St. Paul City Engineer John Maczko said, in some cases, businesses have had trouble getting loans because they have lost on-street parking. That is seen as affecting business viability. In other cases, new mixed-use developments have not been able to lure retail tenants.

In fall 2014 64 businesses and 1,196 residents completed studies on the parking issue.

Seventy percent of business and 71 percent of residential respondents said they would prefer University Ave. with two travel lanes and limited on-street parking. More than 70 percent of survey respondents said they preferred University Ave. to remain two lanes in each direction, though many respondents also expressed interest in seeing on-street parking put back in place at some times.

About 30 percent of business respondents said the loss of on-street parking had negatively affected their businesses. About half of business respondents said increased or slower travel times on University would also hurt their businesses.

Homans said the main concern about restoring parking during the day was that it would reduce University to one lane in each direction and cause traffic congestion. Fire and police officials opposed that move for safety reasons.

“Restoring parking all day would have too much of a negative impact,” said Ferguson. Parking also couldn’t be restored in areas with light rail station platforms, pedestrian crossings and the two St. Paul fire stations along the Green Line.

University’s traffic volumes drop dramatically around 6 to 6:30pm, which is why the committees recommend restoring parking only in the evening and early morning hours. It’s not clear where all of that traffic went, although the study notes that motorists who found alternative routes may have stuck to those routes after light rail construction wrapped up.

The study found that post-light rail construction traffic volumes on University Ave. and cross streets were 25 to 55 percent less than expected. Traffic volumes on University have dropped by as much as 30 to 85 percent, depending on the area and the time of day. Volumes haven’t returned to pre-construction 2008 and 2009 levels.

Transportation Committee member and St. Paul Smart Trips Executive Director Jessica Treat questioned how restoring parking would impact long-term goals of providing an east-west bicycle line between Aldine St. and Transfer Rd. Some cyclists want to see more done on University to accommodate bikes, but it’s not clear how restoring parking would affect that goal.

Ferguson said the bike issues have to be looked at, as do any potential impacts on truck traffic. Other issues raised by the Transportation Committee and UPDC Committee members include pedestrian safety and sight lines with more parking along the street, and whether businesses would want to see time limits. Maczko said there’s concern that posting different time limits would cause confusion.

The parking studies generated an 18-page report, as well as 88 pages of analysis of the fall 2014 survey. The studies can be seen at parkingpossibilitiesmsp.com.