In-lieu parking fee beneficial to developers, not downtown
In a letter to the editor of the Daily Democrat (click title to access), downtowner John Perry pokes another hole in the new ordinance. Here's the letter:
On April 2, the City Council approved a new "in lieu" parking fee ordinance for the benefit of developers. I spoke before the council in opposition of the proposed new ordinance. The new ordinance was of particular interest to me because the proposed City Center Lofts project is adjacent to my existing business and this project will benefit greatly from the new "in lieu parking fee" ordinance.
The city planning staff states that developers must meet at least one of a list of findings to be able to pay in lieu fees rather than construct new parking. According to planning staff, the findings include projects located where the creation of new parking is unfeasable due to physical constraints at the location or unnecessary due to proposed use. As a business person, who is located in the downtown area, these findings make sense.
The last finding that a developer may need to meet, is that parking is unnecessary because existing parking in the area is sufficient, would be detrimental to the pedestrian nature of the area or would be undesirable because encouraging people to walk would benefit the area. Since the City Center Lofts project is entitled to pay an in lieu fee, and does not meet the first two findings, it falls under this last finding.
When I expanded my building in the 1980s, I was limited to 1,000 square feet because of inadequate parking. The City Center Lofts project is adding approximately 30,000 square feet of commercial space, with no onsite commercial parking being provided. When I met with the city planning staff, I was told that there was adequate parking within a three block radius. I fail to understand how making people walk up to a three block radius from their desired location, benefits anyone other than the developer that is not required to install onsite parking.
The fee that was discussed at the council meeting is less than 1/5th the cost of constructing on site parking. I can understand why the developer chooses the in lieu fee over constructing on site parking.
Mayor Flory stated, in The Daily Democrat's April 3, story on parking that the ordinance would encourage developers to invest in Woodland's downtown. If the in lieu fee is utilized to accommodate a developer, in the down area, because of physical constraints or unnecessary due to proposed use, I would agree it would be good for the community. If the reason for the in lieu fee is because there is adequate parking within a three block radius, than the benefit to the community is non existent. This ordinance will be devastating to existing businesses that already have a shortage of parking in the downtown area. My business already has a shortage of parking within a reasonable distance. I don't consider a three block radius reasonable. In planning text books or big city areas, three blocks may be considered reasonable, but not in downtown Woodland.
From the council's unanimous vote supporting the ordinance, it is apparent that my position was not very convincing to the council. I must assume that my position on the new parking ordinance, based on doing business in downtown Woodland for over 34 years, was overshadowed by the desire to encourage developers to invest in the downtown.
The new parking ordinance may encourage developers to invest in the downtown, but it will also encourage businesses that need convenient parking, such as my business, to move from the downtown area. The City Council should avoid taking actions that encourage developers at the determent of existing businesses. The new in lieu parking fee ordinance will encourage developers but at the same time will be detrimental to existing businesses. My business will survive, because I have the option to move from the downtown area, which I am currently in the process of investigating. In my opinion, the in lieu parking ordinance will be a disaster for the downtown area but the capitalistic system does allow ill conceived projects to proceed and fail.
JOHN PERRY, Woodland












